Skip to main content

GA 09: Day One

Evening. I'm back here in the computer room in Chester, after coming out of the bar, offering a few relfections after the first day of the Unitarian General Assembly Annual Meetings 2009.

After a number of a travel hiccups I managed to get here in time for the start of the Minister's Pre-Conference. Nothing much to say about that.

Went to the John Relly Beard lecture with someone talking about ministry and trade unions. Then I was in with the youth group helping them plan their worship for tomorrow.

I went to the Ministerial Pension Fund AGM, nothing much interesting to say about that, but thought I ought to go because, well, it is kind of important to me now.

Opening Celebrations - seem to have become less and less celebratory over the last few years. It has become another service like the Anniversary Service, when I would really like it to be something a bit different.

Then UniPride (the GLBT Unitarian group) - where Andy Pakula, the Minister of Newingoton Green and Islington Unitarians spoke about his congregation's stand of not performing different-sex marriages until the same rights are available to same-sex couples to get married. It was an interesting meeting.

Two random thoughts:

1. These Meetings are not at all newcomer friendly. If I were here as the sole congregational delegate for the first time, and didn't know anyone here, I'd be completely confused and not have any idea what's going on. This is an issue we really need to deal with.

2. It strikes me that our problem is our we're the size of a movement, and yet we have all the baggage of an institution. We could be ten times the size we are with this number of committees and organisations (a functional institution). Or we could be the size we are (a few thousand) and with loose, dynamic, leadership and organisation (a functional movement). In some ways we have the worst of both worlds.

Lewis.

Comments

Rich said…
I am here for the very first time as a sole congregational delegate*, and I have been made to feel very welcome. The newcomers' reception was a great idea, and the red star on my badge means many people are saying hello to me and asking what I think so far. I already know twice as many Unitarians as I knew when I woke up yesterday.

You're right that there's much that could be improved here but I came here dreading that side of things and my experience has been much more positive than I had expected.

* although, of course, I'm lucky to have about 5 of my congregation here in other capacities.
NUFer said…
You write:-
"It strikes me that our problem is our we're the size of a movement, and yet we have all the baggage of an institution."
More the pretensions of an institution, I feel. The recent EC vote of only 50% of the eligible electorate is a good indication that for a good many Unitarians the GA matters little.
Robin Edgar said…
"It strikes me that our problem is our we're the size of a movement, and yet we have all the baggage of an institution."

I guess they don't call Unitarian*Universalism, aka U*Uism, The U*U Movement for nothing. . . ;-)

Still ROTFLMU*UO!

"In some ways we have the worst of both worlds."

Hark! Do I hear an echo of famous ex-Unitarian Samuel Taylor Coleridge? :-)

"Unitarianism is the worst of Atheism joined to the worst of Calvinism, like two asses tied tail to tail."
jef jones said…
I think GAs are a missed opportunity . They seem designed to produce argument rather than dialogue and listening, and don't feel very congruent with our values and faith. I know they are our decision-making forum and differences are healthy but even so...My grandmother used to tell me off for 'having opinions' and GAs seem designed to get people to have opinions. I don't have easy answers but somehow we need to integrate 'business' and 'worship' and find a way to place a deep respect for each person's shining sacred worth at the centre of
how we assemble and debate. I don't believe in hierarchies but I suspect that listening is probably a little more holy than talking!
Mel P said…
On Friday I was talking to a 'newcomer' and discovered they'd never actually found where coffee was being served. Oh dear.

I'm just reading your posts backwards, interesting to read as always. I haven't been to GA for a few years, and can't honestly say that returning in 2009 will have been the highlight of my Unitarian year.

Amen re the worship... needs a bit more energy and risk taking. I mean, when projecting hymn words is considered a bit dodgy and the new hymn we chose was branded too difficult and too happy clappy, where is there to go?! Back to the nineteenth century I guess.

Popular posts from this blog

Radical?

When I started this blog nearly 4 years and nearly 300 posts ago one of the labels I used for it/me was "radical." Perhaps I used it a little unreflectively. Recently I've been pondering what radical means. A couple of things have made me think of this. Firstly this blog series from my friend Jeremy, which explores a distinction between "radical progressives" and "rational progressives." There is also this definition of radical, liberal and conservative from Terry Eagleton quoted at Young Anabaptist Radicals : “Radicals are those who believe that things are extremely bad with us, but they could feasibly be much improved. Conservatives believe that things are pretty bad, but that’s just the way the human animal is. And liberals believe that there’s a little bit of good and bad in all of us.” What interests me is finding a way to express the tension I feel sometimes between myself and the wider Unitarian movement. One way to express this is to say I tend

What does it mean to be non-creedal?

Steve Caldwell says "The problem here isn't humanism vs. theism for theist Unitarian Universalists -- it's the non-creedal nature of Unitarian Universalism" This is a good point. We need to think much more deeply about what it means to be a non-creedal religion. The first thing I want to say is that there is more than one possible understanding of non-creedalism. The Disciples of Christ are a non-creedal church, they say here : " Freedom of belief. Disciples are called together around one essential of faith: belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Persons are free to follow their consciences guided by the Bible, the Holy Spirit study and prayer, and are expected to extend that freedom to others." Quakers are also non-creedal and say here : Quakers have no set creed or dogma - that means we do not have any declared statements which you have to believe to be a Quaker. There are, however, some commonly held views which unite us. One accepted view is that th

What is Radical Christianity?

Radical Christianity is about encountering the God of love . It is first and foremost rooted in the discovery of a universal and unconditional source of love at the heart of reality and within each person. God is the name we give to this source of love. It is possible to have a direct and real personal encounter with this God through spiritual practice. We encounter God, and are nourished by God, through the regular practice of prayer, or contemplation.  Radical Christianity is about following a man called Jesus . It is rooted in the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet living under occupation of the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. It understands that's Jesus' message was the message of liberation. His message was that when we truly encounter God, and let God's love flow through us, we begin to be liberated from the powers of empire and violence and encounter the  "realm of God" - an alternative spiritual and social reality rooted in love rather th