There is an amazing power in being able to control the agenda, be it in a
congregation, in the U.S. Congress, and even (and perhaps especially) at General Assembly. I have usually in my Articles from GA talked about the day in order, but I’m going to first talk about the decision of the General Assembly to go to Phoenix Arizona in 2012, do the minimum business there required by our bylaws, and then spend the rest of the event in social justice work and events on immigration.
First, let me state my own “skin” in this game. I voted for the resolution to go to Arizona under these restricted conditions. It is not completely what I had hoped for (I wanted GA business to be suspended completely and for our time in Arizona to be fully focused on social justice). I also voted to make immigration reform our new Congregational Study Action Issue for the coming four years (which passed)… so we will be half-way into exploring the issues in a systemic and institutional way when we go to Arizona. I believe the compromise resolution that was worked out by the UUA Board, the Allies for Racial Equality and others represented a good choice… a better choice than the original resolution for a boycott and a better choice than doing nothing at all. If I am still within the continental United States in June of 2012, I will go to the Phoenix GA. I hope to be involved in events in that area even before then.
So, while I supported the new Board Resolution, I was still amazed by the amount of framing that the UUA Moderator, the UUA Board, the Commission on Social Witness, and others presented prior to the debate. I was amazed that that framing seemed to me completely one-sided. For over and hour (almost two, I think, but at least one) we were presented with the voices of individuals who were for the new board resolution. Two mini-sermons, a video from the Phoenix congregation, four prayers in a row, comments from the Board of Trustees, and quite a bit more that I cannot remember. All of it in support of the new board resolution.
So much so that even I, a supporter of the new board resolution, began to feel a little uncomfortable at how much framing was happening. Now, I admit, it is important that someone get to frame the agenda… but I want to ask the question… Do the persons who have the power to frame and set the agenda, in a people who value democracy, have a responsibility toward equality of position in that framing?
Pastorally, I can guess why the framing was so one-sided… there was a lot of anxiety about what was going to happen in that debate. Debates over such issues in the past have at times become personal, and have been destructive influences upon our movement. We are still living with the wounds from some of those debates during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s and 70’s, and we are intentionally understanding this immigration reform commitment as the Civil Rights movement of our time. In that light, this GA felt historical for us, and standing in the realm of living history can be anxiety producing all on its own.
So, I’m conflicted. There is a part of me that wants to salute a masterful job of framing the debate so that what I think was the best outcome possible in the moment was what occurred… and another part of me made uncomfortable by how focused that framing was. It’s okay… a little discomfort is good for the soul.
What I will probably remember about this day at the Minneapolis GA however will not be my discomfort with lead up to this debate on going to Arizona, but rather that, in an event for the roll-out of the new UUA Military Meditation Manual “Bless All Who Serve”, I took my oath and was accessioned into the U.S. Army Reserve as a Military Chaplain. It was a small event, and Chaplain George Tyger flung the old Chaplain Candidate (Staff Specialist) insignia across the room as he pinned a bright and shining new set of silver crosses upon my uniform. Afterward, it was wonderful to have friends make fun of me, because my titles now consist of more words than my actual name… Chaplain First Lieutenant the Reverend David Glenn Pyle.
Just wait till I finish a Doctor of Ministry, so I can sound even more pretentious! Thank you George for issuing my accessioning oath, and to the UUA Stewardship team for allowing us to do this at your event. And, if you have not checked out the book, I urge you to buy a copy, or if you are a veteran or service member, contact the Church of the Larger Fellowship for a free copy (while they last).
It was also wonderful to have a member of the UU Fellowship of Midland Michigan, where I will be next year’s interim minister, present for the ceremony… and she brought a great camera! Pictures to follow. And it was wonderful to have lunch with her. Thank you Heather.
The last thing I want to comment on about Ware Lecture Day at GA 2012 is the Ware Lecture itself. This year’s Ware Lecturer, Winona LaDuke, is a Native American activist on issues of justice from the protection of indigenous peoples to the environment. She was witty, challenging, and someone who had made profound changes in her community and in the world, and was challenging us to do the same. She represented my favorite kind of leadership style, the person who moves into a challenge and dares others to follow her. She had an obvious appreciation for some of our strengths and weaknesses as Unitarian Universalists, and tailored her message to that understanding. I was impressed with her, and when I next have a place to live with land, will see what I can do about my own garden.
That being said, she did make one comment that I and a friend take issue with. She stated that we in the United States have a train system that even Bulgaria would be ashamed of. That is probably true, Bulgaria would probably be ashamed of our railway system… because by all reports I know their trains are wonderful, some of the best in Eastern Europe, thank you very much! 😉
Klonopin should be taken orally 2-3 times a day (unless otherwise prescribed). The dosage of the drug https://iabdm.org/klonopin-online/ depends on your state of health and individual reaction to the treatment. To achieve the best results, you should use the drug regularly. Don’t forget to take the medicine at the same time every day.
All in all, it was a full and wonderful day, one that re-affirmed my realization that, on issues of great importance, it is the tendency of the leadership of our religious movement to attempt to frame the debate in ways that, while they may lessen anxiety and lead to less conflict, may detract from the democratic nature of our faith governance and be more than a little conflict-avoidant. I get the history of why this is, and there is a part of me that is thankful for it (as I said, I’m conflicted). But I want to name this as a growing edge for us, that we need to continue to build our faith in one another that we can have more honest and equal debate without some of the negative experiences of our past.
May it be so…
Yours in faith,
Rev. David
Hi David,
I’m so glad that we choose to vote to have a GA in AZ. I like you would have liked the business to be completely suspended, but I like the compromise that was struck. I just hope that our colleagues and co-religionists of color will feel safe in attending. I kept seeing flashes of the ’60s/70s’ debate of the either/or stance showing up in the posts of discussions that led up to GA. I’m very glad that we did not repeat that mess.
Good luck with your interim year,
Jean
i really enjoyed your perspective on the Arizona resolution. i concur that there is a lot of power wielding by the few in our UUA circles. its deeply embedded in our history as an association, we’ve got room to grow in our democratic and religious values.
Pingback: Social justice at GA, suffering, salvation and more « uuworld.org : The Interdependent Web
Power. Ah, power…
There’s no making it go away. There’s no giving it away, really–though it can be shared, and sometimes one can abdicate it. But it comes with responsibility, and one can’t abdicate that.
So. Was it a secret that we had a large, hairy, contentious, potentially explosive and damaging issue to wrestle to some resolution?
(No, I think that was obvious to all.)
Part of the lesson I took from my (our–though not literally shared) seminary classes that touched on prior events such as the ‘Black Empowerment Crisis’ was that leadership handled it badly (Mark Morrison-Reed may be right that it was an unavoidable catastrophe… but it need not have been as bad of one).
One of the roles of leadership–my lesson from congregational life, and being in such a position–is that one is responsible for guiding a community through the rockiest, hardest, most emotional and charged things.
Was the power wielded abused?
Ah, there’s the question.
I’m with you–the framing was superbly done. Masterfully. I observed it from almost the beginning. The focus on us, staying together, being caring and worshipful. It started during Ministry Day, the efforts to set that tone that presumed that throwing brickbats was inappropriate.
Focused, oh yes.
But the resolution of what to do was largely (as I understand it–I didn’t participate in the mini-assembly for reasons that aren’t salient here…) worked out by the leadership of the two camps. The outlines of it were, I think, starting to be discernible even before GA, but far from clear or fully detailed. A principled, ethical, engaged compromise….
What I saw was wielding power in a way that valued the community and the communities–without suggesting that individuals were to be rolled over.
Perfect?
No.
Perfectly done?
No. Nothing ever is. But very well done.
I paused here and went to consult one of my congregation’s delegates. She hadn’t been familiar with the Black Empowerment Crisis history (a very, very vague sense that there was some sort of something around race back in the 60s). She knew that there had been a very… hot and testy conversation online prior to and at the beginning of GA. She says that she felt–and feels–relieved that things were worked out, that they were worked out civilly, and that she’s satisfied with the result.
Closing comment; I think that leadership acted out of knowledge of our history and the heat and sensitivity of this issue. Knowing the past, they may have leaned a bit farther than necessary in framing…. But given the history, I can understand that. The recriminations and so forth had they not done enough, if GA had erupted in a new walkout and crisis… the leadership would have been pilloried for it by those who know our history.
Given the realities of the association as it is, of our widespread ignorance of our own history, etc…. I think they acted appropriately.
I identify with the discomfort you felt about the framing. And, yet, like Patrick, I believe it was a powerful and effective way to guide us through this controversy. Yes, imperfect and perhaps b bit too much. But, given our history as UUs, it was a wonderful and meaningful step forward from the damaging days of the Black Empowerment times.
I also observe that many current UUs do not know anything at all about this part of UU history. Ignorance is not bliss!! It is simply ignorance. Perhaps we can do a better job of owning our past and looking at its consequences that clearly reverberate today. I must confess that I did not know anything about the Black Empowerment situation until I went to Starr King. Past is indeed prologue and I will be seeking creative ways to lift up this history in the service of promoting good process and the anti-oppressive imperative that our faith demands. Perhaps the upcoming 50th anniversary year is a good place to start.
Thanks for raising this important observation, David. See you in Michigan soon! I look forward to serving the Flint UUs down the road from Midland.