Local Teen Saves World

I’ll be leaving Leominster, Massachusetts soon, but stories like this one, reported in weekly newspaper The Leominster Champion are what really make me proud of a community. They have nothing to do with the local high school football team (as storied as it might be, playing the 3rd oldest Thanksgiving Day football game int he country) or a military service person returning from Iraq (as much as such service deserves support and recognition).

No, this one gets me because it brings together the things that really make me tick: supporting our young people, service to those in need, and religious motivation.

Shari Davis, you chastise me. You call me to be my best self. I am sad that I wasn’t self aware enough at the age you are now nor aware enough about the world as you are now to do what you are doing with your life now. Instead I do what I can now. So should we all.

I want to say this is Tikkun Olam – healing the world, but it is more:

As a post-biblical term, tikkun olam neither appears in a prophetic book nor constitutes one of the mitzvot. However, as this concept has come to be equated both with a general call to justice, and with specific philanthropic and volunteer activities, the definition of tikkun olam has been merged with those of tzedakah (financial support of the poor), g’milut hasadim (acts of loving kindness), and tzedek (justice). http://www.zeek.net/706tohu/

There have to be more people like Shari Davis around. I want to meet more of them. The world needs as many of them as can be found.

Incompetence Goes Both Ways

I ususally don’t reprint entire posts from another blog, but felt this was important enough as I couldn’t get a direct link to this exact post within the blog.  Yes, ministers can be incompetent. But what about congregations? There are two partners in the minster-congregation relationship and it is a reality that some congregations just don’t treat ministers correctly? well? ethically? (use whatever term is appropriate? What recourse then? What is the pastoral response? Terminating a congregation hardly seems appropriate, but some action or action plan before a such a congregation gets another fellowshipped minister doesn’t seem to far a stretch does it? See The Boy in the Bands (tip of the hat for getting me on this topic).

From the UUA’s GA Blog

Ministers can be terminated for incompetence

posted by Jane Greer

Two UUA bylaw changes were passed at this morning’s plenary, and one Action of Immediate witness statement was debated and passed.

Controversy erupted over a proposed bylaw change allowing for the removal of a UU minister for incompetence. The sentence in question reads: “The fellowship of a minister may be terminated by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee for unbecoming conduct, incompetence, or other specified cause.”

The Rev. Dan Schatz of Buxtown, N.J., protested the vagueness surrounding the term “incompetence.” “I recognize the good intentions of the amendment,” he said. “However, it is too vaguely phrased. I’m afraid that this would damage the ministry by encouraging clergy to cover mistakes rather than admit them. Expectations should be specific and clear.”

The Rev. Wayne Arnason, who serves as the head of the MFC, tried to explain the committee’s sense of the term “incompetence” when someone at the procedural microphone raised that question. “Ministerial candidates are required to demonstrate competencies,” he said. “Incompetence is when they’re behaving in ways that demonstrate that some of those competencies have been lost or were never that good.”

The Rev. Burton Carley, UUA board member and MFC liaison, explained in his opening presentation that the rules had been updated for several reasons: to reflect current practice; to remove rules referring to no longer existing rules; to make them more readable; and to address them to all ministers, instead of using the former system of ministerial categories. Changes had been made in the disciplinary section, he said, to make the rules less legalistic and more suited to a credentialing body, such as the MFC.

The Rev. Jory Agate, the UUA’s director of Ministerial Development and one of the authors of the revised rules agreed. “There are situations where the committee would like to respond to misconduct or incompetence, but the way the rules were written guaranteed that every case would become a court process,” she said.

Denny Davidoff, former MFC member and UUA moderator, spoke at the “pro” microphone. “We are involved even now as a movement in a deep, and thoughtful, and much needed conversation about excellence in ministry,” she said. “We wouldn’t have this conversation if so many of us had not experienced as congregations, incompetence in ministry. There is incompetence in ministry and lay people have felt unempowered to do anything except suffer through it.”

An additional concern was raised by the Rev. Paul Johnson, minister of the UU Church at Shelter Rock, N.Y., who felt that the new rules were not explicit about whether ministers could have legal representation during the disciplinary process.

Agate said the ministers could have lawyers, if they preferred to do so, but that it wasn’t immediately required. “There are situations when it is warranted,” she said. “Someone can hire an attorney at any time. But not every review would be set up like a court situation.”

After an extended debate, UUA moderator Gini Courter called for a vote and the delegate body approved the revised rules without changes.

A second bylaw change merging the Northeast District with the New Hampshire/Vermont District to form a new Northern New England District passed without discussion.

Because of a lack of time, only one Action of Immediate Witness was presented: “AIW 3: End Present-day Slavery in the Fields.”

The Rev. Abhi Janamanchi, minister of the Clearwater Unitarian Universalists, spoke on behalf of the action citing cases in which farm workers had been recruited and had literally been enslaved by their bosses. “Modern-day slavery continues to stain the fabric of the present-day United States,” he said.

Despite objections that the action was not comprehensive enough, it passed with little discussion.

The Dark Side of Creation

Hat tip to Sisyphus for this completely disturbing report from the Columbus Dispatch about John Freshwater, an 8th grade “science” teacher in Mount Vernon, OH who, according to an investigation as reported by the Dispatch:

undermined science instruction in the public school district by discrediting evolution in his classroom and focusing on creationism and intelligent design.

told his class that homosexuality is a sin.

burned crosses onto students’ arms, using an electrostatic device,

he was insubordinate for failing to remove the Bible and other religious materials from his classroom.

The real stunner? This went on for 11 years! Who was asleep at the wheel in Mount Vernon?

The Dispatch also reports that The family of one student who was burned filed a federal lawsuit last week against Freshwater and the district, saying the student’s civil rights were violated.

The student’s civil rights were violated? You think?

What happens when the above situation becomes, if not encouraged, at least much more plausible when the state enacts something like Louisiana did this week. Another hat tip, this one to DarkSyde at dailyKos for posting what I feared would happen with this and an interesting commentary on it:

Louisiana’s Governor Bobby Jindal signed Senate Bill 733 into law, 27 years after the state passed its Balance Treatment for Evolution-Science and Creation-Science Act … Jindal’s approval of the bill was buried in a press release issued on June 25, 2008 …Houma Today reports (June 27, 2008) that the bill “will empower educators to pull religious beliefs into topics like evolution, cloning and global warming by introducing supplemental materials.”

DarkSyde comments:

This, in and of itself, undermines the claim to secular purpose. Evolution is no more scientifically controversial than gravity, and Governor Jindal surely knows that — he graduated from Brown University with honors in biology. His own biology professor reminded him recently that “Without evolution, modern biology, including medicine and biotechnology, wouldn’t make sense. In order for today’s students in Louisiana to succeed in college and beyond, … they need a solid grounding in genetics and evolution.

Another sham is the claim of bill supporters that this bill isn’t about creationism was put to the lie early on, when supporter David Tate, a member of the Livingston Parish school board, told the New Orleans Times-Picayune “I believe that both sides — the creationism side and the evolution side — should be presented and let students decide what they believe.” He added that the bill was necessary because “teachers are scared to talk about” creationism, but didn’t mention whether they were similarly scared about discussing astrology or the belief that babies come from storks, not sex. An anti-abortion news site crowed that, thanks to Jindal’s signature “Louisiana public school teachers can now educate their students about the theory of intelligent design,” a practice ruled unconstitutional in both 1987 and again in 2005.

I wrote and phoned Governor Jindal’s office offering my opinon that he shouldn’t have signed Bill 733. I guess he didn’t listen to me. Perhaps I should send him a copy of On The Origin of Species for Christmas?

Specific Assembly

The gathering was called Specific Assembly on the e-vite invitation. Tina, Zack and I all attended.  It was in Medford at the home of my friend a Hank, another UU minister.  Security checkpoint involved a 10 month old in her father’s arms stretching out her hands towards me, welcoming me into the house.  A handful of UU ministers, spouses/partners and children gathered for a cookout and conversation because we were not at General Assembly for various reasons.  We had a non-agenda, attended no workshops, no lectures, voted on nothing but generally agreed it was a good time to fire up the grill about 5 p.m. We did say a perfunctory grace, but it was brief and casual even by UU standards. In general, we had a grand ol’ time. We have to specifically plan to do this more often, even when we’re not skipping GA.

Specific Assembly

The gathering was called Specific Assembly on the e-vite invitation. Tina, Zack and I all attended.  It was in Medford at the home of my friend a Hank, another UU minister.  Security checkpoint involved a 10 month old in her father’s arms stretching out her hands towards me, welcoming me into the house.  A handful of UU ministers, spouses/partners and children gathered for a cookout and conversation because we were not at General Assembly for various reasons.  We had a non-agenda, attended no workshops, no lectures, voted on nothing but generally agreed it was a good time to fire up the grill about 5 p.m. We did say a perfunctory grace, but it was brief and casual even by UU standards. In general, we had a grand ol’ time. We have to specifically plan to do this more often, even when we’re not skipping GA.

Specific Assembly

The gathering was called Specific Assembly on the e-vite invitation. Tina, Zack and I all attended.  It was in Medford at the home of my friend a Hank, another UU minister.  Security checkpoint involved a 10 month old in her father’s arms stretching out her hands towards me, welcoming me into the house.  A handful of UU ministers, spouses/partners and children gathered for a cookout and conversation because we were not at General Assembly for various reasons.  We had a non-agenda, attended no workshops, no lectures, voted on nothing but generally agreed it was a good time to fire up the grill about 5 p.m. We did say a perfunctory grace, but it was brief and casual even by UU standards. In general, we had a grand ol’ time. We have to specifically plan to do this more often, even when we’re not skipping GA.

Specific Assembly

The gathering was called Specific Assembly on the e-vite invitation. Tina, Zack and I all attended.  It was in Medford at the home of my friend a Hank, another UU minister.  Security checkpoint involved a 10 month old in her father’s arms stretching out her hands towards me, welcoming me into the house.  A handful of UU ministers, spouses/partners and children gathered for a cookout and conversation because we were not at General Assembly for various reasons.  We had a non-agenda, attended no workshops, no lectures, voted on nothing but generally agreed it was a good time to fire up the grill about 5 p.m. We did say a perfunctory grace, but it was brief and casual even by UU standards. In general, we had a grand ol’ time. We have to specifically plan to do this more often, even when we’re not skipping GA.

Pew Part Two

The Pew Forum on Religion “& Public Life released the second part of their major study on the U.S. Religious Landscape this past week. I’ve been working my way through the reports this week in between house buying and selling, prepping a college course, and going to a Sox game.

This part of the report deals with Americans’ religious beliefs and practices and how those correlate to their opinions on political and social issues. Although Unitarian Universalists are too small a group to statistically figure into the report on their own, there are some interesting trends that bear on on UU life and practice in addition to issues of importance to any religious person, UU’s included.

Remember, this survey sampled 35,000 Americans and is the only survey of its scope and depth on these issues, yet it is still a survey. It leaves me asking how certain questions were framed. For example, a “strong majority in every religious tradition do not believe their religion is the only way to salvation.” Who says that religion is about “salvation?” What does “salvation” mean? Just asking the question puts the entire religious landscape in Christian framework where the task of the religious life is to save to your soul from the torments of hell in the afterlife. Another finding of the study is line with this one and poses similar problems – “most Americans agree that many religions – not just their own – can lead to eternal life.” Again, who says that eternal life is the end of the religious life? Or even a goal at all? The study seem to posit this as a positive in the American religious landscape, but what about people who don’t believe in an afterlife?

Some things of which I took note:

Americans are NOT atheists. 92% of the adult population believes in God, 71% with absolute certainty (whatever that means). “Certainty and nature of believe in God, however, vary widely across religious groups.” Absolute certainty in God’s existence is highest among Jehovah’s Witnesses (93%), Mormons (90%), evangelicals (90%), and members of historically black denominations (90%). These majorities in similar, but not quite as high numbers view God as a person with whom they can have a personal relationship. Again, similar numbers of these groups view the Bible as the word of God, whereas the American average is only 63%. “By contrast Buddhists (67%), Jews (53%), and Hindus (47%) are more likely to view their scriptures as the work of men than as the word of God”

“Majorities of Jews (83%), Buddhists (75%), Hindus (92%) and unaffiliated (70%) express a belief in God, but these groups tend to be less certain in their belief.” The Buddhist number surprised me because technically Buddhists are atheists, but among the number of self identified Buddhists there must be Christian-Buddhists and Hindu-Buddhists and Jewish Buddhists.

Universalism could claim some modest gains in a sense as belief in hell “is less common than is belief in life after death or heaven, with about six-in-ten Americans (59%) expressing belief in hell.”

People who are religious are not necessarily traditionalists. Only a “44% plurality affiliated with a particular faith say their religion should preserve its traditional beliefs and practices while 35% say their religion should adjust to new circumstances.” If you think Unitarian Universalists automatically belong in that 35% group, you’ve been in a committee meeting or a board meeting and heard the words, “but that’s not the way we do it here.” Words that have been called the “Last words of a dying church” by more than one church growth consultant.

Belief in the supernatural is very high with 79% of adult Americans believing in miracles. This of course, makes me want to ask, “what is a miracle?” Seven-in-ten American believe angels and demons are active in the world. (Carl Sagan’s “Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark” rattled and fell off my book shelf as if pushed by Dr. Sagan’s spirit). Belief along these lines is higher among Mormons and evangelicals and traditionally black Protestant groups. Belief in miracles, angels and demons is less among Jews, Buddhists and Hindus and unaffiliated people.

Six-in-ten Americans pray daily and four-in-ten meditate daily.

There’s no great surprise in the findings that Mormons and evangelicals tend to be more conservative politically and Jews, Buddhists and Hindus and atheists are more liberal than the general population.
“One of the realities of politics in the U.S. today is that people who regularly attend worship services and hold traditional religious view are much more likely to hold conservative political view while those who are less connected to the religious institutions and more secular in their outlook are more likely to hold liberal political views. The connection between religious intensity and political attitudes appears to be especially strong when it comes to issues such as abortion and homosexuality.”

This we know. What I find more interesting is the growing consensus across religious lines about he need for government involvement in providing need to the poor and doing something about the environmental crisis. The study bears this out.

“On the question of the government’s role in providing aid to the needy, for instance, large majorities of most religious traditions agree that the government should do more to help need Americans, even if it means going deeper into debt. “(I would have liked to see the answer to the question, even if it means redirecting the vast military budget). “A similar consensus exists across the board with respect to view on the environment, with majorities of most religious groups saying the stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost. And majorities within most religious traditions say that diplomacy rather than military strength is the best way to ensure peace.”

54% of Americans who claim a religious tradition do not feel there is a conflict between their faith and living in modern society, yet “a substantial minority across nearly all religious traditions believe such a tension exists.”

78% of Americans believe there are absolute standards of right and wrong, yet only 9% report relying on philosophy and reason and science (5%) for guidance in determining their beliefs about what is right and wrong. I found this to be the scariest fact in the entire report.

The second scariest fact in the report was this: “Despite their overall feelings of satisfaction with their personal lives, and even higher levels of satisfaction with their family lives, only about a quarter of U.S. adults (27%) say they are satisfied with the way things are going in the country (as of the summer of 2007 when the survey was conducted). Members of historically black churches (17%) and Jehovah’s Witnesses (10%) are among the least satisfied with the overall direction of the country.”

In the richest country in the world, in the most developed time in history, 3/4 of the population are unhappy. In country at war with a history of racism that unhappiness level is higher among people of color and a pacifist group. I really can’t say I’m too surprised. Yet, for all the religiosity, all the faith, where is our spirit? For all the religious values, what do we really value? For so many to feel unsatisfied and unhappy, what does that say about us?

The summary report is an 18 page pdf file and the full report is a 268 page pdf file and it is also available by intro, chapters and appendices in separate sections. You can get them all from the Pew Forum web site here.

Supremes Continue to Limit Death Penalty 5-4

The Supreme Court continued to limit the use of the Death Penalty Wednesday in a 5-4 decision, saying that capital punishment is unconstitutional punishment for child rape, thus overturning laws in Louisiana and five other states. Justice Kennedy for the majority from the NY Times:

said there was “a distinction between intentional first-degree murder on the one hand and non-homicide crimes against individual persons,” even such “devastating” crimes as the rape of a child, on the other.

The Times report continues with:

The decision was the third in the last six years to place a categorical limitation on capital punishment. In 2002, the court barred the execution of mentally retarded defendants. In 2005, it ruled that the Constitution bars the death penalty for crimes committed before the age of 18.

Given my categorical opposition to capital punishment (see my post Don’t Kill for Me), I am pleased with the ruling.

Here’s the Dallas Morning News report.

And of course, the SCOTUS blog.

Remember, opposing the death penalty doesn’t mean criminals should be set free or that there is no compassion for victims of violent crime, it means that the way to a less violent society is not to have the state kill as punishment, it means that an eye for eye only ends up leaving the whole world blind.

Clergy Pass at the Most Beloved Ballpark

Wednesday night Zack and I went to America’s Most Beloved Ballpark – that’s Fenway Park in Boston – John Updike’s “Lyric Little Bandbox” between Kenmore Square and the Fens to see the defending World Series Champions Boston Red Sox defeat the Arizona Diamondbacks 5-0.  Ageless knuckleballer Tim Wakefield pitched two-hit shutout ball over seven innings, Manny Delcarmen handled the 8th and when Craig Hansen got into bases loaded trouble in the 9th Jonathan Papelbon came on for the last out.

The real story for us however was in how we watched the game.  This year was the first year I was eligible for the Boston Red Sox Clergy Pass program.  The Clergy Pass allows me, as an ordained minister to line up at gate B, along with active duty military personnel, two hours before game time and purchase two standing room tickets at half price (that would be $10). Now $10 would almost buy two regular priced bleacher seats at some ballparks around the country, but you have to remember that Fenway is both the smallest park in the country as far as seating capacity and the most expensive tickets in the game at $26 for bleacher seats.

Zack and I used the clergy pass.

This pass got us these standing room tickets:

Our standing room only tix

We entered the park, and had dinner. This is tough for Zack with his food allergies, but the food service at Fenway uses canola oil for the fries so he had a hot dog sans bun and fries and water and we hung out and watched batting practice.  Bonus for Zack – it was NASCAR night at Fenway and all the Roush-Fenway team racers were there and threw out the first pitch.  We sat and stood on a cement step behind the last row in right field’s section two, which gave us this view:

the view from section 2

As rough as this might seem, it wasn’t all that bad, if we stood (when there was a hit to the outfield, or during the Sox at bats, we could see the entire field and being at the extreme far end of the right field grandstand, there was comparatively little foot traffic crossing our sight line.  Then in the middle of the fifth inning there occurred what the deists among us would call the divine intervention.  A man wearing khaki’s and red Boston Red Sox Courtesy Staff golf shirt (with walkie talkie and ear piece) comes walking along the row between handicapped seats and the standing roomers and stops in front of Zack, looks at both us and says, “Would you two guys like real seats?”

Zack looks at me.  I say, “Sure.”

The Red Sox employee hands me an envelope and says, “They’re in Section 23, about opposite where you are now, but I think you’ll like them a lot better.”  He needn’t explain the sections in Fenway to me, I attended my first Red Sox game when I was 5 and could draw you a map.   But we just say thanks and scoot to Section 23.  Which is JUST to the third base side of home plate.

We were given these tickets:

section 23 tix

If you look closely enough, you’ll see that these seats were not tix, that someone never showed up for at the will call window. In the place where the price would be it says *COMP*.  These babies are on the house and must be something the Sox reserve for every game for this purpose or some other such kindness.   If every random act of kindness I’ve ever done only amounts to have gotten me seats 3 and 4 in row 17 of Section 23 at Fenway on Wednesday night, I could live with that. Seriously, I am Red Sox fan, I could live with that.  This was the view from the new seats, not right behind the catcher, but a major, substantial improvement.  Zack was happier than on Christmas morning.  OK, he wasn’t, but I was.

the view from section 23

Fenway is crowded, the seats are too small, the sight lines are poor with support beams in the way, the tickets (even standing room) are overpriced, the food is terrible, and there is absolutely no better place to watch a baseball game in the entire world. Even standing up in the back row.  I must be out of my mind – or a Red Sox fan.