Skip to main content

GA 08: Day Two (Thursday)

Business Meetings

Nothing too contentious going on. A new innovation via the Denominational Support Commission is to 'celebrate our congregations' through a two minutes slot for one congregation per district. I like to see this kind of thing which should showcase our most successful and innovative congregations, though clearly through the presentations some are more innovate than others.

Mortions (in roughly the order they came) And I'm paraphrasing.

The General Assembly congratulates the Women's League on its 100th anniversarry. Well duh. Non-contentious.

The Ministerial Fellowship is recognised as an affliated body to the General Assembly. Not every minister was in favour of this, I don't think anyone else cared about it very much.

We believe prison if often inneffective and encourage other more effective rehabilitation. Another social justice motion that is entirely worthy but entirely ineffective as a way for us to do effective social justice work as a community.

Constitutional amendment. Partly this was a tidying up of the constitution, but it did represent some changes. The number of members a congregation needs to send two delegates to the Annual Meetings has changed from 50 to 30. A sign of our decline I'm affraid. The other change was a rolling system for the Executive Committee elections. Now instead of a whole new committee every 3 years (although you can serve two terms), now 4 people will be elected every two years, so only half of the committee will change in an election cycle. The next election will be 2009.

What I find in some ways horrifying and in some ways fascinating is the need of some people to spend so much energy trying to correct grammar and English in something like a constitution. We're so nit-picking as a movement! It's a depressing thing being stuck in a room of 200 people arguing about grammar. Why do people get so engaged with that? Is this the thing we ought to be concerned with??

Hibbert Trust

This was a presentation by David Usher, who the Hibbert Trust have paid to create a 'liberal alternative to the Alpha course.' This seems now to be called 'A Course in Practical Spirituality.' The first DVD for this has been produced and it's planned that there will be five more. It was very professionally done. I'm not convinced myself that professionalism is the most important thing myself. Plus I would really like to see something that is distinctly Unitarian, and this is not.

International Association for Religious Freedom

My mate Simon Ramsay did a time of meditation using readings from various traditions. The problem of course with meditation is that I became aware of how tired I was. I'm not getting much sleep.

Communications Commission

Michael Dadson told the story of the publicity material used in our Macclesfield congregation.

Also at this meeting my new book, The Unitarian Life, was officially launched. I'll write more about the book in a post very soon. But I'm very pleased that we managed to get it out in time for these Meetings, and I'm also very pleased that we have sold out of the book after two days. Fifty copies were delivered directly to Hatfield and they've all gone. Good good.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I disagree about the alternative to the alpha course. People are (generally) used to seeing high quality production values everywhere.

I'd be interested to know whether it's going to be as tightly stage managed as the alpha course. There is only one authorised way to deliver that and that's something that really works for them.

Oh, and I thought it was sufficiently Unitarian for the dvd. I think the supporting material is equally as important especially the leaders' packs.

Popular posts from this blog

The dumbest thing about American Unitarian Univeralism

I'm glad Peacebang started blogging about this cos I was about to, and now it's like I'm joining in with a conversation rather than doing a big rant and having a go at Americans (though that is always fun ;-)). Why the hell do American (or is it just in New England??) UU churches take, like a quarter of the year off? In the summer they close. They CLOSE!! A church, closing. It's so bloody weird and wrong. Where does it come from? Why? Why? Why? Why do people need church less in the summer? Where are people supposed to go? Where is the Divine supposed to go? My church in Boston didn't close exactly, but moved to the smaller upstairs chapel, but the minister still had all that time off. Now I've spent most of my life around teachers and priests, both jobs where people think people don't put many hours in, when in fact they put in loads ('you only work Sunday mornings/9 to 3.25'). Teachers work hard and need their long holidays. Ministers work hard, a...

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...

LOST and theology: who are the good guys?

***Spoiler alert*** I'm continuing some theological/philosophical reflections while re-watching the series LOST. One of the recurring themes in LOST is the idea of the "good guys" and the "bad guys." We start the series assuming the survivors (who are the main characters) are the "good guys" and the mysterious "Others" are definitely bad guys. But at the end of series 2 one of the main characters asks the Others, "Who are  you people?" and they answer, in an extremely disturbing way, "We're the good guys." The series develops with a number of different factions appearing, "the people from the freighter" "the DHARMA initiative" as well as divisions among the original survivors. The question remains among all these complicated happenings "who really are the good guys?" I think one of the most significant lines in the series is an episode when Hurley is having a conversation with ...