The Emerson Avenger

The Emerson Avenger is a "memory hole" free blog where censorship is scorned. This blog will "guard the right to know" about any injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism. Posters may speak and argue freely, according to conscience, about any injustices and abuses, or indeed hypocrisy, that they may know about so that the Avenger, in the form of justice and redress, may come surely and swiftly. . . "Slowly, slowly the Avenger comes, but comes surely." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

My Photo
Name:
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada

In 1992 I underwent a profound revelatory experience of God which revealed that the total solar eclipse "Eye of God" is a "Sign in the Heavens" that symbolizes God's divine omniscience. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal contemptuously dismissed as my "psychotic experience" here: http://revelationisnotsealed.homestead.com - This revelatory religious experience inspired me to propose an inter-religious celebration of Creation that would take place whenever a total solar eclipse took place over our planet. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan and other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" here: http://creationday.homestead.com - I am now an excommunicated Unitarian whose "alternative spiritual practice" includes publicly exposing and denouncing Unitarian*Universalist injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. The Emerson Avenger blog will serve that purpose for me and hopefully others will share their concerns here. Dee Miller's term DIM Thinking is used frequently and appropriately on this blog. You may read more about what DIM Thinking is here - http://www.takecourage.org/defining.htm

Sunday, October 29, 2006

A U*U Intelligence Test Courtesy Of U*U Super Hero Ultrasonic U*U

Ulrasonic U*U said:


It is impossible to maintain the integrity of a church of "intellectuals" when there is no test of intelligence required for membership.

No kidding. . .

I think that is why Canadian religion writer Tom Harpur recently described U*Us as being " a group of do-gooder, would-be intellectuals". . . Of course the U*U *would*be* intellectuals took these words as a ringing endorsement of U*Uism and posted Tom Harpur's words to their web sites.

Doh!

ROTFLMU*UO

13 Comments:

Blogger indrax said...

It seems, Robin, that I am now more well informed than you.

And nicer about it.

Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
25 Beacon Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 The Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens
President
(617) XXX-XXXX FAX (617) XXX-XXXX
May 6, 1996

Robin Edgar
15 rue Lafleur apt. 11
Verdun, Quebec
CANADA, H4G 3C3
Dear Mr. Edgar:

Your actions on Sunday, April 21, were, by your own description, quite reprehensible.

It is inappropriate to use the time set aside in community worship for "joys and concerns" to speak in derogation of the minister, no matter how disappointed you may feel in him. Handing out letters to the same effect following the service is also entirely out of bounds.

Historically, other congregations that have had such behavior from congregants have been forced to remove such persons from membership and to ask help from secular authorities in seeing to it that their worship is not disrupted.

As I have told you before, the Unitarian Universalist Association does not require that its ministers see to it that a member's "claim of a revelatory religious experience be properly documented and critically examined." We are also under no obligation to share with other religious communities any message from a person who has behaved as you have.

You lack a basic understanding of, and respect for, the procedures of a democratically governed religious community. The minister, having been chosen by that community, is not to be publicly attacked. One may challenge privately, and discuss concerns through
other channels established by the congregation. One may not behave as you have done.


Yours sincerely,

John A. Buehrens

cc. The Rev. Ray Drennan
President of the Unitarian Church of Montreal
The Rev. Wendy Colby, St. Lawrence District

Sunday, October 29, 2006 11:15:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Well thanks for providing that classic example of U*U DIM Thinking indrax. It looks like you chose a very appropriate thread to post it in. It was one of the letters that I said that I wanted to post to illustrate President John Beuhren's meanness, arrogance, evasiveness and intimidation tactics but was unable to find on my computer. I presume it was amongst the text files of documents that I sent you almost a year ago now. You should have been thus informed months ago. . . Presumably my response to that letter is included with what I sent you too, as well as the letter I sent to President Beuhrens that prompted that respose from him. Please be so kind as to post all three letters in sequence for full context. You will not that Rev. John Beuhrens never responded to my letter that showed up his DIM Thinking here. You can't get much more evasive than refusing to respond at all indrax. . . But allow me to now respond to President Beuhrens letter point by point now.


:Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
25 Beacon Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 The Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens
President
(617) XXX-XXXX FAX (617) XXX-XXXX
May 6, 1996

Please note that the date is May 6, 1996. More than ten years ago now and just under three months later than my initial letter of grievance about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive attack on me. Please note also that indrax apparently does not want people to know how to contact the UUA by phone or by fax. . .

:Robin Edgar
15 rue Lafleur apt. 11
Verdun, Quebec
CANADA, H4G 3C3

Please note that indrax has no qualms about posting my full home address however. . .

:Dear Mr. Edgar:

:Your actions on Sunday, April 21, were, by your own description, quite reprehensible.

Please note that President Beuhrens begins his letter, which is in response to a letter that indrax is keeping hidden for now, by castigating me because the letter he is responding to informed him that I had felt it necessary to share my concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive labeling of Creation Day as a "cult", and my revelatory experience as "your psychotic" experience, as a result o the Board's refusal to act on my original letter of grievance that they had received almost three months earlier. Please note that he describes my calm and brief plea for help to the congregation during a time that is specifically devoted to 'Sharing Concerns' as "reprehensible" whereas Rev. Ray Drennan's false and malicious "paranoid accusations" about me were apparently not "reprehensible" and perfectly acceptable to President John Beuhrens and the Executive of the UUA's Ministerial Fellowship Committee. . . So most people of true intelligence and actual conscience will see that President Beuhrens letter begins with an expression of outrageously hypocritical double standards in his moral and ethical values and integrity. . .

:It is inappropriate to use the time set aside in community worship for "joys and concerns" to speak in derogation of the minister, no matter how disappointed you may feel in him.

I only felt it necessary to share my concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive clergy misconduct to the congregation as a whole during "Joys and Concerns" because the other more "appropriate" channels and manners for obtaining some justice, equity and compassion had been unsuccessful due to the negligent stonewalling of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the UUA and CUC. In any case I had warned the Board two weeks prior that I would use sharing concerns to air my grievances to the congregation if they refused to responsibly act on them and no one, other than Rev. Ray Drennan of course. . . had indicated that this would be inappropriate. Likewise, after I shared my concerns with the congregation, no one said that my action had been inappropriate and one church member, who was a prominent human rights worker, said "That took guts."

:Handing out letters to the same effect following the service is also entirely out of bounds.

So apparently it is verbotten for church members who have a legitimate grievance against a U*U minister, or Board, or other staf member to distribute letters of grievance to their fellow church members following church services, even though it is perfectly acceptable for people to go around distributing pampplets or seeking signatures on petitions about other exteral injustices and abuses. . . Another hypocritical double standard exercised by UUA President John A.* Beuhrens in his effort to intimidate me into silence, or at least castigate me for not remaining silent, about Rev. Ray Drennan's abusive clergy misconduct. How else can one communicate one's concerns to the congregation as a whole if not by orally airing them during 'Sharing Concerns' or calmly distributing letters of grievance after the serviced is over? What are the alternative more "appropriate" methods of letting the congregation know that there is a serious problem that they need to address because the Board failed to responsibly address it? As far as I am concerned both of my actions were highly appropriate after three months worth of DIM Thinking institutional stonewalling and denial by the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the UUA and it's effectively complicit Ministerial Fellowship Committee and the CUC.

:Historically, other congregations that have had such behavior from congregants have been forced to remove such persons from membership and to ask help from secular authorities in seeing to it that their worship is not disrupted.

So, as I have said previously and quite recently here following indrax's accusations that I have been "mean" and "arrogant" and "evasive" and that I "intimidate" people, it is abundantly obvious here that I was threatened with expulsion from the church and even threatened with police action and criminal prosecution, because that is what the euphemism "help from secular authorities" means. . . for doing nothing more than calmly and briefly sharing my concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive "paranoid accusations" about me and calmly and peacefully distributing letters of grievance to church members three months after having brought my grievances to the attention of the Board and the Presidents of the UUA and CUC.

:As I have told you before, the Unitarian Universalist Association does not require that its ministers see to it that a member's "claim of a revelatory religious experience be properly documented and critically examined."

Notice how President Buehrens conveniently changes the subject in a highly evasive manner here. . . My grievances were not simply about a U*U minister failing or refusing to help document or critically examine my claimed revelatory religious experience but arose from the fact that Rev. Ray Drennan had intolerantly and abusively labeled my "revelatory religious exeperience" as "your psychotic experience" and had contemptuously dismissed my monotheistic religious beliefs that were inspired by that "revelatory religious experience" as both "silliness" and "fantasy".

:We are also under no obligation to share with other religious communities any message from a person who has behaved as you have.

UUA President John Beuhrens once again completely sidesteps the real issues involved which were Rev. Ray Drennan's abusive clergy misconduct and the negligent response to my serious grievances by President John Beuhrens and the UUA's Ministerial Fellowship Committee, to say nothing of the negligent DIM Thinking stonewalling of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. Thanks for providing this classic example of how top level UUA officials were highly "evasive", to say nothing of "mean", "arrogant" and trying to "intimidate" me over a decade ago indrax. . .

:You lack a basic understanding of, and respect for, the procedures of a democratically governed religious community.

I don't think so. I followed the procedures and met with institutional stonewalling and denial by U*Us including President John Beuhrens from Day One. I would say that President John Beuhrens quite apparently fails to understand that when "the procedures of a democratically governed religious community" fail to work, or are knowingly and willfully misused and abused by people to obstruct justice or commit other abuses and injustuces that the people have a democratic right to express their dissatisfaction with the results of those "procedures" or point out problems with the "procedures" themselves. I was simply
exercising my democratic right to take my grievances to the people since the "procedures" of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the Unitarian Universalist Association aka U*UA and its Ministerial Fellowship Committee, and the Canadian Unitarian Council, has failed to provide any justice, equity and compassion in human relations or had even been misused and abused to obstruct justice, equity and compassion in human relations. . .

:The minister, having been chosen by that community, is not to be publicly attacked.

ROTFLMU*UO

You are a DIM Thinking "crazy asshat"* President John Beuhrens.

Here, let me change the word minister to another "democratically elected" leader.

The President of the United States of America having been chosen by that community, is not to be publicly attacked. . .

Please note here how a victim of egregious religious intolerance and verbal abuse by a U*U minister is now being accused of publicly attacking that minister for doing nothing more than informing his congregattion that the abuse had occurred and seeking their cooperation in ensuring that justice, equity and compassion in human relations are restored. . .

*"injurious" but not necessarily "untrue" "insulting and defamatory language" courtesy of Peacebang aka Rev. Victoria Weinstein.

:One may challenge privately, and discuss concerns through
other channels established by the congregation.

I did that. President John Beuhrens was kept informed about progress or lack thereof. . . No "channels" other than the Board were made available to me and the Board refused to responsibly redress my grievances. Once that channel is closed, and it was quite firmly closed, the only channel left available in a democratically governed relgious community is the congregation itself. . .

:One may not behave as you have done.

Obviously I disagreed with President John Beuhrens and still do. If a congregant believes that the Board of his or her U*U church has made a wrong and harmful decision of any kind I believe that they have every right to share their concerns with their fellow church members and that distributing letters to church members following church services should be quitte acceptable in any genuinely democratically governed religious community. Likewise, in some cases involving egregious errors and negligence, I see no reason why a congegant cannot share their concerns during 'Joys and Concerns' if all other channels have been closed to them.

:Sincerely,

I don't doubt it John. . .

:John A. Buehrens

:cc. The Rev. Ray Drennan
President of the Unitarian Church of Montreal

Please note how President John Beuhrens made sure that Rev. Ray Drennan knew that he had castigated me and had tried to intimidate me into silence with threats of expulsion and police action for sharing my legitimate concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's far more serious and harmful attack on me. . .

Now ask yourself why is it that President John Beuhrens never said to Rev. Ray Drennan

"One may not behave as you have done."

The hypocrisy. . . The hypocrisy. . .

Thanks indrax for providing that classic example of DIM Thinking* U*U institutional stonewalling cover-up and denial, to say nothing of a fine example of top level U*U meanness, arrogance, evasiveness and intimidating behaviour that dates to the early stages of this war of words and is now over a decade old. You have just provided more solid documentary evidence that U*Us were mean, arrogant, evasive and intimidating towards me over a decade. Now please be so kind as to post in this thread my letter that UUA President John Beuhens is responding to here, along with the letter that I sent him in response to this one.

I find it most interesting that you have publicly accused me of not being fortcoming with documents that you already had in your possession. . . Check that file I sent you because I have good reason to believe that the full text of Rev. Ray Drennan's sorry excuse for an apology is in there too. . . Feel free to post it so I can once again point out why it was not acceptable. Not that I haven't already done so in the past. . .

Monday, October 30, 2006 11:35:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

BTW indrax I really don't get how you come up with the seemingly quite delusional belief that you are now "more well informed" than me on the basis of posting that letter from former UUA President Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens of over a decade ago. After all it was addressed to me and addresses aspects of this conflict that I know a lot more about than you and other U*Us do. N'est-ce pas?

Monday, October 30, 2006 11:51:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

BTW The mailing address that indrax saw fit not to obscure is no longer valid so anyone sends anything to it will be wasting their time. But that does not change the fact that indrax, who has castigated me for "outing" Peacebang by identifying her as Rev. Victoria Weinstein, has no qualms about publishing my full mailing address here, even if it is an old one. It could very well be that it was still valid. I wonder if Joel Monka will tell off indrax for his indiscretion? I kind of doubt it. . .

Monday, October 30, 2006 12:11:00 pm  
Blogger indrax said...

No, You did NOT email me this document. Don't try to pretend you have been forthcoming with me. Your agenda is obviously not about informing people.

I kindly provided this document because you said you were looking for it.

Anyone can find the UUA's phone number easily enough. I doubt that that phone number goes to Buehrens anymore.

I didn't out anything. Do not accuse me of it.

I will deal with the letter and related documents in another forum.

Monday, October 30, 2006 12:45:00 pm  
Blogger Joel Monka said...

I wonder if Joel Monka will tell off indrax for his indiscretion? I kind of doubt it. . .

Apples and oranges. This is YOUR blog; you have complete control over what appears in it. You can moderate comments, edit comments, or delete comments. Your former address appears only at YOUR discretion. Will you give Peacebang the choice of whether her name appears? Somehow I doubt it...

Monday, October 30, 2006 3:20:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

You seem to forget Joel that my profile very clearly states that The Emerson Avenger is a "memory hole" free blog. That means pretty much nothing will be deleted on it with the rare exception of my own posts in which I made an HTML error or something. In fact I decided months ago that even under those circumstances I would not delete the post but just post a correction following it because I don't want to even give the appearance that I have "memory holed" any of my own posts. I deleted a few of my own comments that had bad links in them early on but I won't even be doing that.

Indrax posted a document that had my full mailing address in it, albeit an old and out of date one, without making any effort to obscure the address even though he did go to the effort of obscuring the UUA phone number and fax number. What does that tell you Joel?

You are exercising hypocritical double standards Joel whereas, as much as you and other U*Us can't stand it, I am being very consistent in terms of applying my "standards". You have already proven yourself to be exercising outrageously hypocritical double standards in terms of your criticizing more allegedly trying to "ruin" Rev. Weinstein, which is a ridiculous accusation to make to begin with as very little is likely to happen to her as a result of my justifiably "outing" her for unbecoming conduct. You wrote several emails and made several posts demanding that I de"out" Rev. Weinstein for all of your paranoid imagined terrible consequences might come to her as a result of it but you and zillions* of other U*Us have turned a balefully blind eye to the very real damage that has been done to me as a result of Rev. Ray Drennan and other like-minded U*Us effectively "outing" me as a "psychotic" cultist. Heck, even Rev. Victoria Weinstein participated in that ongoing U*U witch-hunt by describing me as a "hostile" and "crazy" Super-Vampire who she didn't have a Crucifix big enough to ward off. . . If I'm "hostile" it's because U*Us, including Rev. Victoria Weinstein and now you, have given me plenty of good reason to be just a bit hostile. Unfortunately for DIM Thinking U*Us I am far from crazy and I will drive a stake through the heart of corpse-cold blood-sucking U*U vampires if it should ever come to that. . .

Are you after a years of turning a blind I going to write a few emails or make a few blog posts or comment that might actually lead towards redress for the very "real life" injustices and abuses that I have been subjected to by U*Us throughout this decade old U*U witch-hunt? I have good reason to doubt it. . . You have already presented your credentials as a U*U hypocrite via your years of complicit silence.

Monday, October 30, 2006 4:17:00 pm  
Blogger indrax said...

Robin, you are accusing me and Joel of things here without taking into account all the available facts.

Do not be so confrontational.

Monday, October 30, 2006 4:43:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:No, You did NOT email me this document.

Really? Please tell us where you got it then, because it is not available anywhere on the internet as far as Google and I can see. . . AllTheWeb can't find it either indrax. If it was not in the file of text documents that I sent you months ago where did you obtain it from? Did the UUA provide it to you? Did the Unitarian Church of Montreal provide it to you? Or is it possible that you are *lying* when you claim that I did not send it to you even though I sent you a file that should have contained it months ago. . . I won't call you a liar just yet indrax because I am not quick to accuse people of lying. I only do so when I can prove it but you sure are looking like a liar in that that letter should have been amongst the various letters that I did send you.

:Don't try to pretend you have been forthcoming with me.

Yes I have been very forthcoming with you indrax, especially considering that I had reason to distrust you from Day One. I sent you some of the most pertinent documents in an email attachment months ago. The only reason I have become somewhat less forthcoming with you is because you have said and done things that have given me very good cause to distrust you. Even if you weren't outright out to discredit me, and there is evidence that you were, you were just plain foolish and incompetent. I have justifiably said with "friends" like indrax who needs enemies and that comment was highly justified by your words and actions.

:Your agenda is obviously not about informing people.

No of course not. . . Well that was quite a fortuitous Google search wasn't it indrax? Haven't I told U*Us that Google is on my side?

:I kindly provided this document because you said you were looking for it.

Well as you can see I appreciated your being so forthcoming with it regardless of your motivation behind so kindly providing it. . . I did however say that I was looking for all three documents. The letter that prompted that DIM Thinking institutional stonewalling response from UUA President Rev. John Buehrens and the letter that I wrote in response to this letter. Why did you fail or refuse to provide all three letters in sequence indrax? After all you are the one who is always complaing that I don't provide enough context even though I provide plenty of context. What is the reason or motivation behind your presenting President John Buehrens words but hiding mine?

:Anyone can find the UUA's phone number easily enough. I doubt that that phone number goes to Buehrens anymore.

Then why did you go to the effort to obscure it indrax? And why did you fail to obscure my mailing address that might well have been valid?

:I didn't out anything. Do not accuse me of it.

Sure you did. You posted a complete mailing address for me to the internet. Would you like me to post yours here indrax?

:I will deal with the letter and related documents in another forum.

Presumably you mean this other forum. right indrax? Man Google is just so forthcoming when I run all kinds of searches like the one I just ran earlier in this thread. You never know what you are going to find. . .

Deal with it here indrax. Stop trying to hide the real truth. Post all three letters in sequence or your credibility will be even lower than it already is. . . assuming that is possible of course.

Monday, October 30, 2006 4:49:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

And I'm still trying to figure out how somehow "it seems" to you that you are "now more well informed" about this conflict than I am. That is a totally ludicrous, if not seriously delusional. assertion for you to make.

Care to explain indrax?

Monday, October 30, 2006 5:20:00 pm  
Blogger indrax said...

No, You did not email me this document.
I agree that you should have, but you didn't.
I do have your response to Buehrens, and I will put it in the timeline relatively soon.
I do not have your original letter to him. I am not keeping it hidden, as you have asserted. If you can find it, I would like to have it.
I am in fact in the process of bringing a number of documents out of hiding. Your appreciation is not well expressed.
If I had said these were 'all over the internet', and suggested that you should just run a simple search, then I would be a liar like you.

However they ARE on the internet, apparently in a place not well indexed. Perhaps your valentine to the board is out there somewhere too.

I knew that that mailing address was already posted to your blog. I have not outed you.

What reasons have you had to distrust me 'from day one'? What was day one?

You should clarify whether or not you are trying to threaten me with an 'outing'.


Oh Robin, you spoiled the surprise, and I'm not finished with it yet.
Oh well, Happy Halloween!

Why should I 'deal with it here' Robin? I can't make a timeline very easily in comments, and you refuse to do it. You asked for a free and responsible search, and that is what you're getting. I am finding the truth..

I've been working on my own now for just under a month. I got these letters a few days ago at most. I am in the process of organizing a huge amount of information that is widely scattered. I will put the letters out soon. I ask you for a fraction of the patience I have shown you in requesting information.

Of course I'm delusional Robin.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006 12:49:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:Robin, you are accusing me and Joel of things here without taking into account all the available facts.

I don't think so indrax and I am confident that most people of intelligence and cinscience reading these posts will agree. You have accused me of lying on the flimsiest and most spurious of grounds indrax.

I doubt that even my worst enemies would back you up on your spurious accusations that I am a liar because they are at least smart enough to know that they would lose any credibility if they did. To use your own childish tactics, I challenge you to find ONE person, U*U or otherwise, who will back up your ridiculous allegations that I am a liar according to your truly bizarre criteria for what constitutes a lie.

:Do not be so confrontational.

I am no more confrontational towards you and other U*Us than you and other U*Us are confrontational towards me. If U*Us want a war of words they had better be prepared to take some hits. They had also better be prepared to lose it one of these days. . . Not that they have not already effectively lost this war of words years ago. U*Us just are too full of hypocrisy and hubris to throw in the towel when they have lost an argument.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006 1:21:00 am  
Blogger Joel Monka said...

I finally found the post I was looking for, that I didn't use in my earlier reply to your accusation of Indrax "outing" you by posting your address because I didn't want to make an accusation without having the reference to quote. You yourself posted your letter of grievance, WITH address, in a comment on the "Heresiology" blog. It was already public information, supplied by YOU. So... you feign outrage at his posting information that YOU had already published... you permit it to stand, when you could have editted it out... then compare yourself to your victim... then dare to call me a hypocrit. Well, I'll grant that you're "...being very consistent in terms of applying my "standards"."... I just can't agree with those standards.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006 1:41:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home