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
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: - 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: - 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 -

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

The Very Model Of A Modern Unitarian?

The Emerson Avenger's rather militant version of Gilbert & Sullivan's comic opera song 'I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major General'

This is most certainly not the Rev. Dr. Christopher Gist Raible version of - 'I Am the Very Model of a Modern Unitarian'*

I am the very model of a modern Unitarian,
I'm "liberal", and "Humanist", remarkably contrarian,
I know some things of Channing, but ignore the fights historical,
From Coleridge to Emerson, because I'm hypocritical;
I'm very unacquainted too with matters theological,
I understand our pagans are most flaky and illogical,
As a religious "Humanist" I'm dealing with some nasty news,
With many fearful facts about those "fundie" atheist U*Us.

I'm very good at being corpse-cold, indifferent, and callous,
I know the U*U logo is a form of flaming chalice,
In short, in matters human*itarian and Social*ist Darwinian,
I am the very model of a modern Unitarian.

I don't know our mythic history of corpse-cold Unitarians,
I won't answer to those rumours about Nazi Unit-Aryans,
I quote in U*U blogs the many crimes of Roman Catholics,
While turning a blind eye to those of our own U*U clerics,
I Deny, Ignore and Minimize U*U abusers and barbarians,
I can't hear the croaking chorus from our famous Unitarians,
Then I do my very utmost not to face the music's din again,
And ignore the whistle-blowing of that infernal Emersonian.

Then I can write a blog post in barbaric and insulting form,
And tell U*Us every detail of the Accepted Straight Man Uniform;
In short, in matters Wagnerian, Bavarian, and Totalitarian,
I am the very model of a modern Unitarian.

In fact, when I know what is meant by U*Us are unravelin',
When I can't tell the difference between some U*Us and Joe Stalin,
When affairs of U*U clergy are surprises I don't dare berate,
And when I know precisely what is meant by to "commiserate". . .
When I have learnt what progress has been made in U*U shunnery,
When I know no more of ethics than a U*U in a nunnery:
In short, when I've a splattering of anal U*U funnery,
You'll say a better U*U has never ever sh*t on me.

I know that Robin's knowledge, though quite lucky and adventurous,
Has insultingly been put down by U*U Atheists Acrimonious;
But still in matters contrarian, sectarian, and indeed barbarian,
I am the very model of a modern Unitarian.

* A work** in progress. . .

** Dare I say a masterpiece? ;-)

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

A Whole Pack Of U*U Lies Courtesy Of Rev. Charles Eddis, Minister Emeritus Of The Unitarian Church Of Montreal

What U*U's Affirm - by Rev. Charles Eddis minister emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal

:I have never met a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not accept the findings of science.

This is almost certainly a misleading half-truth intended to "affirm and promote" the myth that U*Us are big on Reason and rationality. No doubt Rev. Eddis means "the findings of science" in a general sense but it is exceedingly unlikely that Rev. Charles Eddis has never met a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not dispute some of the findings of science. . . Also, depending on just how broadly one wants to interpret the word "science", there are quite a number of "findings of science" i.e. readily demonstrable and verifiable facts and truths that a whole lot of U*Us are quite averse to accepting.

:I have never met a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not affirm the importance of this life, of living well in the here and now as opposed to preparing now for a life to come.

No doubt this is primarily about the "Humanist" faction of U*Uism's rejection of any possibility of an "afterlife" of one kind or another but it is also about the U*U emphasis on "living well" in the U*U World and the "real world". I expect by now that Rev. Eddis has met a fair number of U*Us that do believe in "a life to come" and that one can and shold prepare for it in "this life". It is however open to considerable question as to just how committed U*Us are to "living well in the here and now" when one contrasts the purported principles and purposes of U*Uism and other claimed ideals of U*Uism (including many of the ideals professed in this U*U tract. . .) with the other words and actual actions of U*Us in the here and now. . .

:Unitarians and Universalists hold that living well now is the only possible preparation for whatever may come after death - if anything.

This is indeed largely true in principle, in terms of those U*Us who do believe in the possibility or reality of "the life to come"; however, U*Us not only abjectly fail, but obstinately refuse, to live up to the very principles and ideals that constitute "living well" in Rev. Charles Eddis' and other U*Us conception of "living well".

:Life is a gift, a mystery to be respected and lived.

Well when one takes even a cursory look at how a lot of U*Us live it is open to considerable question just how "well" U*Us "respect" the mystery of life and live their lives. . .

:I have never met a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not feel a sense of personal responsibility for how he or she lived his or her life and for what happened to society and the world.


I have met hundreds of U*Us, many of them members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal where Rev. Charles Eddis is the minister emeritus, who display a glaring lack of a sense of personal responsibility for how he or she lives his or her life and for what happens to society and the world. If Montreal Unitarian U*Us, to say nothing of other U*Us world-wide, really possessed a genuine sense of personal responsibility for how they live, and for what happens to society and the world, they would not have walked past my picket signs for close to a decade now without taking the slightest responsibility for the U*U injustices, U*U abuses and U*U hypocrisy that those picket sign slogans expose and denounce. Ditto for the grossly negligent and utterly irresponsible response of U*Us world-wide, including top level U*UA officials like former UUA President the Rev. Dr. John A* Buehrens, current UUA President Rev. William G** Sinkford, former Ministerial Fellowship Committee Director Rev. Diane Miller and Rev. David Hubner, to my letters of grievance and my online criticism of U*U injustices, U*U abuses, U*U hypocrisy and U*U stupidity. Rev. Ray Drennan is just one glaringly obvious example of an outrageously hypocritical U*U who has obstinately refused to accept the slightest personal responsibility for how his or her words and actions, or lack thereof. . . happened to affect U*U society and the U*U world, to say nothing of "society at large" and the real world. . .

:I have never met a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not insist on the right to make up her or his own mind, rather than being told what to believe.

ROTFLMU*UO again. . .

Rev. Charles Eddis is minister emeritus of a whole U*U "church" full of DIM Thinking U*Us who have effectively allowed the negligent, incompetent, complicit and collusive leadership of the Unitarian Church of Montreal to quite manipulatively tell them what to believe about me as a result of abjectly failing, or even obstinately refusing. . . to responsibly make up their own minds about me after entering into a genuinely free and genuinely *responsible* search for the truth and meaning of the "root causes" of my letters of grievance and my "alternative spiritual practice" of protesting against their own and other U*Us' injustices, abuses, hypocrisy and stupidity.

:I have never known a Unitarian or a Universalist who did not believe that Jesus was the son of normal human parents, conceived and born as are you and I.

This may be true but it may well depend on what the meaning of the word "known" is. . . Considering Rev. Charles Eddis' very prominent position in the U*U World it is somewhat unlikely that he has never at any time met a single Unitarian or a Universalist who believed that Jesus was conceived by the "Holy Spirit" as per "orthodox" Christian belief.

:I know no Unitarian or Universalist who regards the world as a puppet stage over which some higher inscrutable power from time to time pulls strings.

This may have been true at the time that Rev. Charles Eddis first wrote this tract decades ago, although even that is open to some question as it is likely that even decades ago there were Unitarians and/or Universalists who Rev. Charles Eddis had some personal contact with who did believe that from time to time God pulls a few strings here and there. I take note of the fact that Rev. Charles Eddis says "I know" rather than "I know of". . . This may well have been Clintonesque disingenuousness at the time Rev. Eddis wrote this tract. In any case, as I have said to Rev. Eddis on a few occasions now, including very recently. . . This part of his inadequately revised "What Unitarians and Universalists Believe" tract has been obsolete for well over a decade now because Rev. Charles Eddis has met me and knows very well that I believe, and can even honestly claim to know. . . that God does indeed pull stings here and there from time to time as evidenced by the phenomenon of the unusual and highly meaningful "coincidences" termed as synchronicity by Carl Gustav Jung. Of course I guess that Rev. Charles Eddis can still disingenuously yet quite truthfully claim not to "know" me. He certainly hasn't made any effort to really get to know me over the last decade or more. . .

:I cannot be sure no Unitarian or Universalist will contradict me on some of this,

Well Rev. Charles Eddis most certainly can know and almost certainly did know that I not only could, but almost certainly would, contradict him on at least some of "this" before it was considerably less than adequately, and quite evidently less than honestly. . . revised and republished recently. . .

:but I venture to say that Unitarian and Universalist agreement on these matters is as close to unanimity as you will find in any religious movement.

Not any more Chuck. . . In fact Montreal Unitarians, and indeed plenty of other U*Us world-wide, quite evidently seem to strongly favor censorship by church, and even misusing and abusing the "secular authorities" of the state as proxies to impose U*U "church" censorship, at least when it comes to censoring and suppressing U*U sh*t-disturbers who dare to publicly expose and denounce U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy. . .

:If you ask Unitarians and Universalists what they believe, you may find them stumped for an answer.

Now there's some truth in advertising for you. . .

:If you were to conclude from this and from their diversity and freedom, that they don't know what they think, or that one can believe anything one likes and be a Unitarian or a Universalist, or, as some say, a Unitarian Universalist, you would be mistaken.

No you would not. . . There is plenty of evidence that strongly suggests that Unitarian Universalists can believe pretty much anything they want to believe these days, even when those beliefs are demonstrably false. Heck even this effectively fraudulent U*U propaganda is riddled with demonstrably false beliefs and assertions. Although U*U diversity of belief is quite evident U*U freedom is quite another matter these days. . .

:In spite of appearances, they are remarkably united in their basic values and beliefs.

Perhaps you should say that U*Us are remarkably united in their "claimed" values and beliefs Chuck because their actual values and beliefs are all over the map of the U*U World.

The following addendum to "What U*Us Affirm" comes courtesy of CUC Executive Director Mary Bennett -

:So, what about it? Do you agree with this version of what we affirm?

Quite evidently I do not agree that this version of what U*Us affirm is a truthful or accurate reflection of what U*Us really believe or how they actually live their lives. . . It is abundantly evident that many U*Us abjectly fail or obstinately refuse to actually walk this effectively fraudulent U*U talk.

:Is there more you'd like to add?

I could think of a few things that I would like to add in addition to those obsolete and/or fraudulent words that I would like to remove from this U*U false advertising. Amongst other things I would like to insert the word NOT! between "We are" and "opposed to censorship by church, state, or any other institution."

:Are you one of those Unitarians or Universalists who want to "contradict me on some of this"?

Indeed I am and have already done so in the past. Indeed I fully intend to continue to contradict U*Us on some of this in the future. . .

* Asshat

** Gutless if not Godless

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, November 27, 2006

Comrade Kevin And The Emerson Avenger Tag Team The U*U Church Of Birmingham!

Comrade Kevin, a somewhat disillusioned U*U from Atlanta Georgia, thinks that things are anything but peachy at the neighboring U*U Church Of Birmingham, Alabama. . . U*UWF wrestling champions Comrade Kevin and The Emerson Avenger hereby deliver this truly gory double whammy to the Unitarian*Universalist "Church" Of Birmingham, Alabama that seems to be the very model of a certain species of hoity-toity U*U Social Club, er I mean U*U "Church". . .

Emerson Avenger inquired in a comment as to the gory details of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Birmingham. He also wishes to know about the young adult UU movement and its problems.

The problems with the national movement deserve a post all to itself (if not a series), so I will talk about UUCB for right now.

For starters, the church was housed for forty years in Mountain Brook, the uppity old money suburb of Birmingham. The 24 karot gold stick up the ass of many long term members stems primarily from that crucial fact. Four families had been instrumental in founding the church in the mid 1950s. These upper-crust, pretentious chosen ones believed that they ran the church and that the entire life of UUCB should revolve around them and the decisions they chose to make.

They made over-theatric gestures in reference to their own supposed activism in the local community. In reality, their glory days had long since passed. Some had taken minor roles in the Civil Rights Movement and rested on their laurels, wishing to receive accolades for their roles as martyrs and messiahs. In reality, few had actively stuck their necks out but all wanted credit; they stated, in hushed tones, that they had actually walked hand in hand with Dr. King.

The problem with B activists is that their stories are often more impressive than the reality of their deeds. The problem with B activists is that, having scaled one mountain, they are utterly oblivious to the fact that there are other ranges and hilltops worthy of climbing. They were instead content to bask in the dying embers of their glorious past while running in place and thumping their chests.

Some abused the Circle of Lights, feeling that every Sunday's joys and concerns were their own personal soapbox.

They did not wish to grow the church. Instead, they wished to preserve the country club for members who they deemed worthy. They made no efforts to extend a warm hand to friends and visitors and only made overtures of friendship once satisfied they were worthy of their attention.

The latest minister they've installed has proceeded to call them out on all of these issues. I find it immensely amusing because these people decided: This time we're going to have the gay minister we've always wanted.

I guess they thought maybe the gay minister wouldn't get angry at them nor force them to confront the fallacies of their ways. I'm afraid this was not the case at all.

I feel sorry for about half of the members, who have come to expect a sort of mediocrity. They could have it so much better, but they have sold out into this second-rate, medium-sized city, self-defeating, inferiority complex attitude to such a degree that they resemble the walking dead.

I feel immensely unsorry for the other half who feel as though common courtesy is a gift only bestowed on people who masturbate their own immense egos and narcissistic attitudes.

Click here to read comments, or add your own. . . to Comrade Kevin's original post about the U*UCoB.

Labels: , , ,

The Emerson Avenger Fires Another Well-Aimed Warning Shot Across The Bows Of The U*U Ship of Fools. . .

Here is something that I just posted to U*U Uber-Propagandist UU World Executive Editor Chris Walton's Philocrites' blog in this thread. Catch it before Philocrites relegates it to his gaping U*U "memory hole". . .

I can and will use words as carefully aimed guided cruise missiles, or even verbal weapons of mass destruction. . . as long as U*Us persist in using and/or refuse to retract the insulting and defamatory or otherwise harmful and damaging war words that they quite regularly use against me and other people Philocrites. I have said it before but I will say it again. Anyone who starts a war of words with me had better be prepared to take some hits and ultimately lose that war of words. It is most regrettable that you and other DIM Thinking U*Us, including UUA President Rev. Bill Sinkford, Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, and (most recently) Rev. Diane Rollert. . . have repeatedly failed to pay heed to the numerous warning shots that I have fired across the bows of the U*U Ship of Fools in this ongoing War of the U*U World. . .

BTW The Emerson Avenger blog is nowhere near as "unfrequented and isolated" as you and other DIM Thinking U*Us would like to believe, and I can easily take steps to ensure that it is a lot more frequented in the future if and when I put my mind to it. . . I may well do that sooner rather than later.

Update November 27, 2006 12:28 pm. Too late. . . The above guided verbal cruise missile was "memory holed" within minutes as is typical of Chris Walton's "memory holing" of pretty much everything that I have ever submitted as a comment to his Philocrites blog. I must get around to posting some of the more interesting educational and entertaining comments that Philocrites aka UU World Executive Editor Chris Walton has "memory holed" over the last year or so. . .

Language is weaponized when it is used to objectify, depersonalize, dehumanize, to create an "other." Once a person is labeled as "not like us," the rules for civilized behavior no longer apply. . . .

Progressives as well as conservatives have their way of dehumanizing. They hurl stones when they use terms such as "fundamentalist," "rednecks," or "right-wing conservatives" in derisive ways that allow no room for nuances, individual differences, or empathy with their adversaries' points of view.

I am not interested in weapons, whether words or guns. I want to be part of the rescue team for our tired, overcrowded planet. The rescuers will be those people who help other people to think clearly, and to be honest and open-minded. They will be an antidote to those people who disconnect us. They will de-objectify, rehumanize, and make others more understandable and sympathetic.

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, November 26, 2006

U*U Lies #2 In A Very Long Series

The 2001 Covenant/Vision Statement of The Unitarian Church of Montreal:

We, Unitarians of Montreal, provide a sacred space, where we embrace diversity and seek truth. We cultivate moral integrity and foster a spirit of caring, creativity, and celebration of life. We nurture spiritual search and practice, affirm the democratic process in human affairs, and visibly promote social justice, sustainability, and kinship with all of life in our neighbourhood, nation, and global community.

Labels: , , , ,

Hypocritical Totalitarian Unitarians Are At It Again. . .

Well the last couple of days have been quite interesting for The Emerson Avenger on the public protesting front. I will start with what happened today and then report what happened last night in another post. . .

This morning I arrived at the Unitarian Church of Montreal earlier than usual because the fourth Sunday of the month now has an additional service in French that starts at 9:15. I wanted to make it clear to the Francophone members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, aka Mouvement unitarien universaliste du Québec, aka Mouvement U*U du Québec ;-) ;-) , that if they are not part of the solution to the U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that I am protesting against that they are part of the problem.

My protest action began at about 8:45 or so and a small handful of Montreal Unitarians, not all of them Francophones BTW. . . showed up for the early morning French language service that was "animated" by one Patricia Philip. In my hands I displayed two French language picket signs. One was the classic -


slogan that dates back to Rev. Ray Drennan's insulting and defamatory anti-Catholic tirade against Pierre Elliot Trudeau's Roman Catholic rite state funeral and the other said -


A sign saying -



was displayed near the entranceway to this so-called Unitarian "Church".

My other English language picket signs were displayed in their usual places propped up against lamp posts, sign posts, a municipal trash can that the city kindly provided as an extra picket sign support last year, and the trees and bushes that border the property of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. Rev. Diane Rollert drove by in her car around 9 am or so and witnessed what Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance once insightfully called my "alternative spiritual practice" once again.

Some time later a police car drove by on the other side of de Maisonneuve boulevard heading from west to east. It stopped at the traffic lights on the corner of Claremont and then did a U-turn and came back towards me as I was walking from west to east on the sidewalk in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. I walked a little bit past the church and the police car which had parked in front of it and then turned back towards the west and walked past the police car. It was clear that the police officers were either curious or responding to a compaint. As usual I just continued on with my "alternative spiritual practice" of protesting against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy. After a while the police officers got out of the car and we had the usual chat that occurs when the police show up to act on a complaint lodged by Montreal's DIM Thinking U*Us. I told the police that as far as I was concerned I was acting 100% within my rights. The police said that they would verify that and got back in their car and spent a while consulting their onboard computer and list of municipal bylaws etc. I continued my usual protest activities. A bit later a police van (probably a supervisor's van) pulled up behind the police car and soon three police officers were consulting each other and talking on their cell phones, presumably with their superiors but possibly also with police department lawyers.

I can't remember exactly when certain things were said but one of the male police officers did at one point ask me if I had been contacted by an investigator, i.e. a police detective. I replied that I had not and that I was unaware of any criminal charges against me. I later informed this officer that I had already been arrested on criminal charges in 2000 and that I had been acquitted of those charges. This officer saw my picket slogan that says -


and asked me what a "Trudeau Salute" was. I showed him what a "Trudeau Salute" is. No disrespect was intended, it was just the simplest way to let him know what a "Trudeau Salute" is. He did not take offence at all, as I think he understood that the "Trudeau Salute" that I showed him was just a demonstration of what a "Trudeau Salute" is and not directed at him. He said "Trudeau did that?" and I explained to him that former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau had indeed once given the finger to some strikers in the 1970's and that, ever since that pivotal moment in Canadian history, giving the finger has been known in Canada as a "Trudeau Salute". I explained to him that the picket sign dated back to the time that Rev. Ray Drennan had offensively attacked the Pierre Trudeau's Roman Catholic funeral in his appropriately headlined 'Wrong Message' and very opinionated Op/Ed piece in the Montreal Gazette. I told him that the Gazette had received 50 letters to the editor condemning Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerance and bigotry and that five of them were published.

The police asked me the usual questions but not very many. They seemed more preoccupied with dealing with church members who had called in complaints and consulting each other and their superiors. I explained the basic reasons for my protest and made it clear that the dispute arose from Rev. Ray Drennan's fundamentalist atheist intolerance and bigotry. No doubt it was an eye-opener to these cops that a so-called "church" could have an intolerant dogmatic atheist as a minister. . . At one point I told the female officer that I considered the many complaints called in to the police by Montreal Unitarians to be police harassment. She understood that in the traditional sense of the term and replied that it was the first time that she had ever come to deal with a complaint at the Unitarian Church of Montreal. I told her that the police had come dozens of times in the past as a result of repeated complaints about my protest activities by Montreal Unitarians. I explained to her that I did not mean police harassment against myself so much as I meant that Montreal Unitarians were harassing the police by repeatedly calling in spurious complaints about my protest activities and were thus forcing the police to repeatedly come to the alleged crime scene that is known as the Unitarian Church of Montreal. . . I must say however that the repeated police interventions that result from numerous complaints called in by Montreal Unitarians, as well as certain acts committed by a few unprofessional police officers in the past, could indeed be considered police harassment. Indeed my arrest on trumped up criminal charges in December of 2000 could most certainly be considered to be a false arrest as the charges were totally spurious and I was rightly acquitted of those flimsy criminal charges.

I just kept walking back and forth with a couple of picket signs as usual. After going into the church once or twice to discuss the situation with church members the police car and van finally left. The police never made an issue of the picket signs that were leaning up against various props, as some officers have done in the past, and they never indicated that they thought I was doing anything illegal. The fact that one of the police officers specifically asked me if I had been contacted by a police investigator aka detective does however indicate that some Montreal Unitarians may have brought some criminal charges against me, and that there may be yet another criminal prosecution of my protest activities in the works, unless he just misspoke which is a possibility.

The police van parked surrepticiously behind a nearby building just off Bulmer Street, immediately to the west of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, presumably to keep me under surveillance for a bit. I saw the van and I think that the driver knew that I had seen the van. After a few minutes the van gave up and left. Some time later a supervisor's van, I am not sure if it was the same van because I didn't notice the word Superviseur written on the first van, drove by from west to east keeping an eye on me. Later a police van, possibly the same one, parked a couple of hundred feet to the west of the Unitarian Church of Montreal on de Maisonneuve boulevard and kept me under surveillance for at least fifteen to twenty minutes, and possibly as long as half an hour or so. It must have been quite boring and I kind of regret that no Montreal U*Us decided to try to assault me today. . .

I just continued on in my "alternative spiritual practice" and, when the WASU*U ** crowd began to show up, I replaced the French language picket signs with two brand-spanking new English language picket signs that said -




Their backsides said -




These signs were quite shamelessly displayed to the police van that had me under surveillance for at least fifteen minutes. Most Montreal U*Us were not at all happy to see the picket sign slogans that directly referrenced the false and malicious labeling of Creation Day as a "cult" by Frank Greene, John Inder, Keith Robinson and of course Rev. Ray Drennan. Many Montreal U*Us shot me stony faced glares when confronted by these "image tarnishing" picket sign slogans. It was quite gratifying to see John Inder himself approaching the Unitarian Church of Montreal from Clairemont avenue in the east. He walked very stony faced past these picket sign slogans that I made certain that he would have to look at unless he closed his eyes or something. Some Montreal U*Us actually do their best to hide my picket sign slogans from their eyes by averting their eyes from the picket signs or even by pulling their hats and umbrellas down low over their heads.

Some time later, probably after 10 am the police car that had first arrived on the scene from Station 11 (11-1) pulled up in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal again and the two police officers got out of the car and headed towards the entrance of the Unitarian Church of Montreal once again. . . I asked them if they had a few seconds and they said "Later". I none-the-less suggested that they should call in their Community Relations officer to deal with this problem. This is a suggestion and even a recommendation that I have made many times in the past but the police have never acted on that eminently reasonable suggestion.

The two police officers went up to the front entry of the church but remained outside and had a long discussion with a tall blonde fifty-something woman who I did not recognize as being a member of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. Interestingly enough, a car with Massachusetts licence plates had arrived earlier and I believe that it is within possibilty that this tall blonde woman may have been in that car as I did notice a similar looking blonde woman in that car as it passed me. It would be quite interesting if Boston has actually sent someone up to Montreal, especially if their approach is more geared towards police intervention (including possible further criminal charges) rather than entering into dialogue and negotiating a genuinely just, equitable and compassionate resolution of this ludicrously drawn out war of words.

After their discussion with this tall blonde woman, which went on for at least five to ten minutes and included some discussion with one or two Montreal U*Us like Juan Vera, the two police officers approached me. They asked for my current addess and phone number in case they needed to contact me. I provided them with my address and my email address which is the best way to contact me. The fact that they asked for my address and phone number in case they needed to contact me indicates to me that the police officer who asked if I had been contacted by a police investigator yet may not have misspoken, other than unwittingly alerting me to a possible new criminal investigation of my protest activities of course. It will be most interesting to see how this most recent misguided attempt by hypocritical U*Us to criminalize my criticism and dissent plays out. . .

I reminded the female police officer about my suggestion to make judicious use of their Community Relations officer in an effort to settle this dispute and she responded that it was up to the police to decide whether or not to use their Community Relations officer. I said that it was just my "recommendation". I also told the police that I had repeatedly sought dialogue with the Unitarian Church of Montreal in an effort to settle the dispute. I told them about the recent emails that I had sent to the new settled minister of the UCM Rev. Diane Rollert. I told them how she had not even provided an acknowledgement of receipt of the emails. I also told them in some detail about how I had spoken with Rev. Rollert last Sunday as we both walked towards the church from the Vendome METRO station and that she had orally acknowleged having received the emails but had then said that she was "not at liberty to speak" with me. I told the police that it was possible that Rev. Diane Rollert's hands were tied by the Board and congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. I even put my hands behind my back as I said this, in a gesture that the police officers would well understand. . . The police officers gave me some world-weary knowing looks and we left it at that. I am seriously thinking of forwarding my recent emails to Rev. Diane Rollert to Station 11 as evidence of the UCM's refusal to negotiate a settlement with me, and I will probably have a chat with the commander of Station 11 in the near future.

I am quite certain that it is only a matter of time before the police at Station 11 realize, like their colleagues at Station 12, that it is the Unitarian Church of Montreal's obstinate refusal to enter into dialogue with me and initiate responsible conflict resolution procedures that cause me to persist in my "alternative spiritual practice" . . . As a Montreal journalist once told me, the police at Station 12 who he had interviewed after my arrest in December 2000 thought that the Unitarian Church of Montreal was crazier than I am. I would have to concur. In fact the police clearly understand that I am a very reasonable person as a result of my numerous interactions with them that are usually very smooth with the occasional exception when over-zealous and unprofessional police officers abuse their authority. Today's police intervention has certainly given me the push to move forward with my complaint to the Police Ethics Commission about the highly questionable and probably illegal seizure and destruction of my picket signs last fall by two totalitarian police officers from Station 11. In fact I will discuss the "big picture", including today's intervention, with appropriate advocates and rights groups.

Just before they left I asked the police officers if there was any problem with my protest activities and the female officer indicated that everything was OK ask long as I refrained from saying "stupid things" (betises) to church members as they entered the church. The male officer had previously asked me if I made comments to church members and I indicated that I did at times make comments as people passed me. I also pointed out that I did not have a megaphone. . . Quite frankly I believe that I have a perfect right to make pertinent comments to certain people as they pass. If people can blare all kinds of slogans and diatribes though megaphones at peaceful public protests I see no reason why I cannot say a thing or two to some DIM Thinking Montreal U*Us as they pass me on their way to their alleged "church". AFAIAC The police have no grounds to ask me to refrain from making coments and the police and Montreal Unitarians should be quite thankful that I don't shout slogans through a megaphone as I am protesting. If the police try to restrict my ability to make a comment or two as people pass I may well invest in a megaphone. . .

This all comes down to outrageously hypocritical U*Us, and possibly not just Montreal Unitarian U*Us, trying to use what former UUA President Rev. John A* Buehrens referred to as "the secular authorities" of the state to impose Unitarian "church" censorship and suppression of my constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression and peaceful public protest. Once again Montreal Unitarians, and possibly even UUA U*Us. . . are making a complete mockery of obviously insincere and effectively fraudulent U*U principles and ideals in using the "state" police force to try to silence or restrict my legitimate public protest in front of their so-called "church".

* Asshat

** WASU*U = White Anglo-Saxon U*U

Pronounciation wa-zoo

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, November 25, 2006

My Defence Against The Spurious "Charges" Brought Against Me By DIM Thinking Montreal Unitarians On November 22nd, 1999

My defense to the motion to revoke my membership that the Board of Management of the Unitarian Church of Montreal brought against me at the congregational meeting of November 22, 1999.

(The following is a copy of a hand-written defense that I read from with minimal modification, self-censorship, or other editing. There were, however, some ad-lib asides etc. It is possible that a tape recording of this meeting exists but I am not aware of it.)

“Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. . .”

I beg to differ

Does anybody know what day it is today?

(Nobody responded to this question although I said that I sought a response and gave some time for people to provide one)

Today is the 36th anniversary of the small e, small c, in quotation marks “eTHNIC cLEANSING” of John Fitzgerald Kennedy - 35th President of the United States of America.

(I then read extensively from the “Riot Act” i.e. the Guidelines of Ministerial Leadership)

In my eyes, based on my “direct experience” the Board’s recommendation to this congregation that my membership in the Unitarian Church of Montreal be revoked (as proposed in the motion that I received in the mail and that is now before you for your deliberation and subsequent vote) is yet another “leap of faith.” It is “based on the hope” that, by controlling the process in such a way as to minimize my ability to defend myself from their charges, the leadership of this church can mislead a two-thirds majority of this congregation in to approving their motion; thus transforming their “leap of faith” into an actual Act of Faith or, in Spanish, Auto-da-Fé. An Auto-da-Fé is, according to Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language: The public declaration of the judgement passed on persons tried in the courts of the Spanish Inquisition, followed by the execution by the Civil Authorities of the sentence imposed.

It is clear to me, and I believe that it will become clear to all reasonably intelligent people who, having a genuine appreciation for justice, equity and compassion in human relations, and seriously investigating all of the circumstances surrounding these charges, that there are serious flaws in the justice process and in the wording of the motion that the Board wants this congregation to adopt. I believe that the Executive Committee and the Board members of this “church” have made a very serious “mistake” in even proposing this motion, particularly without ever having invited me to any Board meetings to present my side of the story to them. I believe that, had I been invited to the June 16, 1999, Board meeting, or previous and subsequent meetings, so I could present my case to the Board that the motion that is before you would never have been put to the congregation. I wish to give the Board an opportunity to admit their “mistake” and voluntarily withdraw the motion.

(I made it clear that I would continue with my defense but that, as far as I was concerned, the Board could withdraw the motion at any time during the meeting.)

The Board says that I have refused to accept any decisions of the UCM or its affiliated bodies.

I say prove it.

(I have in fact “accepted” some of the said “decisions.”)

The Board says I have demonstrated a lack of respect for the said decisions.

I say prove it, and perhaps any lack of respect I have shown was simply because those decisions were unworthy of respect.

The Board says that I have demonstrated a lack of respect for the democratic process.

I say prove it, and countercharge that the successive church Boards have not quite lived up to the democratic ideals of our church.

The Board says that I have “lodged a number of spurious and unfounded claims against the Church.”

I say that I firmly believe that none of my claims against the church are unfounded, and even the few that may appear to be spurious can be shown to be justified when explained to reasonably intelligent people.

Prove they are unfounded. Prove they are spurious.

The Board says that I have refused to accept the rejection of my complaints etc.

I say thank you for so publicly admitting that you have repeatedly rejected my perfectly legitimate and very serious complaints.

The Board says that my “refusal to accept and abide by the decisions of the UCM and its affiliated bodies is incompatible with membership in the Church.

I say that this statement might be true if this were the Totali-tarian Church of Montreal.

(I ad-libbed: “or the Authori-tarian Church of Montreal.”)

I say that the said statement is simply another well documented example of the “moral and ethical mediocrity that I have encountered amongst Unitarians.” But if I wanted to use Ray Drennan’s hyperbole I would say that, “I am shocked.” “It is a moral outrage that a (Unitarian) person, usually a (dissenter) can be thrown out into the street” for exercising their “right of conscience” when they believe the church has made decisions that are neither just, nor equitable, nor compassionate. Decisions that promote marginalization of a person rather than “acceptance and encouragement of their spiritual growth.” Decisions made without any “responsible search for truth.” Decisions that degrade the “inherent worth and dignity” of a person.

The Board says that the “dispute settling mechanisms of the Church are exhausted. I say they are not. Not by any means.

(I then made it clear that I would be filing a second complaint with the MFC regardless of the outcome of this meeting.)

The Disruptive Behaviour Committee, whose epithet has been described as “Stalinistic” by a former Board member of this Church, one of Eastern European ethnicity , is , by its very name, not a “dispute settling mechanism.” The DBC never attempted to “create compromise” it was set up primarily to prevent me from trying to distribute letters to the congregation appealing to you for intervention in my dispute. It rejected my complaint against Ray Drennan and John Inder, perhaps unilaterally, rejected my complaint arising from Pierre Binette’s physically pushing me around and threats of more serious physical assault.

(I was told I had one minute left at this point and went directly to my concluding statement on the final page of my defense beginning with

“This is your hour of darkness. . .”

I was thus unable to respond to the third and, for the UCM, most problematic charge against me.)

The Board says that I have “made statements in print, sought media attention for my demands, and displayed messages. . . in a picketing campaign.”

I say I have a perfect right to do so as both a Unitarian and, thank God (and I mean that not in vain) a citizen of Canada which fortunately is not a totalitarian dominion.

I say this is a church where “malicious gossip” is not only condoned but seemingly rampant. I say that the words “Solar Temple” and “cult” come from the mouths of Frank Greene (former President of the Board and “Pillar of the Church” who was Parliamentarian of this meeting”), Ray Drennan and, if I am to believe Ray’s insistence that he was the “only one being honest” with me, other more politically astute members of this church who had the good sense to say these words to my face or to someone who would inform me of them.

I say that this church does engage in small e, small c, in quotation marks, “eTHNIC cLEANSING” that is what we are here for tonight. I can justify this statement to the public and have done so with success.

I say that this church “tarnished” its own “image”, indeed its principles and purposes, through the words and actions of its leaders and I am simply exposing this to public scrutiny. I am protesting the shameful conduct that I have been subjected to. Why can’t you see that words like “Solar Temple”, “cult”, “crazy”, “nuts”, “psychotic” etc. etc. etc. are “image tarnishing” and that I felt “harassed” by these “statements” long before I ever publicly protested them?


In the words of the woman who berated me on Sunday:

“Allez vous faites soignez.”

Why is it that you all rejected my letters complaining about my (mis)treatment and failed to acknowledge how “very difficult and unpleasant” my life was made by (it)? Some Unitarians said, “If you don’t like it why don’t you leave?”

Small e, small c, in quotation marks “eTHNIC cLEANSING.”

The “Last of the Mohicans” walks into a bar and asks for a beer to slake his thirst. The bar tender growls, “We don’t serve Injuns in these here parts.” Not wanting any further confrontation the “Last of the Mohicans” calmly and quietly walks out of the bar.

Small e, small c, in quotation marks “eTHNIC cLEANSING.”

Thirty-six years ago today Unitarians and most other citizens of our neighbour to the south, and indeed people all around the world were in mourning. John F. Kennedy was murdered. Blown to “kingdom come” by concealed assassins JFK was an “ethnic.” He was Irish, an ethnic group that suffered from prejudice in the “Land of the Free.” Not only was he Irish but he was of the Roman Catholic faith, a religion looked upon with suspicion by White Anglo Saxon Protestant Americans in the “Home of the Brave.” And boy was he “cleansed.” Murder, or in the terminology of the gouvernment agencies that many conspiracy theorists believe played a role in JFK’s assassination, “terminated with extreme prejudice.” The ultimate and final act of any “ethnic cleansing” campaign. If there is time I propose a two-minute period of reflection for all people who have been subjected to the Orwellian euphemism “ethnic cleansing.”

What is an Orwellian euphemism?

As Ray Drennan has stated clearly in his sermon titled “Direct Experience” in which he described MFC (Ministerial Fellowship Committee) as, “a (sic) euphemism of the first order. A (sic) euphemism is best understood as a handy device of the English language which is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Conclusion::“This is your hour of darkness”

(I ad-libbed that I meant “darkness” in the sense of ignorance and not knowing all the facts or truth about my case.)

I hope that more than two-thirds of you* are beginning to see the darkness and will begin to move towards the light by taking my grievances seriously and responding to me with genuine justice, genuine equity, and genuine compassion.I bid you adieu.

(*I only needed one third to “win” but two-thirds would have been a clear majority.Only three members out of 80 present voted against the Board’s motion.)

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

A Child Of Dogmatic Atheists Speaks Out Against Emotional Abuse

Well look what The Emerson Avenger just found over on The Daily Kos blog. . .

I was raised as an atheist UU

My mother was a dogmatic atheist -- had the same scornful attitude as some of the posters on this thread -- but at Sunday School and later at a Unitarian camp the possibility of my actually having a choice as to what I believed was offered -- thank the Gods!

Some people are born with a spiritual bent. I don't want to talk about why because I don't want to get into an argument, but it happens. To ridicule a child for it, same as to ridicule a child for anything, is emotional abuse and does emotional damage. I am speaking from personal experience. Are any of you sniffing, contemptuous atheists parents? Take note.

As for evolution and a belief in something divine -- the idea that they are mutually exclusive is baffling to me, really.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

U*U Lies #1 In A Very Long Series

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, November 19, 2006

The Emerson Avenger's E-Mails That Rev. Diane Rollert Is "Not At Liberty" To Respond To. . .

You will find below the email communications that I have sent to the new settled minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal Rev. Diane Rollert starting on Thor's Day October 12th, 2006 right up until today. According to what she told me earlier today she has received the two emails that preceded today's latest communication but is "not at liberty" to speak with me due to "congregational polity" or possibly "congregational policy". Maybe she can respond anonymously here or something. . . Or maybe she can show some backbone and tell the Unitarian Church of Montreal that the time to start responsibly speaking with me is long overdue.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Dear Rev. Rollert,

Thank you for verbally confirming that you have received the emails copied below when I asked you if you had received them as we were both walking toward the Unitarian Church of Montreal from Vendome METRO station this morning.

I have written about our encounter on The Emerson Avenger blog here -

As I said to you earlier today, and as should be clear from what I have repeated on The Emerson Avenger blog, I believe that you have a moral and ethical professional responsibility as the minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal to take a leadership position that leads it towards actually practicing justice, equity and compassion in its human relations with me rather than willfully disregarding and flagranting violating these and other U*U principles in its rather inhuman human relations with me.

I will not allow you to abdicate your responsibility in this matter. I am not aware of how "congregational polity" on even "congregational policy" can legitimately prevent you from responding to my email communications, or otherwise speaking with me. Any such policy violates U*U principles as far as I am concerned. I am sure that if I went through the UUMA Guidelines for the conduct of ministry I could find a fair number of clauses that would support your right and even your responsibility and moral and ethical obligation to enter into dialogue with me in an effort to resolve the ongoing conflict in a manner that lives up to the U*U "covenant" to affirm and promote justice, equity and compassion in human relations. How is this just for dstarters?

Members of our congregations have freely gathered to become a body of people seeking to find and to walk together in ways of *truth* and affection. Members have gathered in freedom to worship; to teach, encourage and support one another; and to speak to the world in words and actions of *right*, beauty, *peace* and goodwill.

To seek and to accept ordination to our ministry is to dedicate one's life to the work needful for *fulfillment* of these high *aims*. The minister is one who has made a *life commitment* to the religious community as an institution.

If you really care about the well-being of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, if you care about the well-being of the greater U*U religious community, to say nothing of your profession of ministry, you will begin now to take a moral and ethical leadership position that can and will lead towards a genuinely just, genuinely equitable and genuinely compassionate resolution of the ludicrously drawn out conflict that Montreal Unitarians have so unethically and immorally chosen to engage in for over a decade now. That process will most certainly include dialogue with me.

Whatever institutional constraints may have been placed on you to avoid communication with me almost certainly violate claimed U*U ideals and principles, if not the UUMA guidelines and other UUA and CUC policies. As I indicated in my original email to you, it is almost a certainty that the reason the leaders of the Unitarian Church of Montreal don't want you communicating with me is because, once you do so, it will very quickly become apparent that I have very legitimate cause for grievance and my ongoing public protest activities and that the leaders of the Unitarian Church of Montreal almost certainly misled you in any "debriefing" they may have given you about this conflict. A free and genuinely responsible search for the truth and meaning of the "root causes" of my grievances and protests will most certainly not set U*Us free.

At some point in time the Unitarian Church of Montreal is going to have to acknowledge the injustices and abuses that I have been subjected to by Rev. Ray Drennan and other intolerant and abusive anti-religious atheists, as well as the subsequent injustices and abuses arising from the UCM Board's negligent and effectively complicit responses to my letters of grievance and the unjust, inequitable, and uncompassionate punitive expulsions that I have been subjected to for submitting letters of grievance and publicly protesting against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy. The sooner in your ministry this occurs the better for everyone concerned.

It is most certainly not my fault that Montreal Unitarians and the UUA have obstinately stonewalled, delayed, and outright denied justice until you became minister. Montreal Unitarians and the UUA have had numerous opportunities to settle this conflict but, quite regrettably, they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. The ball is very firmly in your court and I expect you to play ball. I expect you to wage peace in this conflict and you can only wage peace by waging justice, equity and compassion in human relations with me. And yes, that does mean that I expect you and other appropriate Montreal Unitarians to enter into free and open dialogue with me in the very near future.


Robin Edgar

Robin Edgar wrote:

Monday, November 13, 2006

Dear Rev. Rollert,

It is now over one month since I sent you this email. I have not received so much as a confirmation of receipt from you. This is not acceptable to me.

Please reply to this important communication within the next week.


Robin Edgar

Robin Edgar wrote:

Dear Rev. Rollert,

I regret to have to inform you that in taking on the position of settled minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal you unfortunately inherited a bit of a mess that Montreal Unitarians knowingly and willfully chose not to clean up prior to engaging you as their new settled minister. For more information about this failure on the part of Montreal Unitarians please read the email copied below that I sent to the Board members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal in March of 2005.

I fully expect that church leaders have "debriefed" you about my ongoing public protest activities in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal that you have seen with your own eyes on at least one occasion. I equally fully expect that any such "debriefing" by church leaders was a very carefully controlled exercise in misinformation and disinformation that was knowingly and willfully misleading. Montreal Unitarians probably withheld some important information that you have a right to know about and their version of the story almost certainly included some highly misleading half-truths, untruths and falsehoods, and even some outright lies. I therefore invite you to enter into dialogue with me about this unfortunate conflict in the near future so that you may hear my side of the story and thus enter into a genuinely free and responsible search for the truth and meaning that is the "root cause" of my ongoing public protest activities. I expect you to take on a responsible leadership position in this matter that leads to genuine justice. Without real justice there will be no peace between me and Montreal Unitarians.

As per the email that I sent to the members of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal that is copied below I fully intend to continue in my ongoing public protest against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy until such a time as my perfectly legitimate grievances are responded to with genuine justice, genuine equity, and genuine compassion by Montreal Unitarians, and indeed the UUA and CUC. When it became clear to me that Montreal Unitarians had chosen to ignore my clear warning that I would continue my protest activities into the term of the next settled minister if they refused to hold Rev. Ray Drennan accountable for his intolerant and abusive clergy misconduct I decided to hold in reserve some actions that I could have taken earlier. I will be moving forward with those actions that I chose to hold in reserve in the coming weeks and months.

This state of conflict will continue until such time as Montreal Unitarians and the UUA and CUC clearly and unequivocally acknowledge the injustices and abuses that I have been subjected to by Unitarian Universalists and take steps to properly redress my very serious legitimate grievances that arise from those injustices and abuses. The sooner that you, in your capacity as the new settled minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, take a morally and ethically sound leadership position that clearly seeks to provide genuine justice, genuine equity and genuine compassion in your own and other U*Us' human relations with me the sooner this long drawn out conflict will come to a long overdue resolution.

Opening lines of communication and entering into genuine dialogue is absolutely essential to resolving this ongoing conflict. I have always made it clear that I am ready, willing and able to enter into mediated dialogue and to participate in genuinely just and equitable conflict resolution procedures however, in spite of spurious claims to the contrary, Montreal U*Us have consistently failed and even outright refused to enter into any viable mediated dialogue with me or to initiate any genuinely just and equitable conflict resolution procedures in this matter. On the contrary Montreal Unitarians have undertaken highly questionable efforts to try to silence my legitimate criticism and dissent and have even tried to censor and suppress my public protest by having me arrested on false criminal charges. I invite you, and other Unitarian Universalists who genuinely desire justice, equity, compassion and peace in human relations to enter into meaningful dialogue with me, and to initiate genuinely just and equitable conflict resolution procedures. Only a sincere and sustained effort to finally resolve this ongoing state of conflict in a genuinely just, genuinely equitable and genuinely compassionate manner can bring some long overdue healing and peace to not only the Unitarian Church of Montreal but to the greater Unitarian Universalist religious community.


Robin Edgar

Forwarded Message
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 06:28:37 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robin Edgar"
Subject: About Re. Ray Drennan's Resignation

Robin Edgar
Montreal, Quebec
X2X XGX March 9, 2005

Dear Member of the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal,

It has come to my attention that Rev. Ray Drennan recently tendered his resignation as minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. I wish to make it very clear to church Board members that Rev. Drennan’s resignation will not result in an end to my ongoing protest activities. On the contrary it is likely to result in an intensification of my protest activities in the coming weeks and months unless the Unitarian Church of Montreal acts quickly to responsibly redress my longstanding grievances that arise from Rev. Ray Drennan’s demeaning and abusive clergy misconduct. My public protest will not end until Rev. Ray Drennan, and other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal who are responsible for labeling Creation Day as a “cult” and other injustices and abuses that include discrimination and harassment, are held fully responsible for their harmful words and actions. I also expect certain former and current church leaders to face full accountability for their clearly negligent, effectively complicit, and/or unjustly punitive responses to my previous letters of grievance and public protest that contributed to the unnecessary prolongation and escalation of this conflict.

To my knowledge Rev. Ray Drennan has never faced the slightest accountability for his openly hostile, false and malicious, labeling of Creation Day as “your cult”. Likewise he has never been held in any way accountable for his contemptuous dismissal of my revelatory religious experience as “your psychotic experience” along with his angry demands that I immediately seek “professional help”. His “injurious and untrue” belittling and maligning of the religious insights that arose from my profound revelatory religious experience as being nothing but “silliness and fantasy” was also condoned. Rev. Drennan has never retracted his clearly abusive “insulting and defamatory” words that I reported to the church Board, the ‘Disruptive Behavior Committee’, and other church members in my previous letters of grievance, nor has he ever acknowledged their “injurious and untrue” nature. My own highly justified picket sign slogans have been described as “injurious and untrue” by Rev. Charles Eddis, and I have been similarly accused of using “insulting and defamatory language” by Board President John Pike.

Why is it that I have yet to hear Rev. Charles Eddis, President John Pike or any other leader of the Unitarian Church of Montreal responsibly acknowledge the quite evidently “injurious and untrue” and “insulting and defamatory” nature of the offensive and damaging language that Rev. Ray Drennan, Frank Greene, John Inder, Keith Robinson and other members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have falsely and abusively, to say nothing of outright maliciously, used to label me personally and/or my religious beliefs and practices such a Creation Day?

For close to a decade the Board and congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have willfully ignored or unjustly dismissed my serious grievances. Above and beyond this evidently unjust, inequitable, and uncompassionate treatment the Unitarian Church of Montreal has subjected me to repeated, and ultimately permanent, expulsion from the church. The initial six month expulsion was a cynical attempt to censor and suppress the expression of my legitimate complaints in letters of grievance. Later expulsions were unjust and inequitable punitive responses to my subsequent public protest. My ongoing public protest would never have begun if the Board of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and its so-called Disruptive Behavior Committee, had acted to responsibly redress my legitimate grievances in a just, equitable, and compassionate manner when I filed formal complaints about Rev. Ray Drennan’s evidently insulting and injurious “disruptive behavior” towards me and my religious beliefs and practices.

I hereby demand that Rev. Ray Drennan must face full accountability, including appropriate disciplinary action, for his abusive clergy misconduct prior to leaving the Unitarian Church of Montreal. This disciplinary action must be entirely commensurate with the seriousness of Rev. Drennan’s demeaning and abusive behavior towards me as it is described in my previous letters of grievance. Rev. Drennan should also be subjected to disciplinary action for the obvious harm that his ongoing refusal to accept any personal responsibility for his clearly “insulting and defamatory language” has clearly caused the Unitarian Church of Montreal. Rev. Ray Drennan, and several other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, bear personal responsibility for most of any “image tarnishing” that the Unitarian Church suffers as a result of my ongoing legitimate public protest.

I expect the Unitarian Church of Montreal to act quickly and responsibly in its response to this demand for genuinely just and equitable redress of my serious grievances. I expect the church Board to initiate responsible conflict resolution procedures very soon. The upcoming special congregational meeting in April presents an opportunity to responsibly address this conflict and I expect to be provided an opportunity to clearly explain to the congregation as a whole why I am protesting and what the Unitarian Church must do to responsibly redress my legitimate grievances. This ongoing conflict could have ended several years ago if the church Board and the ‘Disruptive Behavior Committee’ had not responded in a negligent, effectively complicit, and unjustly punitive manner to my previous letters of grievance. If I do not receive genuinely just and equitable redress for my legitimate grievances before Rev. Ray Drennan leaves the church I will hold President John Pike and this Board responsible for negligence that effectively condones Rev. Drennan’s abusive clergy misconduct. My protest will continue and the next minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal will inherit this conflict.


Robin Edgar

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Emerson Avenger Has A Synchroni-City With Rev. Diane Rollert

The Seventh Principle of U*Uism purports that Unitarian*Universalists "covenant" to affirm and promote -

Respect for the interdependent* web of all existence of which we are a part.

There may be quite a bit more to that "interdependent web of all existence" than most U*Us are even remotely aware of. . . Indeed there is a significant part of that "inter-connected web" that many U*Us, especially the fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us, don't even know that they "are a part" of. . .

This morning I headed out to engage in my "alternative spiritual practice" of protesting against U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal. I had some brand spanking new picket sign slogans and I had refreshed and reintroduced updated versions of some of the old "classics" as it were. As I entered the METRO station it seemed like a train had just entered the station. I knew that if I rushed that I just might catch it. I decided not to rush as I had got off to a pretty good start this morning after having been awoken by blaring rap music at about 7:30am. I'm a pretty easy-going laid back kind of guy so I decided to take it easy and just take the next METRO train. Sure enough a train began pulling out as I got to the platform. I walked down the platform a bit and sat down and waited for the next train.

When the next train came in I entered it and sat down in a single seat that faced the doors. Several stations along the route, and just two stations from the Vendome METRO station that is closest to the Unitarian Church of Montreal, the train doors directly in front of me opened to let in passengers and lo and behold there was Rev. Diane Rollert standing right there in front of me. I recognized her immediately and I believe that she also recognized me. I am sure that the bag of picket signs right next to me helped her to make a positive identification. ;-) Rev. Rollert took the same kind of seat that I took a little further down the car. Anyone here care to calculate the odds on that little "coincidence" occurring by pure random chance? I do believe that the Spirit may just have been at work in the mysterious ways that It tends to work in the inter-connected aka interdependent web of all existence. . .

This unusual "meaningful coincidence" sure looks a lot like a bona fide case of Synchroni-City to this Urban Shaman. . . Bona fide synchronicity or not, I am sure that this unusual "coincidence" was just a tad unnerving for Rev. Diane Rollert when she saw me face to face (dare I say eye to eye?) as she entered the METRO car to head into the Unitarian Church of Montreal to deliver her sermon 'From This We Live'. A sermon which is ostensibly "a celebration of our dreams and our commitment to sustaining this community as a beacon of liberal religion."

I considered asking her if she had read the emails that I had sent her recently offering dialogue towards a genuinely just and equitable resolution to our little problem that she has yet to respond to in any way. . . I decided to wait a bit as, even though I was quite sure the woman who entered the METRO directly in front of me was indeed Rev. Diane Rollert, I was not absolutely 100% certain. She looked a bit older than the photos that I had seen of her and I had only caught a couple of fairly brief glances of her in "real life". I decided that I would know soon enough if she was indeed who I was quite sure that she was.

Sure enough she got off the METRO at Vendome station, as I had expected she would, although she stayed in her seat until the last minute to be sure to exit the train behind me. I held the heavy station door open for her as I left the station but she chose to push open the heavy door next to it herself. She walked between ten to twenty feet behind me as we both headed towards the Unitarian Church of Montreal. About halfway between the METRO station and the UCM I decided that I really should ask her if she had read the emails that I had sent her. I stopped, looked back at her, and asked her if she had received my emails. After a long pause she responded, "Yes I have Robin, but I am not at liberty to speak to you." I think that I scoffed out loud when she said that. If I didn't laugh out loud I certainly laughed inside. So much for the much vaunted "freedom of speech" that oh so "liberal" U*Us are constantly preaching but rarely actually practicing or defending, except of course when they are busy defending their slandering or libeling of someone else. . . Rev. Rollert added that the reason that she could not talk to me was "congregational polity". I said that it sounded more like "fascism" to me. . .

Personally I don't see how the U*U political practice of "congregational polity" has any bearing whatsoever on the ability of Rev. Diane Rollert, or indeed any other U*U minister, to speak with me or to otherwise communicate with me. Perhaps Rev. Rollert said, or meant to say, "congregational policy". . . I can well imagine that it is indeed the DIM Thinking policy of the congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal to have their brand-spanking new minister remain in the dark about why I am standing in front of their so-called Unitarian Church with picket sign slogans saying -




and starting today. . .



Rev. Rollert's apparent abdication of responsibility got my back up a little bit and I tersely reminded her that, as the minister of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, she has a responsibility to provide moral and ethical leadership to the congregation and that I expect her to take a responsible leadership position in this matter; one that can and will lead to some genuine restorative justice and long overdue equity. As a parting shot as she headed towards the rear entrance of her U*U "church" I told Rev. Rollert that she ought to pay attention to the unusual "coincidence" that brought her face to face with me in the METRO as it just might be an indication that Someone was trying to tell her something. . .

How is it possible that Rev. Diane Rollert can claim that she is "not at liberty to speak" to me as a result of "congregational polity", or alternatively "congregational policy" (assuming that I heard wrong or that she misspoke a little bit), when Unitarian*Universalists proclaim in their evidently quite fraudulent religious propaganda written by Rev. Charles Eddis, minister emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal that -

We jealously guard the right to know, to speak, and to argue freely, according to conscience**, within our own church and in society at large. We are opposed to censorship, by church, state, or any other institution. We believe that truth stands the best chance of emerging under conditions of freedom.

We expect honesty of belief and integrity of convictions in each person. We do not say: "Think as you like, but say you believe." We say: "Think as you must, then say what you really believe."

end quote

Well I hate to have to bring it up Chuck but I have thought long and hard about what you have said in your fraudulent U*U propaganda and I am sorry to have to say that I *really believe* that you, and all the other Unitarian*Universalists who make a total mockery of those empty words, are outrageous hypocrites.

How can Rev. Diane Rollert speak and argue freely, according to her conscience, in society at large, to say nothing of within her own church. . . when she is somehow constrained from talking to me, or even responding to my important email communications with her, by some U*U gag policy of some sort? How can genuine truth, which is integral to and absolutely essential to genuine justice and equity in human relations, ever possibly begin emerging when Rev. Diane Rollert "is not at liberty to speak" to me? Is this liberal "conditions of freedom"? I think not. Far from it. It is part and parcel of carefully contrived and controlled DIM Thinking U*U institutional stonewalling, cover-up and denial, to say nothing of much broader U*U "community denial".

It is glaringly obvious that the very last thing that Montreal Unitarians want to happen is to have the real truth behind my legitimate grievances and ongoing public protest activities begins emerging within the 'Fortress of Silence' that is the Unitarian Church of Montreal. That is why Montreal Unitarians and even a stunningly hypocritical pompous ass of a DIM Thinking UUA President threatened me with expulsion from the "church" and even police action and criminal prosecution when I first tried to share my concerns about Rev. Ray Drennan's abusive clergy misconduct with the congregants of the rather less than genuinely Welcoming Congregations that still quite fraudulently calls itself the Unitarian Church of Montreal. And this years after Rev. Ray Drennan rightly declared in the Unitarian Church of Montreal's newsletter that it was "false advertising" for the Unitarian Church of Montreal to continue to call itself a "church", and Queens Counsel lawyer and petty criminal Kenneth Howard QC followed-up by pointing out that is was also "false advertising" to call it "Unitarian" in a letter to the editor.

* It would appear that the UUA have tweaked the Seven Principles a bit. The word 'interdependent' apparently replaces what used to say 'interconnected'.

** 'Plagiarism Found'. . . It looks like Rev. Charles Eddis shamelessly plagiarized the fine words of John Milton here. I wonder what John Milton would think about not only Rev. Charles Eddis' plagiarization of his words, but Rev. Eddis' and other outrageously hypocritical U*Us abject failure, and even obstinate refusal, to actually practice what John Milton preached in his speech 'AREOPAGITICA'. John Milton's exact words were and still are - "Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." What was it that Rev. Diane Rollert just said to me earlier today? Oh ya. . . "I am not at *liberty* to speak to you." Oh well I guess that proves what I told Rev. Charles Eddis just the other day. That his fraudulent CUC pamphlet has been rendered obsolete by the words and actions of U*Us and a few other intervening factors. . .

Labels: , , , , ,