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 -

"CHURCH" OF THE "PSYCHOTIC" REACTION

and

UNSAFE SECT?

and starting today. . .

WHAT "CULT" JOHN INDER?

"SOLAR TEMPLE" FRANK GREENE?

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. . .