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

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Is This Who U*Us Want To Be CC? Seriously?

In a post titled Is this who we want to be? Seriously? U*U uber*blogger The ChaliceChick raises some interesting questions. Of course I have been raising pretty much the same questions for over a decade now.

Welcome aboard the U*U Ship of Fools CC. . .

For now I will just reproduce the two comments that I just left on CC's blog (with some typo corrections and additional embedded links) but I definitely have more to say on this issue and may add to this thread later.

CC said - "If they want to express their views in rude way that is not intended to represent the organization they can get personal blogs of their own and keep the organization's name off of it."

Oh, you mean like Rev. Victoria Weinstein? But doesn't she clearly identify herself as "a small town pastor serving an historic New England Unitarian Universalist congregation" on her Peacebang blog? As I pointed out to appropriate UUA administrators. . .

Quite frankly the UUWA posts were comparatively polite compared to Peacebang's insulting and defamatory, to say nothing of obscene. . . language.


And by the way, I strongly suspect that if the UUA was the sort of place that made it clear to everyone that nastiness against people who you disagree with is wrong and is totally not the UUA's mission, Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, and no doubt plenty of other U*U clergy and UUA administrators. . . would have known what the boundaries were and known what they were saying was over the line.


What the heck. . . U*U blogger The Socinian aka Fausto can chow down on a slight reworking of his words too. . .

When you work for a religious organization, its objectives have to take priority over your own opinions whenever you are out in public. You especially shouldn't use the organization's resources to publish personal views that impair the organization's ability to promote its own views or objectives, or that bring disrepute upon the organization. An unfiltered personal-reflections blog sponsored by the UUA to allow its staff to express their personal opinions is begging for trouble in that regard. Even a personal blog that is unconnected to the organization can present conflicts if the blogger's identity is known, because the blogger still presents a public portrait of the attitudes held by staff of the organization and therefore can impair organizational effectiveness.

The larger problem here is not that (fill in the blank*) as a newcomer didn't understand those realities, but that nobody else at the UUA seems to understand them either.

* Rev. Ray Drennan was a newcomer to the U*U "church" after having been kicked out of the Presbyterian Church following what he calls a "heresy trial". . .

Rev. Victoria Weinstein is not a newcomer to being a U*U however. . . In fact Rev. Weinstein aka Peacebang is a life-long U*U.

6 Comments:

Blogger Joel Monka said...

You evidently don't know how things are organized, Robin. Peacebang is *NOT* an employee of the UUA. She is *NOT* part of the organizational staff. She does not, and does not claim to represent the UUA.She is employed by an independent congregation- the person CC spoke of is employed by the UUA, and was blogging on an official UUA site.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:34:00 pm  
Blogger Robin Edgar said...

You evidently can't see the forest for the trees Joel. I am quite aware how things work. Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Ray Drennan and other U*U clergy may not be "employees" of the UUA but they are none-the-less "fellowshipped" by the UUA's Ministerial*Fellowship*Committee, and complaints of unbecoming conduct and other forms of clergy misconduct are handled by the UUA's Ministerial*Fellowship*Committee and/or the department of Congregational Services. Ergo it *IS* the UUA's "mission" to make it clear to every U*U minister that nastiness against people who they disagree with is wrong. Furthermore this *IS* a mission that the UUA abjectly fails, and even obstinately refuses. . . to responsibly perform. As *IS* quite evident by how the UUA has negligently responded to my clergy misconduct complaints against Rev. Ray Drennan and later Rev. Victoria Weinstein, to say nothing of various other cases of clergy misconduct including clergy sexual misconduct.

Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, and *ALL* other U*U ministers *DO* publicly represent the U*U "religious community" and both Rev. Ray Drennan, and Rev. Victoria Weinstein, have in fact tarnished the image of U*Uism via their written words in a very public manner. The fact that they may not actually be employees of the UUA is very much beside the point. In fact U*U clergy should be held to a higher standard of public and indeed private behaviour than your average run-of-the-mill UUA employee however, quite evidently. . . they are *NOT* Joel.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:34:00 pm  
Blogger James Andrix said...

UUA has negligently responded to my clergy misconduct complaints

Care to back that up?

For starters, to argue negligence you would have to show that there was some other decision that the MFC should have come to.

For example: In the case of your complaint against Drennan, they chose to defer to the UCM, who in turn had decided that the letter of apology that Drennan sent you was sufficient.

What should they have done instead?

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:18:00 pm  
Blogger Robin Edgar said...

::UUA has negligently responded to my clergy misconduct complaints

:Care to back that up?

No problem James. In fact that assertion is already backed up by plenty of documentary evidence.

:For starters, to argue negligence you would have to show that there was some other decision that the MFC should have come to.

No sh*t Sherlock. . . For starters the UUA and it's aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee could have and should have come to the decision that Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive clergy misconduct was indeed just that and quite unbecoming of a U*U minister.

:For example: In the case of your complaint against Drennan, they chose to defer to the UCM, who in turn had decided that the letter of apology that Drennan sent you was sufficient.

Once again you blurt out yet another wild*ass statement based on sheer ignorance (unless of course you are being disingenuous and/or dissimulating. . .) that could have been very easily avoided if you had bothered to consult your own time-line of this conflict indrax. . .

I could waste time demonstrating just how far from the truth that wild*ass statement is indrax, but instead I will simply suggest that you review your timeline and check the facts in a *responsible* search for the truth.

:What should they have done instead?

For starters the UUA and MFC, under the directorship of Rev. Diane Miller should not have negligently and irresponsibly, to say nothing of outright complicitly. . . asserted that Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusibve behaviour, as I truthfully and accurately described it in my letters of grievance, was "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership". The UUA, MFC and indeed the Unitarian Church of Montreal should have demanded that Rev. Ray Drennan formally retract his "insulting and defamatory language" aka "injurious and untrue" words and deliver a formal apology that clearly and unequivocally acknowledged the wrongfulness and harmfulness of his demeaning and abusive clergy misconduct. Had the UUA and MFC and Unitarian done this in 1996, or even 1997. . . you can be quite sure that not only would this blog not exist in its present form but my ongoing public protest against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal would not have begun in the spring of 1998.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007 8:13:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"""you can be quite sure that not only would this blog not exist in its present form but my ongoing public protest against U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal would not have begun in the spring of 1998. """

And you might have a wife and kids right now,and perhaps a reputation as an all around good guy rather than the reputation you have now of being an obsessive boor.

You could be out spreading your revelation and helping people attain a new understanding of God.

You might even see the Rev. Victoria Weinstein as a decent person who impulsively said something disgusting and let her back away from it retaining a little dignity, as opposed to your current strategy of making it impossible to say "Hey, I said something I shouldn't have said" without looking like she's capitulating to you.

So let's see, a loving family, a reputation for theological wisdom and a forgiving character.

You don't have any of that because Ray Drennan's apology wasn't good enough.

Ray Drennan is a powerful, powerful man in your life, Robin.

Don't you think you've let him be too powerful?

Sunday, July 29, 2007 9:03:00 am  
Blogger Robin Edgar said...

:And you might have a wife and kids right now,and perhaps a reputation as an all around good guy rather than the reputation you have now of being an obsessive boor.

I do have a reputatuion as an all round good guy with pretty much everyone who knows me. . . As far as obsessive boors go I put it to you that U*Us seem rather obsessive in their own boorishness and are clearly obsessive about obstinately refusing to acknowledge the boorishness of their unbecoming clergy.

:You could be out spreading your revelation and helping people attain a new understanding of God.

I am reasonably sure that I have aleardy done that and will continue to do so. Spreading my revelation and helping people attain a new understanding of God is not mutually exclusiove to exposing and denouncing U*U injustices abuses and hypocrisy. In fact, theyu go quite nicely together in some ways.

:You might even see the Rev. Victoria Weinstein as a decent person who impulsively said something disgusting and let her back away from it retaining a little dignity,

Unfortunately Rev. Victoria Weinstein quite habitually says *boorish* things, some of which may be described as "disgusting" although I don't believe that I have used that word to describe her senatorial sodomy fantasy. In most if not all cases Rev. Victoria Weinstein obstinately refuses to back away from the boorish things she says. In fact I gave her plenty of opportunity to back away from her boorish attack on me in a manner that would not only preserve her dignity but would serve as an example for other U*Us to follow. . . She chose not to and just "memory-holed" her libelous attack on me in an act of Stalinistic revision of history. The UUA's Department of Congregational Services under the dubious directorship of Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris was given an opportunity to deal responsibly with Rev. Victoria Weinstein's boorish behaviouyr aka unbecoming conduct but abjectly failed if not obstinately refused to do so. Rev. Dr. Tracey Robinson-Harris' Orwellian rationalizations that protected Rev. Victoria Weinstein from even the slightest accountability for her unbecoming conduct were fully approved by Rev. Beth Miller current Executive Secretary of the MFC aka Ministerial Fellowship Conmmittee.

:as opposed to your current strategy of making it impossible to say "Hey, I said something I shouldn't have said" without looking like she's capitulating to you.

Rev. Victoria Weinstein could have and should have said, "Hey, I said something I shouldn't have said" months ago but refused to do so. It is precisely because she refused to do so that I conducted my little experiment to determine just how well or how poorly the UUA is responding to unbecoming conduct by U*U clergy these days. Needless to say the UUA once again proved that it refuses to enforce its own clearly stated guidelines about clergy misconduct. . .

:So let's see, a loving family, a reputation for theological wisdom and a forgiving character.

Most people who know me reasonably well know that as a rule I have forgiving character but when my forgiveness is rejected and people continue to behave badly towards me and/or other people they get called to account. . . Both Rev. Ray Drennan and Rev. Victoria Weinstein were given plenty of opportunity to seek my forgiveness and both refused to do so. The UUA was given an opportunity to deal responsibly with their obviously *boorish* if not "disgusting" behaviour and abjectly failed, indeed clearly refused. . . to hold thenm accountable for their unbecoming conduct and indeed their abusive clergy misconduct.

:You don't have any of that because Ray Drennan's apology wasn't good enough.

Correct. Besides not being good enough (too say the very lkeast) Rev. Ray Drennan's sorry excuse for an apology was well over than a year late. Rev. Victoria has yet to apologize for her own boorishness and owes apologies to several people, including U*U blogger Jamie Goodwin. . . Do you think that Peacebang would have verbally defecated all over Jamie Goodwin if the UUA had responsibly acted upon my complaint instead of negligently and irresponsibly, indeed quite complicitly. . . dismissing it?

:Ray Drennan is a powerful, powerful man in your life, Robin.

Oh really? How often do I even talk about him these days? It should be glaringly obvious that there are plenty of other boorish, hypocritical, abusive, and just plain stupid. . . U*U clergy to deal with.

:Don't you think you've let him be too powerful?

Nope. In fact it is negligent and complicit U*Us, including the Board and congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal and top-level UUA officials such as former UUA President Rev. Dr. John A* Buehrens and former MFC Director Rev. Diane Miller who allowed the intiolerant and abusive U*U "pastor" Rev. Ray Drennan to be too powerful. . .

Sunday, July 29, 2007 12:48:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home