Is Rev. Clyde Grubbs *Really* Suggesting That U*U Ministerial Candidates Are Victims Of Abuse Meted Out By The Regional Sub-Committees On Candidacy?!!
As part of her series of blog posts on "excellence in ministry" and ministerial formation Rev. Christine Robinson has posted a "guest post" written by Rev. Clyde Grubbs en*titled 'Ministerial Education; Ideas from Clyde Grubbs' which seems to suggest that Rev. Grubbs believes that U*U ministerial candidates are somehow victims and "survivors" of "abuse" in terms of their screenings by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee's Regional Sub-Committees On Candidacy.
The exact words of Rev. Clyve Grubbs are -
"Like child abuse victims many survivors enter our ministry resentful and regard the good people who serve on the RSCs and MFC as "strangers," "people with their own agendas" and other language indicating alienation rather feeling collegially embraced."
Quite the interesting analogy don't U*Us think?
Or is Rev. Clyde Grubbs just a big fat U*U troll trying to stir up trouble?
Would Rev. Clyde Grubbs care to elaborate on this unusual and somewhat disturbing analogy?
Is Rev. Grubbs suggesting that Unitarian*Universalist ministerial candidates are *really* victims and "survivors" of some form of "abuse" meted out to them by the "good people" who serve on the MFC's Regional Sub-Committees on Candidacy and/or victims of other "abuse" courtesy of the UUA's Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee? Does he believe that the screening process for U*U ministerial candidates itself is inherently abusive? Or is Rev. Clyde Grubbs just yet another Unitarian*Universalist minister suffering from a case of U*U foot-in-mouth disease?
I will have more to say about Rev. Clyde Grubbs' allegations or insinuations later, but first I want to give Rev. Grubbs an opportunity to explain his rather unusual public statement that apparently equates the Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee's screening process of brand-spanking new U*U ministerial candidates with "child abuse".
Here is the fuller context of Rev. Clyde Grubbs' somewhat bizarre words for those who want it -
When the Regional SubCommittee(s) on Candidacy was proposed in the early 1990s it was supposed to function as a UU version of an in care system. The advocates talked of retreats and getting to know the students and finding ways to discern who should continue and who should not. By the time the RSCs were actually instituted in the late 1990s the vision had been watered down to a way to discourage unlikely aspirants to the ministry before they acquired to much debt. The RSCs have failed even this more modest goal.
We must conclude that the RSCs have devolved to just another hoop for students to jump over, granting candidate status based on an interview and paper work. They function simply to prescreen aspirants and while that function takes some burden from the MFC it does not change the quality of the ministerial formation process at all. Students are screened rather than nurtured and formed. Like child abuse victims many survivors enter our ministry resentful and regard the good people who serve on the RSCs and MFC as "strangers," "people with their own agendas" and other language indicating alienation rather feeling collegially embraced. For me, the Unitarian Universalist Ministry belongs the community of Unitarian Universalists and we together serve that community. Our process of credentialing must be part of a process of formation for full participation in that Unitarian Universalist Ministry.
The exact words of Rev. Clyve Grubbs are -
"Like child abuse victims many survivors enter our ministry resentful and regard the good people who serve on the RSCs and MFC as "strangers," "people with their own agendas" and other language indicating alienation rather feeling collegially embraced."
Quite the interesting analogy don't U*Us think?
Or is Rev. Clyde Grubbs just a big fat U*U troll trying to stir up trouble?
Would Rev. Clyde Grubbs care to elaborate on this unusual and somewhat disturbing analogy?
Is Rev. Grubbs suggesting that Unitarian*Universalist ministerial candidates are *really* victims and "survivors" of some form of "abuse" meted out to them by the "good people" who serve on the MFC's Regional Sub-Committees on Candidacy and/or victims of other "abuse" courtesy of the UUA's Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee? Does he believe that the screening process for U*U ministerial candidates itself is inherently abusive? Or is Rev. Clyde Grubbs just yet another Unitarian*Universalist minister suffering from a case of U*U foot-in-mouth disease?
I will have more to say about Rev. Clyde Grubbs' allegations or insinuations later, but first I want to give Rev. Grubbs an opportunity to explain his rather unusual public statement that apparently equates the Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee's screening process of brand-spanking new U*U ministerial candidates with "child abuse".
Here is the fuller context of Rev. Clyde Grubbs' somewhat bizarre words for those who want it -When the Regional SubCommittee(s) on Candidacy was proposed in the early 1990s it was supposed to function as a UU version of an in care system. The advocates talked of retreats and getting to know the students and finding ways to discern who should continue and who should not. By the time the RSCs were actually instituted in the late 1990s the vision had been watered down to a way to discourage unlikely aspirants to the ministry before they acquired to much debt. The RSCs have failed even this more modest goal.
We must conclude that the RSCs have devolved to just another hoop for students to jump over, granting candidate status based on an interview and paper work. They function simply to prescreen aspirants and while that function takes some burden from the MFC it does not change the quality of the ministerial formation process at all. Students are screened rather than nurtured and formed. Like child abuse victims many survivors enter our ministry resentful and regard the good people who serve on the RSCs and MFC as "strangers," "people with their own agendas" and other language indicating alienation rather feeling collegially embraced. For me, the Unitarian Universalist Ministry belongs the community of Unitarian Universalists and we together serve that community. Our process of credentialing must be part of a process of formation for full participation in that Unitarian Universalist Ministry.
Comments