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

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

The U*U Movement Sounds Like Something Inspired By A Laxative. . .

But don't take my word for it all U members of *The* U*U Movement U*U World-wide, take Rev. StinkyVestments*' word for it, as posted in a comment to Bill Barr's post titled 'Unitarian Universalism as a Movement' on his Pfarrer Streccius blog.

For the record here are the (im)pertinent comments that I posted in response to that particular log post -

Well top level U*Us do quite regularly speak about "the U*U movement" as evidenced by this big fat U*U PDF file. Maybe you should enter into a free and responsible search for the truth and meaning of the U*U movement by asking them what they mean when they speak of "the U*U movement" Joel. In any case who is to say that the "tiny, declining, fringe religion" known as "the U*U movement" won't eventually fail in its rather less than clearly defined "mission" and fade away with its members burned out, or just plain bummed out, over the next several decades?

The rather *too* Eclectic Cleric's comment was not posted when I began writing my reply to Joel's comment. I must say however that his parting shot "it does sound like something inspired by a laxative...." most serendipitously complements *my* comment.
What was CUC Executive Director Mary Bennett thinking when she so U*Unilaterally decided to insert famous U*U Kurt Vonnegut Jr.'s "picture of an asshole" between the twin cheeks of what *was* the UU movement in order to symbolize the alleged inclusiveness of what is now known U*U World-wide as the U*U movement? :-)




* aka *The* Reverend Doctor Timothy W. Jensen aka The Rather *Too* Eclectic Cleric

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, May 25, 2009

Why Are Unitarian*Universalist Congregations Still 97% White?

Could It Be Because Too Many U*U Welcoming Congregations Are *Still* Far From Genuinely Welcoming To God Believing People Including "People Of Color"?

Here is my response to SC Universalist Steven R's question Why are UU Congregations still so mono-cultured?

Allow me to repeat what I said on Rev. Christine Robinson's iminister blog a while back when she addressed this issue. For the record she responded to this comment by saying -

"Robin's got his finger on one of our major problems."

If U*U congregations really want to become more ethnically diverse and genuinely multicultural they are going to have to try a lot harder to be genuinely welcoming towards God believing people from all kinds of different cultural and religious backgrounds. I have been telling U*Us for years that one of the reasons the U*U movement has so few "people of color" as members is the anti-religious intolerance of the hard-core atheist faction of "Humanist" U*Us that rears its ugly head in too many U*U "churches". It does not take that many such "obnoxious atheists"* to repel any number of potential U*Us either. A small but vocal minority of "obnoxious atheists" can make a large number of God believing people feel far from welcome in *their* U*U "church" if their anti-religious intolerance is ignored and/or effectively condoned by the proverbial "silent majority" of that unwelcoming congregation's members.

Even non-theists who are none-the-less open-minded and tolerant people have been seriously put off U*Uism simply by witnessing the anti-religious intolerance of the "fundamentalist atheist" subset of "Humanist" U*Us when visiting some U*U "churches". I have very reasonable grounds to believe that U*U tolerance and even tacit acceptance and approval of the anti-religious intolerance and bigotry of the minority of outspoken "fundamentalist atheists" is a major contributing factor to not only the lack of racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity within the U*U religious community but also to the overall lack of interest of the American public in joining U*U "churches". What God believing person wants to go to "church" on Sunday only to have some obnoxious atheist express condescension, and even outright hostility and contempt, for their theistic religious beliefs?


* To quote former UUA president Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens

end quote

Would that U*Us had responsibly acted upon what UUA President Bill Sinkford once rightly described as my "obviously deep concerns". Had they done so more than a decade ago, when I first shared my concerns with U*Us, I expect that U*Uism would be more multicultural by now, to say nothing of a less tiny and declining "fringe religion" to use UUA Presidential candidate Rev. Peter Morales' words.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, May 23, 2009

Was Charlotte Allen's Anti-Atheist Bigotry And Stereotyping Provoked By The Anti-Religious Bigotry Of Atheist Supremacist Spokespersons?

"Bible-Belt" atheist U*U blogger Steve Caldwell has blogged about being "shocked" by the Los Angeles Times' publishing of author, blogger, and Beliefnet editor Charlotte Allen's recent anti-atheist diatribe in an Opinion Editorial piece headlined 'Atheists: No God, no reason, just whining' and sub-titled 'Superstar atheists are motivated by anger -- and boohoo victimhood.'

According to the letter to the editor that Steve Caldwell submitted to the L.A. Times he was "shocked to read Charlotte Allen's recent display of religious bigotry and stereotyping" in this newspaper.

Mr. Caldwell writes -

"Imagine if she had done this sort of stereotyping with any other group -- let's say Christians, Jews, Moslems, women, homosexuals, etc. Would the LA Times print unfounded smears about these groups like they did about atheists?"

He has a point of course, although it is open to some debate as to just how "unfounded" Charlotte Allen's various criticisms of atheists actually are. It seems that Charlotte Allen's worst mistake aka sin was in painting atheists with too broad a brush. If she had clearly specified that she was criticizing that minority subset of atheists who I and other people describe as "fundamentalist atheists" or even Atheist Supremacists, her alleged "smears" would not be all that "unfounded" at all and, as a reader and promoter on his blogroll of obnoxious "fundamentalist atheist" P. Z. Myers' Pharyngula blog, Steve Caldwell really ought to know this. . . The argument that Steve Caldwell makes above can be very readily applied to the bigoted stereotyping and slanderous smears that U*Us, including U*U clergy like Rev. Ray Drennan, Rev. Victoria Weinstein, Rev. Cynthia P. Cain just to name and shame a few "less than excellent" U*U ministers. . . make about various people, or indeed whole groups.

Steve Calwell asserts that -

"Atheists and other free-thinkers may sound angry but their anger is justified."

while failing to consider the possibility that Theists (and other free-thinkers. . .) may sound angry about what I call "fundamentalist atheists" and Atheist Supremacists but their anger is justified by the anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that obnoxious atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, P. Z. Myers and others, including "small fry" like "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Ray Drennan, engage in from time to time if not quite regularly. . .

Then of course activist atheist U*U Steve Caldwell ever so predictably launches into the standard anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping that "fundamentalist atheists" aka Atheist Supremacists just can't restrain themselves from hurling at religion and religionists whenever the opportunity presents itself, such as stump speeches announcing their candidacy for President of the UUA for example. . .

"Given the role that religion (as it is actually practiced and not as it's taught in seminary) has in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism, we can't afford to be unquestioning about religious ideas anymore. Religion is too influential and has the power to hurt too many people to go unquestioned."

Fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*Us like Steve Caldwell never cease to amaze me. . . If they are so utterly convinced that religion, as it is actually practiced rather than how it is taught in seminary (to say nothing of U*U principles and ideals), has a strong role in promoting injustice, ignorance, hatred, war, and terrorism etc. etc. why do they chose to belong to the Tiny, Declining, Fringe *Religion* known as Unitarian*Universalism? I am truly baffled by such U*U atheists. They seem to be remarkably conflicted human beings. . . Going on and on about how terrible religion is yet knowingly and willfully choosing to belong to a so-called "religion" in any case.

Without further ado, although I assure U*Us that I could go on at length if I chose to do so. . . here is the comment that I posted to Steve Cladwell's 'Liberal Faith Development' blog earlier this afternoon -

Here is my response to Charlotte Allen's anti-atheist diatribe in the Los Angeles Times as posted to the pertinent blog that responds to her somewhat off-base Op/Ed -

I agree that Charlotte Allen painted atheists with too broad a brush in her Opinion Editorial piece and thus engaged in at least moderate anti-atheist bigotry. Most ironically it seems quite clear from her Op/Ed "rant" that it was the intolerance and bigotry of what I often term "fundamentalist atheists", and sometimes even Atheist Supremacists where this is warranted. . . that provoked her public attack which did not distinguish such intolerant and indeed bigoted atheist zealots such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and P. Z. Myers et al from the more moderate mainstream of atheists who have no great quarrel with believers and seek only to be allowed to adhere to their atheistic world view in peace, if not a reasonable amount of acceptance and even some respect. In fact it seems that a rather bigoted statement made by that world-famous pompous ASS* Richard Dawkins in a recent interview is what set Charlotte off. If she had only inserted the word fundamentalist before atheists or had substituted the term "Atheist Supremacists" for atheists in the following telling statement should could not justifiably be accused of anti-atheist intolerance, prejudice or bigotry at all -

:Maybe atheists wouldn't be so unpopular if they stopped beating the drum until the hide splits on their second-favorite topic: How stupid people are who believe in God. This is a favorite Dawkins theme. In a recent interview with Trina Hoaks, the atheist blogger for the Examiner.com website, Dawkins described religious believers as follows: "They feel uneducated, which they are; often rather stupid, which they are; inferior, which they are; and paranoid about pointy-headed intellectuals from the East Coast looking down on them, which, with some justification, they do." Thanks, Richard!

As we can readily see, professor Richard Dawkins is in full Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson mode here in suggesting that God believing people are uneducated, "rather stupid", and even altogether *inferior* human beings. . . Where have I heard talk of *inferior* human beings before? Yes, Charlotte Allen "misspoke" in painting all atheists with too broad a brush, but Richard Dawkins' rather disturbing Atheist Supremacism, as evidenced by these and other well documented public statements, seems to me to be a rather worse form of intolerance and bigotry. Thank God Richard Dawkins is only a 21st century university professor rather than a high ranking politician in the Stalinist Soviet Union or Maoist China. . .


* Atheist Supremacist Spokesperson

end quote

Allow me to take this opportunity to remind you and other U*Us that anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping is 100% OK in the U*U World if Robin Edgar and other theists are the target. . . In fact, the UUA's very aptly named Ministerial *Fellowship* Committee is on record as saying that the quite egregious anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of one Rev. Ray Drennan is "within the appropriate guidelines of ministerial leadership." I have yet to see the UUA retract that effective endorsement of fundamentalist atheist "Humanist" U*U minister Rev. Raymond Drennan's anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of yours truly and/or hold him accountable in the slightest manner for his anti-religious bigotry and stereotyping of me personally and God believing people more generally.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton aka William Jefferson Clinton Is Number One In Google For This Particular Google Search. . .

But the Open Letter About Clergy Sexual Misconduct posted by the Denominational Affairs Committee of the Nashville Unitarian Universalist Church *and* The Emerson Avenger blog post about that Open Letter About Clergy Sexual Misconduct are currently ranked second, third and fifth in the Google search results for a search on -

presidential sexual misconduct

I guess U*Us that can thank the UUA's *own* President Bill for that unfortunate situation because if UUA President Bill Sinkford, who is suspected by some U*Us (including U*U clergy) of having committed clergy sexual misconduct himself. . . had responsibly taken measures to live up to the now quite evidently empty promise of the UUA's official apology to victims of U*U clergy sexual misconduct during the eight year span of his term as President of the UUA that Open Letter publicly sharing the concerns of Nashville Unitarian Universalists might never have been written and posted to the internet for Google to index and share with the interconnected and interdependent web of the real world. . . What a wonderful legacy for UUA President William G. Sinkford to leave for Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman or Rev. Peter Morales. No U*Us?




* To be fair, aka just and equitable, it is my understanding that Rev. Bill Sinkford's *alleged* clergy sexual misconduct, at least that particular *alleged* clergy sexual misconduct which several different U*U sources have spoken about with me, would have occurred before he was actually elected as President of the UUA and thus it cannot be construed as "presidential sexual misconduct".

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, May 11, 2009

Welcoming Philippino Unitarian Universalists To The U*U World

The following comment was just submitted to the UUA's UUAWO Inspired Faith, Effective Action blog in response to a blog post about the UU Church of the Philippines aka the Unitarian*Universalist Church Of The Philippines with any luck they will post it soon -

I consider this particular Advocacy & Witness staff group blog post to be quite serendipitous, and even something of an online synchronity. At 12:59 AM this morning Conservative pagan U*U Joel Monka brazenly asserted on the 'UU A Way Of Life' blog that there is "no such thing" as a U*U World as in Unitarian*Universalism outside of America. Or at least that's what it looks like he said -

There is no such thing as "the whole wide U*U World"- Unitarian Universalism is unique to America; it is the merger of the American Unitarian Conference and the Universalist church- a church founded in America.

I disagree with Joel Monka and even specifically mentioned Philippine Unitarian*Universalists (amongst other non-American U*Us) in my point-by-point rebuttal of Joel Monka's "hogwash" at 2:28 PM today while being quite unaware of the existence of this blog post dedicated to the Unitarian*Universalists of the Philippines. Even though I am currently "less than welcome" in the U*U World I would like to heartily welcome Philippino Unitarian*Universalists to the U*U World. The more non-American U*Us the merrier AFA*I*AC.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Rev. Theodore Parker - The Great Unitarian Bigot?!!

The Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen aka Rev. Tim Jensen aka The Rather *Too* Eclectic Cleric aka Rev. StinkyVestments has seen fit to honor famous Unitarian minister Rev. Theodore Parker in a blog post entitled -

Theodore Parker, the Great American Preacher in which he says -

"Lest we forget, both the Parker birth bicentennial and the Parker death sesquicentennial are coming up next summer. Might make for an interesting opportunity to reassess the impact his inspiration and influence have had on our movement."

That's not a bad idea at all Rev. StinkyVestments. Maybe you would like to invite U*U blogger Patrick Murfin to help contemporary Unitarian*Universalists to reassess what impact and influence, if any, the Rev. Theodore Parker's alleged anti-Catholic bigotry had on what is now known as The U*U Movement. . .

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, May 09, 2009

Suzyn Smith Webb Meet ChaliceChick, ChaliceChick Meet Susyn Smith Webb. . .

Just saying. . .

UU Ü*Überblogger ChaliceChick aka Suzyn Smith Webb, who for years has repeatedly tried to discredit me with DIM Thinking and dubious highly misleading or outright false accusations about me, just pushed her U*U luck a little too far today by pretending that I cannot back up my accusations about various U*U injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy with hard evidence.

The insulting and defamatory Straw Man argument that broke the back of ChaliceChick's already compromised internet pseudonymity was the following statement that she made on the 'Why I Support Robin Edgar' blog post on David G. Markham's UU A Way Of Life blog earlier today -

:who did trust you with her name and knows you have the power to spread that someone with that name allegedly punched a nun or that your memory tells you that someone with that name kicked a kitten, but you don't have the hard evidence, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

end quote

In case anyone doubts that she pushed her luck *that* far here is some hard evidence -


From here on in "investigative journalist" and amateur lawyer Suzyn Smith Webb's real name will be closely associated with any misleading or false allegations, or insulting and defamatory claims that she makes about me, or anyone else. . . under the cover of internet pseudonymity using the pseudonym ChaliceChick or any other pseudonym I find her using in the future.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Friday, May 08, 2009

The Transparent Eye Ball Of Ralph Waldo Emerson And The Somewhat Less Than Transparent Eye-Ball Of The Emerson Avenger. . .

In a blog post titled glad to the brink of fear. . . Boston Unitarian has quoted the passage from 'Nature' in which the world famous American Transcendentalist and "disillusioned" Unitarian Ralph Waldo Emerson speaks about becoming a transparent eye-ball.

Here is the pertinent quote -

"I become a transparent eye-ball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God."

And here is the comment that I just submitted in response to this Boston Unitarian blog post -

We are all part or particle of God, and seen by God's transparent eye-ball, whether we are conscious of that fact or not. Allow me to paraphrase Aldous Huxley and say that facts do not cease to exist just because they are disbelieved. . .

end quote

For the record U*Us facts do not cease to exist just because they are "memory holed" or otherwise covered up and hidden from view. . .

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, May 07, 2009

La Apestar Del Zorrillo. . . Will Yet Another Unitarian*Universalist Super Hero Leave His Mark On The U*U World?


Unitarian*Universalists U*U Worldwide can thank Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen aka Rev. Tim Jensen aka The Rather *Too* Eclectic Cleric for inspiring yet another Unitarian*Universalist super hero. Introducing Zorrillo the masked man who can raise a stink like no other super hero, U*U or otherwise! :-)

The following is a corrected and edited version of a comment that I left on David G. Markham's UU A Way Of Life blog in response to Rev. Tim Jensen yet again disregarding his grandmother's very good advice about not getting into a pissing match with a skunk. . .

I am not in fact pissing on myself Tim. Skunks rarely do that. . . No, what skunks do Tim is they have these two little nozzles on either side of their anus aka asshole aka * aka ass-to-risk and, when the two quite straight and narrow streams of rather stinky piss that comes shooting out of those two converging nozzles actually converges in what some people might term a "cross-fire" they create a fine mist of spray that not only causes its intended target to stink to high heaven but causes the surrounding area to smell rather bad for a while.

Please allow Wikipedia to enlighten you Tim -

The notorious feature of skunks is their anal scent glands, which they can use as a defensive weapon. They are similar to, though much more developed than, the glands found in species of the Mustelidae family. Skunks have two glands, one on either side of the anus, that produce a mixture of sulfur-containing chemicals (methyl and butyl thiols (mercaptans)) that have a highly offensive smell that can be described as a combination of the odors of rotten eggs, garlic and burnt rubber. The odor of the fluid is strong enough to ward off bears and other potential attackers, and can be difficult to remove from clothing. Muscles located next to the scent glands allow them to spray with high accuracy as far as 2 to 5 meters (7 to 15 ft). The smell aside, the spray can cause irritation and even temporary blindness, and is sufficiently powerful to be detected by even an insensitive human nose anywhere up to a mile downwind. Their chemical defense, though unusual, is effective, as illustrated by this extract from Charles Darwin's Voyage of the Beagle:

We saw also a couple of Zorrillos, or skunks—odious animals, which are far from uncommon. In general appearance the Zorrillo resembles a polecat, but it is rather larger, and much thicker in proportion. Conscious of its power, it roams by day about the open plain, and fears neither dog nor man. If a dog is urged to the attack, its courage is instantly checked by a few drops of the fetid oil, which brings on violent sickness and running at the nose. Whatever is once polluted by it, is for ever useless. Azara says the smell can be perceived at a league distant; more than once, when entering the harbour of Monte Video, the wind being off shore, we have perceived the odour on board the Beagle. Certain it is, that every animal most willingly makes room for the Zorrillo.[3]

Skunks are reluctant to use their smelly weapon, as they carry just enough of the chemical for five or six uses—about 15 cc—and require some ten days to produce another supply. Their bold black and white coloring however serves to make the skunk's appearance memorable. Where practical, it is to a skunk's advantage simply to warn a threatening creature off without expending scent: the black and white warning color aside, threatened skunks will go through an elaborate routine of hisses, foot stamping, and tail-high threat postures before resorting to the spray. Interestingly, skunks will not spray other skunks (with the exception of males in the mating season); though they fight over den space in autumn, they do so with tooth and claw.

The singular musk-spraying ability of the skunk has not escaped the attention of biologists: the names of the family and the most common genus (Mephitidae, Mephitis) mean "stench", and Spilogale putorius means "stinking spotted weasel". The word skunk is a corruption of an Abenaki name for them, segongw or segonku, which means "one who squirts" in the Algonquian dialect.

Most predatory animals of the Americas, such as wolves, foxes and badgers, seldom attack skunks—presumably out of fear of being sprayed. The exception is the great horned owl, the animal's only serious predator, which, like most birds, has a poor-to-nonexistent sense of smell.

end quote

Labels: , ,

Saturday, May 02, 2009

The Eclectic Cleric aka Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen Just Got "Memory Holed" By Rev. James Ford On His Monkey Mind Blog

A rather questionable comment by Rev. Tim Jensen aka Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen aka the so-called self-titled (not to mention self-appointed) "Eclectic Cleric" has been deleted aka "memory holed" by Rev. James Ford on his Monkey Mind blog. Most ironically this deletion of Rev. Tim Jensen's questionable words by his professional colleague Rev. James Ford took place on his Monkey Mind blog post entitled 'On Deleting Blog Entries' after Rev. Ford had initially approved of and posted this comment by The Eclectic Cleric. In that Rev. Tim Jensen insulted and defamed me in his questionable comment I submitted a rebuttal of his U*U BS that was cross-posted here late last night. It seems that Rev. James Ford was unready and unwilling, albeit not actually unable, to post my response to Rev. Tim Jensen's insulting and defamatory attack on me which would have been the genuinely just and equitable thing to do and chose to delete Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen's personal attack on me instead.

As U*Us know I am not big on the "memory holing" of blog posts and comments, perhaps especially when they contain evidence of the transgressive behavior of U*U ministers since such "memory holing" can be readily interpreted as an attempt to cover-up and hide the evidence of the transgressive U*U minister's "sins". For that reason I am reproducing verbatim everything that Rev. Dr. Timothy Jensen said in his questionable comment for U*U posteriority here. . . There will be no further comment from me in this particular blog post but I will almost certainly be questioning what Rev. Tim Jensen said in this rather questionable comment in some upcoming blog posts. I will respond to any comments on this blog post however, and I cordially invite Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen to comment here since I think he has some more explaining to do. . .

The Eclectic Cleric said...

I think anytime we write or speak in public as clergy, we are balancing a careful equilibrium between our duty as writers (and preachers) to "speak the Truth in Love," and the privileged trustworthiness and confidentiality people expect of us as clergy, whether we ask for it or not. I don't believe one or the other value ever really trumps its opposite; it's just that these two sometimes conflicting values cannot really be "compromised" without a serious loss of integrity on both ends.

Telling "the Truth, the Whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth" is a fantasy at best; none of us really knows the WHOLE truth to begin with, while all kinds of opinion, bias, and even prejudice slip into our analysis of "truth" often without even our own awareness. Thus none of us are ever truly objective either, even if we do have a viewpoint that allows us to consider multiple perspectives. Instead, we owe to our readers accuracy, authenticity, and humility -- to make our narratives as honest and real as we can, in recognition of our profound limitations both in perception and our ability to communicate what we perceive.

But this isn't really what's got me going today. What I want to know is why do you and other prominent UU bloggers allow Robin Edgar to latch on to your readers like a parasite in order to spread his...well, insanity...to larger and larger audiences?

I just found out today that I even rate my own TAG on his site, which includes what I can only take to be a not-particularly-subtle death threat in his post of January 4, 2009. My offense? Apparently he thought I should have given him credit for seeing the same image and having a similar (and I imagine quite common) reaction to it as he did.

I'm not even going to try to go any deeper into the situation as it evolved than that. All I can say is that, for whatever reason, Robin is pretty clearly a very deeply disturbed soul, and we don't do him or ourselves any favors by spreading his disturbance any more widely that he is capable of doing so on his own. I actually feel quite strongly and personally threatened by his unsolicited and undesired attention, and would feel quite grateful if everything that Robin has ever said, read, or written about me could be conveniently "memory-holed" and never see the light of day again. Personally, I just try to ignore him as much as possible, and have for quite some time now (which is what makes the thought that I somehow went to his site and "stole" his idea even all the more laughable). I don't approve his comments on my blog, and generally even avoid commenting myself on posts where he has already commented. And I sure wish other UU bloggers would do the same.

Keep this in mind: the mission of healthy religious organizations is to take people who are hurt and to help them become whole, and then take people who are whole and help them become wise. But dysfunctional institutions (often in the name of important values like "inclusion" or "empowerment" or "the democratic process") inevitably end up turning effective control of the organization over to its least functional members. The healthy people eventually come to share the illness, while the wise people see what is happening and leave. Which may help explain why over two/thirds of the people who ALREADY identify themselves as Unitarians, Universalists, or Unitarian Universalists are not active members of ANY UU congregation....

Labels: , , , , , ,

Friday, May 01, 2009

Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen aka The Klepto Cleric Strikes Again!

Here is the follow-up comment responding to yet another insulting and defamatory Unitarian*Univeralist tirade against me courtesy of *the* Reverend Doctor Timothy W. Jensen that I just submitted to Rev. James Ford's 'Monkey Mind' blog post titled 'On Deleting Blog Entries'

Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen's grandmother is no doubt spinning in her grave.

James, since you have chosen the fate of publishing Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen's insulting and defamatory tirade against me to your moderated blog, rather than suppress it, I hope that you will live up to the U*U principle calling for justice and *equity* in human relations by allowing me to post my rebuttal of what I sometimes less than politely refer to as U*U BS. For the record I hereby thank you for publishing Rev. Tim Jensen's insulting personal attack on me rather than suppressing it. I much prefer these things to be out in the open where they can be seen and/or heard and then appropriately dealt with, rather than being hidden from public knowledge in a malicious whispering campaign behind my back. Personally I think that Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen is just a tad crazy himself to publicly suggest that I am insane in a thread wherein I speak about U*U ministers needing to be held accountable for abusing their freedom of the pulpit by launching insulting and defamatory attacks on people in the so-called U*U blogosphere. . .

I would appreciate it James if you deigned to provide an answer to the question that Rev. Tim Jensen has posed to you here. With any luck it might belatedly bring him to his senses. Why Rev. Jensen so unwisely chooses to disregard his grandmother's good advice is beyond me. . .

:I just found out today that I even rate my own TAG on his site,

Correct. It makes it easier for Emerson Avenger blog readers to find my various blog posts dealing with Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen's insulting and defamatory, or otherwise unbecoming and quite unprofessional, online conduct. I also have reasonable grounds to believe that those tags make it easier for people searching for information about Rev. Jensen on the internet to find those TEA blog posts in the first place.

:which includes what I can only take to be a not-particularly-subtle death threat in his post of January 4, 2009.

ROTFLMU*UO! Obviously Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen is referring to this satirical blog post which simply uses a famous line from that "bad cop" Rev. Dr. Harry Callahan aka 'Dirty Harry' to underline the fact that Rev. Dr. Tim Jensen pushed his luck with me just a little *too* far by publicly attacking me on his blog and following up that initial public attack by attacking me again in comments on my blog. The last time I checked Rev. Tim Jensen was very much alive albeit not all that well. . . As should be quite obvious to most sane and rational people, it is in reality Rev. Jensen's rather less than lucky status in a Google search for -

Never get in a pissing match with a skunk

that this blog post refers to. There is not even the subtlest "death threat" against Rev. Jensen involved in it. The quite evident paranoia of rather too many U*U ministers never ceases to amaze me. . .

If I wanted to be charitable I might compassionately attribute Rev. Tim Jensen's "less than excellent ministry" to the medications he is apparently on these days but, most unfortunately, regardless of any potential disorienting effects of his medications there is a pattern of behavior involved here that goes back a while. One that has already been taken note of by the UUA's department of ministry in the past. . . What was it that Rev. John Weston said Tim?

"I believe that the Carlisle leadership is entitled to know, Tim, that we find your public claims against the congregation to be unworthy of our ministry."

I look forward to the day when the UUA's department of ministry responsibly acknowledges that your "snotty and hot-headed" public claims against me, including those made right here. . . are unworthy of U*U ministry. I will be formally asking the UUA to do just that once the "ancien regime" which has negligently and complicitly allowed U*U ministers to insult and defame or otherwise verbally abuse people with complete impunity is no longer ensconced at 25 Beacon Street. Quite regrettably I have no confidence whatsoever that my complaint about Rev. Jensen's well-documented unbecoming conduct would be responsibly handled by the current UUA administration so I will present it to the next one soon after it has been formed.

:My offense? Apparently he thought I should have given him credit for seeing the same image and having a similar (and I imagine quite common) reaction to it as he did.

Actually I had, and still have. . . very reasonable grounds to believe that Rev. Dr. Timothy Jensen may well have plagiarized some of my words and ideas that were posted on my StumbleUpon blog and repeated in a comment on Rev. Christine Robinson's iminister blog. I even have some hard evidence that strongly suggests, if not proves beyond a reasonable doubt, that he did in fact plagiarize my words and ideas from my comment on Rev. Robinson's blog. That however is not the main offense that I subsequently took Rev. Jensen to task for. No, Rev. Jensen's rather worse offense in my view was to launch an offensive public attack on me on his The Eclectic Cleric blog after I had privately and, all things considered, reasonably politely suggested that he might want to give some credit where credit was due since it appeared that he had most probably plagiarized my words and ideas. Rev. Jensen could have responded to my requests and suggestions in any number of other acceptable ways that would have been quite worthy of U*U ministry but it was quite evidently his chosen fate to use "snotty and hot-headed" words, to say nothing of insulting and defamatory language, in his very public personal attack on me. . . Anyone wanting further details about this regrettable matter knows where to find them.

It is not my intention to make this Monkey Mind blog post a battleground so I will leave it at that unless Rev. Ford sees fit to publish more comments about this matter. If Rev. Dr. Timothy W. Jensen wants to discuss this matter further he can post his own blog post about it, or respond to some of my blog posts about it, including the brand-spanking new one that will reproduce what has been said here.

Labels: , , , , ,