Unitarian Church of Montreal President Juan Vera 2nd Email Response Sunday January 20 2019
On Thursday January 17th, 2019, I received an email from Juan Vera, President of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, that had an attached PDF file of a letter from him that responded to my two emails that were sent to him on December 21st, 2018 and January 14th, 2019. This is my response to that letter with some typos corrected and some hyperlinks added to it to provide background information for those who care to practice Unitarian Universalism's 4th Principle which calls for "a free and responsible search for Truth and meaning".
Montreal, January 20, 2019
Dear Juan,
Thank you for your response to my email letters of December 21st, 2018 and January 14th, 2019.
I will respond point-by-point to it below.
:We have certainly made progress in our talks, initiated and mediated by two members of the Equipe Polarisation. We clarified that neither you nor I are aware of any pedophilia happening in the Unitarian Church of Montreal (UCM) or in any other Unitarian congregation in Canada.
We also clarified that while neither you nor I are aware of any pedophilia happening in the Unitarian Church of Montreal (UCM) or in any other Unitarian congregation in Canada, that does not mean that there has not been any. The fact that the UUA has gone to extreme and foolish lengths to try to conceal "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" from Unitarian Universalists and the public suggests to me that there are almost certainly cases of pedophilia that occurred in the USA that the UUA managed to keep hidden, and it is quite possible that something similar happened in Canada. That being said, my picket sign slogans that say:
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISTS MISUSE CANADA'S BLASPHEMY LAW TO . . . COVER-UP AND DENY PEDOPHILIA AND RAPE
protests against the fact that the Unitarian Universalist Association hired Stikeman Elliott Barristers & Solicitors defamation lawyer Maitre Marc-André Coulombe to falsely accuse me of the archaic criminal act of blasphemous libel for allegedly making "unfounded and vicious allegations to the effect that ministers of the Association engage in such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape". This is a completely false accusation, and an UNethical, and indeed borderline criminal, abusive misuse of Canada's now repealed blasphemy law in UUA legal bullying that clearly sought to conceal "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers" (to say nothing of UUA Religious Educators) from Unitarian Universalists and the general public by intimidating me into deleting aka "memory holing" The Emerson Avenger blog posts about "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by Rev. Mack Wallace Mitchell and Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein's pedophile rapist First Parish Norwell parishioner Richard Buell. It also sought to intimidate me into not blogging about other cases of pedophilia and rape committed by UUA clergy etc.
The above should be completely unacceptable to all Unitarian Universalists, yet to my knowledge, no Montreal Unitarians, nor any other Unitarian Universalists, have ever condemned the UUA's misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in legal bullying meant to cover-up, and perhaps even officially deny, "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers". As far as I am concerned, all Unitarian Universalists who do not condemn the UUA's false blasphemous libel accusation against me, and other Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts, are complicit in Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up and denial. The Montreal Unitarians who have repeatedly tried to suppress my protest against this abusive misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in various ways, since I began protesting against it in 2012, are active participants in Unitarian Universalist efforts to cover-up and deny child sex abuse committed by UUA clergy etc. in my opinion.
: We also agreed that no Unitarian mother, or Unitarian member in general, condones pedophilia and that the two cases of pedophilia in Unitarian congregations known in the USA have been properly dealt by the judicial system there. I consider these clarifications as major steps toward reconciliation.
Actually we most certainly have not agreed that "no Unitarian mother, or Unitarian member in general, condones pedophilia". I never stated any agreement with that. Au contraire, I made it clear that my Mother's Day themed chalk protest slogans protesting the fact that Unitarian Universalist mothers, including Montreal Unitarian mothers, are complicit in Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers" are justified by the fact that female Unitarian Universalists, some of whom are in fact mothers, are active participants in the UUA's efforts to conceal pedophilia and rape from the public. I pointed out to you that Montreal Unitarian mother Sue Montgomery has not only refused to report on the UUA's false blasphemous libel accusation against me in her capacity as The Gazette's "Justice Reporter", but that she has also actively sought to suppress my protest against the UUA's abusive misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in legal bullying intended to conceal U*U pedophilia and rape from the public. I told you that I have video footage of Sue Montgomery's quite literally "hands on" participation in trying to conceal that UUA child sex abuse cover-up from the public by literally throwing my picket signs that protest against it into the street.
See: https://youtu.be/9UUTLEzxO34
And: http://emersonavenger.
The fact of the matter is that I am not aware of one single Montreal Unitarian mother who has condemned the UUA's child sex abuse cover-up efforts, even though I have been very vocally protesting against them since 2012. Needless to say, the same can be said about Montreal Unitarian fathers. I have video footage of various female and male Montreal Unitarians hosing down my chalk protest slogans that expose and denounce Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of child sex abuse committed by UUA clergy etc. All of these Montreal Unitarians are not only guilty of complicit silence, they are active knowing and willful participants in Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of clergy sexual abuse of children, to say nothing of the other forms of clergy abuse and other U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that I am protesting against with my chalk slogans.
I should add that there are more than just "two cases of pedophilia in Unitarian congregations known in the USA" as you quite misleadingly state here. I know of a certain number of other cases of pedophilia, or other sexual abuse of children, that occurred in the USA that I have yet to blog about. I expect the UUA to publicly disclose all known cases of pedophilia, or other sexual abuse of children aka minors, committed by UUA clergy and UUA Religious Educators, whether the Unitarian Universalists in question were successfully prosecuted for their despicable sex crimes or not, and that includes any cases of UU child sex abuse that the UUA may know about which took place in Canada.
:At your request, I contacted Mr. Drennan in December 2018 and he reaffirmed his regret for the way he expressed his views to you. However, as Mr. Drennan has left the Unitarian Church, he no longer has any participation in the process of Truth and Reconciliation in which, with the help of Equipe Polarisation, we are both participating.
As I said. I asked you to ask Rev. Ray Drennan to confirm or deny having said what I am accusing him of saying in our private meeting in my apartment in early November of 1995. He did neither. You told me that Rev. Ray Drennan claims that he does not remember what he said. Personally I think he is probably lying about that, in order to continue to evade and avoid any accountability for his reprehensible words and actions. As far as I am concerned, even if "Mr. Drennan has left the Unitarian Church", as you claim, that does not mean that he cannot have any participation in the process of Truth and Reconciliation in which, with the help of Équipe Polarisation, we are both participating. Personally I believe that, in addition to still owing me a proper apology for his intolerant and abusive behaviour towards me, which goes well beyond his "insulting and defamatory language", Mr. Drennan also owes the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and indeed the larger Unitarian Universalist religious community, an apology for all of the trouble that he has caused for them by obstinately refusing to properly apologize for his intolerant and abusive behaviour in early 1996 as he should have done, and would have done, if he was a man of honesty and integrity.
: Rather than continuing to dwell on interpretations of past events, perhaps the best way of getting hold of the problem is resorting to a neutral judgment as the one stated in the conclusions of the ‘Commission des droits de la personne et de droits de la jeunesse, Quebec’ answering to your complaint against the Unitarian Church of Montreal. In its document CP-422.20 of February 10, 2004, the Commission decided to close the case stating the following in its Decision.
“ LA DÉCISION CD_422.20. Commission de Droits de la personne et de droits de la jeunesse. Quebec. February 10, 2004.
“...Le plaignant, alors membre de l'Église unitarienne de Montréal, allègue avoir subi de la discrimination et du harcèlement après avoir reçu une révélation de Dieu et décidé, suite à cette expérience mystique, de partager ses croyances religieuses personnelles avec des représentants et des membres de cette Église.
L'Église unitarienne, pour sa part, considère que le plaignant, dont les points de vue religieux divergent des siens, en fit la promotion d'une façon telle que cela créa de la confusion au sein de la communauté. Cette situation amena diverses interventions des représentants de l'Eglise auprès du plaignant jusqu'à son expulsion, après un vote de l'assemblée générale. De l'avis de la Commission, le litige qui oppose le plaignant à la partie mise en cause résulterait de l'incompatibilité entre les croyances et pratiques religieuses de ce dernier et celles de l'Eglise unitarienne de Montréal dont il était membre. Le litige serait également tributaire du comportement du plaignant qui, selon la mise en cause, aurait utilisé la congrégation comme plate-forme pour faire valoir ses croyances religieuses personnelles et, de ce fait, créé de la confusion quant à savoir s'il exprimait ainsi la position officielle de l'Église ou ses propres opinions. Dans un tel contexte, la Commission estime que les éléments dont elle dispose au terme de l'enquête sont insuffisants pour porter la cause devant un tribunal. Conséquemment, la Commission cesse d'agir en vertu de l'article 78, alinéa 2 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne.
Résolution prise à l'unanimité par les membres du Comité des plaintes à leur 422e séance tenue lundi 15 décembre 2003 par leur résolution CP-422.20.
I disagree with this suggestion. The whole point of any "Truth and Reconciliation" process is to deal with "interpretations of past events" in a way that determines what the real objective Truth actually is, towards the end goal of genuine reconciliation. There are also some serious problems with how the Commission de Droits de la personne handled my complaint against the Unitarian Church of Montreal which is why I publicly protested against it in 2006.
See: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
I find it curious to say the least, that the Commission de Droits de la personne provided the Unitarian Church of Montreal such a detailed decision, when the decision I received only said that the Commission de Droits de la personne decided that it was not within its mandate to handle my case if I remember correctly. This is the first that I have ever seen this decision of the Commission de Droits de la personne, and I will deal with it separately, so as not to make this communication excessively long.
: So, let us look to the future. In your letter, you say: “I am prepared to do as much as possible to resolve the dispute at the local level, with or without the participation of the Unitarian Universalist Association.” We are very appreciative of your readiness to work toward closing this conflict. We are also trying to find a basis where we can reach common understanding.
So far, although there has been some "common understanding" expressed in our meetings with Équipe Polarisation, I do not see much "common understanding" expressed in your official written communications that arise out of those discussions. This is now the second time that you have sent me a letter that contains serious errors of fact in it, and statements of "understanding" that I most certainly do not agree with. I expect any common understanding that we reach to be firmly founded on the truth, and on verifiable facts as much as is possible. I strongly recommend that you bring Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, Rev. Gail Seavey, whatever may be left of UU Safety Net, and other Unitarian Universalists who are have competency in dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct into this conflict resolution process, so as to avoid any further errors and "misunderstandings". I am quite easy going, and I can deal reasonably and rationally with errors and "misunderstandings" etc. in a fairly dispassionate manner, but it would be better for the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the larger Unitarian Universalist religious community if errors and "misunderstandings" are kept to a minimum in this conflict resolution. I am confident that Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, and Rev. Gail Seavey, would have cautioned you against making the inadequate apology that you sent me on December 18th, had they been made aware of your intentions. I believe that even the Équipe Polarisation was taken by surprise by it.
: The letter of apology that I sent to you dated December 18th, 2018, was our first step.
I have made it clear to you that the letter of apology that you sent me dated December 18th, 2018, contained errors of fact and other serious problems, and thus was not an apology that I can honourably accept. I would urge the Unitarian Church of Montreal to work on a new and improved official apology that I can honourably accept that clearly acknowledges the wrongfulness and harmfulness of Rev. Ray Drennan's "insulting and defamatory language", and other intolerant and abusive behavior, as well as the Unitarian Church of Montreal's negligent and complicit, not to mention punitive. . . responses to my legitimate grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan, between now and mid-February. An official public apology that will be read out to the congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal during the Sunday service of February 10th or February 17th, a few days before or after the 23rd anniversary of my original letter of grievance against Rev. Ray Drennan. If the Unitarian Church of Montreal fails to properly and publicly apologize for these things by mid-February, I can live with that, but the sooner the Unitarian Church of Montreal properly and publicly apologizes for Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, the church's negligent and complicit dismissal of my grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan, and the church's coercive and punitive misuse of the "Disruptive Behaviour Policy" in its efforts to silence me and punish me for complaining about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, the better for all concerned.
: Now, it is your turn to address the personal insults against me and other UCM members that you have posted on your website.
I made it clear in our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation that I am not apologizing for anything before I receive long overdue official apologies for much more serious insults, and even worse abusive behaviour than just insults, from the Unitarian Church of Montreal that I can honourably accept. I told you that I am not even promising to apologize for the comparatively minor insult of you that was posted to The Emerson Avenger blog in a blog post that was meant to teach Unitarian Universalists a lesson about using "insulting and defamatory language". To be honest I do not believe that I have a great deal to apologize for, because Montreal Unitarians, and Unitarian Universalists more generally, have been insulting and abusing me for decades with complete impunity. Montreal Unitarians, the UUA, and numerous other U*Us, have also made it abundantly clear that they consider it to be more than acceptable for Unitarian Universalist clergy to engage in deeply insulting and harmfully defamatory verbal abuse with complete impunity. Any insults that I have said or posted have been part of my efforts to make it clear to Unitarian*Universalists aka U*Us that their "insulting and defamatory language" can come back to bite them in their Big Fat U*U Ass as it were. I invite you to properly review what I said, and why I said it, before once again demanding an apology from me for not completely unjustifiably calling you an "asshole" in March of 2009.
http://emersonavenger.
As I said in our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation on December 20th of 2018, when you demanded an apology for calling you an "asshole", this is a false equivalency. There is no comparison between me calling you an "asshole" in my blog post of March 2009 for behaving in a rather "silly" manner during my protest outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal in September of 2007, and what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and about me, what other intolerant and abusive Montreal Unitarians like Frank Greene et al said to me and about me, and indeed what Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein aka Peacebang and other verbally abusive U*Us have said to me and about me online. The "insulting and defamatory language" of Rev. Ray Drennan, Frank Greene, Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein etc. etc. etc. is FAR worse, and considerably less justified, than my calling you an "asshole" because you more than a little bit obtusely challenged me to take your picture so that you could then call the police to complain about the fact that I took your picture. This is an inconsequential triviality in comparison to the deeply insulting and harmfully defamatory verbal abuse that you and all other Montreal Unitarians have caused me to have to endure without any just and equitable recourse for the better part of a quarter century now. . .
That being said, I stand ready to address any and all statements that I have made that you and other Montreal Unitarians believe to be "insulting and defamatory language", but in order to do so I need to know what these allegedly insulting and defamatory statements are. While I am not inclined to apologize for anything prior to having received some genuinely remorseful apologies from Montreal Unitarians who have either directly insulted and defamed me, or who have allowed Rev. Ray Drennan and Frank Greene et al to insult and defame me with complete impunity. I may apologize for a thing or two if I believe that an apology is actually warranted. Please provide a comprehensive list of those things I have said that Montreal Unitarians believe constitute "insulting and defamatory language" so that I may be aware of what they are and govern myself accordingly.
: You and I have worked together well in the past. Now it is time for reflection. ‘Il faut reflechir’, as they say in French.
I agree that you and I, and indeed various other Montreal Unitarians, have worked well together in the past, and I hope that we will be able to work well together again in the not too distant future. That is what Truth and *Reconciliation* is all about. I find it very sad that you, and various other Montreal Unitarians who I did work well with together in the past, did little or nothing to speak out against the injustices, abuses, and outrageous hypocrisy that I have been complaining about since 1996, or work towards a genuinely just, equitable, and compassionate resolution to this almost quarter century old conflict much earlier. The "asshole" blog post was published in March of 2009, more than a full decade after I initiated my peaceful public protest against Rev. Ray Drennan's anti-religious intolerance and bigotry, and various other U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy, (including protesting against UUA mishandling of clergy sexual misconduct complaints by mid-late 1999 if not earlier), outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal in May of 1998, and more than 13 "less than lucky" years after I filed my clergy misconduct complaint against Rev. Ray Drennan on February 14th of 1996. What did you and other Montreal Unitarians, to say nothing of the UUA, do to honour and uphold the 7 Principles of Unitarian Universalism in those 13 "less than lucky" years? Not much from what I can see. Au contraire, you all completely disregarded them. Please reflect on *that*.
https://www.uua.org/beliefs/
: I will be back in April, ready to re-engage fully in this process of reconciliation with you.
In our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation, to say nothing of earlier ones, we were fully aware of the fact that you would be spending several months in Chile between January and March or April of 2019. We agreed that representatives of the Unitarian Church of Montreal would continue to meet with me in Équipe Polarisation meetings towards the end of resolving this conflict. We even tried to schedule some meetings with Équipe Polarisation for February etc. I expect meetings with Équipe Polarisation to continue while you are away in Chile. That is one of the reasons that I urged you to fill out the church committee dealing with this matter to at least 3 people, and ideally 4 or 5. That is also one of the reasons why I said that Rev. Diane Rollert can, and should, begin to participate in meetings with Équipe Polarisation, and the Truth and Reconciliation process more generally, while you are way in Chile. Please take steps to ensure that at least 2 meetings with Équipe Polarisation per month are scheduled for February, March, and April; and please also ensure that an official notice about this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process, and where it currently stands, is published in the February news letter of the Unitarian Church of Montreal.
I take note of the fact that you have cc'd your emails to Rev. Dr. Charles Eddis, the Minister Emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, so he has no doubt received my replies to your emails as well. I believe that his participation in this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process is important, and the sooner Rev. Eddis begins to actively participate in conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation work the better. I realize that Rev. Dr. Eddis is now in his early 90s, but the last I heard about him he was in quite good health, both physically and mentally. Rev. Dr. Eddis is in a position to verify certain facts about what *really* happened over the course of this conflict, especially the early stages of it. I think that we need to hear from Rev. Eddis ASAP. Perhaps you can even persuade Rev. Eddis to join your conflict resolution committee, and to participate in upcoming meetings with Équipe Polarisation in February, March, and April.
: We have time to find a way, or ways, to overcome the residual aspects of this reconciliation. In this process we should understand that, as in any acrimonious divorce, one can aim to have a peaceful settlement but that there is no hope of bringing back again both sides of the conflict to bed together.
This isn't a "divorce", and I would caution you against comparing a Truth and Reconciliation process dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct, and related injustices and abuses, to a "divorce". I know that both you and Bill used that word in the last two meetings with Équipe Polarisation, but I do not agree with that characterization of what we are doing. This is supposed to be a Truth and Reconciliation process, one that is supposed to be in alignment with the Unitarian Universalist church's established policies and procedures for dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct. A term the UUA used frequently in the past, but seems to have forgotten and even "memory holed" of late is:
"Restorative Justice For All"
The Unitarian Church of Montreal displays a banner saying:
"Vivre Ensemble" and "Live In Harmony"
above its entrance.
I expect the Unitarian Church of Montreal, to say nothing of the Unitarian Universalist Association, to fully honour and uphold their respective (and over-lapping) religious rhetoric, in this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process, and to work together towards genuine restorative justice not only for me personally, but for numerous other victims of Unitarian Universalist clergy misconduct who have never received anything even remotely resembling restorative justice.
Please take steps to ensure that my reasonable recommendations made in this email, and in my previous communications, are responsibly addressed. It seems that some of my recommendations have been disregarded, overlooked, or outright rejected. I look forward to receiving a "rough draft" of the Unitarian Church of Montreal's new and improved official apology for Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, and the Unitarian Church of Montreal's negligent, complicit, and indeed punitive responses to my legitimate grievances arising out of Rev. Ray Drennan's non-sexual clergy misconduct aka non-sexual clergy abuse in the coming days and weeks. Ideally an official public apology that I can honourably accept will be delivered during a Sunday service at the Unitarian Church of Montreal between now and February 17th, 2019 but, if the Unitarian Church of Montreal wants to drag its heels about properly and publicly apologizing for its well-documented "sins of omission" and "sins of commission", I can deal with that ongoing reluctance of Montreal Unitarians to genuinely respect my worth and dignity, and that decades old FAILure, indeed the shameful obstinate refusal, of Montreal Unitarians to actually practice justice, equity and compassion in their human relations with me.
Sincerely,
Robin Edgar
Montreal, January 20, 2019
Dear Juan,
Thank you for your response to my email letters of December 21st, 2018 and January 14th, 2019.
I will respond point-by-point to it below.
:We have certainly made progress in our talks, initiated and mediated by two members of the Equipe Polarisation. We clarified that neither you nor I are aware of any pedophilia happening in the Unitarian Church of Montreal (UCM) or in any other Unitarian congregation in Canada.
We also clarified that while neither you nor I are aware of any pedophilia happening in the Unitarian Church of Montreal (UCM) or in any other Unitarian congregation in Canada, that does not mean that there has not been any. The fact that the UUA has gone to extreme and foolish lengths to try to conceal "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" from Unitarian Universalists and the public suggests to me that there are almost certainly cases of pedophilia that occurred in the USA that the UUA managed to keep hidden, and it is quite possible that something similar happened in Canada. That being said, my picket sign slogans that say:
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISTS MISUSE CANADA'S BLASPHEMY LAW TO . . . COVER-UP AND DENY PEDOPHILIA AND RAPE
protests against the fact that the Unitarian Universalist Association hired Stikeman Elliott Barristers & Solicitors defamation lawyer Maitre Marc-André Coulombe to falsely accuse me of the archaic criminal act of blasphemous libel for allegedly making "unfounded and vicious allegations to the effect that ministers of the Association engage in such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape". This is a completely false accusation, and an UNethical, and indeed borderline criminal, abusive misuse of Canada's now repealed blasphemy law in UUA legal bullying that clearly sought to conceal "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers" (to say nothing of UUA Religious Educators) from Unitarian Universalists and the general public by intimidating me into deleting aka "memory holing" The Emerson Avenger blog posts about "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by Rev. Mack Wallace Mitchell and Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein's pedophile rapist First Parish Norwell parishioner Richard Buell. It also sought to intimidate me into not blogging about other cases of pedophilia and rape committed by UUA clergy etc.
The above should be completely unacceptable to all Unitarian Universalists, yet to my knowledge, no Montreal Unitarians, nor any other Unitarian Universalists, have ever condemned the UUA's misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in legal bullying meant to cover-up, and perhaps even officially deny, "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers". As far as I am concerned, all Unitarian Universalists who do not condemn the UUA's false blasphemous libel accusation against me, and other Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up efforts, are complicit in Unitarian Universalist clergy abuse cover-up and denial. The Montreal Unitarians who have repeatedly tried to suppress my protest against this abusive misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in various ways, since I began protesting against it in 2012, are active participants in Unitarian Universalist efforts to cover-up and deny child sex abuse committed by UUA clergy etc. in my opinion.
: We also agreed that no Unitarian mother, or Unitarian member in general, condones pedophilia and that the two cases of pedophilia in Unitarian congregations known in the USA have been properly dealt by the judicial system there. I consider these clarifications as major steps toward reconciliation.
Actually we most certainly have not agreed that "no Unitarian mother, or Unitarian member in general, condones pedophilia". I never stated any agreement with that. Au contraire, I made it clear that my Mother's Day themed chalk protest slogans protesting the fact that Unitarian Universalist mothers, including Montreal Unitarian mothers, are complicit in Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of "such despicable crimes as pedophilia and rape" committed by "certain Unitarian Universalist ministers" are justified by the fact that female Unitarian Universalists, some of whom are in fact mothers, are active participants in the UUA's efforts to conceal pedophilia and rape from the public. I pointed out to you that Montreal Unitarian mother Sue Montgomery has not only refused to report on the UUA's false blasphemous libel accusation against me in her capacity as The Gazette's "Justice Reporter", but that she has also actively sought to suppress my protest against the UUA's abusive misuse of Canada's blasphemy law in legal bullying intended to conceal U*U pedophilia and rape from the public. I told you that I have video footage of Sue Montgomery's quite literally "hands on" participation in trying to conceal that UUA child sex abuse cover-up from the public by literally throwing my picket signs that protest against it into the street.
See: https://youtu.be/9UUTLEzxO34
And: http://emersonavenger.
The fact of the matter is that I am not aware of one single Montreal Unitarian mother who has condemned the UUA's child sex abuse cover-up efforts, even though I have been very vocally protesting against them since 2012. Needless to say, the same can be said about Montreal Unitarian fathers. I have video footage of various female and male Montreal Unitarians hosing down my chalk protest slogans that expose and denounce Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of child sex abuse committed by UUA clergy etc. All of these Montreal Unitarians are not only guilty of complicit silence, they are active knowing and willful participants in Unitarian Universalist cover-up and denial of clergy sexual abuse of children, to say nothing of the other forms of clergy abuse and other U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy that I am protesting against with my chalk slogans.
I should add that there are more than just "two cases of pedophilia in Unitarian congregations known in the USA" as you quite misleadingly state here. I know of a certain number of other cases of pedophilia, or other sexual abuse of children, that occurred in the USA that I have yet to blog about. I expect the UUA to publicly disclose all known cases of pedophilia, or other sexual abuse of children aka minors, committed by UUA clergy and UUA Religious Educators, whether the Unitarian Universalists in question were successfully prosecuted for their despicable sex crimes or not, and that includes any cases of UU child sex abuse that the UUA may know about which took place in Canada.
:At your request, I contacted Mr. Drennan in December 2018 and he reaffirmed his regret for the way he expressed his views to you. However, as Mr. Drennan has left the Unitarian Church, he no longer has any participation in the process of Truth and Reconciliation in which, with the help of Equipe Polarisation, we are both participating.
As I said. I asked you to ask Rev. Ray Drennan to confirm or deny having said what I am accusing him of saying in our private meeting in my apartment in early November of 1995. He did neither. You told me that Rev. Ray Drennan claims that he does not remember what he said. Personally I think he is probably lying about that, in order to continue to evade and avoid any accountability for his reprehensible words and actions. As far as I am concerned, even if "Mr. Drennan has left the Unitarian Church", as you claim, that does not mean that he cannot have any participation in the process of Truth and Reconciliation in which, with the help of Équipe Polarisation, we are both participating. Personally I believe that, in addition to still owing me a proper apology for his intolerant and abusive behaviour towards me, which goes well beyond his "insulting and defamatory language", Mr. Drennan also owes the Unitarian Church of Montreal, and indeed the larger Unitarian Universalist religious community, an apology for all of the trouble that he has caused for them by obstinately refusing to properly apologize for his intolerant and abusive behaviour in early 1996 as he should have done, and would have done, if he was a man of honesty and integrity.
: Rather than continuing to dwell on interpretations of past events, perhaps the best way of getting hold of the problem is resorting to a neutral judgment as the one stated in the conclusions of the ‘Commission des droits de la personne et de droits de la jeunesse, Quebec’ answering to your complaint against the Unitarian Church of Montreal. In its document CP-422.20 of February 10, 2004, the Commission decided to close the case stating the following in its Decision.
“ LA DÉCISION CD_422.20. Commission de Droits de la personne et de droits de la jeunesse. Quebec. February 10, 2004.
“...Le plaignant, alors membre de l'Église unitarienne de Montréal, allègue avoir subi de la discrimination et du harcèlement après avoir reçu une révélation de Dieu et décidé, suite à cette expérience mystique, de partager ses croyances religieuses personnelles avec des représentants et des membres de cette Église.
L'Église unitarienne, pour sa part, considère que le plaignant, dont les points de vue religieux divergent des siens, en fit la promotion d'une façon telle que cela créa de la confusion au sein de la communauté. Cette situation amena diverses interventions des représentants de l'Eglise auprès du plaignant jusqu'à son expulsion, après un vote de l'assemblée générale. De l'avis de la Commission, le litige qui oppose le plaignant à la partie mise en cause résulterait de l'incompatibilité entre les croyances et pratiques religieuses de ce dernier et celles de l'Eglise unitarienne de Montréal dont il était membre. Le litige serait également tributaire du comportement du plaignant qui, selon la mise en cause, aurait utilisé la congrégation comme plate-forme pour faire valoir ses croyances religieuses personnelles et, de ce fait, créé de la confusion quant à savoir s'il exprimait ainsi la position officielle de l'Église ou ses propres opinions. Dans un tel contexte, la Commission estime que les éléments dont elle dispose au terme de l'enquête sont insuffisants pour porter la cause devant un tribunal. Conséquemment, la Commission cesse d'agir en vertu de l'article 78, alinéa 2 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne.
Résolution prise à l'unanimité par les membres du Comité des plaintes à leur 422e séance tenue lundi 15 décembre 2003 par leur résolution CP-422.20.
I disagree with this suggestion. The whole point of any "Truth and Reconciliation" process is to deal with "interpretations of past events" in a way that determines what the real objective Truth actually is, towards the end goal of genuine reconciliation. There are also some serious problems with how the Commission de Droits de la personne handled my complaint against the Unitarian Church of Montreal which is why I publicly protested against it in 2006.
See: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
And: http://emersonavenger.
I find it curious to say the least, that the Commission de Droits de la personne provided the Unitarian Church of Montreal such a detailed decision, when the decision I received only said that the Commission de Droits de la personne decided that it was not within its mandate to handle my case if I remember correctly. This is the first that I have ever seen this decision of the Commission de Droits de la personne, and I will deal with it separately, so as not to make this communication excessively long.
: So, let us look to the future. In your letter, you say: “I am prepared to do as much as possible to resolve the dispute at the local level, with or without the participation of the Unitarian Universalist Association.” We are very appreciative of your readiness to work toward closing this conflict. We are also trying to find a basis where we can reach common understanding.
So far, although there has been some "common understanding" expressed in our meetings with Équipe Polarisation, I do not see much "common understanding" expressed in your official written communications that arise out of those discussions. This is now the second time that you have sent me a letter that contains serious errors of fact in it, and statements of "understanding" that I most certainly do not agree with. I expect any common understanding that we reach to be firmly founded on the truth, and on verifiable facts as much as is possible. I strongly recommend that you bring Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, Rev. Gail Seavey, whatever may be left of UU Safety Net, and other Unitarian Universalists who are have competency in dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct into this conflict resolution process, so as to avoid any further errors and "misunderstandings". I am quite easy going, and I can deal reasonably and rationally with errors and "misunderstandings" etc. in a fairly dispassionate manner, but it would be better for the Unitarian Church of Montreal and the larger Unitarian Universalist religious community if errors and "misunderstandings" are kept to a minimum in this conflict resolution. I am confident that Rev. Deborah Pope-Lance, and Rev. Gail Seavey, would have cautioned you against making the inadequate apology that you sent me on December 18th, had they been made aware of your intentions. I believe that even the Équipe Polarisation was taken by surprise by it.
: The letter of apology that I sent to you dated December 18th, 2018, was our first step.
I have made it clear to you that the letter of apology that you sent me dated December 18th, 2018, contained errors of fact and other serious problems, and thus was not an apology that I can honourably accept. I would urge the Unitarian Church of Montreal to work on a new and improved official apology that I can honourably accept that clearly acknowledges the wrongfulness and harmfulness of Rev. Ray Drennan's "insulting and defamatory language", and other intolerant and abusive behavior, as well as the Unitarian Church of Montreal's negligent and complicit, not to mention punitive. . . responses to my legitimate grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan, between now and mid-February. An official public apology that will be read out to the congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal during the Sunday service of February 10th or February 17th, a few days before or after the 23rd anniversary of my original letter of grievance against Rev. Ray Drennan. If the Unitarian Church of Montreal fails to properly and publicly apologize for these things by mid-February, I can live with that, but the sooner the Unitarian Church of Montreal properly and publicly apologizes for Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, the church's negligent and complicit dismissal of my grievances against Rev. Ray Drennan, and the church's coercive and punitive misuse of the "Disruptive Behaviour Policy" in its efforts to silence me and punish me for complaining about Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, the better for all concerned.
: Now, it is your turn to address the personal insults against me and other UCM members that you have posted on your website.
I made it clear in our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation that I am not apologizing for anything before I receive long overdue official apologies for much more serious insults, and even worse abusive behaviour than just insults, from the Unitarian Church of Montreal that I can honourably accept. I told you that I am not even promising to apologize for the comparatively minor insult of you that was posted to The Emerson Avenger blog in a blog post that was meant to teach Unitarian Universalists a lesson about using "insulting and defamatory language". To be honest I do not believe that I have a great deal to apologize for, because Montreal Unitarians, and Unitarian Universalists more generally, have been insulting and abusing me for decades with complete impunity. Montreal Unitarians, the UUA, and numerous other U*Us, have also made it abundantly clear that they consider it to be more than acceptable for Unitarian Universalist clergy to engage in deeply insulting and harmfully defamatory verbal abuse with complete impunity. Any insults that I have said or posted have been part of my efforts to make it clear to Unitarian*Universalists aka U*Us that their "insulting and defamatory language" can come back to bite them in their Big Fat U*U Ass as it were. I invite you to properly review what I said, and why I said it, before once again demanding an apology from me for not completely unjustifiably calling you an "asshole" in March of 2009.
http://emersonavenger.
As I said in our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation on December 20th of 2018, when you demanded an apology for calling you an "asshole", this is a false equivalency. There is no comparison between me calling you an "asshole" in my blog post of March 2009 for behaving in a rather "silly" manner during my protest outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal in September of 2007, and what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and about me, what other intolerant and abusive Montreal Unitarians like Frank Greene et al said to me and about me, and indeed what Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein aka Peacebang and other verbally abusive U*Us have said to me and about me online. The "insulting and defamatory language" of Rev. Ray Drennan, Frank Greene, Rev. Dr. Victoria Weinstein etc. etc. etc. is FAR worse, and considerably less justified, than my calling you an "asshole" because you more than a little bit obtusely challenged me to take your picture so that you could then call the police to complain about the fact that I took your picture. This is an inconsequential triviality in comparison to the deeply insulting and harmfully defamatory verbal abuse that you and all other Montreal Unitarians have caused me to have to endure without any just and equitable recourse for the better part of a quarter century now. . .
That being said, I stand ready to address any and all statements that I have made that you and other Montreal Unitarians believe to be "insulting and defamatory language", but in order to do so I need to know what these allegedly insulting and defamatory statements are. While I am not inclined to apologize for anything prior to having received some genuinely remorseful apologies from Montreal Unitarians who have either directly insulted and defamed me, or who have allowed Rev. Ray Drennan and Frank Greene et al to insult and defame me with complete impunity. I may apologize for a thing or two if I believe that an apology is actually warranted. Please provide a comprehensive list of those things I have said that Montreal Unitarians believe constitute "insulting and defamatory language" so that I may be aware of what they are and govern myself accordingly.
: You and I have worked together well in the past. Now it is time for reflection. ‘Il faut reflechir’, as they say in French.
I agree that you and I, and indeed various other Montreal Unitarians, have worked well together in the past, and I hope that we will be able to work well together again in the not too distant future. That is what Truth and *Reconciliation* is all about. I find it very sad that you, and various other Montreal Unitarians who I did work well with together in the past, did little or nothing to speak out against the injustices, abuses, and outrageous hypocrisy that I have been complaining about since 1996, or work towards a genuinely just, equitable, and compassionate resolution to this almost quarter century old conflict much earlier. The "asshole" blog post was published in March of 2009, more than a full decade after I initiated my peaceful public protest against Rev. Ray Drennan's anti-religious intolerance and bigotry, and various other U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy, (including protesting against UUA mishandling of clergy sexual misconduct complaints by mid-late 1999 if not earlier), outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal in May of 1998, and more than 13 "less than lucky" years after I filed my clergy misconduct complaint against Rev. Ray Drennan on February 14th of 1996. What did you and other Montreal Unitarians, to say nothing of the UUA, do to honour and uphold the 7 Principles of Unitarian Universalism in those 13 "less than lucky" years? Not much from what I can see. Au contraire, you all completely disregarded them. Please reflect on *that*.
https://www.uua.org/beliefs/
: I will be back in April, ready to re-engage fully in this process of reconciliation with you.
In our last meeting with Équipe Polarisation, to say nothing of earlier ones, we were fully aware of the fact that you would be spending several months in Chile between January and March or April of 2019. We agreed that representatives of the Unitarian Church of Montreal would continue to meet with me in Équipe Polarisation meetings towards the end of resolving this conflict. We even tried to schedule some meetings with Équipe Polarisation for February etc. I expect meetings with Équipe Polarisation to continue while you are away in Chile. That is one of the reasons that I urged you to fill out the church committee dealing with this matter to at least 3 people, and ideally 4 or 5. That is also one of the reasons why I said that Rev. Diane Rollert can, and should, begin to participate in meetings with Équipe Polarisation, and the Truth and Reconciliation process more generally, while you are way in Chile. Please take steps to ensure that at least 2 meetings with Équipe Polarisation per month are scheduled for February, March, and April; and please also ensure that an official notice about this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process, and where it currently stands, is published in the February news letter of the Unitarian Church of Montreal.
I take note of the fact that you have cc'd your emails to Rev. Dr. Charles Eddis, the Minister Emeritus of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, so he has no doubt received my replies to your emails as well. I believe that his participation in this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process is important, and the sooner Rev. Eddis begins to actively participate in conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation work the better. I realize that Rev. Dr. Eddis is now in his early 90s, but the last I heard about him he was in quite good health, both physically and mentally. Rev. Dr. Eddis is in a position to verify certain facts about what *really* happened over the course of this conflict, especially the early stages of it. I think that we need to hear from Rev. Eddis ASAP. Perhaps you can even persuade Rev. Eddis to join your conflict resolution committee, and to participate in upcoming meetings with Équipe Polarisation in February, March, and April.
: We have time to find a way, or ways, to overcome the residual aspects of this reconciliation. In this process we should understand that, as in any acrimonious divorce, one can aim to have a peaceful settlement but that there is no hope of bringing back again both sides of the conflict to bed together.
This isn't a "divorce", and I would caution you against comparing a Truth and Reconciliation process dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct, and related injustices and abuses, to a "divorce". I know that both you and Bill used that word in the last two meetings with Équipe Polarisation, but I do not agree with that characterization of what we are doing. This is supposed to be a Truth and Reconciliation process, one that is supposed to be in alignment with the Unitarian Universalist church's established policies and procedures for dealing with "historic" clergy misconduct. A term the UUA used frequently in the past, but seems to have forgotten and even "memory holed" of late is:
"Restorative Justice For All"
The Unitarian Church of Montreal displays a banner saying:
"Vivre Ensemble" and "Live In Harmony"
above its entrance.
I expect the Unitarian Church of Montreal, to say nothing of the Unitarian Universalist Association, to fully honour and uphold their respective (and over-lapping) religious rhetoric, in this conflict resolution Truth and Reconciliation process, and to work together towards genuine restorative justice not only for me personally, but for numerous other victims of Unitarian Universalist clergy misconduct who have never received anything even remotely resembling restorative justice.
Please take steps to ensure that my reasonable recommendations made in this email, and in my previous communications, are responsibly addressed. It seems that some of my recommendations have been disregarded, overlooked, or outright rejected. I look forward to receiving a "rough draft" of the Unitarian Church of Montreal's new and improved official apology for Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive behaviour, and the Unitarian Church of Montreal's negligent, complicit, and indeed punitive responses to my legitimate grievances arising out of Rev. Ray Drennan's non-sexual clergy misconduct aka non-sexual clergy abuse in the coming days and weeks. Ideally an official public apology that I can honourably accept will be delivered during a Sunday service at the Unitarian Church of Montreal between now and February 17th, 2019 but, if the Unitarian Church of Montreal wants to drag its heels about properly and publicly apologizing for its well-documented "sins of omission" and "sins of commission", I can deal with that ongoing reluctance of Montreal Unitarians to genuinely respect my worth and dignity, and that decades old FAILure, indeed the shameful obstinate refusal, of Montreal Unitarians to actually practice justice, equity and compassion in their human relations with me.
Sincerely,
Robin Edgar
Comments