Unitarian Church Leadership

[tcpip]

I've spent a bit of time over the past couple of weeks as a candidate for chairperson for the Melbourne Unitarian Church. It wasn't an easy decision; the current chairperson is a convivial chap and has a fair knowledge of the subject matter. But he's also been in that role for a very long time, and, it must be said, he has been less than effective at dealing with some real problems that the place is facing that have been raised time and time again for years on end. It became very clear to me that nothing was going to change unless the leadership changed.

The reality is that the Church is stagnating or declining on all metrics one cares to mention (except for website visits). Membership is aging and declining - the "electoral roll" is a mere 47, down from over 60 when I first joined and average attendance at services is around 25-30. There is no effort at all to bring in new blood, and least of all young people - indeed, there is active discouragement. The content of the overwhelming majority of services and the Church journal is largely indistinguishable from a left-wing political club, making even the purpose of the place completely redundant. The organisation is too top-heavy with a maddeningly inefficient bureaucracy and a tightly controlled concentration of power. Over the past three years the Church has recorded constant financial losses and a decline in equity.

I've gone into all this in my election material for those who want more information on the dire straits the organisation is in, along with some very achievable, measurable pledges of my own. Alas, I do not have soft-copies of the rather hostile and personal responses, which are overwhelmingly based on defending the bleak financial record, with the particular the claim that depreciation isn't an issue as it is just a 'paper loss', a claim, I must confess, simply astounds. Mostly however, I cannot fathom what the incumbents stand for. More of the same? It'll become a race to see who dies first; the incumbents or the organisation - and nothing will be left for the future.

Comments

[zey]

Good luck with the election, I do believe you'd be a very positive and effective chair for the organisation.

I'm actually a bit surprised an organisation like a Unitarian Church would be losing membership in this era. The fundamentals are so strong: the Internet's open forum nature is such that the large number of people who are agnostics and atheists (or at least, skeptical of organised religion) know they're not alone.

The one thing about the religious I do quite envy is the way their churches are really organised when it comes to both community/charitable activities and social gatherings for getting their singles mixing. If you manage to get the Unitarians even halfway there, you'll have done a tremendous job.

[ninboydean.livejournal.com]

Good luck! Just because capitalist finance isn't a "just" system doesn't mean the church can ignore it. Sounds like that's what they're arguing - what they're missing is that the church will be the only loser with its membership of course) for as long as they think "paper loss" is irrelevant.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

It's a common feature I've seen among many members of the political left; an interpretation that because capitalism is unjust then therefore accounting and economics can be equally condemned. Trotsky, a little smarter on such matters than many of his contemporaries had some harsh words to say on the subject.

Economic accounting is unthinkable without market relations...

If a universal mind existed, of the kind that projected itself into the scientific fancy of Laplace – a mind that could register simultaneously all the processes of nature and society, that could measure the dynamics of their motion, that could forecast the results of their inter-reactions – such a mind, of course, could a priori draw up a faultless and exhaustive economic plan, beginning with the number of acres of wheat down to the last button for a vest. The bureaucracy often imagines that just such a mind is at its disposal; that is why it so easily frees itself from the control of the market and of Soviet democracy. But, in reality, the bureaucracy errs frightfully in its estimate of its spiritual resources....


The innumerable living participants in the economy, state and private, collective and individual, must serve notice of their needs and of their relative strength not only through the statistical determinations of plan commissions but by the direct pressure of supply and demand. The plan is checked and, to a considerable degree, realized through the market. The regulation of the market itself must depend upon the tendencies that are brought out through its mechanism. The blueprints produced by the departments must demonstrate their economic efficacy through commercial calculation.

-- Leon Trotsky, "Soviet Economy in Danger", New York, 1933.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

In Mr Trotsky's case, of course, this sentiment is overwhelmingly a matter of hindsight being 20/20. Only about ten years earlier he had been a staunch opponent of the NEP, perhaps because of the requirements of his job as Commissar of War.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

I think you're right. The circumstances of war generate very different economic conditions where market relations and commercial calculation are not entirely appropriate. It also generates pretty miserable consumer conditions..

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

They did call it War Communism for a reason; that said, there was a fairly extensive and legitimate ambiguity among the Bolshevik leadership regarding whether or not War Communism should in essence become permanent and form the basic structure of the future Soviet economy. (The confusion is pronounced because different people say slightly different things about what Trotsky's precise position was at any given time during the deliberations.)

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Well certainly Bukharin thought it should be permanent - but then he changed his mind and favoured the NEP. Oh, how opportunity presents itself! At least with Trotsky he certainly took into account the legitimate criticisms of planning mechanisms from people like von Mises. I never got the sense that Bukharin supported War Communism or the NEP for other than entirely political reasons; although I may be wrong. I am no expert on his economic reasoning..

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, Bukharin presents me with such a problem! On the other hand he's a prodigal economic and theoretical writer, with occasional bouts of practically doctrinaire stubbornness (as with Trotsky, the Brest-Litovsk debate is probably the crowning example of this), and on the other hand he's also a consummate party careerist and day-to-day political strategist.

[sebastianne.livejournal.com]

A major problem with insulated groups is that they get caught up in idealism as a culture develops about reinforcing and validating each other in order not to destabilise the group- suddenly the thoughts and ideals become more important than the initial purpose of the group, which is to maintain the organisation to allow it to have a real and positive impact. I think many organisations would highly benefit from a self-reflexive annual audit of their actual achievements and real-world impact. Sure capitalism in its current form is a social justice atrocity, but allowing your organisation to die because of it is equally socially irresponsible when alternatively you could work within the constraints of capitalism to achieve positive social change.

[pache.livejournal.com]

Best of luck with your campaign, looks like a very worthwhile attempt at reform.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

Change like that is always good; I wish you the best of luck!

[direwolf23.livejournal.com]

You said my name! ...Sort of. :P

I hope that you're successful in your coup. Being a good person isn't always enough; especially when you have the existence of an organization weighing in the balance. I hope you reinvigorate this group, and get people of all ages and backgrounds interested and excited about what you can offer them.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Hey, a coup is a sudden and unconstitutional change! :p

But yes, you're absolutely right about what I'm trying to achieve - reinvigoration, people of all ages and backgrounds, a place that is interesting and stimulating.

The UUs in the US did a great ad a few years back.. It's the sort of thing I would like to promote.

[sebastianne.livejournal.com]

Good luck! It sounds like change really does need to occur, and while it might make you unpopular initially with few people, in the long run they will hopefully see the good intentions and very reasonable strategic thinking behind your campaign :)

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Well, the first thing that I was accussed of was engaging in an ALP branch-stacking excersise! So the assumption is immediately one of negative intentions. I guess some people have spent a lifetime playing in the morass of dirty politics and the Church is the entirety of their life, rather than being part of their life. So the possibility of their nest being upset is very troubling, even if it means that the organisation dies out.

(The particular accusation died off a little when it became evident that there is not one full member of the Church that I have 'introduced' to the congregation, let alone any members of the ALP.. but it's still being spread among those with small and poisoned minds)

I think I have majority support among the membership. Most are not fools but any stretch of the imagination and can see that the Church need reinvigoration. Sunday will tell...

[sebastianne.livejournal.com]

I've always found it very interesting that there is a quite high over-representation of paranoid personality features (not disorders) amongst people attracted to politics, yet the methods often used in politics are the very ones which aggravate such personality traits~ makes things difficult no matter which approach you try as people will be suspicious naturally and often with experiential backup given the nature of their past experiences in politics. The other main feature of paranoid types is the heavy reliance on a clique, so your recommendations will literally be ruffling a lot of feathers! ;) Hopefully they can move past their anxieties and see that they can have an ongoing and hopefully more progressive and fruitful involvement in the church :)

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Sure, and when the personality feature finds themselves in a position where a clique can be easily established through systematic means then the personality and the system start feeding off each other. That's why it's very important that any reform should be about making an organisation more democratic rather than less - as Tony Benn's blackboard stated quite bluntly..

It is one of the difficulties of any organisation claiming to be 'democratic'. On one side it can mean a dictatorship of whomever receives 50%+1 of the vote in an election, with all sorts of behaviours and rules to ensure that dictatorship of the majority remains in place.

On the other hand it can mean proportional representation, inclusion of minority opinions, term limits, automatic recall & etc. The more of these features that are included, the less prone the organisation will be towards being "taken over" - because it will be happening all the time in a manner than nobody can control. Which is ideally what a democratic governance should be about..


(Of course, we're approaching this from different directions.. With your background in psychology and mine in sociology... but the two do meet!)

[sebastianne.livejournal.com]

I don't think you can look at them exclusively- we are social creatures and the relationship between the individual and the social enviornment, while infinitley complex, is certainly a two-way process. I always found it ludicrous that psych and socioloigy are two distinct subjects, but that's another topic altogether :)

A lot of misuse and abuse at systemic levels is founded on shared irrational and mostly unspoken values and beliefs, whether done consciously or otherwise. And as history continually shows the mob mentality is powerful and scary thing!

[brockulfsen.livejournal.com]

I've noticed groups in Australia do this. I'm not sure why. They get closed and xenophobic.

Up side is that it tends to limit Evengelical Christian groups, as they develop a stable core group then bunker down.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

That's an interesting point. I hadn't noticed that, but I think you're right. Even the big conservative evangelical movements, like the Festival of Light, Saltshakers etc. have reached a maximum level...

[brockulfsen.livejournal.com]

There seem to be sizes at which this happens... 25, just over a hundred, 500-600. This is the core group, sometimes hidden in a similar number of peripheral members.

One of the warnings that a group is about to circle the wagons seems to be one or two (often new) people who trigger culling, casting out a small number of people on often quite absurd grounds. Apparently propelling themselves towards to centre of the group in a kind of social conservation of momentum.

Another is the rationalization of not recruiting. Often couched in terms of having to absorb the last influx, or having failed to do that, not wanting to repeat that mistake.

[a-carnal-mink.livejournal.com]

Best of luck, good sir.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Would you prefer a Yule or Beltane festival to spice the place up?

[a-carnal-mink.livejournal.com]

Hrm... burning logs and holly cuts... or bonfires and sex?

BELTANE!! :D

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

You are such a carnal mink ;)

(And this is the first time I've been able to use this icon in a "very friendly" manner)

[a-carnal-mink.livejournal.com]

My eyes! The goggles, they do nothing!

[kremmen.livejournal.com]

I've seen many clubs/groups/societies in Australia have problems of declining membership and stagnation. In almost every case, the underlying issue was that the old guard were running things because of a sense of obligation and could not find anyone who wanted to take the time and effort to take over and run with it.

Your current leaders are idiots. When facing that problem and someone competent comes along who is prepared to do the work, the sensible reaction would be to embrace you and thrust you into the position before you have a chance to change your mind!

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

However, like the old joke about the social worker and the lightbulb, the leadership has to want to change. And, amazingly, in many cases the smaller the organisation the more fanatical people become in wanting to hang on to power rather than pass it on...

Personally, I have no intention of holding the position of chairperson for two or three terms if elected, and from day one I will be thinking of training/mentoring people to take over the role....

[zey.livejournal.com]

because of a sense of obligation and could not find anyone who wanted to take the time and effort to take over and run with it.

A lot of the time (and it sounds like it may be the case with this Unitarian church), it's that they can't find someone who wants to take the time and effort to run it in exactly the same way they would :(

It's a bit of a cliche, but, some people really do get incredibly set in their ways.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

What you say is true. After the next year I am going to emphasising this point a lot. The other part of to try to work out exactly what they do want before they shuttle off the mortal coil...

sorry to hear it

[wanton-heat-jet.livejournal.com]

It's too bad you have no choice but to run.

My late wife found us a big, active Unitarian congregation, but even there it's a lot of old white liberal activists.

Re: sorry to hear it

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Well, credit where it's due, this congregation has a number of older people from south European backgrounds and a few Chinese as well... Indeed in greater proportion to the average population..

[scandalous-dave.livejournal.com]

I read your essay. Sounds a lot like the United Church of Christ congregation I'm a member of, which however is explicitly Christian and not Unitarian Universalist. A place for left-wingers to meet on Sunday to keep up the good political fight. A church for people who don't really like religion but who think they should go to church on Sundays (and even call themselves Christians) in order to be thought of as proper citizens.

I read the "election material". What I saw there was a re-emphasis of the purpose of church as political action, not the addressing of the importance of religion in informing our lives. A real disappointment.

I don't fit well in conservative churches because I reject religious superstition and demand honesty in matters of religion. Liberal churches usually are not a very good fit because they mostly have little interest in religion and are all about leftist political action, whereas I have great love for religion as philosophy and basic education on how to live as an intelligent being. Although I am not against politics, the Big P has very serviceable venues outside of church whereas the Big R does not. So in church my disinterest in politics and my critique of its inadequacies marks me as a fringe element.

I would suppose that most folks who visit a church are looking for something they hope that religion can provide, and if what they find there is 1960's leftist politics and little in the way of religious substance, they walk back out (as well they should). Take religion seriously and do it in a way that doesn't replicate what people left other churches over, and people will come and stay, that's my theory anyhow. I have been saying this at the UCC where I am (was?)a member and was finally told by the minister to shut the heck up. To her it's all about getting the right programs in place, twisting the right arms, all that religiously empty evangelical church renewal-through-marketing stuff. So, I'm outta there, I don't go to church for the purpose of engaging the minister in a power struggle.

Leaving was tough, because I taught Wednesday evening Bible class and there were about 5 people who loved it and stuck with it, not because anyone was beating them over the head, but because the open-minded way in which we did it opened a whole new world for them. They were very disappointed when I announced I was leaving, and I hated having to disappoint them. But, as I explained, if I'm not attending church on Sundays any more, it arguably ain't right that I should continue teaching the Wednesday evening Bible class (which was about a whole lot more than just the Bible! It was also about religious history and other religions.)

So now I'm unchurched and will probably stay that way. I'll probably drop in and visit the UU congregation now and then where I was a very active member for several years and have friends, and where several years ago I left for my own reasons, not because anybody told me to take a hike.

--Dave J. in El Paso, USA