Losing My Religion (and finding another)

[tcpip]

Unitarian elections were as expected on Sunday, with a significant victory to the Marxist-Lenninist faction (yes, this steeple-jacking really did happen and the same people are still in control), who were trotted out for their annual vote. More disappointing was the decision to vote down a proposal to introduce proportional representation, which cements an wilfully exclusionary attitude. Amusingly, they now have a treasurer who doesn't believe that the organisation needs a budget (following a c$60,000 loss last year). As one more neutral member has observed in a classic understatement, "the church has governance issues" (including classics such as bikeshedding). Same person also suggested that I am better off putting my energies in an organisation where they can actually have some effect, rather than having any attempt to change or initiate being blocked as it perceived as a threat.

Indeed I had come to the same conclusion prior to the meeting, and will be directing my energies instead towards the Uniting Church, specifically St. Michael's Church in Melbourne where the executive minister, Dr. Francis McNab, has advocated the sort of ecumenical and liberal religious perspective that I would be comfortable with. They have a much better idea of financial and organisational management, a much larger congregation, and overall a much larger national grouping (albeit they have a more orthodox and Christian viewpoint overall, but I am accepting of that). I will of course, keep my subscription to the Unitarians, because that is where my orientation lies, but I seriously cannot see any chance of the existing group even considering reforming themselves before their life reaches its historically inevitable conclusion.

Ultimately it does give rise to the need to avoid organisations whose leaders have irrationalisible ideologies, as they will always prone to intransigence and reject good ideas on the grounds of that ideology. Larger and less ideologically-driven organisations are better as they are used to dealing with diversity within their group, they understand the need for a fair distribution of power which recognised participation. Most importantly they have the organisational intelligence to work out what actually constitutes a good argument. Doctrinaire ideologues can never understand this. They will always fail a test of intelligence because they have ideological blinkers. This said, I am surprised (and impressed) by the number of regular congregation members who have contacted me to express their frustration at the events. Perhaps it also time for them to find a new home.

Comments

[horngirl.livejournal.com]

I was actually at St Michael's yesterday performing in their St Michael's Day service. I have my own opinions on what I'd prefer to do regularly on Sunday mornings, but I can say that the person organising the musicians for yesterday's service was subject to some pretty interesting behaviour in the lead-up.

[lifedistilled.livejournal.com]

Haha, "Historically inevitable conclusion." The Marxist-Leninists. I see what you did there.

[carlowe.livejournal.com]

Every committee is going to be the same to some extent. Is why I steer clear these days.

[(Anonymous)]

Good work all round tovarisch. xx
Redmetal :-)

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

More disappointing was the decision to vote down a proposal to introduce proportional representation, which cements an wilfully exclusionary attitude.

A wilfully exclusionary attitude? From Marxist-Leninists? Well, I must say I'm astonished by this totally unexpected turn of events.

[(Anonymous)]

Good luck with your conversion to a new religion. I was at Sunday’s AGM and in my recollection of events, the only thing I can deduce from the election results is that you were resoundingly rejected both as Treasurer and Committee of Management member. I wonder if that had anything to do with your negativity and lack of respect towards other members of the Church, as demonstrated by your loud sniggering and side-comments when others had the floor and were trying to voice their point of view? I am sure the Unitarian Church will continue to thrive with or without your input. Oh, and finally, I don’t think any Church would benefit from members who claim to be open-minded and yet use blogs to attack others by negatively accusing them of belonging to specific political factions, e.g. “with a significant victory to the Marxist-Lenninist faction (yes, this steeple-jacking really did happen and the same people are still in control), who were trotted out for their annual vote” – your reaction smacks to me of being that of a sore-loser... wouldn’t you say?

[(Anonymous)]

Interesting response - where were those illusory supporters you have referred to? They weren't there when it counted, were they? Perhaps it tells you something about those who did turn up, because the AGM mattered and they wanted their voices heard... delude yourself at will, blame the process of election as you like, blame it on the blow-ins, but ask yourself this - why did they come? As for myself, I was there because I love the values held by the community within that branch of the Unitarian Church and, like you, made a point of being there, to exercise my voting rights. I follow closely what happens at the Church, even if I cannot presently attend as I would like to, and I wanted to make sure my voice was heard. Ironically, I had no idea who you were until your manners (or lack of them) alerted me to your presence.