If I felt the need to go to a church, or belong to a Western religion, I suppose it would be a Unitarian Universalist church. Years ago I visited one in the South (I can’t remember if I spoke there), and was impressed that there was no cross on the wall, no fixed set of beliefs (many members are pretty much atheists); and I was impressed by their commitment to real social justice. UUs, as they’re called, have been tremendously active in fighting racism, raising awareness of LGBTQ+ activities, and helping immigrants. As far as I can see, the church exists not to foster any beliefs or creeds, and does no proselytizing, but aim—or, rather, aimed—to create a sense of community among their liberal and largely well-off members. (I don’t feel a need for that kind of community, but of all American churches, UU is probably the one that does the most net good, since up to recently it’s caused little harm.)

But it’s the “progressive” nature of the church, and the privilege of its members, that in recent years has propelled it from the realm of social justice to that of Social Justice, with the capital letters denoting wokeness. In the article below, published at the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism (FAIR) Substack site, Kate Rohde describes the creeping and destructive wokeness of the church, something I’ve heard about several times before. She’s now a defrocked (?) UU minister suing the UUs for defamation and for denying her her job; and she describes in detail how the church is crumbling. The cause, as you might expect, is accusations of racism, or rather accusations of white supremacy, Part of the controversy is described in the Wikipedia article on the church:

You are viewing: Why Unitarian Universalism Is Wrong

Racism:

Internal controversy over the hiring of the UUA’s Southern Region Lead (a white man from outside the region was hired rather than a Latina woman who resided within the region) led to resignations and apologies in 2017. UUA President Peter Morales, the denomination’s first Latino president, resigned amid criticism of his failure to address the diversity controversies. The three co-presidents who took over commissioned a “racism audit” to address white supremacy within the denomination. In April 2018, The Washington Post reported that the UUA “in the past year has been asked to help resolve 15 congregational conflicts involving religious professionals of color”.

Rhode has all the ideological qualifications to be a UU minister, but they booted her out anyway:

Read more : Why Do Ants Keep Coming Back

Dr. Rohde is a graduate of Reed College, University of Chicago, and Meadville Lombard Theological School. From 1980 to 2014, she served as a UU Minister. She was active in women’s rights, gay rights, civil rights, and the sanctuary movement.

Click below to read about how a decent church is going bad:

Rohde became a UU minister in 1980, and had a good 17-year run before things started to fall apart. It involved accusations of racism—in a church famous for being antiracist. I quote Rohde, and have bolded one part to show how woke the UUs have become: they’re policing language in a ridiculous way:

Things began to change dramatically six years ago, when a latina Sunday school director complained of discrimination after a white minister was chosen for a job that she wanted. The Unitarian Universalists’ first latino president resigned in the midst of an internet storm and accusations of racism against his administration. No concrete proof was offered for any of the accusations. In a closed-door meeting, the national Board of Trustees declared that Unitarian Universalism harbored “structures and patterns that foster racism, oppression, and white supremacy.” No evidence was given for this assertion. This was a surprising self-evaluation for a group with a strong civil rights record, including the highest percentage of clergy to participate in the Selma Civil Rights March.

Read more : Why Are Soccer Players So Dramatic

A program of instruction in postmodern anti-racism was directed at ministers and laity. It allowed no modification or questioning of its precepts. Enlightenment values like reason, free speech, and diversity of opinion were characterized as part of the white supremacy culture. Any attempt to challenge someone else’s ideas is now frequently met not with evidence or reasoned defense, but by labeling the challenge (and often the challenger) as racist, ableist, transphobic, and the like. For example, at a national meeting of clergy in 2020 I argued in favor of allowing ministers to keep the right to legal representation in disciplinary matters, but my position was attacked as racist by a minister who more recently has become the leader of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). The successful slogan “Standing on the Side of Love” was junked because a few people complained that the word “standing” was offensive to those who couldn’t stand. In discussion groups at our national assembly, people were arbitrarily removed by facilitators because some person or persons objected to their opinions.

The ideological purge ramped up in 2019 when the new leadership condemned, defamed, persecuted, and ultimately removed from the ministry the Reverend Todd Eklof after he published three essays criticizing the UU’s rejection of liberal values. I joined with others to defend him. Then they came for me too—ultimately removing me from ministry for comments I made criticizing those who were enforcing ideological uniformity in UU spaces. They accused me of “gaslighting,” and making people feel “unsafe” with my words.Ironically, one of the accusations they made against me was that I had complained about “retaliation” and “persecution” within the church. They also came after me for my political opinions—claiming, for example, that because I had the audacity to question whether individuals with male genitalia could be lesbians, I had “caused UU spaces to actually be unsafe” for “trans congregants.”

Clearly, the freedom of speech and thought that was deeply embedded in the UU church is now gone: the authoritarian Left has taken over and has, in effect, now forced a creed on the church: the creed of woke antiracism. One more point:

Now, church officials regularly and without compunction defame someone and destroy their life’s work over ideological or political disagreements. When queried by lawyers about the UU’s violation of their own bylaws promising freedom of conscience and their lack of normal due process, the UUA replied that as a religious organization, they are legally entitled to contravene their own rules if they choose to do so.

Rohde was fired (and lost her pension) for opposing the creeping wokeness of the Church. For one thing, she criticized junking the “standing on the side of love” slogan on the grounds that it’s ableist. I wish her luck in her lawsuit. But as for the church itself, I’m afraid you can kiss it goodbye. Maybe it will fragment into several moieties, at least one of which will embrace the UU’s original principles. But as for me, if forced to pick a faith I’d now take Buddhism over Unitarian Universalism.

You can read more about her lawsuit at the New York Post, where this photo of Rohde appears:

Source: https://t-tees.com
Category: WHY