Fellowship or Ministry?

[challupa]

Originally Posted by Storm

Were I you, I'd wash my hands of this congregation, but I'm also glad that you recognize it for the anomaly that it is. Every group has its bad apples, and it sounds like someone's on a power trip.

Yes, that's what I get from it too. Hope the next minister, even though they may be only temporary, will change it back to the way it was.

[J Bryson]

Wow, that's just creepy. I have my first Trustees meeting this week, and I think that I'll mention that before we get started. It's a good lesson on what to watch out for.

I can't believe that someone would be forced to fill out two pages.

May I make a recommendation? When this gets presented to the group. ask them exactly what they're going to be looking for in the for that gets filled out, and what qualifications or lack thereof would exclude someone from being considered for membership. As it is, this sounds exclusionary, elitist, and (as Storm pointed out) in direct violation of the UU guiding principles.

In response to your main question: Our church has a minister. I love the man, and I'm thrilled that we have someone available to help us at all times. However, if we had a minister like yours, I'd seriously consider going the fellowship route.

[challupa]

Originally Posted by J Bryson

Wow, that's just creepy. I have my first Trustees meeting this week, and I think that I'll mention that before we get started. It's a good lesson on what to watch out for.

I can't believe that someone would be forced to fill out two pages.

May I make a recommendation? When this gets presented to the group. ask them exactly what they're going to be looking for in the for that gets filled out, and what qualifications or lack thereof would exclude someone from being considered for membership. As it is, this sounds exclusionary, elitist, and (as Storm pointed out) in direct violation of the UU guiding principles.

In response to your main question: Our church has a minister. I love the man, and I'm thrilled that we have someone available to help us at all times. However, if we had a minister like yours, I'd seriously consider going the fellowship route.

Yes they are definitely going to find that out. They are also leaning towards a fellowship but the board is obviously wanting a minister. I don't know what is going to happen. The current minister leaves at the end of the month and I guess that is his legacy that he's leaving with the church. Doesn't sound too good to me.

[Wolfscout1]

sighs.... it sounds like a power play among the board members and their seeking to justify actions and encomber the congregation at large to enforce support or cancel out possible voting memberships.
church politics in a UUChurch. how sad.

[challupa]

Originally Posted by Wolfscout1

sighs.... it sounds like a power play among the board members and their seeking to justify actions and encomber the congregation at large to enforce support or cancel out possible voting memberships.
church politics in a UUChurch. how sad.

Yes, that is what it looks like to me too. There must be a group of them that want to weed out the "undesireables". Not sure who the undesireables are yet though. Time will tell I guess.

[applewuud]

I've never heard of "screening" membership in this way at a Unitarian-Universalist church.

However, the "qualifications" for membership in many UU churches and fellowships are close to nonexistent, and that has some great perils. To a person who's not a member of a church, it must seem very nasty and unnecessary to even propose that the Board not give full voting membership to anyone who walks in the door and signs a book. But if you had been an active member for a few decades, you might have seen the down side of a full open-door policy.

The history of congregational-polity churches (where the direction of the church is set by vote of members, not by a minister or bishop) does have cases of splits and "takeovers". Times of ministerial transition are key points for power struggles. A faction that wants the church to go in one direction or another could "cram" the congregation with friends and get them to vote their way: to fire a minister, to leave the Unitarian-Universalist Association, to eliminate a sex-education program they don't like, to sell church property, to adopt a theological position that long-time members don't believe in. There are splits between humanists and theists...that's why almost every old New England village has a Congregational church on one side of the Common, and a Unitarian church on the other.

You don't have to be a voting member to attend a UU church or its programs. Membership is not a right, it's a privilege and responsibility, and I think that if it's extended to everyone without any examination at all, membership becomes worthless and the organization loses direction, focus, and any sense of boundary.

As for your question of fellowship vs. ministry, any good minister in the UU denomination should foster the "priesthood of all believers" so that everyone, ordained or not, takes a role. Both fellowships and minister-led organizations can go in bad directions, or good directions. Personally, I prefer professional leadership, if a church can afford it. It's like music: amateur musicians are fine, but if you really want to hear challenging, interesting, state-of-the-art music, you need people who are doing it full-time, and they in turn draw larger crowds.

Does anyone know of a fellowship without a professional minister that has more than 200 members? There probably are some, but not many.

ON YET ANOTHER HAND...
Is the church you're going to going straight from their present minister to another called minister? If so, that's not recommended. Usual practice is to hire an "interim minister", one who is hired for a limited 1-2 year period while the congregation goes through a period of discernment about what kind of minister they want to call next. So, there will be a chance for all voices to be heard...even those who don't want a minister at all...if they're following the UU tradition.

[challupa]

Originally Posted by applewuud

I've never heard of "screening" membership in this way at a Unitarian-Universalist church.

However, the "qualifications" for membership in many UU churches and fellowships are close to nonexistent, and that has some great perils. To a person who's not a member of a church, it must seem very nasty and unnecessary to even propose that the Board not give full voting membership to anyone who walks in the door and signs a book. But if you had been an active member for a few decades, you might have seen the down side of a full open-door policy.

The history of congregational-polity churches (where the direction of the church is set by vote of members, not by a minister or bishop) does have cases of splits and "takeovers". Times of ministerial transition are key points for power struggles. A faction that wants the church to go in one direction or another could "cram" the congregation with friends and get them to vote their way: to fire a minister, to leave the Unitarian-Universalist Association, to eliminate a sex-education program they don't like, to sell church property, to adopt a theological position that long-time members don't believe in. There are splits between humanists and theists...that's why almost every old New England village has a Congregational church on one side of the Common, and a Unitarian church on the other.

You don't have to be a voting member to attend a UU church or its programs. Membership is not a right, it's a privilege and responsibility, and I think that if it's extended to everyone without any examination at all, membership becomes worthless and the organization loses direction, focus, and any sense of boundary.

As for your question of fellowship vs. ministry, any good minister in the UU denomination should foster the "priesthood of all believers" so that everyone, ordained or not, takes a role. Both fellowships and minister-led organizations can go in bad directions, or good directions. Personally, I prefer professional leadership, if a church can afford it. It's like music: amateur musicians are fine, but if you really want to hear challenging, interesting, state-of-the-art music, you need people who are doing it full-time, and they in turn draw larger crowds.

Does anyone know of a fellowship without a professional minister that has more than 200 members? There probably are some, but not many.

ON YET ANOTHER HAND...
Is the church you're going to going straight from their present minister to another called minister? If so, that's not recommended. Usual practice is to hire an "interim minister", one who is hired for a limited 1-2 year period while the congregation goes through a period of discernment about what kind of minister they want to call next. So, there will be a chance for all voices to be heard...even those who don't want a minister at all...if they're following the UU tradition.

First of all, yes there is going to be an interim minister. I also agree that being a voting member should be a priviledge and a responsibility. I don't think that's what they are upset about. It is the 2 page membership questionnaire and a voting process of who to let in I think. I don't belong to the church and likely never will, but I do go as a Friend to small gatherings etc. I am interested because it seemed like an unusual stance for a UU Congregation to take. I had thought they accepted all faiths in a pretty open fashion.

[Wolfscout1]

hrm..... sometimes.. more long term members of a congregation may tend to think that the church is seeking a venture into more diversity.. perhaps this threatens the current board members. That I think is happened in my own church in the past.
It can turn into a very nasty situation.

[challupa]

Originally Posted by Wolfscout1

hrm..... sometimes.. more long term members of a congregation may tend to think that the church is seeking a venture into more diversity.. perhaps this threatens the current board members. That I think is happened in my own church in the past.
It can turn into a very nasty situation.

Well this has the potential to turn nasty too. The knee jerk response by most of the people when they first heard it was "that's it, they're getting my resignation". It wasn't an association they wanted to be a part of with these new rules. Hopefully enough will protest and keep their membership and reverse the rules they so passionately oppose.

[Trey of Diamonds]

Currently our church is a fellowship that has hired a consulting minister to try and helps us grow. Making the transition from a Family Size church to a Pastorial Size. See this document for more info on the four UU church sizes and types.

http://www.uua.org/documents/congser...ransitions.pdf

It has been a very trying time because there are many who wish to remain a family church and not move to a Minister lead pastorial church. There's been lots of politics and such but I've decided that it's just part and parcel to being human.

As to your church's questionaire tactic. Strange, but people do strange things. The more I'm around UUs the more I think there is no single aspect to the church that is common to them all.