[UU] Soul Work and Anti-Racism/Multi-culturalism

[lilithu]

From the Coffee thread, a discussion on the book, Soul Work.

Cone actually struck me as open to further input, especially when it came to gender issues. His essay was hardcore (as you put it) to be sure, but in further discussions, he came across as being willing to share in give-and-take.

Tinker reminded me of some Christians I know in his approach, and it was only his perspective that varied. It seemed to me that in many of the discussions, his input was limited to "Well, my people believe [insert Native American belief here], and [implication that this is how everyone should look at it, though never expressed overtly]." I think that he raises some excellent points, though I find it unfulfilling that he only tangentially touches on the fetishization of Native American culture by White society, and offers few solutions on how to incorporate said beliefs without falling into that trap.

I think Tinker's solution on how to not fall into the fetishization trap would be to leave Native American spirituality exclusively to the Native Americans. Not in Soul Work, but in another essay that I've read by him, he makes that clear.

Granted, he is hard core. Not only should non-NAs stay away from NA spirituality but in his opinion there is no room for Christianity in NA spirituality, even tho many NAs identify as Christian.

McBratt's essay spoke to me, so it's interesting that you pointed that one out. Her revelation that King had considered joining the Unitarian Church but thought that it would be impossible to get a movement going from within our congregations speaks much to the drawbacks of the Unitarian Church of the time, and still holds validity when it comes to the UU Church of today. It's easy to go to church and have your beliefs confirmed, to say "Yes, we shouldn't teach evolution in public schools, and should eliminate racism, and should support or LGBT brothers and sisters, and watch out for sexism, and take care of the environment." It takes effort to actually do something about it. It's so easy to fall into the complacent liberal trap, and that's one of the major reasons that the religious right has managed to wrest the label "religious" from us to the point that venal hypocrites like Dobson and Reed can appear on talk shows and claim to represent not just the Christian (which is still wrong), but the "religious family values" perspective.

Even tho Cone and Tinker were more hard core, I felt that it was Rosemary Bray McNatt's essay that posed the biggest challenge for UUs. We claim to be a religion that welcomes pluralism, and yet UU culture is monocultural.

What does it mean that UUs praised the demographics of the Democratic convention and condemned the demographics of the Republican convention, and yet, when you look at our congregations, which one do we look more like? It's one thing to claim to welcome diversity (the GOP makes such claims too) and another to actually embody it. Right now, our govt is doing a much better job of embodying multiculturalism than our church is. The only aspect we seem to be doing better at is BGLT equality. Given that we consider ourselves to be "progressive" and "prophetic" something is very wrong with this picture.

There's a Biblical verse that's been spinning in my head for the past couple of weeks, and I believe that it applies to what I'm speaking to:

James 2:26 (NIV)

As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
​

As Unitarian Universalists, I believe that the vast majority of us do have faith. If not faith in God or some sort of divine presence, then at least faith in the uplifting of humankind, in the ability of us as brothers and sisters on this planet to make a better world for ourselves and for future generations. However, the UUs I've known in my life have largely kept to buying organic produce (when convenient), voting for progressive causes (when they remember to vote), and putting "Darwin" bumper stickers on their cars. Not that these things are bad, mind, but it's not enough.

Like you, I do not mean to disparage the many UUs who are deeply committed to justice (and who put my sorry butt to shame when it comes to the time and energy they commit to their causes), but in general I think you paint an accurate picture. There is a disconnect between our espoused values and what we actually do. Buying organic, voting progressive, and displaying bumper stickers are all very fine but not enough. Neither is, sorry to say, going to protests. These amount to buying indulgences.

The biggest barrier we face in our denomination, the final frontier, harder to address than even racism, is classism. As a whole, we UUs are too comfortable. Social justice is an "interest" for us, not a necessity. In some ways, this is deeply commendable. It says that people who are relatively sheltered from injustice care about injustice against others. It shows compassion. But the frustration comes from getting people to care as if their own lives depend on it (because ultimately it does), not just when it is convenient.

 

[J Bryson]

From the Coffee thread, a discussion on the book, Soul Work.

I think Tinker's solution on how to not fall into the fetishization trap would be to leave Native American spirituality exclusively to the Native Americans. Not in Soul Work, but in another essay that I've read by him, he makes that clear.

Granted, he is hard core. Not only should non-NAs stay away from NA spirituality but in his opinion there is no room for Christianity in NA spirituality, even tho many NAs identify as Christian.

Glad that you mentioned that essay, since that was sticking in my craw a bit. It's reminding me of Malcolm X's response to a young white girl who asked him what an idealistic young non-racist like herself could do to help his cause. His answer: "Nothing".

Even tho Cone and Tinker were more hard core, I felt that it was Rosemary Bray McNatt's essay that posed the biggest challenge for UUs. We claim to be a religion that welcomes pluralism, and yet UU culture is monocultural.

Agreed. Cone and Tinker didn't really do it for me, since they were two of the ones who seemed to be "THIS is the problem" types to the exclusion of other legitimate points of view. From my limited experience, one of the major issues that seems to be confronting the UU church nowadays is how to incorporate other points of view and belief systems without falling prey to the aforementioned fetishization. The take from many seems to be almost Borglike, as in "We will add your religious and cultural distinctiveness to our own," meaning that said distinctiveness gets lost in the general background noise of fuzzy liberal good tendencies and occasional references in sermons.

It's a bit like that scene in The Blues Brothers: "Oh, we play both kinds of music here. Country and Western!"

What does it mean that UUs praised the demographics of the Democratic convention and condemned the demographics of the Republican convention, and yet, when you look at our congregations, which one do we look more like?

I wince at how uncomfortably apt this comparison is.

It's one thing to claim to welcome diversity (the GOP makes such claims too) and another to actually embody it. Right now, our govt is doing a much better job of embodying multiculturalism than our church is. The only aspect we seem to be doing better at is BGLT equality. Given that we consider ourselves to be "progressive" and "prophetic" something is very wrong with this picture.

It's almost like we stumbled during the civil rights movement, felt bad about it, plunged into LGBT equality with both hands and were quite sucessful...so sucessful that we forgot to make up for our previous failures to the very people we failed.

Like you, I do not mean to disparage the many UUs who are deeply committed to justice (and who put my sorry butt to shame when it comes to the time and energy they commit to their causes), but in general I think you paint an accurate picture. There is a disconnect between our espoused values and what we actually do. Buying organic, voting progressive, and displaying bumper stickers are all very fine but not enough. Neither is, sorry to say, going to protests. These amount to buying indulgences.

Again, I wince. Excellent comparison, and I'm stealing it from you.

The biggest barrier we face in our denomination, the final frontier, harder to address than even racism, is classism.

You just brought tears to my eyes. I lived on and off the streets for years of my life, and I often feel that I'm only a step or two away from returning. I experienced classism firsthand on a daily basis. I was openly mocked, scorned, and often in fear for my safety not only from civilians, but from the police who were supposedly there to protect me. I've mentioned this to people at the church when they've asked about my history, or when I felt that it helped to illustrate a point during a discussion. I haven't been judged or looked at askance by anyone there, which is both refreshing and startling. On the other hand, while I've heard people address racism, sexism, and heterosexism, I haven't really heard much noise about classism.

As a whole, we UUs are too comfortable. Social justice is an "interest" for us, not a necessity.

It's something that one does socially through the church, it seems. Like having a sewing circle, or a book group.

In some ways, this is deeply commendable. It says that people who are relatively sheltered from injustice care about injustice against others. It shows compassion. But the frustration comes from getting people to care as if their own lives depend on it (because ultimately it does), not just when it is convenient.

And here's the issue: People as a whole hate being preached at and/or guilt-tripped into doing what is right. Quite frankly, even for as loving, altruistic, and compassionate a group as UUs, it might be time to start appealing to self-interest across the board.