Below you’ll find an excerpt from Violations of State Department Regulations and Pro-Castro Propaganda Activities in the United States, Part 2: Hearings before the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives, Eighty-Eighth Congress, First Session, July 1 and 2 and August 5, 1963 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. government Printing Office, 1963), pp. 474-475. Whatever you think of Mr. Randolph and his politics, what stands out for me is that the Palo Alto Unitarian Church was creating an open space for free association — James Luther Adams, one of our most prominent Unitarian theologians, contended that the freedom to associate was one of the best ways of keeping fascism at bay. (And yes, I know Castro’s Cuba was not very strong on the freedom to associate in 1963 — again, please be sure to separate Mr. Randolph’s politics, and Mr. Castro’s politics, with the actions of the church committee.) Continue reading
Early documentary history of Palo Alto Unitarians and Eliza Tupper Wilkes
From The Unitarian, a periodical edited by Frederick B. Mott (Boston: George Ellis), Volume XI.
January, 1896, p. 48:
Woodland, Cal.— Rev. Mrs. E. T. Wilkes has been continuing her missionary work here and at Palo Alto, under the joint auspices of the American Unitarian Association and the Pacific Women’s Unitarian Conference. She has also visited Santa Cruz and Sacramento in the interests of our cause.
February, 1896, p. 95:
Palo Alto, Cal.—A correspondent writes: “There has recently been organized the Unity Society of Palo Alto, of which Prof. Hoskins of Stanford University is president. Meetings have been directed by Mrs. Wilkes for some time past, and it in sincerely hoped by all the members that she may remain here. A building lot will soon be owned by the society, and on it a suitable chapel will be erected. The society will surely prosper, and be a help and benefit, not only to its members, but also to all that come under its influence.”
Noted with bemusement
From A Long Strange Trip: The Inside History of the Grateful Dead by Dennis McNally:
“Jerry and Sara were married on April 27, 1963, at the Palo Alto Unitarian Church, with a reception following at Rickey’s Hyatt House that included the music of the Wildwood Boys. It was the sort of wedding, several friends later observed, where the groom’s friends could be found stuffing their empty bellies at the food line, while the bride’s family members soothed their shaken nerves with drinks at the bar. The wedding was ‘tense,’ Garcia later recalled. ‘As far as the parents of my girlfriends… I’ve always been like Satan.’ Sara ‘was such a delicate fawn in my jungle.’ His best man was David Nelson, who felt scruffy around the Ruppenthals, although Willy Legate trumped him by attending in a T-shirt….
“[Phil Lesh] took the bus to Palo Alto, staggered into Kepler’s, then landed at the Chateau, the only refuge he could imagine, just a bit before the wedding.
“Five days after their ceremony, Jerry and Sara played together at the Tangent…. Sara had a good voice and they blended nicely…. Two weeks later the Hart Valley Drifters, with Garcia on banjo, Ken Frankel on mandolin, Hunter on bass, and Nelson on guitar, performed at the Monterey Folk Festival in the amateur division, winning Best Group. Garcia was also awarded Best Banjo Player….”
———
Um, yes, that was Jerry Garcia who got married here, back in his folk musician days, but that does not mean we are going to decorate the church in tie-dye. And I admit my disappointment — I was kinda hoping for a Terry Riley connection, or maybe Jello Biafra.
Two “UU franchise” scenarios
A number of people have contacted me to ask for further clarification of Mr. Crankypants’s modest proposal for the Unitarian Universalist franchise system. I’m not sure I want to be in the position of clarifying the fulminations of my evil alter ego (mostly I just wish he’d go away), but perhaps I can clarify things a little by proposing a couple of scenarios to help us think through the issues at hand…. Continue reading
A day of rest
Series of entries in my teaching diary about an experimental Sunday school class. First entry.
It was Columbus Day weekend, and to give the volunteer teachers a break we decided that I would hold a “chapel service” this past Sunday. As a result, many families decided not to come to church at all. Attendance at the 9:30 service was 22 children, compared to 45-60 children on the previous three Sundays. And attendance at the 11:00 service was 2 children, both of whom were children of Sunday school teachers (there were also 5 teens and a couple of toddlers at this service, but they were in other programs).
The first fifteen minutes of the worship service this week were particularly welcoming to elementary age children. Susan Owicki, this week’s worship associate, made sure to mention that one of the children in the family who lit the chalice was having her fourth birthday today (the children in that family had already come to Sunday school at 9:30 and left right after they lit the chalice). The guest musician was a folksinger, and he sang a song that many children know, “A Place in the Choir” by Bill Staines. And the first hymn was an easy-to-sing “zipper song,” an African American hymn titled “There Is More Love Somewhere.” I thought to myself, Too bad only two elementary-aged children came this week!
Through a communications glitch, all four of the teachers showed up this week. Melissa brought all the materials for painting quilt squares, and although I had a lesson plan ready, we decided that the best thing to do was to have a non-structured session during which we simply worked on painting our quilt squares. In addition to Zach and Oliver, Melissa’s teenaged daughter L—- also joined us.
Zach finished painting a quilt square he had started last week; we all admired how well it turned out. Oliver worked on his quilt square, but he did not feel as good about it as did Zach; perhaps he felt he couldn’t live up to Zach’s quilt square; in any case, he wanted to stop working on his even though it seemed to the rest of us that if he worked a little more he would have a really good-looking quilt square. Oliver dabbed a little with the paint, and goofed around in a very charming way, but didn’t add much to what he had already painted. L—- and I worked on our respective quilt squares; the other adults mostly observed or helped out Zach and Oliver, but did not work on quilt squares.
It was a very informal session. Even though Zach finished his work fairly early on, and Oliver wasn’t enthusiastic about painting, the time passed quickly in idle conversation. We didn’t talk about anything important or notable; we just enjoyed a pleasant companionship together. Continue reading
We have a chapel service, and the Buddha tells about the quails and the net
This week, the Children’s Religious Education Committee and I wanted to give volunteer Sunday school teachers a break — it was Columbus Day weekend, which often means attendance goes down, which can be discouraging for teachers who plan a lesson only to have two or three kids show up — so I said I would lead a chapel service for all kids who showed up. And that’s what I did this past Sunday….
As usual, the children went in to the first fifteen minutes of the regular worship service. The first fifteen minutes of the worship service this week were particularly welcoming to elementary age children. Susan Owicki, this week’s worship associate, made sure to mention that one of the children in the family who lit the chalice was having her fourth birthday today (the children in that family had already come to Sunday school at 9:30 and left right after they lit the chalice). The guest musician was a folksinger, and he sang a song that many children know, “A Place in the Choir” by Bill Staines. And the first hymn was an easy-to-sing “zipper song,” an African American hymn titled “There Is More Love Somewhere.” I thought to myself, Too bad so few elementary-aged children came this week! Continue reading
Clouds
The clouds have been thick and dark today; and while we have seen a little bit of sun now and then, the clouds have persisted all day. In the summer, we may get morning fog that blots out the sun, but it generally clears away in the afternoon; but winter clouds don’t disappear by midday. It was supposed to rain today; it hasn’t yet, at least not where I am; but it does feel like the summer dry season is slowly winding down.
A modest proposal concerning franchises which market the “UU” brand
Hello, dear readers, Mr. Crankypants is ba-aack! Yes, your favorite curmudgeon (and Dan’s evil alter ego) is here again, still referring to himself in the third person, and still criticizing anything he thinks is wrong with the world.
Today, Mr. C. would like to talk with about the absurd business model used by Unitarian Universalist congregations. You see, as it stands now, Unitarian Universalist congregations operate under a sort of franchise model. If your congregation has the Unitarian Universalist franchise in a given location, that means your congregation has the exclusive right to market the “UU” brand in that location. Thus we have the Prime Rule of UU Franchises: No upstart Unitarian Universalist congregation may set up shop in your location.
There are exceptions to the Prime Rule. (1) If your congregation has an internal conflict, and half your members leave and form a new congregation nearby, the Powers That Be will frown upon the new congregation for a time, and then accept them fully as a new franchise. (2) If your congregation chooses to spin off a new congregation near your present location, the Powers That Be will not frown at all, but will applaud your alleged entrepreneurial audacity.
Now consider this scenario: A certain Unitarian Universalist congregation — call it “UU Church of Halfdead” or UUCH (pronounced “ouch”) — has been the only franchise of the UU brand in a certain city for the past century. Now UUCH’s membership is down to just 20 people — oops, make that 19 people, one of them just died. All the members are over 70, there is no program for children, and UUCH has no intention of changing anything in order to attract young people (“young” being defined as under the age of 60). Did Mr. Crankypants mention that UUCH has no Web site, they never advertise, and they have no sign on their building? Most people in the community don’t even know they exist. And all they do is use their endowment to maintain their big, old, ramshackle church building.
So what do you think would happen if some enterprising and entrepreneurial folks decided to start up a new Unitarian Universalist congregation in that city? Let’s say it’s a store-front church aimed at people in their 20s and 30s. The Powers That Be would gnash their teeth and decry the efforts of those entrepreneurial upstarts. The leaders of UUCH would weep and wail and call them poachers. Everyone would make big frown-y faces at the entrepreneurial upstarts and tell them that they are Bad People. Never mind the fact that UUCH consistently gets rid of all newcomers. Never mind the fact that a store-front church aimed at Generation Y will be utterly different than a dying church for people over 70. No, we would gnash our teeth and wail wildly, because every UU congregation, no matter how dysfunctional, has an exclusive franchise!
So here’s a modest proposal:
Assume that actual and potential Unitarian Universalists constitute 0.5% of the total U.S. population. Any Unitarian Universalist congregation that draws an average annual attendance of less 0.5% of the total population of its service area loses all right to have an exclusive franchise, and opens itself up to the possibility that an entrepreneurial congregation-planter could come in a start a new congregation within that service area. We’ll let existing congregations determine the exact boundaries of their service areas — they can make those service areas as small as they like, so as to be able to claim an average attendance of 0.5% — but entrepreneurial congregation planters can plant new congregations anywhere outside of defined service areas. Congregations which choose not to determine exact boundaries of their service areas automatically give permission to entrepreneurial congregation planters to determine those boundaries for them.
If this modest proposal were adopted, someone might start up a new Unitarian Universalist congregation in a store-front near your present church! And what if the only way you could combat that new upstart congregation was to actually welcome newcomers, to jazz up (literally) your worship service, and to ditch your old Policy Governance (TM) or other outmoded organizational structure — that is, what if your only defense was to change the way you did church, and make it better than it was before?
Mr. Crankypants believes this is what is called a “disruptive” proposal… well, it would be disruptive if their were any such thing as a Unitarian Universalist who was also an entrepreneurial congregation planter. Sigh. Even so, it’s still fun to think about.
Nobel Prize Committee Troll Investigation
Oslo, Norway
A spokesperson for the Norwegian police confirmed that they are investigating whether the Nobel Prize Committee intended its award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama as a sophisticated form of trolling.
A source close to the investigation, who requested anonymity, confirmed that police here believe the award was designed to provoke U.S. bloggers and talk radio hosts into screaming themselves senseless.
In related stories, both Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh were rushed to local emergency rooms early this morning when they passed out after expressing their outrage that Mr. Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize. Moore reportedly collapsed when he screamed, “But he’s still escalating troop levels!” while Limbaugh collapsed after screaming, “Sarah Palin would’nt’ve allowed this, this is what happens in Obama’s America!”