CUUPs is disaffiliated from the UUA

[kallistii]

It seems that The Covenant of Unitarian-Universalist Pagans has had it's Independent Affiliate Status renewal rejected by the Unitarian Universalist Association.

Read more here:

http://thelivelytradition.blogspot.com/2007/05/independent-affiliate-mystery.html

Comments

[qorinda.livejournal.com]

Well, I'll be curious to see if this is just this guy's opinion or if it really does happen.... *goes to look on the national CUUPS site*

[kallisti.livejournal.com]

'At its most recent meeting, the UUA Board rejected the applications of 15 of the 17 organizations who were re-applying for Independent Affiliate Status. I have read elsewhere that the board voted as follows. I have not been able to find the minutes online -- I suppose that they are still in process."

This is the person reporting this, not stating an opinion....

[qorinda.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. The UUA site still has them listed as an affiliate.

A friend of mine, last I heard, was the president of the National CUUPS organization, and he is a UU minister, so this will really be upsetting the apple cart, I would imagine.... I am thinking of writing to him to see what else I can find out.

[qorinda.livejournal.com]

My friend got back to me on all of this. This is from his email:

"It's not a rumor: the UUA board did not grant CUUPS independent affiliate status in the coming year. It didn't grant IA status to *any* theological group (Christians, Buddhists, Humanists, etc) nor to other groups either. They've changed the criteria for IA status -- they're looking for groups to build coalitions of common interest so that the UUA can be in more effective relationship with the various groups. For example, all the theological interest groups could form an organization that promotes theological study and support for congregational theological work. All the groups that deal with issues of gender and sexuality could group together. The UU camp and conference centers have already done this, creating one organization that works with the UUA, rather than the whole mess of them trying to do it independently.

The process for this change hasn't been communicated well, and has left a lot of people feeling like they were the only group "kicked out." In reality, that's not the case. It's just a major institutional change that was done less than clearly. CUUPS, in fact, has been in close conversation with people at the UUA, and we've been repeatedly and sincerely assurred that this is not a strategy to remove us or any other theological group. It's just change done imperfectly."


So, there you have it. Sounds more like they are just calling it something different.

[kallisti.livejournal.com]

It sounds like a real f*ckup of communication.

If they are going to change the structure of the church, I would *think* that it would be something you communication with all the member of the church, first to get feedback, and second for the ramifications to be explained!

ttyl

[bradhicks.livejournal.com]

Honestly, as someone who was more or less there when CUUPS began, I've never thought that it was a good fit. And the local Unitarian churches both threw out CUUPS years ago. Come on, I think we all know what the issues are here. One is that Pagans, having their own issues that preclude them from any kind of organizational structure secure enough to build real churches or temples of their own were, frankly, parasitic on the UUs. It got to be a real hot-button issue in the local UU congregations that the Pagans expected preferential access to the church property while not actually donating anything to the church or attending (in all but the smallest numbers) any of the church's non-Pagan events. Nor is that at all surprising; the level of "fit" between the historical theology of Neopagan Witchcraft and the historical theology of the UUA is pretty loose, at best.

Pagans can have temples any time they're willing to organize their own church-buying, church-sustaining organizations, commit the necessary financial resources, and buy their own churches. Your average new church gets started by fewer than 10 wage earners, 4 to 6 of them taking out second mortgages to raise the down payment and all 10 or so of them pledging 1% to 2% of their gross income to cover the payments. All that stops Pagans from doing so is lack of will and lack of trust in each other. Trying to short-circuit that progress by parasitising other bodies, up to and including attempts to take them over from within, are neither ethical nor helpful.

[kallisti.livejournal.com]

I was never a fan of the set-up...and I liked it even less when a group at the local UU church tried to form a CUUPs, and the other members of the congregation freaked because there were "witches" in their midst. If it had been a good fit, and the UUs were as open as a group as I was led to believe, then I though it wouldn't be a problem.

I am more worried, personally, about a friend of mine that had found a path to ministry *and* being pagan through the UU system. I hope this will not adversely affect her hope to go through the full ministry training.

I agree with you about the temple thing. Too many pagans are enamoured with the "were part of an ancient religion" going back to the dawn of time, and complaining about Christians stole all our things. We are never going to go back to a mythical "golden age", and have to realize that we have to make do with today's society, and build a system of worshipping The Gods as part of our society today. I though ADF have a system, but upon learning that the whole Indo-European cultural thing is a fairly old concept, and used to be called Aryan Culture, and thus was the basis of many bits of nastiness has led me to abandon ADF as long as they claim IE "foundation myth".

What is needed is a eyes wide open attempt at taking the best of the past and today, and creating something that will work *today*.