When did I become one of the most radical people in the room?

[hermionesviolin]

A room of GLBTA United Methodists.

And not even like how I would come back to Norwood from Smith (where I felt wicked conservative) and feel wicked radical 'cause I was, for example, an ally to the polyamorous community.

I was not a fan of this morning's worship (though I did like the sermon better than last night's), and the workshop I went to was mostly useless, but Intersections Plenary? Which I thought was supposed to be about Race and Religion. Was I guess White Privilege 101. Complete with bonus ableismn. (Doing the Walk/Circle of Privilege and repeatedly saying "take a step" WHEN ONE OF THE PARTICIPANTS IS IN A WHEELCHAIR. That is exponentially worse than last night's sermon-giver talking about "lame excuses" and then later quoting Scriptrue which uses "lame" in the "physically-impaired" sense -- which reminded me that I still owe comment replies to this entry.)

I told Ari last night: "Convo has been, worth coming to, despite its not being awesome. There's been stuff that's made me feel energized to (continue to) work to make the church the welcoming and inclusive place it is called to be (often in reaction to stuff not being awesome, rather than being inspired by positive stuff, but it's better than just being depressed and demoralized by the not-awesome), and there have been moments when I have totally loved Marla."

Comments

[immortalavalamp.livejournal.com]

Doing the Walk/Circle of Privilege and repeatedly saying "take a step" WHEN ONE OF THE PARTICIPANTS IS IN A WHEELCHAIR

Oh. My. God.

radical

[onwingsofeagles.livejournal.com]

Well, your brother thinks you're radical. But at gay camp I would expect you to be on the conservative side. Oy.
Ditto to the comment about the wheelchair. Hello? More willing to cut slack for using the term "lame."
Glad you're being motivated to work for inclusion rather than crawling under the bed.
Who's Marla?

Re: radical

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

Marla's one of the co-lay leaders at CWM. She's very into environmental and feminist issues, and we're on very different pages sometimes -- but not always.

Apparently RMN (the org that runs Convo) is a very mainstream kind of organization, so there was a lot of very traditional worship language (He and Lord and etc. for God -- and CWM has ruined me) but also, yeah, ableism fail and etc.

[wisdomeagle]

Doing the Walk/Circle of Privilege and repeatedly saying "take a step" WHEN ONE OF THE PARTICIPANTS IS IN A WHEELCHAIR.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.

[sweet-adelheid.livejournal.com]

Where is the line between over-angsting and tieing ourselves in knots, and being considerate and inclusive? At some point we have to become mute or else accept that there is a balance but not an ideal.

(I find it incredibly hard when phrases like "for our children and grandchildren" are used. It reminds me yet again that I'm unlikely to have either. But -- where is the line?)

For a number of the years that I was on Commission for Mission, the director of Uniting Care was permanently in a wheelchair. We did a lot to adapt our meetings, but not standing to say the Grace became a point of major contention. Many felt that by not standing (those of us who could stand) we were dishonouring the moment. We never really resolved it, because Elizabeth (the director) moved on to work for Anglicare rather than for us.

And so I guess my reaction is less OMG than others, and maybe that makes me a bad person. Maybe it makes this one of those times when I'm more conservative than you, Elizabeth, and we know how rare that is!

I'm glad Convo has been worth it for you.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

My OMG was because the facilitator was marginalizing a person who was right in front of her, that she was saying "take a step forward/backward" to a group of participants which included one person who clearly could not "take a step." I was boggled by that level of oblivious privilege.

While I would like people/groups to be attentive to the ways in which they might be marginalizing people they don't see (either people who are not currently part of their group but might be in the future, or people whom they don't realize are in their group/don't realize they are marginalizing), I am appalled by people not seeing what is clearly in front of them (though admittedly as a person with privilege, I'm sure I do that sometimes -- Sean and Marla tell the story of using "God in your mercy, hear our prayer" during a liturgy and not realizing until the Deaf parishioner called them out on that after the service that gee, maybe they should use different language [they changed it to "God in your mercy, receive our prayer"]).

I think the people leading worship should be attentive to the situations of those worshiping, and I would hope that they would also signal that they are receptive to feedback, so that people who feel hurt by the language used would feel safe raising those concerns. In their workshop on Just Worship, Sean and Marla talked about how it's not supposed to be about being the Language Police but rather about creating a worship space where all people can worship.

While changing liturgy and language can be difficult, I don't think it necessarily has to be full of "over-angsting and tieing ourselves in knots."

For "children and grandchildren," I might add in a phrase about "those born of our bodies, and all those we nurture through life."

I was debriefing Convo with Ari some on the phone last night, and I mentioned that at one of the workshops I attended, the facilitator had a time for prayer and said something like, "I invite you to stand or sit, to bow your head or raise your hands, to move into whatever posture helps you to move into prayer," which is much more thorough than the "I invite you to stand as you are able" which I am used to from most of my churches (which we also use when announcing which hymn we're going to sing and etc.).

[sweet-adelheid.livejournal.com]

Honesty here. (And see also what marginaliana said about pushing and instincts, because that really rings true to me.)

I'm incredibly unsettled by this. Angered even. Which possibly says that your comments are hitting me where it hurts, who knows.

But my top-level instinctual response to most of the language you're suggesting is just a massive *no*, and that it is in fact over-angsting and knot-tying. (And also that it would freak people in the sort of congregations I'm used to way out.)

I don't know. But I just felt so... somethinged... by your reply that I *had* to respond.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

I appreciate your honesty.

I don't know what it is about my suggestions that are so upsetting, so I don't know how to massage it any, though I trust that you know that my intent is not to anger etc. I'm definitely interested to continue the conversation, since crafting inclusive and accessible worship services that enable ALL persons to worship has apparently become one of my Things, but of course you need to do whatever you need to do to be okay, so don't feel obligated.

As for your congregations... I can envision attempting to engage with people who think the changes I want to make to worship service are theologically unsound, disruptive to church unity, clunky... but I don't know how to address "would be freaked way out."

[sweet-adelheid.livejournal.com]

Responding at midday instead of 7am in the hustle of trying to get out the door...

I know that one of the things that is upsetting is the way that I take conversations like this very personally: take criticisms of how I view things as criticisms of who I am. This is clearly *my* problem, not anyone else's, but having been aware of this for a good five years now, it still hasn't changed much. ~sigh~

I think that maybe this is one of those times when you actually *can't* include everyone. The language that you're talking about would be great for some people - not great, and in fact downright offputting - for others. As long as we can all find somewhere to worship where we feel welcomed, included, and encouraged to feel worshipful (one of my big concerns is that as the UCA gets more and more "contemporary" in their worship (which to me generally means slipshod in their liturgies, dubious in their theology, and downright neglectful of decent music), there will be no where left for me. That terrifies me. (Which again has something to do with how personally I may be taking all this.) Something that also annoys me is a tendency to frame our services for people who aren't there, instead of those who are - "if we change our music, suddenly people will come back to church" etc. I *know* I've got way too much baggage with this stuff that you couldn't possibly know, but my filters have been missing on these things for years now, and I'm sorry.

I've only spent thirty years with "Lord in your mercy, hear our prayer": that's enough for me to be jarred by "receive our prayer". (It's the rhythm as much as anything else: just doesn't sound right.) Trying to change entire congregations of over-70s to whom a lot of this language is intensely important - we're only *just* at a point in the UCA where the changeover in language for the Our Father is beginning to stick, and that came in close to twenty years ago now.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

I definitely agree that no one place is going to be right for everyone. Ironically, one of my problems with the American Left is that in trying to be "inclusive" of "everyone" it becomes so meaningless (plus it's a lie, because of course there are things they *don't* want to affirm or even accept).

Near the beginning of the Just Worship workshop, Marla talked about how the changes to liturgy that have happened at CWM aren't imposed but reflect who the congregation is/has become, which I think is very important.

I definitely don't mean my concern for attention to those who are not present but might be as a "how can we grow our numbers?" ploy, though now that you say it I can definitely see how that would be a concern.

I thought I remembered reading a post on Jeremy's blog (http://blog.hackingchristianity.net/) about how churches trying to do church growth so often focus on marketing strategies instead of focusing on BEING the church ... but I can't find such a post now that I look.

When I talk about being inclusive of and accessible to people who aren't visibly present but might be, I'm thinking more about literal accessibility (e.g., can newcomers follow what's happening in the service? can people with food issues take part in the fellowship meal?), and also about being the church that we say we are. Who do we want to be a part of our worship community (or at least who are we open to being a part of our worship community, even if we might not be actively seeking them out), and does our liturgy reflect that? What are our theological concerns and does our worship embody that?

I worry that I'm talking around your concerns, that I'm not addressing them directly enough. I really do respect your concerns -- and you're articulating them such that I at least don't feel like you have anything to apologize for.

[marginaliana]

Hmm, I think this is one of those cases where my immediate reaction is to push back against what you're saying, and then I find myself pushing back against my instinct to push back, and then I get all muddled. Which I know I've mentioned to you before.

One of the things I like most about you is that I always feel I can be honest with you about contentious things like this. I never feel like my opinion is off-limits.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

One of the things I like most about you is that I always feel I can be honest with you about contentious things like this. I never feel like my opinion is off-limits.

I am really glad to hear this.

(And I feel you on the "my immediate reaction is to push back against what you're saying, and then I push back against that, and...")

[chrispardus.livejournal.com]

In retrospect, my reply to this "And not even like how I would come back to Norwood from Smith (where I felt wicked conservative) and feel wicked radical..." is...


WELCOME TO MY WORLD! :D