Phil's Little Blog on the Prairie

Does the title of this post sound familiar? It's a variation of the highly-successful advertising campaign from 1960's sponsored by the Unitarian Layman's League. According to the September 17, 1965 issue of Time, "The Unitarians have acquired a substantial quota of converts over the years with low-keyed ads in magazines that begin: 'Are You a Unitarian Without Knowing It?'" That's right, "a substantial quota of converts." Something to think about given our renewed interest in growth strategies and ad campaigns (check out the Uncommon Denomination marketing material).

What I haven't heard lately is a suggestion that we should revive the "Are You a Unitarian Without Knowing It?" campaign, which may be considered odd, given its success. For example, here's a passage from Tom Owen-Towle's "Toward a Revolutionary Manifesto":

In reflecting on its history, Robert Hohler, one-time executive director of the Laymen's League, recounts that "perhaps its most significant contribution was to the growth of the overall Unitarian denomination through its sponsorship of an innovative advertising campaign in magazines and newspapers. The ads that asked 'Are You a Unitarian Without Knowing It?' evoked a flood of inquiries from people wanting to know more. This campaign still stands as the most successful outreach program liberal religion has ever sponsored."

If this was, indeed, "the most successful outreach program liberal religion has ever sponsored," couldn't we just tweak it a bit for the 21st century and sit back and watch the torrent of potential converts stream through our doors? We could, I suppose, but it wouldn't make much of a difference. We've already got plenty of potential converts. Perhaps you've heard this one before (this version is from Gary Smith):

Bill Sinkford tells the story of the 1999 UUA General Assembly in Salt Lake City, where “Stefan Jonasson (UUA Large Church Staff Coordinator) met with the head of missionary work for the Mormons. Since we were coming to town,” Bill says, “the Mormons had done their homework and knew a lot about us. One of them said to Stefan, ‘You know, Unitarian Universalists have a remarkable ability to attract visitors proportionately more than the Mormons do. But you’re lousy at holding on to them.’ After some discussion he concluded, ‘If your churches were half as successful at integrating and retaining members as we Mormons are, then Unitarian Universalism would be the most dangerous religion in America.’”

There are plenty of folks out there who think they may be Unitarian Universalists, and they want to find out whether or not they are. Trouble is, they're not finding what they're looking for in our congregations. Without a doubt, we are doing a lousy job of holding on to the visitors we attract. According to the Mormon official in Bill's story, what we really need to be doing is working on integrating and retaining members. And that, I've come to believe, is best done by helping people mature in their faith.

Unfortunately, faith is an "F" word for many Unitarian Universalist. I can't tell you the number of times I've had a congregant come up to me after a sermon and tell me that I didn't need to use the word "faith" to get my point across. Okay, maybe I could tell you the number of times. But the point is, it still surprises me to find people defensive about the notion of faith. And I've got a hunch that there are a lot of good people--thoughtful, liberal religious people--who are coming into our congregations with some high hopes for their faith development and running into something else. What they're running into (or tripping over), I believe, is a pretty low bar (in terms of faith development) for what it means to be a Unitarian Universalist, a bar that was set in the 1960s with the Layman's League ad campaign.

I think many of us know in our hearts that this may be true. With that in mind, I'd like to leave you with a few jokes making the rounds about our faith. All humor has a kernel of truth within. Is this really who we are?

You may be a Unitarian Universalist if you consider Charlie Brown & Dilbert to be spiritual leaders.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if your Christmas tree has 7 symbols on its top.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if unleavened bread is part of your Easter Brunch.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if your idea of fish on Friday is dinner at a sushi bar.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if on Halloween you explain to everyone the Pagan significance of your children's costumes.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if e‑mail fulfills a spiritual void in your life.
You may be a Unitarian Universalist if you take your day planner to church instead of the Bible.

More next week.

I've been thinking a lot about what it means to be a mature person of faith. Part of this is personal. I figure, if I'm going to be part of a religious tradition, it damn well better help me become the best person I can possibly be. After all, didn't William Ellery Channing say something about us being "infinitely perfectible"? Another reason I'm interested in what it means to be a mature person of faith is that I believe the concept is crucial for lifespan faith development. You see, the more I look into what's needed for a religious tradition to attract/retain/develop lifelong members, the more I see the need for recognizing those who have reached a certain level of maturity in their own faith journey, and using those members as models and mentors for the rest of us.

Trouble is, if your faith seems to have no core beliefs (and I think ours does, by the way, we just don't articulate them well), it's hard to say who among you is a mature person of faith. One person might claim to be a mature humanist, another a mature Christian, another a mature Pagan, another a mature Jew--all while clamining to be a mature Unitarian Universalist. What we need is a sense of faith maturity that transcends all of these classifications. And to that end, I'd like to suggest a couple of sermons by UU ministers.

The first is "Eight Themes That Unite Us," by the Reverend Christine Brownlie. Based on a presentation by the Reverend Roy Phillips, Brownlie's sermon does a wonderful job of presenting a variety of beliefs in our tradition, making a strong case for them being part of our core identity. My favorite (of course) is her take on Channing:

We can look to William Ellery Channing as the best and most ardent champion for the fourth theme, that there is a divine seed in every person. Channing was appalled by the Calvinist doctrine of the total depravity of humankind. He preached the opposite, that every person had potential for great good, that we are "infinitely perfectible." He taught that salvation comes through the cultivation of one's character and one's soul according to the best example humanity has ever seen. For Channing that perfect example was Jesus. The role of the church is to encourage the individual unfolding of each person or "divine seed" which acts on our hearts and minds, luring us with a power found within ourselves, to attain our greatest potential for virtue and goodness.

The other sermon is "Mature Faith, Mature Church," by the Reverend Doctor David Sammons. Sammons notes that "ours is a demanding faith, one that requires more of us than a faith that assumes God will provide for us--or damn us--depending on the kind of God we think God is." One of those demands is "a belief that we can have a new life, a better life, a more satisfying and meaningful life if we are care about the life into which we’ve been born and do what we can to add to the existence of which we are a part." We tend to talk a good game here, "inherent worth and dignity"..."respect for the interdependent web," but can we really discern those among us who genuinely live out these beliefs? And more importantly, do we seek out these people to help all of us--children, youth, and adults--mature in our own faith? Sammons quotes theologian Daniel Jenkins on some of the qualities this sort of mature person of faith might have:

Meekness, by which he means the quality of a gentle strength, controlled by a love of God or Life and a hunger for rightness, meaning a desire to try to live in way that contributes something to the existence of which we are a part.

Being a Peacemaker, by which he means relating to people and the communities of which we’re a part in ways that will contribute to the wellbeing of everyone, getting to the roots, not just the symptoms, of what ails the earth and those who dwell on it.

Generosity, by which he means sharing of what we’ve got, even if what
we’ve got isn’t very much. On any given day small things, like a smile or
a touch, can mean as much as something bigger.

Magnanimity, by which he means a “largeness of spirit” that helps us focus on what’s really important and “not sweating the small stuff,” as it’s often put.

Joyfulness, by which he means being open to what’s good in life, even in the midst of struggle. More than once, when faced with something I just couldn’t get done, I’ve let go and said, “Oh, s….,” and laughed. When we can do this it breaks the tension--and brings things into perspective.

Of course, none of us is perfect, that's why we're infinitely perfectible. But some of use may be a little farther along in the journey than others. Are those the people we rely on to pass our faith along to our children and youth? Are they the ones we ask to lead the New UU classes in our congregations? Sometimes yes, I'm sure. But I honestly believe that if we have any chance of growing as a movement (or even holding our own), we're going to need to have more mature persons of faith taking leadership roles in lifespan faith development.

Back in August I posted a list of the eight key factors for developing youth into lifelong members of a faith tradition. The first factor (faith integrated into family identity and practice) has been the subject of a number of my posts since then (check out the "Best of Log" section of my "Favorite Links" page for links to posts on the subject). All the evidence I've seen points to the family as the primary source of one's religious identity. But that's only the first factor--add the second factor to the mix (three or more adult mentors of vital faith) and we'd be well on our way to developing lifelong UUs in record numbers.

What, then, makes an adult mentor of "vital faith"? Last week, I mentioned Christian Smith's signs of religious vitality in a faith tradition, many of which relate directly to an individual's faith. We're talking about people who faithfully adhere to [their] essential...religious beliefs, who consider their faith a highly salient aspect of their lives, who reflect great confidence and assurance in their religious beliefs, who participate regularly in a variety of church activities and programs, and who are committed in both belief and action to accomplishing the mission of their church.

Now we all probably know a few folks who take their faith this seriously. But there probably more than a few of us who wish we were more committed to our liberal religious tradition--both lay folk and religious professionals. Is it even possible to find enough adult mentors of "vital faith" to provide three for every youth who is part of a Unitarian Universalist congregation? To be honest, I'm not sure. The good news is there are a lot of different ways to be a mentor.

In their book Connecting: The Mentoring Relationships You Need to Succeed in Life, Paul D. Stanley and J. Robert Clinton divide mentoring into three catagories: intensive, occasional, and passive. And there are different types of mentors within these catagories: discipler (they're using Christian language here), spiritual guide, and coach within the "intensive" catagory; counselor, teacher, and sponsor within the "occasional" catagory; and contemporary or historical models within the "passive" catagory.

While these catagories could be helpful for finding different kinds of mentors in our congregations, what really caught my attention was their answer to the question, "So what is mentoring?" They say that

[mentoring] starts with someone in need. This person met someone further along in experience who has something to contribute to that need. A relationship was established. The more experienced person shared what he [or she] had been through or learned, meeting the needs of the first person. With the acceptance of what was shared, the power to grow through a situation was passed from the mentor to the mentoree. It was not just a sharing/receiving of knowledge; actual transfer and change took place. We refer to this transfer between mentor and mentoree as empowerment. This process is the heart of mentoring.

And I would add that this process is at the heart of empowerment, for both youth and adults. What's more, it's a much more specific and functional definition of empowerment than the one used by YRUU (Young Religious Unitarian Universalists) (see "Youth Empowerment" on their website). There is a huge difference between the "vagueness" and "ambiguity" of the official YRUU description of "youth empowerment" and the empowerment that comes from meeting the real life needs of the mentoree through the kind of relationship Stanley and Clinton describe.

Imagine what our religious movement would look like in ten, twenty, or thirty years if the youth who are currently involved in Unitarian Universalism were supported in their faith at home by their families and supported in their communities of faith by vital adult mentors who shared their experiences as UUs.