"Thank You" by Rev. Thomas Schade

Thank you.

I appreciate the confidence that you, the congregation, have shown in me in affirming my ministry with you; I hope that I am able to live up to your high expectations. However, I doubt that I will.

Churches are, in some senses, heartbreaking institutions. They carry so many of people’s highest dreams and aspirations that it is inevitable that they will fall short at some point. Ministers, too. So, it is important to temper our expectations with mercy and to remember that forgiving another’s shortcomings is the most common way people show their love.

That said, I think that we are in for some exciting times ahead. I hope that the next few years can be a time of our growth in all directions: bigger, broader, higher and deeper, stronger.

A few other comments about yesterday’s meeting:

I can see why the citizens of Lancaster have chosen David Spanagel to be the moderator of their town meeting. We are lucky to have him to moderate our congregational meetings. When you consider that we did three pieces of major business yesterday, which necessitated a suspension of one article of our by-laws, group-wide wordsmithing of a statement, paper ballots, procedural votes and substantive debate, with such efficiency and clarity, we have to appreciate David’s skill. He made it all seem easier than it was in actuality.

Not everybody voted to affirm my ministry. I am sure that those who, in effect, voted to look for another minister were acting in what they saw as the best interests of the congregation. I don’t know who they were and don’t really care to find out. Knowing that they are among us will keep me on my toes. I am reminded of that old story, so often told, about the monastery that had fallen into squabbling, arguing, and general crankiness. In desperation, they sought out an outsider for help, turning to the local rabbi. The rabbi said he couldn’t really help, but had received a sign that that the Messiah was to emerge from out of this cantankerous, divided, dysfunctional, and unhealthy little monastery. Everyone’s behavior promptly improved as each monk began to treat all others as a potential Messiah.

I suspect that I will be a better minister if I treat everyone as potentially one of those who voted to look for another minister.

And finally, there was a very close vote on an amendment to the proposed vision statement. The vision statement turns us toward the task of gathering and empowering the next generation of religious liberals. Some thought the statement underemphasized our continuing work as a church to gather and to encourage the present generations. An amendment was offered which aimed at correcting this imbalance. It failed very narrowly, and then the statement was passed almost unanimously.

I think that we will find ourselves in this situation again and again for a while. We are trying to do two somewhat contradictory things at the same time; we want change and we want continuity.

Change and continuity are like the oil and vinegar in a salad dressing. They will blend, but you have to keep shaking the bottle.

At any given moment in time, or in the midst of any effort, there may be some of us who feel that we are over-emphasizing change and others that feel the church is over-emphasizing continuity. It is inevitable that we will not be at the right blend all the time. All we can do is keeping shaking the bottle.

The meeting also detoured for a few minutes into a discussion of the use of the term “Liberal Religion” and “Religious Liberals” in the vision statement. This is a very rich topic for discussion, because it is about our understanding of who we are and what we stand for and how we relate to others near to us in the religious spectrum. I would like to pursue this further in the year ahead. But let me offer this brief summary: Unitarian Universalists are Religious Liberals, but not all Religious Liberals are Unitarian Universalists.

Discuss.

And, thanks again.