October 27, 2006

More Details on Terrorist Art Show

_______________ 

October 26, 2006

"Did I understand correctly that some people from the group trying to gain clemency for these individuals met with somebody from Justice or the White House? If that's the case then, I really think that that has to be the most outrageous thing I've ever heard in my life. Because as a victim I was never contacted by anyone."

-Rocco Pascarella, former New York city policeman disabled by FALN bomb in 1982

UCC Justice and Witness Ministries:

Puerto Rican terrorists are unfairly labeled

When UCCtruths.com reported on October 17th that the National Office of the UCC would be hosting a terrorist art exhibit, many were skeptical since the event wasn't mentioned on the UCC's own web site and because the idea was too absurd to be believed. Well... the UCC has finally posted information about the exhibit on their web site.

Adding insult to injury, the UCC's Justice and Witness Ministries (JWM) also approved a bizarre affirmation of the terrorists without mentioning the dozens of victims killed and injured by over 150 bombings in the 70's and 80's. However, the JWM resolution does claim that "Carlos Alberto Torres and Oscar Lopez Rivera are in prison for having advocated on behalf of the people who have suffered under colonization for over 400 years" and were "unjustly labeled as “terrorists” for lifting a prophetic voice through artistic expression on behalf of the voiceless". As we documented last week, Carlos Alberto Torres and Oscar Lopez Rivera were convicted of extremely serious crimes and were labeled as terrorists by law enforcement and by members of Congress because of the crimes they committed ~ not because of their "artistic expression".

This will be a widely discussed topic and we'll be posting more on this over the next few days.

_______________ 

October 25, 2006

UCC playing politics on Sudan... again

Two weeks before mid-term elections, the UCC's Justice and Peace Action Network is, again, playing politics on Sudan by suggesting that the U.S. government hasn't taken a leadership role in trying to end the genocide in Sudan. From the UCC's Action Alert email:

And from the suggested letter on UCCtakeaction.org:

According to an AP story last month, "the U.N. cannot legally lead the mission without Sudan's consent" and it is China, not the U.S., that has insisted on Sudan's consent before the U.N. deploys peacekeeping forces.

Further, the UCC Action Alert is plainly dishonest. The U.S. took the lead on Sudan way before the UCC ever initiated any Action Alert on the crisis in Sudan. When the U.N.'s Human Rights Commission in Geneva passed a weak measure to "send a monitor to the region" in April, 2004, the U.S. representative to the commission was the only delegate to vote against the measure because it failed to condemn racial and ethnic cleansing in Darfur. If you search the UCC web site, you won't find any "Action Alerts" on Sudan during this time and it wasn't until July, 2004 that the UCC formally mentioned the crisis in Sudan... and even then refused to seek a peacekeeping force. A Washington Post editorial from July, 2004 clearly noted the U.S. leadership role on Sudan and noted that "council members such as China, Pakistan and Brazil value the principle of sovereignty more highly than the human purpose that sovereignty is meant to serve: a stable international order that allows people to live in peace."

More recently, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton called for a special closed-door council session to address threats from Sudan against countries who contribute troops to a peacekeeping force.

_______________ 

October 25, 2006

Faith in action

This is a great story about real faith in action:

Here's the question though: Why doesn't the national office of the UCC spend just a fraction of it's energy on providing a workshop and resources like this to local churches? Granted, the UCC's national office did a great job of fundraising and coordinating support when Hurricane Katrina hit, but does it take the largest natural disaster in U.S. history to get this kind of attention? What about the day-to-day faith in action? Isn't this the business we are in?

To better illustrate the point, go to the UCC's homepage right now and look at what the focus is on and ask yourself "Are we putting our faith in action directly with the people who need our help?"

_______________ 

October 23, 2006

UCC minister accused of Bible theft

In a story widely circulated across the AP wires this weekend, a UCC minister has been accused of stealing a set of antique, leather-bound Bibles from a previous church he served and selling them on Ebay. From the AP:

His former church disagrees with the "misunderstanding" but you have to wonder why they didn't just call him first for clarification before filing the charges. I suspect there might be more to this story.

_______________ 

October 17, 2006

UCC National Office to Host

Terrorist Art Show

Yes, this time I've gone off the deep end. No issue has bothered me more than the UCC's relationship with convicted Puerto Rican terrorists that are responsible for over 150 bombings in the U.S. during the 70's and 80's. There is no moral or theological reason for defending members of this group who have killed and injured dozens of people. What is further shocking and completely contradictory to any of our beliefs is that there is no record (in the nearly 30 years that the UCC has been advocating for these terrorists) that our denomination ever reached out to the victims of FALN violence.

commission of seditious conspiracy and interference with interstate commerce by violence, interstate transportation of firearms with the intent to commit seditious conspiracy and interference with interstate commerce by violence and interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle.

Oscar Lopez-Rivera, was convicted a second time, on February 26, 1988 of conspiracy to escape, to transport explosives with intent to kill and injure people, and to destroy government buildings and property, aiding and abetting travel in interstate commerce to carry on arson, and using a telephone to carry on arson.

Lopez was sentenced to fifty-five years and fifteen years, respectively. He rejected the offer of clemency from President Clinton in 1999 (which was heavily promoted by the UCC), which would commute his total effective sentence from seventy to forty-four years.

What is the FALN? How are Oscar Lopez-Rivera and Carlos Alberto Torres a part of this terrorist organization?

The Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (Armed Forces of National Liberation, FALN) was a Puerto Rican clandestine terrorist group that advocated complete independence for Puerto Rico. FALN was responsible for more than 120 bomb attacks on U.S. targets between 1974 and 1983.

FROM THE STATEMENT OF SPECIAL AGENT (RET.) RICHARD S. HAHN BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HEARING ON FALN CLEMENCY - SEPTEMBER 15, 1999

Between June, 1975 and November, 1979, the FALN claimed credit for nineteen bombing and six incendiary attacks in the Chicago area. These included bomb targets such as the woman’s washroom in a hotel restaurant, (9/76), the bombing of the city-county building, (6/77), and Sears Tower (10/75). These bombings, credit for which was claimed by written communiqué or telephone calls, were frequently coordinated with bombings in New York, and eventually with actions on the island of Puerto Rico. The communiqués stated such things as “ a free and socialist Puerto Rico, if necessary, will be written in red blood” and “attempts to suppress it’s offensive would be met with “revolutionary violence”

While initially law enforcement was unable to identify the FALN, in late 1976 a “bomb factory” was discovered in Chicago. This led to identification of Carlos Torres and Oscar Lopez as persons who controlled an apartment in which explosives tied to FALN bombings and FALN communiqués were found.

In January, 1980, the FALN conducted an armed assault on the Oak Creek National Guard Armory in Wisconsin. Employees were threatened at gunpoint and one round was discharged in an unsuccessful effort to obtain access to the weapons vault.

In March, 1980 the FALN conducted a takeover of the Carter-Mondale campaign headquarters. Workers in that office were held at gunpoint while the office was ransacked and spray painted. Lists of delegates to the convention were stolen and threatening letters subsequently were mailed to many of them.

On April 4, 1980, eleven FALN members were captured in Evanston, Illinois as they were preparing to conduct an armed robbery of an armored car. Among those arrested was Carlos Alberto Torres, renter of the bomb factory found in 1976. Also among those arrested was Freddie Mendez, a relatively new recruit to the FALN. The arrests led the location of numerous safehouses through out the U.S. including those in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Newark, N.J. Searches of these safehouses yielded weapons and explosives and bomb paraphernalia tied to the claimed FALN bombings. Mr. Mendez, along with nine other FALN members, was tried and convicted of seditious conspiracy. Throughout the trial the FALN members refused to participate in the proceedings, claiming that the U.S. Government had no authority over them.

Following his conviction, but prior to sentencing, Mr. Mendez reached out for U.S. Government authorities. Mr. Mendez subesquently cooperated with the government and provided significant insight into the operation of the FALN. Mr Mendez identifed each of his co-defendants as individuals who particpated in armed terrorist actions and/or the manufacture/delivery of FALN bombs.

It is Mr. Mendez testimony that identifies the purpose of the gathering of the FALN members in Evanston on April 4, 1980, as well as the actions at Carter - Mondale Headquarters and the Oak Creek National Guard Armory.

In addition to his experiences in armed assaults, Mr. Mendez also provided testimony regarding being tasked, with one other FALN member, Ricardo Jimenez, to place a bomb. Although Mr. Mendez did not ultimately participate in the placing of the device, he did travel on public transportation through Chicago with Jimenez and the live device to the intended target. As they arrived at the target late, they were unable to place the device there, and Jimenez dismissed Mendez, stating that he would take care of the matter. Mendez testified that Jimenez told him that he put the device in the washroom of a building.

Mr. Mendez also provided information as to the functioning of the FALN. He described the FALN in court as a clandestine, revolutionary Puerto Rican organization whose goal was to build a peoples war in Puerto Rico and the U.S. through armed violence. Mr. Mendez also described in testimony, details of the rigors of clandestine operations, designed to preclude one member from knowing the activities of more than just a few others, in order to minimize risk from infiltration or government cooperation. He provided details regarding the training he received in counter surveillance techniques, maintenance of a safehouse, false identification and disguises.

Between December 1981 and January, 1983, various agencies of Chicago law enforcement worked cooperatively to surveil FALN suspect Edwin Cortes. This led to the identification of an active FALN safe house maintained by Cortes and Alejandrina Torres in an apartment at 736 W. Buena Street, Chicago. Shortly after the identification of the specific safehouse apartment, the government sought, and was granted Title III authority to place microphones in the apartment as well as to establish video surveillance within the apartment. These were established in January, and February, 1983, respectively. On March 8, 1983, Cortes and Torres were observed via the video surveillance, cleaning and loading weapons and subsequently building firing circuits for explosive devices. A search of the apartment after the subjects had left yielded approximately 24 pounds of dynamite, 24 blasting caps, weapons, disguises, false identification and thousands of rounds of ammunition. Law enforcement sought and was granted court authorization to neutralize and/or seize the weapons and explosives, and maintain notice of the searches under seal. Subsequently, law enforcement intercepted conversations between Edwin Cortes and still unidentified co-conspirators in New York to arrange for the travel of an unknown individual to Chicago. On or about March 14, 1983, after several conversations with the unknown conspirators in New York, Cortes picked up a man at the airport and transported him to the safehouse. The man, referred to as Benjamin, remains unidentified. Thereafter, Cortes, and “Benjamin” met at the safehouse. They were joined by Torres and were seen gathering the weapons and other materials in the safehouse, and subsequently loading bags with materials into two vehicles, one a stolen vehicle, the other a vehicle registered in a fictitious name, and departing the safehouse apartment in the early AM hours of March 15th. Prior to leaving the safehouse Cortes made the comment to Torres that “ Yes but, she has to have it loaded and cocked further back. If they have to shoot, they can shoot..”

On March 18, 1983, as a result of analysis of Title III intercepts in the Chicago safehouse, law enforcement established a surveillance outside of the ambulance entrance to Wadsworth VA hospital, where FALN leader Oscar Lopez was to be taken that date. Lopez had complained of a malady and had been notified well in advance that he would be taken to the hospital for tests on that date. The surveillance observed Torres, Cortes and “Benjamin” moving about the ambulance entrance for over an hour, all wearing disguises. During this time, Oscar Lopez was precluded from leaving Leavenworth Prison and the ambulance which would normally arrive at the hospital in the morning hours never did arrive, due to law enforcement intervention. Eventually, Cortes, Torres and “Benjamin” left the hospital area and were surveilled to an apartment in Kansas City which had been rented in a false name. A fingerprint of Alberto Rodriguez was subsequently located on an item in this apartment.

On March 19, 1983, Cortes and “Benjamin” returned to the Chicago safehouse at 736 W. Buena Street. While there they were observed on video studying maps of the city of Pontiac, Illinios and Livingston County. FALN member Luis Rosa captured at Highland Park, Illinois following a robbery/kidnapping, was incarcerated at Pontiac State Prison. “Benjamin” subsequently left, returning to Puerto Rico. On March 22, 1983, Luis Rosa was moved from Pontiac Prison to Joliet State Prison. The next day Torres and an unidentified female travelled to the Bloomington, Illinois area, not far from Pontiac, Illinois. There, they rented an apartment under a false name. Later that same evening a telephone call between Cortes and Torres was intecepted on the Buena safehouse phone. In the conversation Cortes and Torres were overheard complaining about the “changes” made the day before.

In March, 1983, Chicago law enforcement located a second Chicago FALN safehouse located on Lunt Avenue. Edwin Cortes and FALN member Alberto Rodriguez were observed to meet there. This apartment was also penetrated with court authorized microphones and video equipment. Through intercepts at this location it was determined that they were developing plans to rob a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), mobile safe operator of the daily collections. Cortes was subsequently observed conducting a surveillance at one of the CTA stops. In intercepted conversations between the two, the topic of whether or not underpaid guards would risk their lives was discussed. Escape routes and advantages of conducting the robbery at different potential sites was also discussed. In a May 15, 1983 conversation Alberto Rodriguez was overheard discussing ways of confronting the guard, stating they may have to “hit him upside the head” and that they may have to “shoot the guard, which makes a noise.” This plot was also diffused by Chicago law enforcement who confronted and obtained Identification from Rodriguez as he conducted a surveillance of a CTA station on March 16, 1983.

On May 27, 1983, Edwin Cortes and Alberto Rodriguez were observed moving materials from the Buena Street safehouse to the Lunt Avenue safehouse. Following the move the two were observed driving around military facilities at Foster and Kedzie, Devon and Kedzie and 74th and Pulaski in Chicago. In early June, 1983, they were observed in the Lunt apartment working with the bomb building paraphernalia previously observed at the Buena Street safehouse. During this meeting Cortes instructed Alberto Rodriguez in how to assemble a firing circuit for an improvised explosive device. In addition to working with the bomb building paraphernalia, they were overheard discussing in detail the physical layout of the Army Reserve Center and GSA facility at 74th and Pulaski, Chicago and talking about the military sites, Cortes wondering aloud how to cause the greatest incendiary damage to vehicles there. Following this meeting they again were observed conducting surveillances of a Marine base, the Army Reserve Center and two military motor pools.

On June 26, 1983, Cortes met Rodriguez at the Lunt safehouse. They were observed working with watches, pipe and pipe caps. They also tried on hats and makeup during this meeting.

On June 28, 1983, Cortes inventoried bomb components at the Lunt safehouse. These included blasting caps, dynamite, detonating cord and batteries. He and Torres met at the apartment and prepared a communique. He subsequently met Rodriguez at the apartment, outside of the presence of Torres. With Rodriguez he drew maps and diagrams and wrapped blasting caps and the explosives which law enforcement had inerted.

On June 29, 1983, Cortes, Torres, Alberto Rodriguez, and a fourth defendant, Jose Luis Rodriguez, were arrested. In comments at sentencing Judge George Layton stated, “One of the strange things about this case is that these defendants didn’t accomplish any of their purpose. The didn’t succeed in springing Oscar Lopez. They didn’t succeed in springing anybody from Pontiac Correctional Center. And they didn’t even succeed in planting the bombs. Why? Because in this case, in this court’s judgement, represents one of the finest examples of preventive law enforcement that has ever come to this court’s attention in the 20-some odd years it has been a judge and in the 20 years before that this Court was a practicing lawyer in criminal cases all over the country. Good, preventive law enforcement succeeded in keeping these defendants from doing what they were going to do. They were going to plant bombs in public buildings during a holiday.”

The co-conspirator(s) in New York and Puerto Rico were never identified.

Luis Rosado, a suspected FALN member from New York, remains a fugitive wanted on state charges in Illinois for the actions taken with FALN member Luis Rosa. Rosado failed to appear on 3/13/81.

In 1985 a plot to break FALN leader Oscar Lopez out of prison at Leavenworth Penitentiary was brought to the attention of the FBI by a cooperative witness. In that case co-conspirators were tasked to obtain weapons and explosives for use in the plot. The plot was to involve forcing a helicopter pilot to land in the yard at Leavenworth. As the escape took place, explosive charges were to be used to distract and to deter guards from taking action to prevent the escape. Co-conspriators in that case were audio taped via court authorized intercepts as they purchased what they believed to be explosives to be used in the plot from an FBI undercover agent. One co-conspirator successfully burglarized a gun store near Littleton, Colorado, to obtain weapons for use in the escape. Due to intervention by law enforcement, none of the plans came to fruition.

Why is the United Church of Christ helping these terrorists?

In the 1990's, Paul Sherry, then UCC president, Rev. Thomas A. Dipko, then Executive Vice President of the United Church Board for Homeland Ministries and Rev. Nozomi Ikuta of the United Church Board of Homeland Ministries actively lobbied and consulted with President Clinton, the Department of Justice and Congress on releasing the FALN terrorists from prison.

According to notes from an April 1998 meeting in a candid discussion with Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder, Rev. Paul Sherry was asked whether or not they (the FALN terrorists) had renounced violence. "Rev. Sherry said they would not change their beliefs. This probably meant they would not change their beliefs about Puerto Rican independence, although he gave a carefully phrased answer that did not make it entirely clear that they had renounced the use of violence."

On August 11, 1999 President Clinton offered clemency to the FALN terrorists and on September 7, 1999, 12 of the terrorists accepted the terms of the clemency. Clinton offered the clemency over the objections of the Anti-Defamation League, Sen. Patrick Moynahan and his wife, Hillary Clinton.

On September 15, 1999, Rev. Nozomi Ikuta testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the clemency process and her lobbying activities. What became very clear through her own testimony is that the United Church of Christ did not, at any point, try to communicate with the victims of the terrorism. This prompted Rocco Pascarella, a former New York city policeman disabled by FALN bomb in 1982, to respond at the same hearings: "Did I understand correctly that some people from the group trying to gain clemency for these individuals met with somebody from Justice or the White House? If that's the case then, I really think that that has to be the most outrageous thing I've ever heard in my life. Because as a victim I was never contacted by anyone."

On September 21, 1999, Reverend Dr. Thomas Dipko, executive vice president, United Church Board for Homeland Ministries, United Church of Christ testified before House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform. In a stunning exchange with Rep. Bob Barr, Dipko tap danced around direct questions as they relate to the church's honoring of terrorists. This led Rep. Barr to actually show Dipko a surveillance video of one of the terrorists, Alejandrina Torres (herself the wife of UCC minister Jose A. Torres and mother of Carlos Alberto Torres) making a bomb:

*****
Mr. BURTON. Dr. Dipko, you took great pains to go to prison to talk to these people who were part of this FALN organization. Did you by any chance take any time to go talk to any of the victims?

Rev. DIPKO. I do not know the victims personally except as I have met them here today.

Mr. BURTON. Thank you. I yield the balance of my time to Mr. Barr.

Mr. BARR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Dipko, your church I think refers to these people as POWs; is that correct?

Rev. DIPKO. We have referred to these persons as prisoners of conscience.

Mr. BARR. Your literature describes them as POWs. What's the difference between a POW and a POC?

Rev. DIPKO. There is a significant difference. A prisoner of conscience is a prisoner whether a citizen of this land or not. But this land is a lawful Nation and its laws must be taken seriously. These are persons who are not citizens of this land, as you well know, on the basis of our territorial agreements with Puerto Rico. It's a strange arrangement indeed.

Mr. BARR. I think you're wrong on that.

Rev. DIPKO. They are citizens of this land, but they are not entitled to the privileges of ordinary citizens.

Mr. BARR. You're wrong there too. The literature uses the term POW.

Rev. DIPKO. What literature are you referring to Mr. Barr?

Mr. BARR. This is a news brief from the Senate and it says, this is an article—''POW Alejandrina Torres to be honored,'' further quote during the Senate, ''POW Alejandrina Torres will receive,'' and then it goes on to describe, ''great accolades are bestowing on her, the church.'' That's where I'm seeing the use of the term ''POW,'' which stands for prisoner of war. Are you saying this was an error, it shouldn't have said ''POW''?

Rev. DIPKO. I'm saying that ''prisoners of conscience'' is the standard language that we have used.

Mr. BARR. What is a POW?

Rev. DIPKO. A prisoner of war would be a person who is from another nation and is in conflict with this Nation, as I would understand that term ordinarily, and therefore should be treated under certain international conventions.

Mr. BARR. Which gets me back to my original question, why do you all consider these people prisoners of war?

Rev. DIPKO. And I'm saying to you, as I understand our use of the term, our standard use for referring to them is ''prisoners of conscience.''

Mr. BARR. Whoever wrote this might have been in error.

Rev. DIPKO. It could well have been.

Mr. BARR. Regardless of whether you describe this, this woman as a prisoner of war or prisoner of conscience, she apparently was singled out for recognition as an honored laywoman; is that correct?

Rev. DIPKO. That's correct.

Mr. BARR. Was it her bombmaking capabilities that make her honored? What was it that makes her honored?

Rev. DIPKO. She was honored because she had convictions about the self-determination of the peoples of Puerto Rico.

Mr. BARR. If, in fact, the activities of her and her colleagues have resulted in many more deaths, would they still be honored in your eyes?

Rev. DIPKO. No, they would not.

Mr. BARR. Where is the distinction between killing only a certain number of people and killing a sufficient number to no longer be considered honored by your church?

Rev. DIPKO. There is a presumption in your question that the church would say with you that she was guilty of killing even a single person. The church has not assented to that.

Mr. BARR. Does the church's definition of killing of a person extend only to the actual physical act between a perpetrator and a person being murdered, in other words actually pulling the trigger, stabbing the knife into the flesh and taking away a person's life? Is that only in—as far as what the church's definition of murder is?

Rev. DIPKO. The church is not a civil or criminal court. We are saying back to you, sir, this is not what she was tried for or found guilty of. Those charges are well known to you on this panel.

Mr. BARR. But you are, though, at the same time saying that the church does draw some lines.

Rev. DIPKO. It certainly does.

Mr. BARR. Apparently these people did not cross the line into being dishonored, they remained on the honored side.

Rev. DIPKO. I'm saying to you as far as this church understands it, they were never tried for or found guilty of such acts as murder.

Mr. BARR. Were you here earlier when we showed the tape of this honored——

Rev. DIPKO. Yes, I was.

Mr. BARR. That didn't impress you at all? You still believe this is an honored person?

Rev. DIPKO. That tape would have to have a lot more unpacking for me to understand where it came from and the circumstances under which it were made.

Mr. BARR. Let's look at it any way.

[The videotape was played.]

Mr. BARR. The woman at the bottom is your honoree, Alejandrina Torrez. They are manufacturing bombs designed to kill, maim, injure and destroy property.

Rev. DIPKO. If that is an accurate record of the happening and that is in fact what she was doing, the church would wish to, of course, disassociate from it.

Mr. BARR. In other words, she would no longer be considered an honored person?

Rev. DIPKO. I would think so.

Mr. BARR. Thank you.

****

_______________ 

October 17, 2006

Details emerge on New Hampshire lawsuit

I was looking through my archived email tonight and I stumbled on an email that I received back in March about an allegation of "inappropriate contact" involving a staffer and a camper between 1993-2000 at the Horton Center. Since the allegations are now public, I think it's important to share what is known about the incident:

1) The New Hampshire Conference DID report the matter to authorities

2) Supposedly, the age of consent In New Hampshire is 16 and since the victim was 16 at the time of the alleged incidents, I'm told the County Prosecutor decided not to press charges

3) The New Hampshire Conference DID NOT have a "Safe Church" policy in place until 2005 or 2006 (it's not exactly clear when the policy was first adopted, but from my information, it wasn't in place in 2005).

4) Some churches decided not to send their kids to Horton this year until they were satisfied that the allegations had been fully investigated. According to the Horton Center, over 460 kids attended the camp this past summer.

5) Many, if not all, New Hampshire churches quickly revised their policies and began running background checks on all volunteers and employees working with children.

It's way too early to know if there's something the New Hampshire Conference could have done to prevent the alleged abuse, but it's clear at this point that the Conference has not made a public statement on the allegations. While that may be good legal advice, it's a disservice to the local churches of the Conference who need to enough information to decide if it's safe to send their children to the Horton Center. This doesn't presume that the Conference was right or wrong in how it handled the situation but it is a reflection of the need to be transparent on matters that involve children.

_______________ 

October 15, 2006

Huff and Puff

It was amusing to see the headline "Not just a 'puff piece'" in the latest UC News. The article covers Rev. W. Evan Golder and Rev. J. Martin Bailey's work on the UCC's 50th Anniversary Commemorative Publication. In December, 2005, we called an article that Golder wrote about Dale Bishop's experience in Iran a "puff piece".

Deep down, I think Ben Guess is amused by this web site.

_______________ 

October 14, 2006

NH Conference sued over alleged

sexual assault

From the the Nashua Telegraph:

_______________

October 11, 2006

UCC Justice and Peace Action Network calls for Hastert to resign

From the Justice and Peace Action Network:

Yes, it's political opportunism at it's worse, but it's also tough to disagree with. The more we find out, the worse it looks for Hastert

_______________

October 8, 2006

Barry Lynn "concerned" about deal between UCC and Connecticut

I had a great discussion with Rev. Barry Lynn following tonight's Church and State discussion forum in Columbus. Lynn, the Executive Director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, and I discussed AU's investigation of a $100,000 grant from the State of Connecticut to help defray the convention center costs for the UCC's 2007 General Synod in Hartford. Lynn, an ordained UCC minister, made it clear that he was "concerned" about the arrangement.

Lynn and I compared and contrasted the deal with a similar arrangement that the State of Maryland made to host a Baptist convention in June. In that deal, a $150,000 state grant was used to help defray the costs of transportation for the group's convention in Baltimore. Lynn called the grant "totally inappropriate and clearly unconstitutional. Religious groups should pass the collection plate to their own members, not the taxpayers.”

In the UCC case, Lynn said "There are a number of questions that need to be answered. Is there a precedence in Connecticut of other religious groups receiving similar grants or is the UCC an exception?" 

While secular groups regularly receive grants from states to attract convention business, Lynn made it clear that there is a distinction between secular and religious groups being the beneficiary of these types of grants.

_______________

October 3, 2006

UCC Hurricane Katrina relief funds

used for new church start

10/15 Update: From Steve C. on the Message Board: "I just got my copy of UCC NEWS & was happy to read the special insert on "Hope shall Bloom". It appears the "new church" is pastored by a pastor of one of the "old" New Orleans congregations whose building is hopeless . A significant part of the new church core are members from the old church.

This puts this whole story in a much better light and make its a very worthwhile use of funds, IMNSHO. Helping our own members rebuild or relocate their worship site is definitely part of the stated mission.

As I suspected/feared, the website release was just shallow & incomplete."

Steve is right... this was a really sloppy press release written by J. Bennett Guess

UC News is reporting that funds designated for Hurricane Katrina relief were actually used to fund, in part, a new church start in Baton Rouge:

However, according to the UCC's "Hope Shall Bloom" fundraising web page, "100% of your gift goes to hurricane recovery programming":

There is, no doubt, an explanation for the discrepancy, presumably that a new church start could be construed as part of the "recovery programming". But why wasn't the possibility of a building new churches outside of New Orleans part of the fund-raising literature? This isn't meant to challenge the need for new churches, but, presumably, when people are contributing to recovery and relief efforts, they wouldn't normally expect those funds to be used for a new church. UCC members gave a great deal of money - nearly $6,000,000 - with the intention that the funds would be used for direct aid for the victims of hurricane Katrina. In an August, 2006 exhaustive update of how funds were being used (many of which are really good programs), no mention is made of new church starts.

There have been many things that the national office has done that deserves a healthy dose of skepticism... I just didn't think disaster relief fundraising was one of those.

I guess I was wrong.

_______________

October 2, 2006

Unwanted Allies

REPOSTED FROM MAINLINETRUTHS.COM

We knew this was coming... and it's kind of funny. All Saints Episcopal Church has been resisting efforts by the IRS to investigate an anti-war speech given by it's minister just before the 2004 election. Now conservative churches who want to exercise their free speech in the pulpit are coming to All Saints defense... even if it's unwanted support. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Bob Edgar believes in the separation of church and state as long as that separation serves his own political purposes... and this is the most idiotic part of the debate: Where is the line that separates the two?

There's no real principle involved here, the line moves depending on your politics. Edgar and clan think it's OK to advocate clearly partisan positions from the pulpit as long as you don't explicitly support a candidate. Conservative churches want unlimited freedom in the pulpit and still retain their tax exempt status.

Both sides should put their money where their mouths are: If they want to play politics then they should forfeit their tax-exempt status. It's really that simple.

_______________

October 2, 2006

Keen observations on Congregationalism

From the UCCtruths.com message board:

_______________

LINKS

Links that appear on this site are for informational purposes and should not be considered an endorsement

United Church of Christ

Still Speaking

Global Ministries

Our Faith, Our Vote

UCC Coalition for GLBT Concerns

Biblical Witness Fellowship (BWF)

Southern Conference Renewal Network

Evangelical Association

Faithful and Welcoming

UCC Unity

Philosophy Over Coffee

Kirkogitation

UCC Directory (including the Executive Council)

CONFERENCE

WEB SITES

Illinois

Illinois South