12 Replies to “Miss Conduct Tears It Up”

  1. To me, symbols on a stole, say, are different from wearing something or decorating with it as an accessory.

    An interfaith stole can be a useful vestment for certain occasions. I only own one that has anything other than a chalice on it, and I wear it when the time seems right to do so (for example, at the wedding of a Catholic woman to a Muslim man, when they specifically asked if I could wear the symbols of both of their faiths).

    As a piece of jewelry, I wouldn’t wear something that wasn’t a part of a faith tradition I was a part of, though. I have chalice pins I sometimes wear–that’s where my decorative symbols end. I have a friend who is a UU Christian who wears both a chalice and a cross–both are authentic symbols of her religious tradition.

    It also depends on what the symbols are. Some symbols are particular to a religious tradition or a certain context, and shouldn’t be used out of context. If I wanted to symbolize welcome to LDS folks, I wouldn’t put the sacred markings of the temple vestments on my stole. Likewise, the Star of David is a different symbol than a mezzuzah is. Senator Hatch, I read, has a fake Torah scroll in his office. That is seriously offensive.

    Maybe I’m way off base (and I’m willing to be corrected if so). I’d love to read what others think.

    in peace,
    Michael

  2. I am not offended by UU interfaith-symbol stoles. I could be wrong here–I’m not a theologian or minister–but UUism is different than other religions, in that some UUs also identify as Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Wiccans. (At the UU church I belonged to in KC, it was fairly common to ask someone, “What religion are you?”)

    So I think for a UU minister to wear a stole that indicates, “We are open to many faith traditions here” is a legitimate expression of a unique aspect of Unitarian Universalism, rather than appropriating symbols that aren’t yours.

  3. Don’t you think it is interesting that this uber Mormon thinks of himself as kinda Jewish – odd at the very least, but hopeful too. It means, maybe, that even he recognizes that we are more similar then different. Or he is just into the whole we are persecuted to aspect and then it is just weird.

  4. It is one thing to display all manner of religious symbols in posters, bumper stickers, or displays aimed at praising Interfaith activity, tolerance, appreciation, and so forth. I’m thinking of those COEXIST bumper stickers or the posters with all the symbols that say something like “We are all God’s children.” Those are great. I’ve even used an array of non-UU symbols together with a chalice symbol on the cover of our order of service on World Religion Day, with the same sort of intent and effect as those posters, the service that day being specifically about appreciating the different ways of worshiping and being religious people rather than pretending to be what we are not.

    But a minister in performance of his or her ministerial duties should not wear a symbol of a religious or other identity of which s/he is not a part and, more specifically, that s/he is not authorized to represent in that ministerial capacity.

    UU ministers should satisfy themselves with UU symbols on any liturgical garb. Or no symbols.

  5. It’s worth noting that Mormons believe they are a branch of the House of Israel, and that they are individually adopted members of one of the Twelve Tribes. Many Mormons have a keen (if sometimes bizarre and empirically ungrounded) fascination with Jews, Judaism, and Israel; they believe their temples are modern versions of the temple in Jerusalem, and that their church isn’t just the restoration of the church of the New Testament, but also the restoration of the patriarchal order of the Old Testament. (Although I knew only one Jewish boy during my childhood, I attended my first seder in a Mormon high school seminary class in Orem, Utah, for example, several years before I attended a seder at a Unitarian church.)

    I say this merely to observe that Hatch’s peculiar interest in Judaism is undoubtedly part of his sense of Mormon faithfulness. He feels that, as a Mormon, he’s also Jewish, in a way.

  6. i think intent and context is paramount here. for example, for a minister to wear symbols of another faith while in their ministerial capacity can be misleading, unless it is done in the way cited above, with the example of promotion of interfaith activities.

    i don’t think spiritual symbols should be co-opted as a trend, for fashion, or for a costume. for example, i sometimes see hipster girls wearing roasary beads as necklaces (i’m not haitng on hipster girls, i am one). rosary beads are not an accessory, and those in a religion that uses them learn from a young age that they are NOT meant to be around the neck.

    i know some people who have symbols of other religions on their person that they actually understand and respect. they may not be a part of that religion, but they are not mocking or playing dress-up. while this may bother some, i see it in a decidedly different category from someone who casually wears symbols of other faith traditions.

    i personally just generally don’t do it. for example, i have spent a good deal of time on field and academic research on head scarves (hijab). while i know how and why to wear them and i own several on account of their beauty, i would just feel thoroughly uncomfortable walking around cairo or boston with one on my head, regardless of my respect for the religion and the decision to observe hijab.

  7. I’ll attempt to make more sense today.

    I hate it when people wear rosaries as jewellery – that’s not what they are for; I assume that if you wear a crucifix then you are Catholic. But by me, Buddhist statues are commonplace merely as ornaments – I don’t know whether that should be acceptable, or I simply think it’s acceptable because I’ve never been Buddhist.

    I’m not a fan of ‘interfaith’ stoles (the ones with multiple religious symbols on) because they don’t give any other context. But the ‘co-exist’ thing, or using them on a relevant order of service is ok, because there’s more explanation there. On a stole, it’s hard to tell whether someone has thought about it, or they just think the designs look pretty (IRL, I give the benefit of the doubt).

    Another reason against is that stoles are very Christian objects, maybe it’s appropriating a bit to add symbols from other faiths? Especially if you live in a majority (nominal) Christian culture.

    Unitarian stoles don’t seem to be common in my part of the UK so it doesn’t come up often. I think I would rather wear symbols that mean something to me (celtic cross, chalice, atheist scarlet A) than some assorted religious symbols. But then, I’m not a big interfaith activist – maybe that would make a difference?

  8. I’m always curious when I see someone who is not Muslim wearing the Hand of Fatima, and wonder what that’s all about, but I wouldn’t say I find it offensive. When I was younger, I would sometimes inquire as to the background, and it was pretty much always in the vein of, “Oh, I used to date a guy who was Muslim and ….”

    But I’m probably not the best person to ask as I am rarely offended by other people’s attire. I can’t even think of a time off the top of my head when I have been. ::::thinking some more:::: Nope. I’ve been baffled, amused, and have thought people looked ridiculous, but not offended.

    Insofar as vestments are concerned, I’d think that if a minister really wanted to be taken seriously, they would only have on their vestments those religious symbols that represent their own beliefs. The fact of the matter is, a Unitarian Universalist minister isn’t everyone’s cleric. They aren’t a Catholic’s priest, and a Jew’s rabbi, and a Muslim’s imam, and a shaman, and so on. So wearing a whole bunch of symbols seems a little arrogant to me, as if to say, “I am all encompassing. I am the holy person of every religion.” Uh, no, you probably aren’t. Unless you actually work with and minister to people from all those religious traditions, wearing the symbols strikes me as being vain and presumptuous.

  9. FYI, the Hand of Fatima is also a Jewish symbol (called the hamsa or Hand of Miriam). Some use it as a reminder of the shared history of the two peoples. I first knew of it as solely a Jewish symbol and was surprised to learn it also has Muslim roots.

  10. I’m ignoring the question of UU clergy wearing symbols from other religions — since I’m stuck on being irritated at UU clergy who wear clerical garments at protests that they would never wear in a liturgical setting — and sticking with the question of Orrin Hatch’s Jewish songwriting.

    Here’s Jeff Goldberg writing at the Jewish magazine The Tablet about how Hatch came to write the song — at Goldberg’s encouragement. It’s sounding pretty genuine to me.

    http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/21863/eight-days-of-hanukkah/

  11. Personally, I’m not offended by Orrin Hatch’s songwriting efforts. I think it’s a funny story. And sadly, in the canon of Hanukkah songs, it’s not half bad. (Sigh.) Besides, Irving Berlin wrote “White Christmas” and “Easter Parade.” It’s the mezuzah and the “mock Torah” that frosts my cookies.

  12. Philocrites wrote: UU clergy who wear clerical garments at protests that they would never wear in a liturgical setting

    I struggle with this one too, but I have a clergy-collar shirt that I sometimes wear when lobbying, though I never ever wear it in my own church, and here’s why: I want people to know, when I’m walking around the state capital with a Freedom to Marry sticker on, that I’m also a clergyperson. Nuns communicate this kind of thing with a 5-inch wooden cross, but UUs don’t have an equivalent symbol (though if one wore a 5-inch chalice it might be obvious that it was a religious symbol…). So my collar is my “I’m a minister” sign.

    I don’t wear it at church because there, everyone knows I’m a minister.

    By the same reasoning, though I don’t pile my “Rev.” on too heavily at church, I definitely use it when I sign a letter to the editor. “Minister speaking” is part of the message.

    I’m off topic so I’ll redeem myself by saying: no Torahs in your office. If real, they should be in a more sanctified setting. If fake, they should be burned. If you want the words of the Hebrew scriptures there, and who wouldn’t, buy a nice book replica. A mezuzah necklace might be different. Does Senator Hatch live by the commandments inside it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *