from Stand Firm
[Hat tip: You Know Who You Are]
For the unitiated, the Office of Transition Ministry maintains the rather bulky and clumsy database of clergy in the search process. A parish engaging in a search process puts in various criteria and voila -- the OTM spits out CDO profiles [which are like resumes] of various clergy that supposedly fit the criteria for which the the parish is looking.
However, some of my Cruel Friends Of Friends & Allies have run their own experiments and discovered that -- apparently -- the database positively weights female clergy over male clergy. In other words, if a male clergy person fits the criteria 100 percent, and a female clergy person fits it 95% she will sometimes be ranked "higher" in fit than the male.
There is this telling paragraph over on the OTM home page -- I've added the emphasis -- that seems to subtly bear out this theory of positive weighting of female clergy.
Of course, if that weren't bad enough, it's but a step to positively weight the CDOs of gay, lesbian, and transgendered "minorities" as well.
If true, then what this does is reveal that -- as much as 30 years later -- TEC revisionist apparatchiks recognize full well that many parishes do not seek female clergy, and in fact, prefer male clergy.
It's 30 years later. One would think that all of the cleansing going on and re-education camps and rhetoric would have convinced everyone by now. But that is not the case.
See -- this is not about "re-educating" -- it's about force. They will make you hire whom they wish, and make you pretend to like and approve of their decisions too.
Practically, what this means is that search committees need to understand that it is highly likely that if certain people come up as "the greatest fit" on their search criteria -- the people behind the curtain have merely engineered it as such. The best thing to do is to take each CDO, person by person, toss the ones that are obviously not a fit, and then proceed to call people who are sources of information in the remaining clergys' dioceses -- not their references, mind you but alternate sources. That -- and Google is a good friend.
For the unitiated, the Office of Transition Ministry maintains the rather bulky and clumsy database of clergy in the search process. A parish engaging in a search process puts in various criteria and voila -- the OTM spits out CDO profiles [which are like resumes] of various clergy that supposedly fit the criteria for which the the parish is looking.
However, some of my Cruel Friends Of Friends & Allies have run their own experiments and discovered that -- apparently -- the database positively weights female clergy over male clergy. In other words, if a male clergy person fits the criteria 100 percent, and a female clergy person fits it 95% she will sometimes be ranked "higher" in fit than the male.
There is this telling paragraph over on the OTM home page -- I've added the emphasis -- that seems to subtly bear out this theory of positive weighting of female clergy.
The Office for Transition Ministry is guided by the following resolution of the Board for Transition Ministry on non-discrimination and affirmative action: Resolved, that the Office for Transtion Ministry make use of every opportunity to lead the Church into providing at all levels opportunity for employment regardless of race, marital status, age or sex, and That to that end the OTM establish and make known to the Church a policy of not using such categories in searching its files for the purpose of deployment, except to further by positive action the deployment of women and minorities.
Of course, if that weren't bad enough, it's but a step to positively weight the CDOs of gay, lesbian, and transgendered "minorities" as well.
If true, then what this does is reveal that -- as much as 30 years later -- TEC revisionist apparatchiks recognize full well that many parishes do not seek female clergy, and in fact, prefer male clergy.
It's 30 years later. One would think that all of the cleansing going on and re-education camps and rhetoric would have convinced everyone by now. But that is not the case.
See -- this is not about "re-educating" -- it's about force. They will make you hire whom they wish, and make you pretend to like and approve of their decisions too.
Practically, what this means is that search committees need to understand that it is highly likely that if certain people come up as "the greatest fit" on their search criteria -- the people behind the curtain have merely engineered it as such. The best thing to do is to take each CDO, person by person, toss the ones that are obviously not a fit, and then proceed to call people who are sources of information in the remaining clergys' dioceses -- not their references, mind you but alternate sources. That -- and Google is a good friend.
No comments:
Post a Comment