Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Buddhist
CREED, COVENANT AND DENOMINATION: A Reflection on Contemporary Unitarian Universalist Polity and Spirituality

CREED, COVENANT AND DENOMINATION: A Reflection on Contemporary Unitarian Universalist Polity and Spirituality

Last updated on: November 1, 2011 at 3:07 pm by James Ford

CREED, COVENANT AND DENOMINATION: A Reflection on Contemporary Unitarian Universalist Polity and Spirituality 2011-11-01T15:07:25-07:00 James Ford

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

CREED, COVENANT AND DENOMINATION

A Reflection on Contemporary Unitarian Universalist Polity and Spirituality

A Paper Delivered at the Fraters of the Wayside Inn to Answer a Charge to Explore the Question, “What is Wrong with Congregationalism?”

25 January 2010

Frater James Ishmael Ford

Fraters of the Wayside Inn

Senior Minister

First Unitarian Church

Providence, Rhode Island

What’s wrong with congregationalism? The short answer is just about everything.

Of the twin errors of mistaking the forest for the trees or the tree for the forest, congregationalists almost always think the tree is the forest. This bias of the congregationalist keeps the focus local, which can be good, but in practice tends to mean the issues dealt with are parochial. A consequence of this myopia is an inward turning, not in the sense of hard introspection, but rather manifesting as a disinterest in what happens beyond the walls of the congregation. As a consequence higher aspirations, any larger vision tends to take a back seat to pleasing what are too often seen as consumers, stake holders, or only slightly better, constituents. I’m sure this attitude has a place in commerce; but if it becomes all we’re about within a religious enterprise, it dooms it.

There are other problems, as well. Within our tradition people have confused congregationalism with Unitarian Universalism itself. From this collapsed UU congregationalism people have come up at least with two different senses of what this means. For some congregationalism is the summum bonum, while others feel it is a tragic mistake, condemning us to being mere witnesses to the currents of spiritual history.

In fact I have considerable sympathy with the former view, but to get there requires a little, as some like to say, deconstruction. So, I will attempt over the next half hour or so to untangle congregationalism from liberal religion itself, take a look at the phenomenon of congregationalism, again acknowledge its shortcomings, and finally suggest how nonetheless it has a great deal to offer to us within our liberal spiritual enterprise.

Now we need to define some terms. First the project we share as Unitarian Universalists is an association of a tad more than a thousand congregations scattered around the country and a few outside that together maintain an office in Boston and sponsors an annual conference. Almost anyone not a UU would call this a denomination. However, as we know, the word “denomination” is a hot button for some of us.

Those who find that word problematic seem to think the word has something to do with authority, or central control, which they adamantly reject. “We are an Association not a Denomination,” they proclaim with great vigor and more than a little heat. Of course they are right in so far as we are an association of congregations, that is, we follow a congregational polity with a particularly weak center. However “denomination” when used to describe religious organizations, simply refers to a coherent or for us more or less coherent body with some common identifying characteristics. At least that’s what it means in Merriam Webster and other standard dictionaries, and in ordinary English usage.

I believe what this heat around the name reveals is a particularly strong adherence to the principals of congregationalism. Which is one of the three ways religious institutions in the West organize themselves. Actually one can extend these three models to almost all religious institutions. The Episcopal model provides the strongest center, the symbol of the community becoming a single person. A Presbyterian model maintains authority through a relatively smaller body of elders. And Congregationalism makes the congregation the center. Modern English speaking congregationalism dates from the sixteenth century and the theories of the theologian Robert Browne who thought he detected congregationalist principles in the Christian scriptures. And the continental Anabaptists evolved congregationalist structures independently during the Reformation. Those who like to study such things suggest currents of Christian monasticism and other pre-reformation institutions were precursors to this theory of religious organization. That should be enough historical background; this is not a history of the origins of congregationalism.

What is true is that we Unitarian Universalists are congregationalists. No doubt. That is the congregation is the legal center of our organizational structure. Pretty much period. The larger associations to which we as congregations belong, our districts and the Association centered at 25 Beacon Street in Boston, are strictly voluntary and any individual congregation may withdraw at any time, and even during the tenure of a congregation’s membership in the Association its financial support of central organizations remains strictly voluntary. Hence the lovely ribbons worn by representatives of congregations at the General Assembly proclaiming fair share, substantial improvement and the like. It’s as close to coercion as the center can exercise.

For organizations larger than single unaffiliated churches we are definitely at the purer end of the congregationalist spectrum. In addition to our roots, which come out of the English dissenting movement, congregationalist denominations in North America include the various Baptist conventions as well as the community church movement. The mega church phenomena as well as the emergent church movement have congregationalist elements, as well. And are well worth examining, although not here, today.

An example of a purer congregationalism than ours could be the National Association of Congregational Christian Churches, the rump that re-organized following the merger of their larger majority into what became the United Church of Christ. The “triple C” has only the most rudimentary of denominational structures, and barely even has a denominational headquarters. Although, and I think interestingly, even with them the right to ordain, which is rhetorically reserved exclusively to the congregation, by their covenant, calls for the assent of several other congregations through an established process for any given church to exercise that right.

The principal departure from a pure congregationalism within our Association is, as it is for the triple C, in how we deal with professional ministry. We move farther than they from a pure congregational control over ordination, or more precisely, over professional ministers. While our rhetoric asserts only the congregation has the right to ordain, we have an extra-congregational system for guiding ministerial formation and training, for authorizing ministers and for disciplining them and on occasion for dismissing them. Through the central offices a system for managing retirement funds as well as providing insurance, while over the years spotty in practice, has been held as a goal, and there these goals themselves conspire to bring the ministry if nothing else under a single unifying institution. And as long as the member congregations continue to support the aspiration of the center that they limit their calls to fellowshipped ministers, this formula will continue.

As limited as this departure from a purer or barer congregationalism as this may be, there are those for whom this is the thin edge of popery, or at least some feared central higher authority. It was once suggested to me that during much of the twentieth century those who cleaved most radically to as bare a congregationalism as possible were our Christians. It allowed them a caveat while still belonging to a denomination that had cut its moorings to the Christian tradition. Yes, we belong to a non-Christian association, but it is merely an association, of which our Christian congregation is a member. It looks to me today as we move into the deep waters of a reclaimed spirituality, as yet not clarified, many of our hard humanists are now saying much the same thing about the sanctity of a primitive congregationalism. So, calls for a bare congregationalism seems likely to be with us for a while longer.

At the same time there are those who find within the institution of congregationalism a form of, if you will, post-Christian spirituality. I have a dear friend who when he was in seminary presented me with the outline of a thesis he hoped later to develop into a book. The core of his thesis was based upon his feeling that congregationalism lay right at the heart of any Unitarian Universalist spirituality. There were all sorts of corollaries to this thesis, including how one could not in any genuine sense be a Unitarian Universalist unless one actually belonged to a UU congregation. He allowed for no, as one recent commentator has put it speaking to this attitude shared by many, “free range Unitarian Universalists.”

My friend expounded on this with considerable enthusiasm. While I thought he had some very interesting ideas and as I’ve already suggested in fact had some thoughts along similar lines, myself, I found the argument that one must embrace a congregational polity in order to be a Unitarian Universalist problematic. After all both English and Irish Unitarians organize along Presbyterian lines and continental Hungarian speaking Unitarians follow a modified Episcopal polity rather weakens the thesis. And as for North American Unitarian Universalism, there are those free range UUs. And within that challenging fact where pollsters can find well over half a million people who identify as UU, while our own internal statistics reveal no more than two hundred thousand or so who actually attend and belong to our churches. This suggests there is something wrong with claiming one must belong to an institution when more than half those who identify with the tradition do not belong to any congregation.

At the moment among the strongest tensions between us seem are those between those of us who advocate as strict a congregationalism as possible and those who see flaws in that congregationalism and wish for something else, more centralized which they perceive as more nimble, more able to act upon opportunities as they present. Those holding this later view see how pure congregationalism tends to an atomism, which is unhealthy for those in the congregations as well as for any aspiration for the movement to grow.

Frankly, I think both these perspectives are largely of limited interest, confined to the ruminations of the clerical class. The actual congregations are going in a somewhat different direction. At least so it seems to me. They are congregationalists, they accept modifications, particularly regarding the nurture of professional ministers. And, and, they are beginning to articulate a desire to grow.

Which, of course, begs any number of questions. Chief among them what are we that we think we should grow? And so another whipping boy for us is the word “movement” itself. As we are quite small and do not seem to be growing there is an easy challenge to that word. Of course it also means direction, and here I will use that word to mean us, we as a generality in motion, with an aspiration for growth hanging somewhere in the background.

But, really, why growth? Now within the circles in which I move I find often the argument for church growth has to do with budget constraints and hopes for doing more and better work. As a working parish minister, I understand those blandishments. But, as it says in the book of Proverbs, “Where there is no vision the people perish.” The truth is as a collective we’ve moved out of the Christian camp. So, as resistant as some of us are to the project, I suggest we need to look hard to see what our vision actually is. Particularly in light of the second half of that sentence in Proverbs, “…he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” If we’re not Christian, and we can say today, if we’re not humanists, what law is it that for us that brings us to joy and happiness? What law is it we hold that heals the human heart and which allows the transformation of human lives?

Are we simply an aggregate of congregations with nothing but history in common? Which is the assertion of some of us at the purer Congregationalist edge. Or, do we represent some evolution of spirituality that has distinctive characteristics, which can be described, engaged and proclaimed? It is my thesis we do represent something dynamic and new. And, further, I suggest this unifying principle can be found within the history of our congregationalist movement.

From very near the beginning our project rejected creedal assertions. We felt the spirit was free and so human beings should be free. And so rather than finding some formula of belief that people needed to adhere to in order to belong to one of our congregations, we instituted covenants. For us a covenant was originally a three-way contract, inspired by the founding myth of Judaism as a covenant between God and a people. For us the covenant became a contract made between people, between you and me, before God. In our times that word God has been examined and pushed challenged, rejected and embraced, but in some form remains critical for a covenant, rather than a bare contract. That word God at its deepest core, for the purposes of coming to a covenant, has been as an articulation of our highest, or if you prefer, our deepest aspirations, informed by intuitions of some larger of which we all are a part.

I suspect as an institutional expression this begins in the middle of the twentieth century more or less with the consolidation of the country’s two most liberal Christian denominations into the Unitarian Universalist Association. Well, already both denominations had largely separated from their Christian origins. But most important for the development of an emergent liberal theology, I believe, was that American Unitarianism was staunchly congregationalist while the Universalist Church of America while having presybeterian elements, was also essentially congregationalist. The resultant Association, of course, was, is our purer congregationalism.

Our congregationalism with its theological focus of covenant has allowed us to explore as individuals within our communities what it means to be human spiritually. While there are other factors involved as well, it is also part of how we were able to move beyond our Christian origins in ways not happening in the British Isles or on the European continent. Now, don’t get me wrong; we owe an enormous debt to the Christian tradition. We owe nearly as much to Judaism. And, at the same time something has emerged that allows for a continuing Christian or Jewish expression, but in general is not either. And I believe it is found within congregational covenant. The first flowering out of this covenant of presence in the face of our deepest intuitions was as humanism, a naturalistic spirituality that embraced the human mind and its possibilities as central to the enterprise. And now after nearly a hundred years another shift has taken place.

The most notable expressions of this has been how feminism and earth-centered perspectives have infused our congregations, and how many people who identify in some manner with Buddhism have come to see themselves, in my case, ourselves, as Unitarian Universalists. A dialogue has taken place, is taking place, where no part of the past has been lost, I believe, but something new and larger has emerged. There has emerged out of this what I identify as a rational mysticism, a grounded way of the heart. Taken together, I call it the new Universalism. And I believe this has all been able to happen because of our congregationalism and congregationalism’s way of covenant.

My hope for our association is that we will come to consciously acknowledge the movement of the heart that has birthed this new universalism, a perspective that indeed can heal the individual heart and which calls us to engagement within the world. This new universalism, nurtured within our congregationalism has been articulated within our call to hold up the preciousness of the individual, while at the same time acknowledging how the individual exists only within a net or web of relationships. All this, I believe, brought together through a free and at the same time responsible engagement with the quest for deepest insight.

Where next, who knows? I suspect an ever-deeper dialogue with Buddhism, as well as the progressive perspectives in Hinduism and Taoism. I think of all religious traditions we’ll probably most closely follow the currents of contemporary psychology as it investigates the shape of the human mind. I suspect this will eventually manifest in a reformulation, as we’re already seeing, of traditional Western religious language. The next steps, again as we’re already beginning to see, will include the rise of conscious spiritual disciplines, either adapted from other traditions such as Insight and Zen or birthed within our own communities such as the Small Group Ministry model.

And with this, I believe, the next step is evangelism, sharing our good news of this new Universalism with a hurt and longing world.

Where this will end up, who knows?

But I feel a great sense of hope.

And this has all evolved directly, I believe, out of our congregational way.

Thank you.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

January 24, 2010

WHAT DOES SEX HAVE TO DO WITH IT? A Consideration of Human Sexuality and the Spiritual Life

Next Post

January 26, 2010 From the Council of Trent to the Reformation Polka

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category A Christmas Carol Abolitionist African-American Ahmadiyya Alan Watts Aldous Huxley Allen Ginsberg Amedkar Jayanti American politics American Zen Anaheim Zen Sangha Anglican Annie Besant April Fool Armageddon Art and Religion artificial intellegence Atheist Awakening B R Ambedkar Barlaam & Josaphat Beatnik Between Bhagavad Gita Bible biography birthday bodhisattva Bodhisattva Precepts Book burning Book of Common Prayer Book of Mormon Brahmo Samaj Buddha Buddhism Buddhist Buddhist Lord's Prayer Butterflies Calendars cartoons cat ChatGPT Chicken Tortilla Soup choices Christian atheism Christian mysticism Christian origins Christian Science Christian Zen Christianity Christianity and Buddhism christmas Christmas Truce Christopher Isherwood Church of Later Day Saints Cinco de Mayo circus covenant critical thinking culture D. T. Suzuki Dalit Buddhism Daniel Defoe Desert Fathers and Mothers dharma talk Dogen Donald Trump Dongshan's Five Ranks Dorothy Day dream Duty Easter ecology Edwin Arnold emptiness Empty Moon Zen Network Episcopal Church Eternal Now Ethics evolution existentialism Faith fantasy Fathers Day film film review fire Five Ranks Folk music food Form and emptiness Four Seals Francis of Assisi Francis Xavier Free thinker friendship George MacDonald Gerald Heard Glenn Taylor Webb God Good Friday Gospel of Gospel of Mark Gospel of Thomas grace Graduate Theological Unioin Graduate Theological Union Guanyin H R Blyth Hakuin Ekaku Hanamatsuri Hanukkah Harada Yasutani Zen Heart Sutra Henry David Thoreau Hermann Hesse Hinduism History and Religion history of religion Holy Spirit home Hospitality Icon Ides of March Isaac Newton Islam Islamic mysticism Jack Kerouac James Luther Adams Jiddu Krishnamurti Joan of Arc Johannes Gutenberg John Donne joke Judaism justice karma kensho King James Bible koan Koun Yamada Kyoto School Lewis Carrol Liberal Christianity Liberal Religion Life Plan Community Liminal literature Literature and Religion Liturgy Lord's Prayer Love Mahatma Gandhi Mahayana Martin Luther King Jr Mary Baker Eddy Mary Magdelene Mary Oliver Mayflower Compact Meditation memories memory metaphor money money and religioin Mormons Mother's Day movie review mysticism mythic Neighborhood Unitarian Universalist Church New Thought Nichiren Buddhism Nonduality not knowing Omar Khayyam Pacific School of Religion pagan Palm Sunday Passover peace Pentecost perennialism Phantastes Philip Kapleau philosophy Pilgrimage poetry Poetry and Religion politics Prayer Precepts Printing Press prophecy prophetic spirituality psychology Pure Land Queer religion queering religion Quietism Ram Mohan Roy rebirth recipe Relationships and religion religion religion and history Religious syncretism Resistance Retirement Retreat review Rissho Kosei Kai Ritual Robert Aitken Roshi Robert Ingersoll Rohatsu Romani religion Rosie the Riveter saints samadhi SanboZen Sangha Satyagraha science science and reigion science and religion science fiction seminary sermon Sesshin Sex and Religion Shinran Sikh Sikh tradition silence Social Justice Socially Engaged Buddhism Society and religion Soto Zen soul spiritual community spiritual practice Spirituality Sufism Suicide superstition Taoism Television Teresa of Avila Thanksgiving theological schools Theosophy Thomas Merton Time Transcendentalism Transcendentalist Trinitarian Trinity Uncategorized unitarian Unitarian Christianity Unitarian Universalist Universalism Vajrayana Vedanta Walking war Willa Cather William Ellery Channing wisdom women and religion women in religion World Teacher Writing zazen Zen Zen Center Zen inspired retriement zen meditation Zen Precepts Zen women

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was Saul's son?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jonathan David Samuel Absalom