Rev. Lewis B. Fisher, the former dean of the Universalist seminary at St. Lawrence University, memorably described religious liberalism’s flexibility:
“Universalists are often asked to tell where they stand. The only true answer . . . is that we do not stand at all, we move.”
For over 40 years, we had essentially stood still. The 7 Principles served as the covenant between our Congregations for most of my life, and for longer than my involvement in Liberal Religion.
The Principles had honestly become an obstruction to the idea that we do not stand–that ours is a living and evolving religion. I regularly hear UUs using them as an answer to what UUs believe or what it means to be a UU. They were never meant to be that. We’ve leaned on them as a constant; they became an anchor. They were never meant to become an identity.
Section C-15.1(c)(4) of the UUA Bylaws reads:
If no review and study process of Article II has occurred for a period of fifteen years, the Board of Trustees shall appoint a commission to review and study Article II and to recommend appropriate revisions, if any, thereto to the Board of Trustees.
Principles and Purposes (Article II) were last given a very modest revision in 1995 to add Earth Centered religions to our sources. The Principles had stood since 1985.
So, we finally changed Article II, partly, BECAUSE the Bylaws required us to justify not doing so, and we could not.
A commission was formed to recommend appropriate revisions, and they did. They worked hard to present something that speaks for what the UUA could be in the 21st century. It is not perfect. It is not complex enough to speak for all the things we might do, as a movement, in the next 15 or 30 years. It is not meant to be that. It is only a part of the governance of the UUA, outlining what Congregations agree to as members.
The Bylaws required that we review and study the covenant between congregations that forms the basis of the UUA and what the UUA exists to do. The bylaws barely impact individual congregations and have no authority over individual UUs except as they interact with the UUA or the General Assembly. You can be banned from UUA HQ and still be the President of your own congregation.
Article II is not meant to tell you what it means to be a UU. You get to have your feelings about that, but it was never meant to become a statement of faith or a shibboleth of membership. You can still embrace the Principles. Your congregation can still promote and affirm them. They have not been erased from history. We just changes the Bylaws, as required by the Bylaws. That does not have to mean anything to you, personally, nor change how you move through the world.
Article II needs to be allowed, even expected, to change. That is how we honor the spirit of our movement. We put off small changes for decades, and now it is time for a big change to signify that we have not stagnated. We’ve stood on these Principles for too long.
Comments by Facebook