FAITH LIKE A RIVER
A Tapestry of Faith Program for Adults
WORKSHOP 8: GENTLY DOWN THE STREAM – POLITY
2011
BY JACKIE CLEMENT ALISON CORNISH
© Copyright 2011 Unitarian Universalist Association.
Published to the Web on 9/29/2014 10:59:30 PM PST.
This program and additional resources are available on the UUA.org web site at
www.uua.org/religiouseducation/curricula/tapestryfaith.
WORKSHOP OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION
As connected as we are—to friends, to family, to each other—we often feel ultimately on our own as we make our way through life, and that can be a frightening prospect. We can overcome this fear only by reaching out to one another, and in our shared courage, we will learn. — Phoebe Eng, Asian American author
This workshop explores the history of how Unitarians and Universalists have gathered and organized into religious communities. It examines differences between the Unitarian and Universalist polity traditions and identifies sources that have influenced our current governance practices. Participants view our polity—the organization, association, membership, and leadership of our congregations, individually and as an association—as an important part of our liberal religious heritage. In what ways has this heritage served us well? How has it has proved challenging or limiting? Participants identify aspects of our heritage of congregational polity that can help us meet the demands of our own time.
Before leading this workshop, review the Accessibility Guidelines for Workshop Presenters in the program Introduction. Make preparations so you can accommodate any individual who may be in the group.
GOALS
This workshop will:
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Participants will:
WORKSHOP-AT-A-GLANCE
Activity | Minutes |
Welcoming and Entering | 0 |
Opening | 5 |
Activity 1: What Is Polity? | 25 |
Activity 2: Cambridge Platform | 20 |
Activity 3: The Historical Parade of Membership | 35 |
Activity 4: Community of Congregations | 20 |
Faith in Action: Lifting Up Covenantal Relationships | |
Closing | 5 |
Alternate Activity 1: Evolutions of Ordained Ministry | 25 |
Alternate Activity 2: Debating Membership | 30 |
SPIRITUAL PREPARATION
Consider what being part of a Unitarian Universalist congregation means to you. If your congregation has a covenant, you may want to read it and consider its words.
Reflect on these questions:
You may wish to ask participants to engage in this same spiritual practice so that they, too, arrive at the workshop centered and ready to engage with the material and the group.
WORKSHOP PLAN
WELCOMING AND ENTERING
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Welcome everyone to the workshop as they enter. Ask them to sign in, make (or pick up) name tags, and pick up the schedule and time line handouts from the welcome table. Point out the posted agenda for this workshop.
Including All Participants
Write the agenda in large, clear lettering and post it where it will be easily visible to all participants. Provide name tags large enough and markers bold enough so names will be easily visible.
OPENING (5 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Light the chalice with these words from the Reverend Libbie Stoddard, minister emeria of the First Universalist Society of Central Square, NY:
Journeys begin in many ways:
... ... ... a step,
... ... ... ... ... an idea,
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .a goal,
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..a dream,
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... a longing.
How we travel may matter more
than how far we travel;
The struggle may matter more
than what we win.
This room, this building, this fellowship,
is both a starting place for our journeys,
and a stopping place along the way.
Draw nourishment from the presence of each one another;
share your many and varied maps;
journey on, sustained and enriched by the spirit
and wisdom and love to be found here.
ACTIVITY 1: WHAT IS POLITY? (25 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Invite participants to free associate with the word "polity." The point is not so much to define polity, as to evoke associations with the term. You may need to prompt with terms such as "governance," "leadership," "association," and "authority." Record contributions on newsprint.
Allow four minutes for brainstorming. Then, see if the collection of words offered by participants suggest any tensions that are inherent in Unitarian Universalist congregational polity. For example, were both freedom and structure named? Rights and responsibilities? Draw double-pointed arrows to mark any tensions, or other connections, you find among the words on the newsprint.
Using Leader Resource 1, share the definitions of terms and present background information about congregational polity.
Then direct the group's attention to the words they brainstormed about "polity." Ask:
ACTIVITY 2: CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM (20 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Read aloud or present the story "The Cambridge Platform."
Distribute the handout. Mention that the preamble you offered in the story was the original 1648 wording, but for clarity and ease of reading the excerpts on the handout are provided from an 1850 "translation."
Consider each excerpt in turn, dividing the time to allow consideration of all sections. Invite participants to discuss how the agreements defined in 1648 compare to your congregation's contemporary practices.
ACTIVITY 3: THE HISTORICAL PARADE OF MEMBERSHIP (35 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
In joining a liberal church or religious society one joins both an organization and a tradition. The organization depends on the loyalty and participation of its members. The tradition includes faiths, guidelines, and customs answering to basic human needs—a consensus expressed in words from time to time but not imposed on anyone as a test for membership. — from Vincent Silliman, Arthur Foote, and Christopher Gist Raible, "A Selection of Services for Special Occasions," Unitarian Universalist Ministers Association, 1981
Description of Activity
Share the contents of Leader Resource 2, The Historical Parade of Membership.
Invite participants to form three groups. Give one group copies of your congregation's bylaws concerning membership, another group copies of materials from your membership committee, and the third group words used to welcome new members to your congregation. Note: If you do not have materials from the membership committee or the minister, have all the groups focus on the bylaws.
Give groups five minutes to review the distributed materials.
Now call everyone's attention to the quotation you have posted. Invite each group to use the congregational materials they have been reviewing and the information you shared from Leader Resource 2, The Historical Parade of Membership, to identify ways people joining your congregation might sense they are joining "an organization" and ways might they understand that they are joining "a tradition." Allow groups to work together for ten minutes.
Invite small groups to report their findings to the larger group.
Ask, "What is missing from your congregation's membership requirements and protocols?"
ACTIVITY 4: COMMUNITY OF CONGREGATIONS (20 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Present the information from Leader Resource 3, A Community of Congregations by reading it aloud or paraphrasing. Invite participants to brainstorm on newsprint the ways your congregation and its members are connected to other Unitarian Universalists. Include both formal and informal relationships. Mention, if participants do not, relationships with:
Denominational organizations such as the UUA; your District; your region; UU congregations in your local area; another UU or Unitarian congregation, such as through the Unitarian Universalist Partner Church Council (at www.uupcc.org/); other Unitarian Universalists groups that are not congregations; and informal connections your congregation may have with other societies.
If participants have trouble thinking of groups, mention a few you have culled from the UUA website.
When brainstorming is complete, draw a representation of your congregation on a new piece of newsprint. Invite participants to come forward one at a time and add a representation of one of your congregation's connections or relationships to the drawing. To help the activity get started, prompt with questions such as:
Discuss the benefits of these relationships for your congregation.
CLOSING (5 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Distribute Taking It Home. Announce the date, time, and place of the next workshop and any other "housekeeping" information. Request or remind volunteers if you want participants to read material aloud or perform other roles at the next meeting.
Invite participants to gather around the chalice. Sing together Hymn 113, "Where Is Our Holy Church." Extinguish the chalice.
FAITH IN ACTION: LIFTING UP COVENANTAL RELATIONSHIPS
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Together, examine the latest issue of Interconnections. Note that most articles lift up new Association-wide initiatives and/or congregational best practices, and that the audience includes congregations of all sizes.
Plan a field trip to another Unitarian Universalist congregation to learn more about one of their committees, task forces, groups, or initiatives. When you visit, identify one or more "best practices" to share with your own congregation.
Variation
Work with your minister and governing body to design an annual renewal of covenant for the leadership and the congregation, or an annual recognition of volunteers.
LEADER REFLECTION AND PLANNING
After the workshop, co-leaders should talk together to evaluate this workshop and plan future workshops. Use these questions to guide your shared reflection and planning:
TAKING IT HOME
As connected as we are—to friends, to family, to each other—we often feel ultimately on our own as we make our way through life, and that can be a frightening prospect. We can overcome this fear only by reaching out to one another, and in our shared courage, we will learn. — Phoebe Eng, Asian American author
Conrad Wright writes, in Congregational Polity: A Historical Survey of Unitarian and Universalist Practice, that within the Unitarian Universalist tradition of congregational polity, "it is left to the individual to decide whether he or she belongs within the covenant of a particular local religious community, and power is not assigned to ecclesiastical authority to decide whether the applicant is to be allowed in."
If you are already a member of the congregation, use Handout 2, Signs of Membership — A Self-Reflective Exercise to reflect on your decision to become a member. How would you have answered these questions when you first decided to become a member? Do any of the questions offer a continuing challenge for you?
If you are not a member of the congregation, use Handout 2, Signs of Membership — A Self-Reflective Exercise as an opportunity for discernment if and when you do consider becoming a member.
ALTERNATE ACTIVITY 1: EVOLUTIONS OF ORDAINED MINISTRY (25 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Present the contents of the Leader Resource 4, Evolutions of Ordained Ministry in your own words or by reading it aloud. Distribute copies of your congregation's bylaws, ministerial contract or ministerial covenant. Invite participants to discuss what that document tells you about the relationship of minister and congregation, and any procedures related to professional ministry such as search, settlement or installation.
ALTERNATE ACTIVITY 2: DEBATING MEMBERSHIP (30 MINUTES)
Materials for Activity
Preparation for Activity
Description of Activity
Read aloud or present the contents of Leader Resource 2, The Historical Parade of Membership. If you paraphrase, read aloud the section about the 1963 General Assembly.
Invite the participants to form two groups. To one group, assign the designation "pro," and to the other, "con." Print out and prepare Leader Resource 5, Membership Debate Scenarios, and give the "pro" group the first half labeled PRO and the "con" group the other half labeled CON.
Invite each group to spend the next 15 minutes preparing their side of the debate. After 15 minutes, invite a representative from each group to present their case. Once each side has been heard, open the conversation to the whole group for discussion and debate.
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
STORY: THE CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM
In 1637, the settlers in what was to become the town of Dedham, Massachusetts, wanted to start a church. The problem was, the roughly 30 families didn't know each other, and, therefore, didn't know what sort of church to begin. As newcomers to the American wilderness, they had had time only to set up enough government to apportion land, build and equip homes, and begin the work of farming. Religiously, they were strangers. However, the exigencies of survival and the religious call of their hearts imposed the need for them to come together.
To that end, they began a yearlong series of cottage meetings, each organized around discussion of a particular question. We might think that in order to know each other's religious views and needs these New England ancestors might choose topics like salvation, damnation, predestination or morality. But they did not. What they mostly discussed were matters of civil organization, for in their understanding, the church would reflect the ethic of the larger society, and what they longed for was sincere religious association based in love and founded in freedom.
In the England they had left behind, these meetings would have been illegal. The bishops of the English churches had begun to crack down on the ministers, scholars, and lay people who looked at the lessons of the Bible stories in a political and social light. Discontent grew, not with church theology so much as with the ecclesiastical structure that dictated every facet of local church affairs. The idea of a free church took shape among the people—a church whose individual congregations were controlled by no outside authority.
This was the sort of church the small group in Dedham, Massachusetts, decided to build. It was a church much like its neighbors, and much like the other churches that would be built in New England in the coming decades, a radically lay-led church gathered by mutual consent rather than by mutual belief, founded in covenant rather than creed, and governed by the congregation itself.
Make no mistake, this group did not hold widely varying theological beliefs that would have made it unable to exist as a creedal church, but their belief that churches should be self-governing organizations gathered in the spirit of mutual love was paramount. This basis for gathering and governing a church by congregational determination was described ten years after the founding of the Dedham church in a document known commonly as the Cambridge Platform (or, more formally, as A Platform of Church Discipline Gathered Out of the Word of God and Agreed Upon by the Elders and Messengers of the Churches Assembled in the Synod at Cambridge in New England).
The Cambridge Platform defined congregational polity. Based in the Calvinist theology of the Puritans, it set out a structure for churches founded on New Testament descriptions of early churches. It defined matters of church officers, ministry, membership, and cooperation between churches. Although changes in practice were being made as early as the second generation, the Cambridge Platform remains a defining document for the denominations, including Unitarian Universalism, that continue to practice congregational polity. Of the 65 congregations that voted to ratify the Platform in 1648, 21 are members of the Unitarian Universalist Association today.
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
HANDOUT 1: SUMMARY OF AGREEMENTS FROM THE CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM, 1648
Here are some of the agreements made by the signers of the Cambridge Platform (or, more formally, as A Platform of Church Discipline Gathered Out of the Word of God and Agreed Upon by the Elders and Messengers of the Churches Assembled in the Synod at Cambridge in New England):
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
HANDOUT 2: SIGNS OF MEMBERSHIP — A SELF-REFLECTIVE EXERCISE
Conrad Wright writes, in Congregational Polity: A Historical Survey of Unitarian and Universalist Practice, that in the Unitarian Universalist tradition of congregational polity, "it is left to the individual to decide whether he or she belongs within the covenant of a particular local religious community, and power is not assigned to ecclesiastical authority to decide whether the applicant is to be allowed in." (p. 206).
What questions might one use for discerning whether or not one is prepared to join a Unitarian Universalist congregation? Here are some suggestions:
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
LEADER RESOURCE 1: WHAT IS POLITY?
Definitions from Donald K. McKim, Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996).
DEFINITIONS
Polity (from Greek, politeia, and Latin, politia, "administration of a commonwealth), a form of church government adopted by an ecclesiastical body.
Congregational a form of church government in which governing authority is with the local congregation, which is autonomous and independent.
Ecclesiastical (from Greek, ekklesia "assembly called out," "church"), relating to the clergy, church organizations, administration, or governance. Contrasted with "secular."
WHAT DO WE MEAN BY POLITY?
Ask a group of Unitarian Universalists what "polity" is and you are likely to get a wide range of responses. Perhaps someone may offer a definition, such as "a form of church governance." There might also be quizzical looks, or even a diatribe about bureaucracies. Those who know little about what polity is may understand more about how polity is expressed in our congregational and denominational life. Perhaps the more salient questions about polity are "When do we use it?" (answer: constantly) and "What does it do?" (answer: define who we are). In the words of the Commission on Appraisal, "... every time we call a new minister, or vote on a resolution of ethical witness, or give money to denominational bodies, or receive financial or expert assistance from a denominational body, or deliberate our ministry to the larger community, or question standards and practices that are commonly honored, we touch on issues of congregational polity."
"Polity" is a general term for the form of church organization adopted by a religious tradition. Unitarian Universalists operate under a particular form of polity called "congregational polity," defined as "the rights and responsibilities of each properly organized congregation to make its own decisions about its own affairs without recourse to any higher human authority." Congregational polity is encoded in the bylaws of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, Section 3-1.2:
Nothing in these Bylaws shall be construed as infringing upon the congregational polity or internal self-government of member societies, including the exclusive right to each society to call and ordain its own minister or ministers, and to control its own property and funds...
Put more simply, polity can be understood as the way we are, as Unitarian Universalists, and why we are that way. Or, in the words of Paul Harrison, "polity is faith put into practice."
Our current framework of polity is a descendent of a rich and robust heritage, starting with the Cambridge Platform of 1648, and evolving through the lived experiences of all who, in covenantal gathering and association, have called themselves Unitarian, Universalist, or Unitarian Universalist. The origins of congregational polity lie in the Reformation, with the first intimations that the power for creating ordered communities of faith lay with the people, not with a hierarchy of clerics. These first stirrings are reflected in the earliest gathered communities of Massachusetts, such as the Dedham church (see Activity 2) and the First Universalist Church of Gloucester (see Activity 4). So foundational is congregational polity to our faith tradition that the Commission on Appraisal has called it "our unwritten constitution."
Soon after the merger of the American Unitarian Association and the Universalist Church of America in 1961, the new Unitarian Universalist Association published a Commission report, "The Free Church in a Changing World." The authors articulated the key principles of our distinctively democratic form of church government which are foundational for congregational polity:
From the beginning, and throughout our denominations' histories, our commitment to congregational polity has brought with it inherent tensions. We come by this naturally from what Earl Holt refers to as a polity that values "reason and persuasion over authoritarianism and legalism." How much freedom, and how much discipline? What about rights versus rules? When does the democratic process serve, and when does it hinder? Who has authority? What about power? Autonomous congregations, or a community of congregations?
Peter Raible wrote these words in his introduction to a course of study of Unitarian Universalist polity:
Polity is not theology, but belief issues affect church organization. Polity is not history, but how we govern our churches grows out of an historical context. Polity is not "how to do ministry," but clerics cannot work effectively without understanding the strictures of governance under which they labor.
Polity—it's everywhere.
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
LEADER RESOURCE 2: THE HISTORICAL PARADE OF MEMBERSHIP
The notion that it is the right of every congregation to determine its own qualifications for membership is basic to congregational polity. Hand-in-hand with this notion is the understanding of our faith communities captured by the phrase "we unite" rather than "we believe." Our gathered communities are defined by a visible covenant, not by allegiance to a creed. From the beginning, our spiritual and historical ancestors have wrestled with this question: "without without creeds or confessions, what are the standards of acceptance to membership?" Though this question is settled ultimately by each individual congregation, our tradition'sno congregations in our tradition do not stands in isolation. They are associated both formally and informally with one another, and so questions of membership — who constitutes the congregation — are a shared concern.
The Cambridge Platform of 1648 (see Activity 2) clearly articulated that gathered churches were to be constituted of "Saints by Calling." For the Puritans, this term meant those who were predestined, or elected, for salvation. Though it was impossible to be sure exactly who those would be, the criteria, or "marks," that the community sought in individuals were:
1. knowledge of the principles of the Gospel;
2. repentance from sin, and an attempt to lead a blameless life; and
3. experience of having been visited by the Holy Spirit.
In 1662, a synod of churches responded to a dwindling number of people who testified to a conversation experience, adopted a "Half-Way Covenant" permitting the baptism of the children of the children of the Saints, with the hope that they would, one day, receive personal conversion. Later in the 17th century, individual churches began to change their practices, opening up baptism and communion to all.
In the mid-18th century, former notions of membership were challenged by the waves of the Great Awakening that swept across the northeastern Northeastern states. On the one hand, the heightened emotionalism of the religious revival led to conversions, and thus growth in numbers for congregations eager for new, enthusiastic members. On the other hand, many clergy and lay leaders alike distrusted highly emotional conversion experiences, and argued for additional criteria for membership beyond a conversion experience.
The late18th century brought more sectarianism to the young Republic. People began to affiliate with a faith community based on theological outlook or other personal factors. The legal structure which ended governmental support for certain established churches also changed the nature of membership. When the churches were no longer supported by publicly collected taxes, congregational operations had to be funded from the voluntary contributions of their members. By the mid-nineteenth 19th century, the answer to the question "Who constitutes the church?" was at least partly answered by the method by which the church would be supported— voluntary subscription, or pews that would be rented, sold, or taxed. James Freeman Clarke of Boston's Church of the Disciples (gathered in 1841), disagreed with defining membership in part by financial support of the institution. He believed that the church was made up of "all who expressed a desire to unite for religious purposes," regardless of ability to help finance the church's operation.
As the 19th century brought more associational activity to both Unitarians and Universalists, there was a clear concern as to how larger organizational efforts would affect local churches and their members. Both Unitarians and Universalists denominational bodies debated what beliefs they held in common and whether congregations ought be held to particular broad statements of faith. The Universalists adopted the 1803 Winchester profession, which had a "liberty clause" so that churches could develop their own statements of faith.
In 1900, the newly elected president of the American Unitarian Association (AUA), Samuel Eliot, established a committee to collect information on church practices regarding criteria for membership. Many churches reported they had adopted a formal covenant, but none had included in their convenant a creedal restriction on membership. Soon afterward, the AUA published its Handbook for Unitarian Congregational Churches. The Handbook reaffirmed that there must be no theological test or confession of faith required for membership, yet continued, "it may wisely be provided that a proper committee first assure itself of the moral probity and serious intention of all persons applying for membership before they are received into full enrollment." The Handbook did not articulate, however, what exactly what would constitute "moral probity and serious intention," nor how or by whom exactly it was to be detected.
Before the consolidation of the AUA and the Universalist Church of America (UCA) as the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA), several committees researched and published recommendations for the anticipated association. A commission on The Church and Its Leadership articulated the rights to be reserved for the local church ; the first of which these was the right of the each church to admit members in accordance with its own definition of qualifications. When the new UUA came to adopt a Constitution constitution and bylaws, this understanding of congregational polity was affirmed in Article II, Section 3, as "the independence and autonomy of local churches, fellowships and associate members;" and further assured "nothing in this Constitution or Bylaws of the Association shall be deemed to infringe upon the congregational polity of churches and fellowships."
Though the new bylaws were a clear statement of the UUA's intentions, and were deeply rooted in historical congregational polity, an event early in the Association's young life presented a challenge to the notion that each congregation defines its own criteria for membership. At the 1963 General Assembly in Chicago, a constitutional amendment was debated that would require congregations to demonstrate that they had a policy of "open membership" in order to qualify for voting rights in the UUA General Assembly. Historian Conrad Wright describes what happened:
The proposal was introduced in 1962 by a number of ministers from churches in the South, who felt that an explicit avowal of nondiscrimination inserted in the Constitution of the continental association would support them in their efforts to eliminate (racial) segregation locally. It provided that a church would be entitled to be represented by delegates only if in the preceding fiscal year it had "maintained a policy of admitting persons to membership without discrimination on account of race, color, or national origin."
The proposal came up for decision in 1963 at the meeting in Chicago. Meanwhile, a considerable number of ministers and laypersons, who were wholly in sympathy with the intent of the amendment, questioned whether this particular proposal was the best way to achieve the intended goal. The Association had never been given the right to set doctrinal standards for member churches, and neither the Board of Trustees nor the General Assembly had been given the power to discipline or expel churches for doctrinal irregularity, or to intrude on the internal self-government of autonomous churches. The question was central to an understanding of the congregational way of the churches.
Although the proposal won the majority of votes, it did not receive the necessary two-thirds of delegates to become a Constitutional constitutional amendment. In 1967, another amendment was proposed and passed. The successful amendment declared the responsibility of both Association and churches "to promote the full participation of persons, without regard to race, color, sex, or national origin," but did not attach this responsibility to an individual congregation's right to vote at General Assembly.
In congregational polity, the right to establish criteria for membership rests firmly with the local congregation. Yet our history raises two intriguing questions to consider: What is — or should be — the criteria for membership in a Unitarian Universalist congregation? And, should the UUA consider legislative proposals that would require congregations to demonstrate certain commitments?
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
LEADER RESOURCE 3: A COMMUNITY OF CONGREGATIONS
While freedom and independence were among the first concerns of those who founded the first Universalist churches and the precursors to the Unitarian churches, so, too, was association. The ideas of freedom and order have been held in tension throughout our history, often reflecting the push-pull to centralize and then again decentralize denominational authority.
Over the centuries, there have been a number of ways Unitarian and Universalist churches have joined together in association. Some ways have been formal, such as national conventions, and some have been informal, such as local ministers' gatherings. Some ways have been ecclesiastical, such as to settle church disputes or to fellowship ministers. Other ways have been administrative, such as to print religious tracts or to raise funds for missionary work.
The Cambridge Platform, the foundational document of the New England Standing Order Churches that would later form the core of Unitarianism in the nineteenth century, called for congregations to cooperate and support one another. No structure was defined for this cooperation, but, early on, ministers' councils gathered to discuss the issues of the day. Over time these ecclesiastical councils took on the work of settling local disputes and assuring fit candidates for the ministry.
In the mid-eighteenth century, the itinerant preachers of the Great Awakening presented a new kind of challenge to the established churches. When ministers not associated with a single, fixed church came to town and preached their version of religion to all who came to hear, local societies could no longer count on orthodoxy of belief among the townspeople or impose discipline. Improved travel presented a challenge to the authority of locally based ecclesiastical councils, as it became possible in times of dispute for a minister or church to gather a council from the societies most likely to support their position. By early in the nineteenth century tensions were rising between liberal and conservative factions in the Standing Order churches. Between 1825 and 1835, some established churches split along Unitarian and Trinitarian lines. The newly emerging Unitarian churches were autonomous. The American Unitarian Association (AUA), headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, was founded in 1825 as a voluntary association of individuals, not congregations. Its goal was simply to provide printed tracts and missionary support to advance the young Unitarian movement. In 1865, at the urging of Henry Whitney Bellows, the National Conference was started as the first Unitarian ecclesiastical body on a national level. The following year, the National Conference organized fourteen districts (known as local conferences), though each local group had its own focus, ranging from discussion to mission. In 1911, the National Conference was renamed the General Conference, and in 1925 was rolled into the AUA, bringing administrative and ecclesiastical functions together in one body.
Like the Unitarians, the Universalists followed a system of congregational polity from the very beginning. The first Universalist church, in Gloucester, Massachusetts, was gathered by covenant. One of their number, John Murray, called to be the minister.
Although the Universalist churches had no founding document like the Cambridge Platform calling them into association with each other, they met on ecclesiastical matters from the earliest days. In 1785, just six years after the Gloucester church was founded, the Universalist churches met at a convention in Oxford, Massachusetts. In 1790, seventeen Universalists representing eight societies met as the Philadelphia Convention and drew up articles of faith and an organizational plan. Similar conventions would be held in the following decades.
The New England Convention of Universalists was the strongest of the several geographically-defined associations, and in 1803 Convention delegates from 35 societies assumed the right to define a statement of belief for all Universalists in the Winchester Profession. The Convention also formalized the plan of church government created at the Philadelphia Convention into a Plan of General Association that called for annual meetings, regular representation by local churches, and the credentialing and discipline of ministers.
Beginning in 1825, state conventions were organized and delegates were chosen from informal local associations. The states in turn sent delegates to the larger area conventions. In 1833, the New England Convention became the General Convention of Universalists in the United States, the single national organization. However, the General Convention suffered from unequal representation and low attendance, and there were calls for increased centralization. In 1865, the Convention instituted its first professional administrative positions to bring stronger leadership to the national level, though in reality the state conventions retained a good deal of power.
The nineteenth century was a time ripe for cooperation not only among congregations, but also in affinity groups that shared common interests or goals. Missionary societies, associations of women, religious educators, young people, and publishing houses arose to unite Unitarians and Universalists alike (for more information see Workshops 11 and 16).
Early in the twentieth century, Universalists began to build a central organization for bureaucratic functions. In 1919 the Universalist General Convention opened its first national headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts, and ecclesiastical and administrative functions were combined in the General Convention. In 1938 the Convention became the Universalist Church of America (UCA).
The consolidation of the AUA and UCA in 1961 retained many of the associational aspects of both denominations. Like both denominations, the new structure had three tiers: autonomous congregations, geographically- based districts, and the national organization providing administrative and ecclesiastical functions. The General Assembly, which transacts the business of the association, continues to be made up of delegates from local congregations. While structure and procedure differ in many ways from what came before, the essential points of congregational polity remain as a heritage from both Universalist and Unitarian denominations.
Unitarian Universalists, thus, continue to live with the natural tension between independence and association, freedom and order. We continue to embody the words of the Cambridge Platform of 1648 that "although churches be distinct, and therefore may not be confounded one with another, and equal, and therefore have not dominion one over another; yet all the churches ought to preserve church communion one with another."
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
LEADER RESOURCE 4: EVOLUTIONS OF ORDAINED MINISTRY
Unitarian
In the list of men who subscribed to the 1637 covenant of community of Dedham, Massachusetts appear the names John Allin and John Hunting. In 1639, the people of Dedham followed the convention of congregation polity that would later be recorded in the Cambridge Platform to elect from their number a minister and a ruling elder. John Allin was chosen to the minister; John Hunting to be the ruling elder.
On April 24, 1639, a simple ceremony formalized the appointments. Allin and two lay members of the congregation ordained John Hunting as elder by a laying on of hands, and Hunting and two members ordained Allin as minister by the same method. Allin's sermon was based on I Corinthians 3:9, "For we are laborers together with God." Although we do not have the text of that sermon, we can surmise from this founding text that its tone was about the work that the congregation would do together. Allin and Hunting were elected by the people, but not separate from the people. While ministers and members from neighboring churches were invited to the ceremony, their only role was to express their "love and approbation of the proceedings of the church by giving to the officers chosen the right hand of fellowship." The Dedham church was welcomed into community of churches; the focus was on the work of the congregation.
This egalitarian view of ministry was to change as, by the end of the century, ministry became a profession. A look at the ordination of Ebenezer Parkman in Westborough, Massachusetts on October 28, 1724 highlights some of the changes. At Parkman's ordination service, the prayers, sermon and right hand of fellowship were all offered by local ministers who welcomed Parkman into a professional group rather than welcoming Westborough into a community of churches. Parkman described the occasion as his "Solemn Separation to the Work of the Gospel Ministry." The focus became the relationship of minister to vocation, not the relationship of minister to congregation.
Where once the lay members of a congregation recognized their choice of religious leader with ordination, ordination now involved other members of the clergy, and emphasized a "Solemn Separation of (a) person to the Work of the Sacred Ministry." Where once a church might operate for many months until a minister was found, now churches locked their doors when they lacked a minister to fill the pulpit. No longer did ministers serve the congregation that ordained them until retirement. Instead, a minister might serve several parishes throughout a career.
In the early seventeenth century, as the Standing Order churches took root, it was the province of societies to select and ordain their own ministers. By the dawn of the eighteenth century, it was the province of local ecclesiastical councils to recommend candidates for the ministry and to become involved in matters of discipline. By the turn of the next century things would shift yet again. As the Unitarian Controversy broke down networks of cooperation, especially among ministers, the ecclesiastical councils waned in their authority. It was not until the founding of the National Conference in 1865 that the Unitarians would have a national ecclesiastical body. Fellowshipping of ministers remained a rather haphazard affair until a Committee on Fellowship was established in 1878.
Throughout the nineteenth century, the definition of ordained ministry gradually widened beyond parish boundaries to include those categories of ministry that we would today call community ministry. Professors in theological schools and ministers working in social services came to be known as Reverend just as their parish counterparts were.
Universalist
Like the first Puritan churches, early Universalist congregations, being accustomed to Baptist farmer/preachers, made little distinction between minister and laity. But unlike the Puritans, the Universalists had ecclesiastical organizations almost from the beginning. State and General Conventions ordained ministers, and were involved in matters of discipline. As early as 1800 the New England Convention had a formal Committee on Ordination. Even after the formation of the General Convention in 1833, the state conventions continued to hold so much power that congregations could call only those ministers in fellowship with the state convention. Churches that defied this rule could lose membership in the Convention. This remained one of the largest differences between the Universalists and the Unitarians, as the Unitarians continued to recommend, but not insist, that churches call ministers who were in fellowship with the denomination. Additionally, Universalist polity did not allow its ministers to hold dual fellowship with another denomination until 1917.
Merger
Approaching the denominational consolidation in 1961, fellowship in the Universalist ministry was conferred by the Universalist Church of America (UCA) (formerly the General Convention) or the state conventions. Fellowshipping of Unitarian ministers came under the purview of the Committee on Fellowship of American Unitarian Association (AUA) beginning in 1925 when the AUA and its ecclesiastical counterpart, the General Conference, merged. Upon consolidation of the UCA and AUA, a single Fellowship Committee was formed to see to credentialing and discipline of ministers. The Unitarian Universalist Association Department of Ministry was created to oversee matters of ministry, from education to settlement.
FAITH LIKE A RIVER: WORKSHOP 8:
LEADER RESOURCE 5: MEMBERSHIP DEBATE SCENARIOS
Make a copy of this resource and cut it in half, the PRO section on one half and the CON section on the other half.
PRO:
It is 1963, in Chicago, and you are delegates to the UUA's General Assembly. You support an amendment to the UUA's Constitution and Bylaws that would require congregations to maintain an open, nondiscriminatory membership policy in order to qualify for voting at General Assembly. You feel this is the best way to achieve the racial inclusion in our congregations. You believe it is appropriate that congregations "step up to the plate" in this way, even if the amendment strikes some as a violation of congregational polity. You think that, despite the logistics of the UUA's Board of Trustees trying to adequately certify the compliance of over 1,000 congregations each year, the benefits far outweigh any efforts.
CON:
It is 1963, in Chicago, and you are delegates to the UUA's General Assembly. You do not support an amendment to the UUA's Constitution and Bylaws that would require congregations to maintain an open, nondiscriminatory membership policy in order to qualify for voting at General Assembly. You are in total sympathy with the intentions expressed in the amendment, but you are opposed to the method being used to accomplish the goal of racial desegregation. You believe this proposal would inappropriately allow the Association to set conditions on membership and voting. While you see the legitimate concerns behind this move, you believe the proposed method for achieving it is unworkable and represents an infringement on congregational polity.
FIND OUT MORE
Commission on Appraisal, Interdependence: Renewing Congregational Polity (at www.uua.org/leaders/governance/congregationalpolity/index.shtml) (Boston: UUA, 1997)
Hughes, Peter, ed. The Cambridge Platform: Contemporary Reader's Edition (Boston: Skinner House Books, 2008)
Wesley, Alice Blair. Our Covenant: The 2000-01 Minns Lectures (Chicago: Meadville Lombard Press, 2002)
Wright, Conrad. Congregational Polity: A Historical Survey of Unitarian and Universalist Practice (Boston: Unitarian Universalist Association, 1997)
Wright, Conrad. Walking Together: Polity and Participation in Unitarian Universalist Churches (Boston: Unitarian Universalist Association, 1989)
The Cambridge Platform of Church Discipline (at books.google.com/books?id=aSkPAAAAIAAJ&dq=cambridge+platform&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=rOJCRuErSX&sig=fdFZ_IGMsFG9j0r0RJPV5g_cXr0&hl=en&ei=kg2MSv-_FIiYMb3OyZMO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6#v=onepage&q=&f=false) (Boston: Perkins and Whipple, 1850)