I really do see it as a movement, potentially the most “broadly catholic and radically protestant” of all approaches to religion…an ongoing movement of ongoing reform, continuous rethinking and progressive action for utmost human liberation and ultimate connectedness…a “legacy faith” in its own right, rooted in both the radical-Reformation and the Enlightenment…a still unfolding, never settled movement for the advancement of pluralistic mutual regard, meaningful global cooperation, social justice, eco-diversity and eco-responsibility. I believe that we have embraced not just religious liberalism, but a particular mode of it, one that has its own special “DNA” that distinguishes it from the rest. Duncan Howlett (in his book The Fatal Flaw) described it as the “new paradigm for religion” …one of “thorough-going” religious liberalism (firmly planted in the free and critically-thinking, boldly questioning and thoroughly nondogmatic—never completely settled–way of looking at and dealing with religion), instead of simply yet another “modifying” liberalism that seeks to constantly keep repackaging the old wines of worn-out creeds and theology. It doesn’t matter what name we give to this particular mode of liberal religion, as long as we remain true to its highest premises and priorities, and to its calling for utmost authenticity and progressive reform. Sometimes that means going beyond simply applying fresh bandages to adoption of more thorough, more systemic treatments of the diseases themselves. I believe that’s both our unique legacy, and our mission in every new generation.

David, please do keep up the good work! I hope you don’t mind that I have used a few of your quotes for the “Quote of the Day” feature at my forum. Come and visit when you get a chance, OK? If you have ideas to improve it, just let me know. Thanks again!

That’s exactly the point I was trying to make without directly making it… sometimes I am too subtle. I included the ICUU in that list for exactly the reasons you mentioned. It is not an offshoot of the UUAoC… For that matter neither is the UUSC or the UUMA. My point is that the movement of Unitarian Universalism does not just consist of the UUAoC, its member congregations, and its “offshoots”. The movement is larger than this. The ICUU and the other worldwide Unitarian and Universalist organizations are, to my mind, part of a much larger Unitarian Universalist movement in the world.

My goal with the post was to stimulate a broader conversation about just what makes up the movement of our liberal faith. The UUAoC is amazingly important… as a Military Chaplain Candidate I am directly related to the UUAoC in my ministry (my “Official Military Chaplaincy Endorser” is the Director of the Ministry and Professional Leadership Staff Group at the UUAoC).

I believe that, when we as Unitarian Universalists find something that we think is important that the UUAoC does not feel that it is their mission to support, then it is up to us as individuals and congregations to support those things.

Thank you for making the point about the ICUU directly that I was trying to imply subtly.

Yours in Faith,

David

I agree, wholeheartedly… which is why I said in the article you linked to at the beginning of your post that, the UUAoC’s focus on congregations will be a positive thing in the long run, no matter what the short term issues it raises might be. But whether Unitarian Universalism will survive was not my issue…

There is a difference between surviving and being what we want to be in this world. We have shown that we can survive… even in times when the mainline denominations are losing membership, we are gaining (if rather slowly) in our congregations.

We may see some increase in congregational membership out of the UUAoC’s clarification of its mission to congregational support. But the question I am asking is a deeper one than survival. Can we accomplish our goals for transformation of society and culture to be more in line with our values by operation only through our congregations?

I think we need to have a broader reach than that… and the responsibility for that reach does not lie with the UUAoC. In truth, I think it lies with members and ministers of our congregations to come together in ways focused more outward than inward. The UUSC is a good example… but its focus is more action based than ideological/theological.

What that is going to be… I dont know yet. I made a few suggestions. But while the UUAoC clarifies its mission, if we wish to keep those aspects that might not be essential to our movement, that effort needs to come from the members and ministers of our congregations… not from 25 Beacon street.

And I would much rather operate from a place of abundance than a view toward survival.

Thank you for the continued discussion!!!

Yours in Faith,

David