-Terry Santmann

As you probably know, WUUC is a member of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). Significant changes to Article II of the Association’s bylaws have been proposed for consideration and vote at the 2023 General Assembly.  Article II lists our Seven Principles and Six Sources, the Purposes of the UUA, a Statement of Inclusion, and a Freedom of Belief statement. 

Our community has a wide range of opinions and feelings about this proposal.  In the WUUC April newsletter, our Racial Justice Task Force (RJTF) outlined reasons for their endorsement of the proposed changes to Article II of the UUA Bylaws. Thank you to the RJTF and all who worked on composing that endorsement for our consideration.  In the same spirit, I would like to share a perspective that may help explain why some people oppose the changes to Article II.  

The rewrite of Article II removes the seven principles and six sources, replacing them with six values and a paragraph entitled “Inspirations.”  An article by Kenneth Ing brings up points I believe it’s important to consider.  I’ve included below two excerpts from his commentary that particularly stood out to me:

“It is likely that the [current] Principles and Sources in Article II were a magnet that brought you to UU and are a vital glue that binds together your UU community… [They] are guiding lights for becoming a better person and making the world a better place… The Principles, as written, make it clear that there is no boundary on our circle of concern and care.”

To me, this is the perfect way to articulate the value of our current Principles.  Ing also points out in his article that change is only sometimes better. I’m open to the possibility of change, but in this case, I believe what we have is better than what is being proposed.  

And finally, from Ken Ing’s article, his outline of the case for retaining the current Article II concisely summarizes why the principles as they exist are, in my opinion, better than the rewrite.  The highlights are listed below.  If you would like a more detailed explanation, please check out his full-length article at https://savethe7principles.org/why-retain-the-uu-principles/  The full text of the current Article II is shown side-by-side with the proposed rewrite starting on page 13 at the link.

Ing offers these reasons for retaining the current Principles:

  1. “Clarity: A strength of the Principles is clear, concise, and cohesive language. The Principles show what makes UU unique.
  2. Freedom: The Principles protect the freedom and sovereignty of each person, whereas the rewrite emphasizes the collective.
  3. Tolerance: The current Freedom of Belief explicitly protects freedom of belief. The rewrite removes that language.
  4. Inspirations: The list of specific Sources is a potent visual reminder of UU’s embrace of spiritual and intellectual diversity.
  5. Polity: The current primary purpose of the Association is to serve its member congregations. The rewrite removes that role.
  6. Agency: The Principles let us decide how to express our values.  Covenants in the rewrite will determine our priorities.
  7. Accountability: … Standards are unknown. Enforcement is not defined. UUs judging other UUs would be divisive and toxic.
  8. Universality: The current language is easily understood. The rewrite adds ambiguous words and phrases that have special meanings. These can be misinterpreted all too easily.
  9. Covenant: The proposed covenants through the Association would reverse the flow of power and authority in UUism to be top-down, with congregations subject to UUA control.
  10. They Work: The Principles are fully capable of inspiring and guiding us. Replacing them is not necessary nor wise.”

My only goal in presenting this perspective is to explain why someone in this community, where we share so many values, might oppose the new Article II.   I offer this respectfully in the spirit of bridge-building and curiosity.  There are people in the congregation with whom this perspective resonates.  I know it resonated with me.  For those who feel differently, I want you to understand my viewpoint.  Disagreement isn’t the same as conflict.  We can disagree and still be a joyful and inclusive spiritual community that accepts and celebrates all our diversity and supports each of us on our life journeys.  

I want to make it clear that I’m sharing this article as an individual member of WUUC, not as a Board member.  A 2022-23 Board Goal is to:

“Foster the development of healthier congregational communication and interactions, aiming to grow mutual understanding among the diversity of perspectives and beliefs represented and build a community where all belong together.

“…The Board as a whole group will NOT take a position on any of the topics of concern …  Individual members of the Board may express their own personal viewpoints, but those opinions do not represent the Board as a whole.”

Regardless of the outcome of the Article II process, I hope that our WUUC community can be a source of support, joy, acceptance, and inclusion for all its members, now and beyond the vote. Thank you all for journeying with me.