Process Questions

Steven Myles

Late Update: Pre GA 2023

• Never in UU History have all the foundational statements been replaced at once.
• The concept of being a “living tradition” with incremental changes made as times change is ignored.
• The process had insufficient participation/awareness across all demographics in UU. UU Congregants were not listed as group of stakeholders that the Commission was charged to survey.
• There was no indication that the “surveying” process was done using rigorous, statistically valid sampling and analysis techniques or employing the use of outside consultants skilled in this type of work.
• Communications during the process were not “open and transparent”. The recommendation to replace all the principles with values was not made apparent until very late in the process.
• Online ZOOM feedback sessions were overly controlled with leading questions and did not allow space or openness to a discussion of keeping the principles or of why the principles were to be eliminated.
• There is nothing in the Proposal that shows how our current Article II fails to meet the charges given to the Article II Study Commission or cannot be minimally modified to do so.
• There is nothing in the charge to the Study Commission suggesting deleting the Principles or Sources.
• The Proposal never explains why values are better than Principles to explain the basis for Unitarian Universalism.
• Nothing in the charge to the Study Commission suggested introducing a concept like “accountability”.
• Nothing explains how the increased use of “covenanting” combined with punitive “accountability” will lead to “beloved community”.
• The words of the proposal are neither “brief nor poetic” as encouraged by the Charge to the Commission.

If you are viewing this on a tablet or cell phone, tap the DOWNLOAD button to view this essay.