UU congregations need membership growth and financial stability. I fear that the new Article II will reduce our attraction to new members by replacing a clear list of what is important to us with a vague commandment to ““liberating love””. Further, instead of serving the needs of member congregations, the national office will lead on social justice and multiculturalism.
Have you discussed this idea with your congregation or other UUs?
Yes, I sent to the Rver Road Board of Trustees on March 13 essentially the same statment I submitted on this forum. One member of the Board acknowledged it.
I share your concern about the wordiness and vagueness of the proposed amendment values being a barrier to introducing UUism to newcomers. I feel strongly that we need to keep the principles and sources in Article II, especially if the values language is adopted at GA. I am not opposed to adding action-oriented values that help frame our mission, but for me they should not be considered a substitute for the principles and sources. I would support a future effort to update our principles and sources, but only if they remain principles and sources. I do not support substituting for them something that looks more like mission.
I agree that the proposed changes to Article 2 are not likely to call new members into our denomination. The language is vague and doesn’t really differentiate us from any other group of well-meaning people. For me, moral principles that are clear, inspiring and solid are what called me to Unitarianism 35 years ago and keep me there today.
