Submission 455 Rev. John Millspaugh Church of the Larger Fellowship (Boston, MA) 1911
What is your suggestion or idea?
I submit:
Interdependence. In humility, we honor the sacred interdependent web of all existence.
With reverence, we covenant to protect Earth and all beings from human exploitation, by creating relationships of care and justice.
To show the deleted, replaced and new text:
Interdependence. In humility,Wwe honor the sacred interdependent web of all existence. With reverence,Wwe covenant to cherishprotect Earth and all beings from human exploitation, by creating relationships of care and respectjustice. With humility and reverence, we acknowledge our place in the great web of life, and we work to repair harm and damaged relationships.
What is the reason for your amendment idea?
Replace “cherish” with “protect.” “Cherish” can mean “to hold dear: feel or show affection for.” While this is nice, it is not what Earth and all beings need from us. They need protection from harm.
Add “from human exploitation.” “Human” because our aim is not to protect all animals: for example, prey from predators. “Exploitation” because this word can refer to individual or systematic exploitation.
Replace “respect” with “justice.” “Respect” can mean “regard,” and is far weaker than “justice.”
Delete “With humility and reverence, we acknowledge our place in the great web of life, and we work to repair harm and damaged relationship.” This sentence is now extraneous.
4a) I included “humility” and “reverence” in the revised language.
4b) “We acknowledge our place in the great web of life” is vague.
4c) “We work to repair harm and damaged relationships” is covered under “protect Earth and all beings from human exploitation, by creating relationships of care and justice.”
Have you discussed this idea with your congregation or other UUs?
Yes. I discussed it with the Board of the Unitarian Universalist Animal Ministry, and with a group of UUAM supporters who gathered to help one another draft revisions to this section.
Some felt that my proposed revisions did not go far enough, but I aimed for language that could be embraced not by just UUAM supporters but Unitarian Universalists at large.
Thank you for this language, John. It is stronger and speaks to actions we will be called on to take to preserve a healthy ecology for ourselves and all the beings we share the planet with.
I like this amendment and would fully support it if the word “sacred” were struck. I find “with reverence” borderline, but acceptable. I particularly like the substitution of “protect” for “cherish.”
The emphasis on protection and “creating relationships of care and justice” is great because it is both strong and focused on the present and future (while “repairing harm” is more focused on the past).
I reviewed the 33 comments submitted on discuss.uua.org that made mention of “all beings,” “creatures,” or “animals.” I grouped them into categories, took them all seriously, and shared my analysis with the UU Animal Ministry Board. What follows is the version that the UU Animal Ministry Board and I are currently supporting:
Interdependence. In humility and reverence, we honor the interdependent web of all existence.
We covenant to protect Earth and all beings from exploitation, creating relationships of mutuality and justice.
I look forward to connecting with other delegates who are invested in this issue. Let’s discuss!
-Rev. John Gibb Millspaugh, Executive Director
UU Animal Ministry
I have mixed feelings about these proposed revisions.
Mainly, I feel that these recommended changes bring Justice into the Interdependence value. I would prefer to have Interdependence to be independent (LOL) of the other values. The Values themselves are interdependent with one another, with Love at the center, so the value of Justice can and should be applied to honoring the interdependent web of existence.
I also miss the phrase, “With humility and reverence, we acknowledge our place in the great web of life.” Yes, it is somewhat vague but it’s also one of the most poetic lines in these proposed revisions to Article 2 and I feel the implication is made clear by the mention of humility and reverence. Our place is as a part of the web, is in a relationship of humility and reverence to the web as a whole and to all its parts.
In many ways I love the proposed changes, particularly the change from “cherish” to “protect” and from “respect” to “justice.”
I feel the benefits of changing from cherish to protect outweigh the downsides but it suggests we human beings can protect Earth rather than that we are a part of the web and if it goes out of balance we suffer as much or more than other parts of the web.
I wonder if mutuality is the best word, especially since it’s already used in Generosity. I wonder if reciprocity might be better here: “… creating relationships of reciprocity and justice.” Though reciprocity might work better in Generosity: “… connects us to one another in relationships of reciprocity” (rather than “… relationships of interdependence and mutuality.”
I would likely support this amendment even though, as I’ve outlined, I have mixed feelings about it, in large part because your most recent proposal is so much more concise than the commission’s version.
Interdependence. In humility and reverence, we honor the interdependent web of all existence.
We covenant to protect Earth and all beings from exploitation, creating relationships of mutuality and justice.
RevLev, I hear your concerns and I understand your mixed feelings.
The word “mutuality” came was proposed a lot in April’s amendments to the Interdependence value and covenant, which is why we included it. There are two meanings of “mutuality” that seem to me most salient for how it is used here. First, “mutuality” means “taking seriously the needs of everyone in the relationship, acknowledging that those needs matter, and working to address those needs if possible.” So a relationship of mutuality with the Earth and all beings suggests that our flourishing matters, as human beings, and so too does the flourishing of individual beings and the Earth as a whole. Secondly, mutuality suggests a tendency to think of the parties in the relationship not only as distinct individuals but also participating in one another’s identities, in a way that is related to the “of which we are a part” phrase in the language about respecting the interdependent web.
So I prefer “mutuality” to “reciprocity,” because mutuality suggests that we care for the other’s interests even when we personally get nothing back in exchange.
My objection to the “we acknowledge our place in the great web of life” is that it is so vague. It could have so many different meanings that it ends up not meaning much. But it is poetic and I could see supporting an amendment that included it.
The current draft of the language is:
Interdependence. We honor the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part. With humility and reverence, we covenant to protect Earth and all beings from exploitation, creating and nurturing sustainable relationships of repair, mutuality and justice.
Thanks for your thoughtful analysis. I hope that you can support this when it is posted here on discuss.uua.org.