Proposed Business Resolution: UUA Task Force on Ministerial Fellowship Committee Policies and Rules for Interim and Developmental Ministers

General Assembly 2026 GA Business
,
1

1   PURPOSE: This proposal asks the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) to charge a task force with
2   recommending updates to Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) policies and rules for Interim and
3   Developmental Ministers.

4   BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) shall
5   establish a task force to:

6   (a) review the policies and rules relating to Interim and Developmental Ministers, and

7   (b) make any recommendations to the Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) for modifications to
8   the policies and rules relating to Interim and Developmental Ministers.

PROPOSER: Ed Klein of First Parish Brewster Unitarian Universalist in Brewster, MA

REFERENCES:

2

Could someone explain what difference this addition will make?

3

Here’s a summary of the rationale. Sorry for the format, the discussion board doesn’t allow uploading of slides or links.

Motivation

•The MFC has jurisdiction over all phases of ministerial credentialing, including fellowship removal, and the authority to disallow participation in the UUA’s ministerial search process.

•A complaint to the UUA Office of Ethics and Safety can result in the MFC Executive Committee conducting a Fellowship Review, placing a minister on Administrative Hold (suspending a minister from search), and potentially removing a minister from Fellowship.

•Expectations of Transition Ministry (Interim, Development, Contract) (quotations from the UUA’s Ministry Search Handbook (1))

•“Interim Ministry helps congregations process transition, address unproductive practices, and prepare for new leadership”

•"Developmental Ministry serves congregations with repeated short ministries, chronic conflict, or systemic issues, requiring more time to make structural or cultural changes"

•“It is better to use an interim time to deal with these frustrations in a period of purposeful disequilibrium… Additionally, congregations may have areas of neglect and/or unproductive patterns that need attention.”

•And, from the UUA’s *Interim Ministry Appraisal Guidelines (*2), "Is the interim minister courageously raising the needful issues in the congregation?"

  1. UUA Ministry Search Handbook: the unified guide to transitional and settled ministry searches, January 2026.
  2. UUA Transitions Office Interim Ministry Appraisal Form, from UUA Leader Lab, December 8, 2025, Overview of the Interim Ministry Partnership.

What’s Needed

With these expectations and guidelines, Transitional Ministers aim to guide a congregation successfully from one settled ministry to the next, often through necessary—and sometimes difficult—change.

Because such change can spark conflict, and difficult circumstances, MFC processes need to account for the unique purposes and challenges of Transitional Ministers – Interim, Developmental, and Contract - but they don’t.

There’s no mention of Interim or Developmental Ministries in the MFC’s Rules and Policies for complaint intake and evaluation; none for fellowship review; none for placing a minister on Administrative Hold; and none for procedures to terminate fellowship. (1)

Neither the UUA Bylaws Renewal project (launched in 2022), nor the UUA’s Transitions Review Task Force (2025) will address these needs - the Policies and Rules of the MFC are not within their scope.

  1. Rules and Policies of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee, as amended July 2024.

The Task Force

Some possibilities for the Task Force to consider:

-Ensure the MFC Committees include accredited Interim and Developmental Ministers.

-Include the Board of Trustees of the Minister’s (most recent) congregation in any review or investigation.

-MFC Policy and Rules modifications that reflect the challenges of transitional ministry.

-Changes to reflect the range of code of conduct violations in the UUMA Guidelines.

-Restore a safeguard, such as an independent audit, to help protect ministers against complaints made in bad faith (without requiring complainants be subjected to a 2nd full review). [Until 2022, MFC investigations included a 2nd independent review of a complaint investigation – it was removed out of deference to the complainant. (1)]

-For continuity, it’s recommended that the submitter of this resolution (or their delegate) be included on the Task Force, and that they be involved in selecting members. Members of the Task Force should include experienced Transitional Ministers, and Congregational Leaders with Transition experience.**

  1. uua website, March 23 2022 Draft Updates to MFC Rules regarding Termination of Fellowship**
1 Like
4

I think that this is important; Interim and Developmental ministers have different roles from settled ministers, and are likely to engender controversy—in some situations, if they do not do so, they are not truly fulfilling the purpose. My UU society had a developmental contract minister, originally for 3 years, I think renewed once, and it was very beneficial, but was far from business as usual, lots of rethinking and revisioning. Independent review of a complaint is certainly warranted, and only the respondent, who is the subject of the complaint, not the complainant, who makes the complaint, should be able to waive it.

Any accusation that cannot stand up to independent review should be considered deficient. Of course, such an independent reviewer should be unknown and unaffiliated with either party, even if that means going outside UUism (highly unlikely).

1 Like
5

FYI, I’m now able to post a link to the slides I’ll present at the mini-assembly (posted on the First Parish Brewster UU website): https://fpbuu.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/FPBUU-GA-Resolution-and-Amendment-May-27-2026.pdf

1 Like
6

Here is why I think a task force is needed to look at rules around Interim and Developmental ministers and modifications considered. Here is one example (I am sure there are others). One disgruntled member or staff member, upset by an Interim Minister’s attempts to help the congregation fix systemic problems can ruin a career if their complaint is taken up and the Interim put on hold. It is a timing issue. An Interim is only at a congregation for 2 years. If the complaint is lodged and accepted somewhere between October and February of the second year of the Interim’s term, they are automatically put on hold. The term for an investigation is not defined; can take months with the Interim minister missing the opportunity to participate in the spring search process so they do not have an employment gap and have a new congregation in the fall. Their next opportunity to search/match with a UU congregation is almost a year away. Of course, if the Interim is cleared, they can wait and participate in the following year’s search—although, at this point I’d think they’d be pretty banged up and discouraged, either leave the UU ministry or, if they stayed, be careful not to make waves at their next Interim church—which totally undermines the value of interims to address “chronic conflict, or systemic issues”…in a period of “purposeful disequilibrium.” A participant in the GA Mini Assembly on May 28 stated that her research shows the number of Interims being put on hold has increased recently. This should be a concern to all churches. If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail—creating a task force to look at rules vis-a-vis Interims and Developmental ministers is a great idea.

2 Likes
7

Thanks; I share the concern about making ministers employees of the UUA, so I am pleased that that portion was withdrawn, but it does clearly show the need to limit the number of ministers put on hold especially during search time. I am also concerned about the reference to Human Resources best practices, as that also seems to make ministers employees of the MFC or CL, not their specific CFS (congregation/fellowship/society).

8

Hi. My mention of Human Resources best practices was in reference to the required Personal & Professional Development plan that ministers provide as a part of the Review Team process, and efforts to provide structured care and developmental support. It was not intended to describe, nor promote an employee/employer relationship. For clarity, substitute the words “Human Resources” with “Personal Development Plan” (best practices).

1 Like
9

If I understand this correctly, at present, the rules allow staff from Congregational Life (CL) and Ministries and Faith Development (MFD) to refer a minister who fits into a catchall of situations (“pattern of conflicted ministries and/or inability to maintain positive congregational, collegial, staff, and/or community relations”) to a “UUA Review Team,” also made up of staff (undefined, but probably from CL and MFD, including the same people who referred the minister?) to pursue a process of assessment (what this looks like and its intention is not defined in the rules) and automatically puts the minister on hold from search (which could significantly impact their career, especially if they are moving and the hold is in place in March/April)?

If one result of the Review is supposed to be some level of “restorative care” or professional development—it is unclear that allowing staff from the CL and MFD to automatically put a minister on hold, threatening to impact their career is restorative or an effective tool to develop ministerial skills …rather, it seems punitive. My take is that the whole process needs review and transparency; meanwhile, this amendment at least makes it clear that the MFC (a UUA Board Committee) is the only one to make the important decision whether to put a minister on hold from search.

1 Like