Be Understood By The Public

It's not much fun being ignored by society and it's not much fun being misunderstood either; yet indifference and incomprehension have been the predominant Unitarian experience over many decades. This problem needs to be approached from a wider perspective.

The story of Britain over the last century is, in part, a dispiriting tale of the loss of faith in institutions of all kinds (the NHS being a possible exception) - and Churches have suffered at least as seriously as the rest. It is in this context that the word "Unitarian" today is likely to be met with blank looks or shrugs of the shoulders.

The challenge to communicate better is unarguable. But who are the 'public' by whom Unitarians in Britain should wish to be understood? It must surely be people living in Britain primarily - as this is the constituency that the General Assembly and its constituent congregations, fellowships, District Associations and Affiliated Societies serve.

There is a further stage required here, however, because to aim to be understood by the public is not as helpful as identifying particular 'publics' that might be interested in us. A communications strategy whose target audience is 'everybody' can more or less be said to be aimed at nobody! If multinationals with hundreds of thousands of pounds available to spend on advertising find it not only advantageous but essential to target their message to particular audiences (broken down by age/gender/income etc) this must be all the more true of organisations with limited resources. We ought to pick our publics! To give one example, it may be that setting up groups at universities is not so daunting a task but it's still essential to 'get the pitch right'.

Yet what does it mean for a religious community to BE 'understood'?

Success might be when a great number appreciate both our progressive values and our open tradition. Anything less and it may seem that there is nothing distinctive about us. We are not equivalent to a branch of the United Nations Association (UNA), worthy though that body is - we ARE religious. We must offer transformative and inclusive community that deepens a personal faith that is both human in its focus and open-minded to that which is beyond our understanding. Significantly, the General Assembly Object, though by no means perfect, is much underrated. If a Unitarian reads it again only to remind herself how unsatisfactory she found it first time round at least it can further a personal thought process about core principles and inclusive spirituality!

We want the 'public' to know that we are distinct - offering the milieu of a freethinking community that nevertheless values archetypal human story - how we make sense of our own lives within the panorama of a wider human drama that eternally resonates with Christian, humanistic and other themes such as love, redemption, equality, forgiveness, discovery of one's own potential and the healing power of being truly present to one another

This 'being understood' business is not primarily a matter of institutional survival; frankly, the continuing value of an institution cannot be assumed from its mere continuation up to today. Churches - including our churches - close their doors partly because they have stopped meeting a need. We need to be honest about that.

Instead of aiming at survival for no very clear purpose, a genuine Unitarian process of seeking to be understood assumes implicitly that there IS a coherent, worthwhile, transformative 'we' that can BE understood - that we collectively ARE coherent. Yet can we truly claim to be coherent? How do we justify such a claim? Similarly, can we currently say that we even understand our essence as a faith community in order to be able to present it to others? From my perspective, values and tradition both matter.

We can bemoan that we are less well understood than the Quakers, for example, but this is a direct consequence of our historically chosen view of religious freedom which has stressed individual conscience above all else. This has much to commend it but without a balancing commitment to learn from and be bound by ties of community - by the old Puritan idea of covenant in fact - we will not be able to give Unitarian collective vision and action the priority it deserves, preferring to operate by an implicit consumerist view of our personal religious involvement whereby anyone can duck out whenever they're not getting their own way.

It is in painstakingly exploring the human implications of making a reality of inclusive community shaped in conversation with our shared values - not infrequently laying aside personal preference and trusting instead at times to the common will - that we will have a stronger message to proclaim and, more importantly, live out. In this way we become at last worthy of being understood and gaining acceptance and influence beyond the church doors. Nothing is more essential if we are to make our contribution as Unitarian communities to the healing of the world.

[Note: The next phrase from the Manchester event speaks of connecting to people "everywhere" but can we recognise this as engaging across Britain with more imaginative and braver outreach
- NOT seeking to raise our profile abroad! Similarly the notion to "Tell the world we're here" could be problematic if understood to mean we can and should commit resources of time, effort and money in communicating here, there and everywhere].

Rev. Matthew Smith.

Connect to People Everywhere

There was a time when the only method of connection was face to face. Then we learnt to write things down and send messages. As the 20th century dawned we invented radio, the telephone, then television and now we have the Internet. No doubt in the future some new method, as yet unknown, will be invented.

We now have so many different methods of receiving communication and far more communications to receive, that we have had to become adept at discarding all but the most important. And therein lies our challenge.

How can we convince others that our message is important to them personally? What is it we are trying to say? What is it that others are waiting to hear?

We can no longer rely on connecting by just one single method and we must ensure that our message is not discarded. The same message will have to be sent in many different forms and many different ways if we are reach those who may benefit. Neither should we forget those who struggle to come to terms with the latest technology.

There is an economical challenge for us in our communications. Post is increasingly expensive. The Telephone is very labour intensive, particularly if there is a general message to go to many people. Television can reach many people effectively but it is expensive. The Internet has spawned many different options. E mails are cheap and quick, but easily discarded. Facebook carries hidden dangers but we appreciate it provides the opportunity to give thoughts and opinions and we are still discovering how to use it effectively as we are with other sites of a similar nature.

What does the future hold?

I have no doubt Unitarian TV will develop and grow to reach those who need or want to receive the message at home at a time of their choosing. There is much competition amongst TV channels, although broadcasting is likely to move increasingly to the Internet. People will need to know that there is something worthwhile to be watched.

Our two publications, the Inquirer and the Unitarian, face challenges today of how to adapt to the Internet, as many including myself, read papers and books electronically. The same is true for the Lindsey Press; and yet many still enjoy reading paper versions.

Facebook, we read, is not necessarily going to be around in its present form for too long and is likely to morph into something new. The younger generation is far more willing than us oldies to advertise the minutae of their lives to anyone who wishes to know about it, and plenty who don't, yet it remains a powerful tool to discuss issues of importance. We are still learning how best to deal with complex and wide-ranging subjects not suited to the limited space Facebook provides. No doubt we will learn to do better in time.

When creating new national website, we recognised that there is a specific skill in writing for the Internet. This is something very different from the talent of writing we are used to. It requires a clearer more concise approach, rather than a developed argument. Presentation and layout have also assumed a new importance as we live in a society faced with many choices and increasingly able to reject anything that does not create immediate interest. Many will say that this is a very shallow approach, and so it is, but this is today's reality.

Distance is no longer an obstacle to communication and most methods these days are all but instantaneous. As our mobiles alert us instantly to a new message received and we interrupt what are doing in anticipation of something new and important, there is a great opportunity to be had, if only we can find a way though the web of possibilities.

And yet, we are famously unsure exactly how to explain what Unitarianism is all about, probably because we all have a different perception of what it means and each of us would explain it different way. As usual, a great virtue has turned into significant challenge for us.

I suspect in this ever more complex world the simple message is the most attractive.

What would your simple message be?

What should our simple message be?

In the short term, however, there are things that can be done and easily achieved:
• Each congregation should be able to communicate electronically. It doesn't have to be the                   secretary, but it would be good if it was.
• Everybody who can, should subscribe to Uni-News, so they know what is going on nationally.
• We should create special interest groups to allow messages and e mails to be sent easily and               quickly to the right people. We already have the capability to do this at Essex Hall.
• We should share our resources through the Internet.

And there are plenty more ways - plenty more opportunities. We just need to find them and make them happen!

Robert Ince

A Service to the Community

An important aspect of our Unitarian identity is what we can offer, what we can offer not only to our own community, but the local and wider communities, of which we are a part.

This is something that perhaps we take for granted, we all nod in agreement; and then proceed to find reasons why we aren't doing anything!

We are too busy with repairing our roof/ struggling to fund our minister/ trying to find new members, but fail to see that many of these problems can be resolved, at least in part, by being more outward looking.

We have a lot to offer, if we would just let it be known to those outwith our congregations. We offer an environment where people can explore their spiritual beliefs within a caring, inclusive, outward looking community; a solid base from which people can explore their own spirituality.

As well as providing our own children with somewhere they can develop, flourish and grow, we can offer young people from our wider communities the same opportunities, those opportunities of regeneration, for the next generation.

How do we do this, how do we provide this 'service to the community'?

We do this by being amongst them, being with them, by being a spiritual home in a secular society. And if they find it difficult to see themselves in our churches, we must provide opportunities for them to see, experience and understand what we are all about, by our activities outwith our Churches.

We can do this in many ways, we can provide amenities for people to meet together with genuine connection, encouraging the use of our buildings by like-minded groups, Amnesty International, Fair Trade, and Mindfulness groups, groups open to all, not exclusively church members.

We can be with people at the important times of their lives, providing rites of passage ceremonies which reflect their needs, their situation, and their beliefs. But it doesn't stop there, we need to be willing and able to continue that involvement, as required, following on from these life changing events. To be seen to be willing to provide somewhere people can find their pathway in an open and dynamic community, and enable them to face life with confidence.

We can welcome, and act as advocates, for people who are marginalised within society, the poor, the homeless, differently abled, LGBT and refugee communities. Those with lifestyles which differ from the mainstream, sex-workers, or members of the travelling communities.

We can use our non-creedal foundations to facilitate discussions between other religious groups, especially those whose faith has become synonymous with fundamentalism, providing a multi¬faith venue in each town.

We should be prepared to take advantage of all opportunities which come our way, to ensure that Unitarianism is something that everybody has heard about, knows about, is there for everyone, and understood by the public. We should respond to letters and articles in newspapers, on the radio, or social media, to speak out against unfair taxes, divisive policies, and government decisions, national or local.

It is the responsibility of all Unitarians to let people know that we are;

a Faith for today, 

a Faith that matters,

a place for roots to grow and wings to fly!

Joan Cook

Develop Personal Leadership

The Question of Leadership

At the Executive Committee's Day of Visioning on the main issues affecting our church as discovered by President Marion Baker in her ' Listening to People' tour, we discovered that Leadership was an issue for many of us for many reasons.

• It was often unclear who was the Leader.
• There was lack of clarity in the roles of Ministers, committees and trustees as to leadership.
• There was little understanding of types of Leadership or leadership skills.
• Many churches spent all their time and energy on Management tasks leaving nothing for                     visionary work.
• We lack confidence or permission to lead.
• There is no area/district level leadership.
• In a leadership vacuum we are open to 'takeover bids' from unsuitable people.
• The Chief Officer role is not that of a Visionary Leader.
• Ministers sometimes fail to lead when it conflicts with their pastoral role.
• We are too individualistic.

Some positive comments were made.
• We are less constrained by our leadership than other denominations.
• We can be leaders in different roles and projects or for short periods of time.
• Modern culture leads people to expect more involvement and less top-down authority.
• We have flexibility.

In a time of increasing change we are more in need of leadership than ever. Resources are limited. It is not likely that each church that wants a minister will get one or even half a minister.

The days of '12 steps to an effective church' are over. Yes, we do need good systems to keep everything running, but we need to be adaptable and led by a vision of who we are and where we want to go. Sometimes we fall into the mistake of worshipping our committee system rather than being at the service of Life itself.

Edwin Friedman's book 'Leadership in the Age of the quick fix: A failure of Nerve' finds the answers in Systems Theory. Originally used as a way of working with families in therapy, it explains the way church communities work. One person can take on and personify the dis-ease of the whole congregation. We are all interdependent as part of this system. Institutions work as systems in the same way families do. Leaders therefore need to understand themselves and the way their place in their own family dynamics has shaped themChronic anxiety affects our organizations very negatively. It produces reactivity, blaming, quick fixes and a lack of well-differentiated leadership.

The underlying causes for this gridlock are always emotional, not intellectual.
• Leaders need to be free to try things without fear of losing their job or position
• Leaders must be able to tolerate others' pain and not fix it.
• Stress and burn out are caused by taking on too much responsibility for others.
• Leaders must know when to make others do something rather than do it themselves.
• Leaders need to have stamina, resolve, self-regulation and remain connected.
• It will be temporarily more acutely painful to escape a chronically painful system.
• Good decisions are a result of how we act after the decision was made.

A Good Leader
• needs to take responsibility for their own emotional being.
• should be non-anxious: not 'peace at all costs'.
• should expect sabotage.
• must be motivated.
• understands boundaries and is unthreatened.
• does not rely on the group for their own meaning.

When we look at examples of successful Leaders in our church who have brought about growth, we tend to ask them" What did you do?" So they give us a long list of activities and innovations and we try to do the same but it doesn't work for us. Why is that? Perhaps we asked the wrong question. Perhaps we should have asked "Who were you?"

Two examples of Ministers I know who have grown their congregations have different theologies, different backgrounds and created different styles of church. Each has some skills and talents which the other does not share and could not implement in their church. Some people say they both have that elusive quality, charisma. But what is charisma? It is, I believe, a certain level of self -faith, of certainty that their approach is correct. These leaders are bold. They make big plans and people follow them. They do not back down when challenged. They are not afraid to be unkind on occasion. It is not what these leaders chose to do that made them successful, it was who they are.

How can we develop such attributes in those in Leadership positions?

I think training can help. I believe we have in our congregations people with skills and knowledge on Leadership . Up to date thinking is vital. We have members who work in the third sector, working with volunteers who have skills here. We have people who work in education or teacher training who again have experience with leadership skills. Can we put out a call for trainers to put on Leadership trainings in our districts and separately for our ministers?

This is an issue we will be discussing at the Annual Meetings and beyond. Let's start our discussion now.

Rev. Nicky Jenkins

Be Religiously Literate

I've been asked to produce some thoughts on what it mea for Unitarianism to be 'religiously literate' following the GA Vision Day held in Manchester in September. There were 19 outcomes, from the question 'What could Unitarianism be in the next 5 years?' towards the end of this day lc event and be 'religiously literate' was one of them.

I was not a member of the group from which this statement came so what follows are my own musing around the subject in the hope that others might be inspired to contribute more to the debate.

What does it mean to be literate in general terms?

Firstly there is basic speaking, listening, reading and writing. Primary school pupils who reach Level 4 or 5 at the end of their last year in school, Year 6, are considered to be literate to a satisfactory standard for their age. They understand and can use words with considerable fluency, they have a basic knowledge of grammar and they can spell accurately. They comprehend written and spoken passages of fact and fiction. They can talk about what they have read and written themselves.

For an adult, literacy is much more than this. It involves a depth and breadth of understanding of different genres of literature, an ability to express accurately or creatively thoughts, understandings and feelings in the spoken and written word. It involves comprehending texts that are considered difficult and confidently entering into in depth discussions with others or writing substantial written pieces about them.

Unitarianism is not a religion of one book like conventional Christianity or Islam. Literate Christians might well boast that they carry 5 translations of The Bible on their i-phone and thus consider themselves to be religiously literate. A Muslim might well be able to quote effectively and pointedly from the Q'ran and be thought to be religiously literate. It is not so easy for Unitarians to demonstrate their religious literacy.

One of the ways in which they can do it is by being able to articulate what Unitarianism is today in a clear and understandable manner to all adults and children who ask the question What is Unitarianism?

It's significant that some of the other outcomes from the Vision Day assume an ability to do this. For example, it would be difficult to give 'a riposte to fundamentalism' or to ensure that Unitarianism is 'understood by the public' or 'something that everybody has heard about' without being religiously literate. Every Unitarian needs to acquire an understanding of the story of Unitarianism as it has risen and fallen in popularity from its early days in dissent from the Church of England, to the complex pattern of its religious belief structure today.

But, that is very much the Level 4 or 5 of religious literacy.

Adult religious literacy would involve an increased understanding of other genres - other faiths, also humanism and earth centred religions and other threads of belief. It would also need to express the deep belief structures that underpin the Unitarian and Free Christian faith today and how they match or counter the belief structures of other world religions.Adult religious literacy should reach down into the depths of human spirituality and bring forth in the spoken and written word the deep questions of life, reading extensively about them, sharing deep conversations with others about them, writing about them to inspire and inform others. To be 'Unitarianly' religiously literate is to be educated and knowledgeable across the wide field of religion.

So how can Unitarianism become increasingly religious literate over the next 5 years?

It can only be done through members, people, becoming religiously literate. When I asked for comments around this topic on Facebook I only got one reply. I quote from part of it:-

'My friends in the Progressive Christianity Network read voraciously. They love books of bible scholarship which explain why their gut feeling that this or that did not happen was in fact based on fact... The Unitarians don't read, they don't need to know why they are right, that they are right is enough. ... Everything we need to know we learned at the knees of Flo and Jo.'

I hope there will be some reaction to these statements!

There are, in fact many opportunities for Unitarians to become more religiously literate which are better than 'Flo and Jo's knees' and which supplement reading appropriately and widely.
Courses are available and others could be offered in many media to enable new members to become fluent in Unitarianism and for longer-time Unitarians to extend and deepen their spiritual/religious knowledge understanding and experience. Such events as Summer School, Unitarian Discovery Holiday, GA Annual Meetings, FUSE a weekend event offered by London District are only a few of many that offer opportunities for Unitarians and, therefore, Unitarianism to become more religiously literate.

Dawn Buckle

Provide Ministry That Enables Ministry

My personal reflections might usefully start with a quote from SYF181

Wake, now, my vision of ministry clear; 

brighten my pathway with radiance here; 

mingle my calling with all who would share; 

work toward a planet transformed by our care.

My starting point for Ministry is the congregation, its ministry to the world and its covenant of membership.

The Covenant and the ministry are intimately linked but it might help to look briefly at each of these:

I believe that it is the task of the congregation to do its ministry and the task of a Minister to help it do this, not to do it for the congregation. As a Minister leads a congregation in its ministry to the world s/he acts as a spiritual leader of the congregation in many ways: acting as repository and explainer of the Heritage; being an example of integrity in action; modelling right relationship; teaching; inspiring & motivating; exploring ethical and social issues with members; enabling; leading the kind of worship that fosters individual growth and a compassionate community that can provide a model for larger society.

The covenant of membership is the expression of right relationship between members in their explorations and the care they exhibit to each other. This is too often implicit rather than explicit and its absence is the source of many splits within congregations. The basis of covenant in a liberal religious community centers on individuals in search, not on answers, but valuing nevertheless the variety of personal developing answers that are shared; valuing personal growth in sensitivity; in skill; in compassion.

A Minister fosters and enables this quality of relationship in a congregation through being alert to suffering, through teaching, inspiring, leading, through Presence and through worship that deepens individual and congregation commitment to bringing compassion and justice to each other and to those in the larger society who suffer.

The ministry of the congregation to the world will take different forms depending on the composition and situation of the congregation as well as the interests and skills of the leader.

The core activity of nurturing, teaching, and living our values needs a community to support individuals as they seek to make their lives meaningful, and meaningful is not just an intellectual exercise but is intuitive, spiritual, and practical. The unique thread of public worship brings things together but is not intended to stand alone and apart from action. As most of our congregations are urban and elderly, and as British society is more secular than formerly, the ministry to the world will often be less theological proclamation and confrontation than in our founding years of the early 19th Century. As our largely secular society is much more pluralist in faith and culture than formerly, our ministry will entail issues fostering and nourishing social justice, protection of minorities, working for community harmony, and providing space for reflection and refreshment. 

There are so many injustices in today's world that only a few can be tackled effectively; this can be discouraging but it also implies a wide range of choice of what issues to tackle and which bodies to collaborate with. The dynamics within congregations should process moral sensitivity among members in ways that lead to specific commitments to action based on their skills and interests.

Some typical issues would be:

promoting interfaith understanding [contact programmes, public witness and even protection, joint activities, tracking religious education programmes];

attempting to alleviate the extremes of poverty in our communities [support for food banks, night shelters, micro-loan schemes];

educating members and the public about changes that are needed to avoid disasters [global warming, personal health, community health];

raising funds for local, national, and international relief work [Red Cross, Oxfam, Guide Dogs];

providing safe communities for people to come together [pensioners' clubs, drivers for events and hospital visits, community education on local fraud];

maintaining civil liberty watches [supporting Amnesty International, Liberty, attending Local Authority meetings]; etc, etc. No individual and no congregation can tackle every issue but these and others are there to be tackled as expressions of ministry to a suffering world.

Historically Unitarians worked more as individuals in social justice than as communities but the modern world illustrates the importance of collaborate efforts; individuals are generally successful to the extent that they can harness the energies and skills of others.

Training our leaders to exercise leadership in this ministry requires both practical skill development [conflict resolution, public speaking, effective committee dynamics, general group dynamics, working with electronic tools] and background information [history of the major religious groups encountered in Britain, sociology of religion, legal requirements of charities] as well as personal insight tools [meditation, research, time management]. Perhaps the greatest priorities for our ministers should include the ability to listen, a basic sense of fairness, an understanding of process, appreciation of historical perspective, and how our individual personalities affect our perceptions. This will, in my opinion, involve a sense of collegiate responsibility larger than the congregation s/he serves and which enables and fosters the congregation's larger identity.

Today's world is radically different to the world I trained in. Tomorrow's world will be radically different to today's world. A Minister's work will change/ develop and a Minister's training must enable maximum flexibility in approach and constant learning through life.

Almost everything about my sense of Ministry also applies to those who exercise congregational leadership on a non-professional basis, but the time available and the entry level skills will vary more widely. This can be good, as closed circles don't grow as well or as fast as open ones, but the commitment level required may be more than can be managed. Congregations that have "lay" leadership may therefore have to adjust their ministry to utilise the strengths of the situation while compensating for the lack of training, skills, and commitment.

Rev. John Clifford

At an induction service I attended a few years ago I heard the words of the American Unitarian Universalist Minister Gordon McKeeman that repeated a familiar refrain 'ministry is everything we do together.' I thought that those were very nice words, and certainly poetic and powerful. But they got me wondering; because, in a way, those words negated the very thing that was happening at that very moment. If 'ministry is everything we do together' then why do we need a person called a 'minister'? The purpose of that service was not for the congregation to commit to the work before them (though that might be a very good purpose for a service); the purpose of that service was for one particular person to be called by that congregation to a specific role. And yet what can we say about this process of calling a particular person to a specific role? In today's Unitarian community the answer is 'very little.' When asked to talk about 'ministry' the first thing we say is 'ministry is everything we do together.' Which is fine as far as it goes. But if there is nothing more to be said than that, the logical conclusion is that we should not have a separate 'ministry.' If we do have a separate 'ministry,' if we have 'ministers' then we need to be able to say why we have them.

That's why I'm glad the Ministerial Fellowship has been pondering this question about the nature of ministry. I believe we need to ask the theological question, 'Why do we have ministers?' This is a seriously pressing question. As the Unitarian community struggles under the secular world of the 21st century, as financial pressures hit hard, congregations are asking the question: Can we afford to pay the stipend of a minister? Why should we have a minister? What is a minister for, anyway? These are good questions.

It seems to me that in regard to ministry we are stuck between two 'theological instincts.' One can be labelled the instinct towards equality. The other is the instinct towards education. Both instincts have always existed in our tradition and both are good instincts, but they sometimes pull in different directions and we are stuck in the tension between them.

As Unitarians we affirm equality: our theological commitment is to the idea that each person has sacred inherent worth and value and is capable of discerning religious Truth using their own reason, understanding and spiritual experience.

And we also affirm the value of education: our theological commitment is to education, reason, the pursuit of truth and science. Ignorance is not a virtue, and all of us are called to deepen our understanding of truth by taking in as much truth and wisdom as we can.

Is it possible to construct a model of Unitarian ministry that respects these two instincts while serving to clarify the role of 'ministers' in today's Unitarian community? I believe so.

I believe there are some phrases that help us understand what a Unitarian minister is, that are built upon our commitment to equality and to education.

The Unitarian minister as ministry coordinator

Ministry is everything we do together. Ministry is the work of the church. The word 'ministry' means the work of serving.

The Sunday school teacher, the flower arranger, the committee member, the pastoral visitor, the marcher in the protest: all of these people are most certainly involved in ministry, as they are all ministering, they are all serving.

But none of these activities happens by accident, or purely spontaneously. They take some organisation and coordination. Every human community, if it is to last the test of time, requires structures of organisation. As much as any group might resist it, structures are always needed. Even Quakers have clear structures. There are 'elders' primarily concerned with worship and 'overseers' primarily responsible for pastoral care. Roles and structures of ministry help a religious community to function.

So, for the ministry of all to function effectively, Unitarian communities need some kind of ministry coordination. Though, conceivably this could be done in all kinds of ways, the easiest way is for one person to be in the role of ministry coordinator.

Ministry coordination is not easy. A person in this role will need specialist skills and training. Everyone can offer their own form of ministry, but the task of coordinating that ministry of the whole community is a specialist skill. David Heywood, an Anglican priest, in the book Re- imagining Ministry calls for ministry to be seen as something that is the work of the whole church. But he goes on to say 'the role of the clergy in this new model of ministry requires of them more professional expertise rather than less. But... their social role is no longer to be understood as that of the "professional", whose status is based on the possession of specialist knowledge. Instead, their calling is to give away their status and power their training might qualify them for and by using their expertise to empower the whole church. Explicit in this model is the Unitarian commitment to equality. It must be affirmed that the person in this role is in no sense spiritually superior to others. The ministry coordinator does not belong to a separated and ordained class of people who are 'holier' than others.

The Unitarian minister as theologian-in-residence and community spiritual director.

The model of ministry coordinator captures a great deal about what we mean by ministry in Unitarianism, but not all of it There is another dimension to ministry. This dimension takes seriously the theological commitment to education. We can understand this dimension by using two phrases: minister as theologian-in-residence and minister as community spiritual director.

Historically, theologian-in-residence seems to be the most dominant understanding of Unitarian ministry. Being a theologian-in-residence requires the skill, the science, the art of relating the tradition, the intellectual understanding of the tradition, and ultimately God to the situation at hand in a particular community. The minister must lead the community into its own theological reflection. This requires teaching, prompting, questioning, inspiring.

Laurie Green calls this role being the 'people's theologian'. David Heywood writes, 'Rather than relating as professional over/against the community, she works within the community in something of the same way as the animator in community work, exercising the skills of the adult educator. While soaked in the Christian tradition, she must remain the servant rather than the controller of it, using her expertise to guide the process rather than claiming the right of final judgment, a role that requires considerable spiritual depth.'

The role of community spiritual director is many ways the same as theologian-in-residence. By using both phrases I do not want to suggest a sharp distinction between two different roles. Rather I want to suggest two vital dimensions to the same activity. Both dimensions ultimately ask the question 'how does this relate to the Holy?' Theology asks this question with the mind, spiritual direction asks this question with the heart. Again I must emphasise that these are not separate but two dimensions of the same process 

Whereas a spiritual director accompanies an individual in their spiritual journey, the minister accompanies the whole community. The minister does not dictate the will of God but prompting questions of the congregation: "Where is God? What is our mission? Where is our joy? Where are we being called to go? Why are we here in the first place?" The minister asks the questions, but the community must answer them.

The ministry of a theologian-in-residence and community spiritual director is not one that anyone can fulfil. It requires a level of intellectual and spiritual depth and maturity. It requires thorough education and training. It requires a great deal of resources to invest in this. And yet without it, there is a danger of spiritual stagnation and decline in a congregation; without it a congregation may be so busy getting on with things that it cannot remember why it is there in the first place.

We need ministers!

It seems that Unitarians are much better at articulating our commitment to equality than we are at articulating our commitment to education. This means we find it much easier to say 'ministry is everything we do together' than 'we think it's really important to have certain people called ministers in our congregations.' We need to be able to say both.

I believe by thinking of Unitarian ministers as ministry coordinators and theologians-in- residence/community spiritual directors we can keep both of our instincts of equality and education in our sights and be faithful to both of them. We need the coordination and encouragement of the ministry of all in serving, and the presence of someone who helps us to understand our deepest why. 

For both of these reasons, we need Unitarian ministers.

Rev. Stephen Lingwood

Gertrud von Petzold (First woman Unitarian Minister in UK)

Prepare For Our Children's Future

 One statement that got jotted up on the flip chart at the Vision Day was 'we need to prepare our children and young people for the rest of their lives.'

Reflecting on this I thought about the activities and themes we explore on Youth Programme weekends.

Our topics include self-esteem, leadership, exploration of gender and sexuality issues, meditation techniques, teamwork, listening skills, creativity and the building of rituals and sacred space. We all hope that these skills and experiences will help prepare our young people for valuable and happy adult lives in which they can find their voice, know some meditation and relaxation techniques, continue to develop an open, questioning faith if they wish and feel part of a supportive community. At youth weekends the youth leaders and young people have a great deal of freedom in choosing activities that seem relevant and we craft a kind of worship that feels fresh and engaging.

Many of our congregations have a rich tradition and history that holds and grounds them in the present. However, many of us know that it is this same rich heritage and church culture that can sometimes, paradoxically, prevent us from ensuring that the style of worship and kind of activities we offer are truly inviting and inspiring to local people who are seeking a vibrant, liberal faith and have yet to discover the Unitarian approach.

I believe we have a great deal to learn from our Unitarian young people. Our children and young people have a habit of speaking their truth, as many of us know only too well, and tend to have a preference for spontaneous exploration of the joys and challenges of today rather than the following old ways of doing things just for the sake of tradition.

Perhaps one could conclude that unless we make our weekly worship and mid-week activities more accessible to people of all ages, cultures and identities and truly keep our open minded, liberal faith alive and kicking and growing and really relevant for the needs of today's communities then we will inevitably watch our decline and slow transition from a dissenting, radical faith to a museum piece.
I believe it was a previous Bishop of Oxford, Richard Harries, who controversially predicted that the Unitarians would be the first religious movement in the UK to become extinct in the not too distant future. How can we collectively make sure that his fortune telling of doom does not come true?

So I would suggest that British Unitarians have a huge responsibility to continue to develop our work with children and young people for two main reasons.

Firstly, because our engagement with and investment in the younger generations has the power to transform lives.

Secondly, because unless we are proactive in bridging the gap between the way our young people want to put Unitarianism into practice and the way some of us want to protect our Sunday four hymn sandwich culture and other tried and tested ways of doing things then we may inevitably lose some of our relevance and vitality in today's ever changing society.

I would argue that we need to learn how children and teenagers' vision and ideas about our faith can prepare us adults for a more Unitarian, honest and vital future. We need to be more creative and proactive in seeking out this vision.

Greater involvement of young people in our decision making and governance would be a good step forward. Was it just a coincidence in the recent referendum on Scottish independence that young people of 16 and over were allowed to vote and the poll achieved one of the highest turn outs in recent history?

Recently, the newly formed Youth Strategy group made a formal proposal that an urgent priority for our Unitarian Movement should be to support a new position, preferably paid, to focus on engaging with and supporting the 18-35 age group.

For God's sake, or rather for the sake of ensuring that more people in Britain can find a welcoming, accessible liberal faith tradition when they look for it, let's invest more in our children and young people, not just financially but spiritually and politically.

Rev. John Harley GA Youth Coordinator