Seattle WA, December 10– 12, 2008
Sarah Lammert, VP UUMA

The Excellence on Ministry Summit was called together by the Panel on Theological Education to focus on the following question: “What is the future of ministerial and lay leadership formation in the UU movement?” 65 individuals, including three representatives from the UUMA’s CENTER Committee and three members of the UUMA Executive Committee were invited to participate in this three day conference. In addition to the UUMA, the MFC, UUA Staff, four theological schools (the two UU schools plus Andover-Newton and Harvard), DRUMM, Shelter Rock, the UUA Board, LREDA, UUMN and guests which included parish and community ministers, as well as youth were included in this event. Rev. Christine Robinson attended as a blogger and her (dare I say “excellent) notes can be read at www.iminister.blogspot.com. Susan Beaumont, Senior Consultant with the Alban Institute did an excellent job of facilitating this event.

As a framework for the discussions, Open Space Technology was employed, which allowed the participants to propose conversation topics in five time slots. The intent of this design is to leave any conclusions or results open, without pre-determination. Notes of 7 of these conversations, as well as the ten page transcript of an incisive keynote address by Dan Aleshire, President of the Association of Theological Schools, entitled “The Tyranny of Excellence” can be found (I’m saving you much digging through the UUA website here) at http://www.uua.org/aboutus/governance/board-appointedcommittees/panelthe....

With the basics laid out above, I want to offer my personal perspective on the conference. The Summit was convened in response to conversations among UUA Trustees, district presidents, the UUMA Exec and others asking, "Who is responsible for encouraging deep, effective ministry within Unitarian Universalism?” Among the key influences which shaped our time together was the ruckus created when the Panel on Theological Education (POTE) recommended to the UUA Board that it no longer direct the majority of its funds to Starr King School for the Ministry and Meadville-Lombard School. These funds, which come from a VEACH established endowment, amounted to about a quarter of a million dollars for each school’s operating budget annually. From POTE’s point of view, some of the critical issues we face in terms of ministerial formation include “recruitment, disparity of resources available to students at Unitarian Universalist (UU) and non-UU schools, accountability, and continuing education for clergy and laity.” They wish to use some of their funds to address these areas. Although the two UU schools have different perspectives, it is clear that in this economic climate all small theological schools are under tremendous financial stress and that the loss of this source of income (and sense of support and connection from the UUA) is significant.

A major thread of conversation at the Summit was dedicated to unearthing the history around the relationships (both positive and negative) between the UU Theological Schools and the UUA. This conversation continued through all of the time slots in one way or another, and it is clear that there is more work to be done. Exactly how the UUMA fits into this conversation isn’t completely clear, although steps were taken at the conference to begin imagining how we might forge stronger ties to our UU schools in terms of planning future continuing education for our colleagues through CENTER. At the UUMA Annual Meeting in 2008 it was clear that there is grave concern for the future of both Starr King and Meadville-Lombard over the near and long term, as centers of UU identity, ministerial formation, and UU scholarship. In addition, the needs of UUs studying for the ministry at non-UU schools is something that we need to look at. It was the feeling at the Summit that these students sometimes graduate without the social networking, mentorship and UU identity formation that is key to successful ministry. In addition, there is broad concern for the financial load and debt our students are incurring in all settings. One student at the Summit referred to internship, CPE, and some of the continued learning mandated by the MFC through the fellowshipping process (such as working with a spiritual director for a year) as “unfunded mandates.”

The other thread of the conference was an array of imaginative, future oriented conversations that looked at theological, spiritual and emotional depth in our process of ministerial formation – both lay and ministerial. At the end of our five sessions, each of us was allowed to vote for 8 conversations that would provide the direction moving forward for the “excellence in ministry” conversation. In addition to continuing the conversation about formal theological education per se, these topics included:
• “ARAOMC and Resistance”
• “Whose Are We?”
• “What’s the Model of Church we are Assuming for Leadership Training?”
• “Ministerial Culture, UU Growth and the Impact of the Credentialing Process”
• “Collaborating for Collegiality and Continuing Education”
• “Lay Theological Education”
• “Fostering Emotional Maturity and Spiritual Depth”

Personally, I was please and surprised at the emphasis on theological framing and spiritual formation -- balanced by discussion of institution-building -- in this conference. The conversations were rich, deep and meaningful. Having representatives from Harvard and Andover-Newton in the persons of Dudley Rose and Nick Carter, as well as the ideas offered by Dan Aleshire had a broadening effect on the conversations I attended. I learned statistics like these: 50% of all MDiv candidates study at 12 schools, 9 of which are Evangelical Christian Seminaries. 50% of congregants in the U.S. (not just UU) were not raised in their current faith tradition. 30 % of today’s churches use projected images in worship; yet of those considered “thriving” 75% do.

I wish to thank the Panel on Theological Education, and in particular its chair, the Rev. Barbara Merritt, and the Rev. David Pettee, the UUA staff organizer for the conference for creating such a rich Summit. For the UUMA, many of our hopes for the event were realized, including defining “excellence in ministry” in such a way that excellent ministers are a part of a larger vision that includes congregations and shared ministry, building stronger partnerships in this effort, and beginning to imagine future models of ministerial formation. POTE will meet in mid-January to determine next steps arising from the conference, and we continue to hope that clear role assignments, accountabilities and agreements will be developed, and that a management team representing the key players will be organized that has the power to be effective in moving the conversations forward. The UUMA Executive Committee remains committed to being a key part of this conversation in service of strengthening our ministry through collegiality and continuing education.