March 26, 2006 The United Church of Christ: a radical experiment in Christian unity Elizabeth C. Nordbeck,  Moses Brown Professor of Ecclesiastical History Andover Newton Theological School (Right-click to save to your computer or right-click "Open in new window" to start streaming.)   Agenda Program (PDF)   Lecture Outline below

photos by George Delianides

Ten Basic Questions, or, Everything You Always Wanted to Know
about the UCC...
by Elizabeth C. Nordbeck

l. What IS the United Church of Christ, anyway? The UCC is a union of four
traditions, each of which has its own history and regional presence. These ar
* Congregationalists (a New England tradition that traces its American roots back to
the Pilgrims and Puritans, and its English roots back to the 1580s)
* Christians (an indigenous, east coast American tradition that grew out of post-revolutionary
revivalism, around 1800)
* Reformed (a German immigrant tradition that was brought to the mid-Atlantic states
in the early 1700s; another wave of immigration in the 1830s brought the Reformed
tradition to parts of the mid-west)
* Evangelicals (a German tradition from Prussia, brought to the mid-west by
immigrants around 1840)

The UCC was formed in 1957. Prior to that union, Congregationalists and Christians had
united in 1931, and Evangelicals and Reformed had united in 1934.

2. Why did these groups unite, and what in the world did they have in common?
They united because they believed deeply that Jesus calls Christians to be one, for the
sake of the credibility of the gospel in the world. Although they were different in many
ways, by the mid-20th century they shared a concern for mission and social action, an
emphasis on education for both laity and clergy, commitment to Christian nurture for the
propagation of the faith, a conviction that the many denominations should be one, and a
generally progressive or liberal theological outlook.

3. Liberal!? I always hear that the UCC is “liberal.” What does this mean? The UCC
is part of a group of churches often called the “Protestant mainline” churches. Although
all of these denominations include people of widely varying theological viewpoints, they
are generally considered “liberal” because 1)they understand the Bible as authoritative,
but in some respects culturally conditioned; 2)they affirm culture itself and the possibility
of human progress; 3)they affirm that “God is still speaking,” that “God has yet more
light and truth to break forth from his holy word”-t h a t is, that each generation must
seek both to understand and to articulate God’s word freshly. It is this conviction that
historically, and today, has inspired some members of the UCC and its constituent
traditions to take social stands (such as opposition to slavery) that have been
controversial.

When someone questions you about the UCC’s liberal theological perspectives, tell them
this: “The UCC is dogmatic about not being dogmatic.” That’s what we mean by
“liberal.”

4. So, then, what does the United Church of Christ believe? If anyone should ask you
this, tell them to re-frame the question! Why? Unlike some churches--e.g., Roman ?
Catholicism-the UCC has no magisterium, or overarching governing body, that
determines the specifics of faith and practice. Each local church articulates its own
theological stance, often in a written covenant or statement of faith. This means that there
is a great deal of theological diversity within the UCC. However, by voting to be part of
the UCC itself, local congregations have indicated two important convictions. First, they
have assented implicitly to four broad themes that distinguish the United Church of
Christ among denominations: mission, ecumenism, diversity, justice. Second, and even
more important, they have assented to certain very basic principles that are stated in the
UCC’s founding documents. These documents indicate, among other things, that
* Jesus Christ (not a pope or bishop or president) is the head of the church
* the UCC claims as its own the historic creeds and confessions of the church, as well
  as the writings of the Protestant reformers

The UCC thus stands in the historic tradition of Protestant orthodoxy. However, it uses
formal statements of orthodoxy as testimonies, not tests, of those things commonly held
among its members. An excellent consensus statement of general UCC understanding is
the motto of Eden Theological Seminary, a school in the Evangelical tradition: In
essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty,- in all things, charity.

5. But what does the UCC believe about the Bible and biblical authority? There is no
single “UCC understanding” about the Bible. Generally, however, UCC members
understand something like the following: the Bible is uniquely authoritative, although
tradition, experience, and reason are also important sources of authority. The Bible is not
a rule book, a history book, a geography book, or a genealogy text. Rather it is a divinely
inspired drama- the drama of God’s plan of salvation for God’s own family. As such, it
is not to be read as a series of proof-texts, but in its entirety, for its broad and unequivocal
themes of judgment, forgiveness, love, and redemption.

6. How is the UCC governed? The polity, or governance, of the UCC is ultimately
congregational, that is, each local church has the full legal authority (often referred to as
autonomy) to handle its own affairs. However, for the sake of good order as well as
mission, mutual accountability is paired with autonomy: local churches agree to work
together in regional associations to authorize ministries and to handle disciplinary
matters. Conferences, made up of associations, provide local churches with needed
services, and provide a link with the church in its national setting. General Synod is a
representative national body, made up of delegates from conferences and others; it meets
biennially to do the work of the denomination.

Each of these settings of the church --local, regional, and national-ideally relates to the
others covenantally. This does not mean, for example, that local churches must do or
agree with what is decided at General Synod; General Synod speaks to, not for, the
churches. However, being in covenant does suggest that local churches should consider
Synod’s actions prayerfully and fully, even if they ultimately disagree. The reverse, of
course, is also true.

7. But what, exactly, does “covenant” mean, and how does it relate to the UCC?
Most often these days, we hear the word “covenant” used legally or contractually, as a .
quid pro quo (“if you do this for me, I’ll do that for you”). Theologically, however,
“covenant” is very different; it is a biblical concept that refers to a mutual agreement, in
God’s presence, between parties. (Perhaps the most famous covenant is that of the Salem
Church (now Danvers, MA) of 1629: “We covenant with the Lord and one with an other
and doe bynd our selves in the presence of God, to walke together in all his waies,
according as he is pleased to reveale himself unto us in his blessed word of truth.”)

In the UCC, the different settings of the church-local, regional and national-are in
covenant. This means that they agree to respond to one another seriously, respectfully,
and prayerfully-or in other words, they agree “to walk together in all God’s ways,” even
in the midst of disagreements. Nationally, the bodies that carry out denominational
mission-General Ministries, Local Church Ministries, Wider Church Ministries, and
Justice and Witness Ministries-are called “covenanted” ministries, signaling the mutual
responsibility they too have with the rest of the church. Some people have even suggested
that our entire system of governance should be called “covenant polity.”

8. I disagree politically with what I see coming out of the conference and the
national setting of the church. Why are they so unresponsive to people like me, and
what can I do about it? The UCC, like the United States, can be understood as a
representative democracy in which majority rules. (One can argue that a consensus model
might be better, but so far, only the Quakers have managed that-and they aren’t even a
fully Christian group anymore.) Being a representative democracy means that there really
is no “us” and “them;” the people who vote for or against certain matters are members of
local churches-just like us-w h o are chosen as delegates. If the conference, or the
Synod, appears unresponsive to particular interests, it is generally because
    1)individuals who hold certain views have not been active and vocal within their
        association and conference, or
    2)those interests represent a minority viewpoint and have been voted down.

Sometimes an individual may decide, after prayerful consideration, that his or her views
are sufficiently different from those of the majority that the best solution is to seek a new
fellowship. This is true in the UCC, as in all denominations. Thankfully, in America we
are blessed with a wide variety of churches that together meet the diverse devotional and
theological needs of most faithful Christians. Neither local congregations nor individual
believers should feel guilt or anger about the occasional need for some to seek new
denominational homes.

9. Okay, General Synod and the conferences speak “to, not for” the churches. But if
they are spending money on things I don’t approve of, aren’t they in some sense
acting for me, without my agreement? Good point; any governing body that handles
finances must make decisions about them without checking each decision with the entire
constituency -a n d some of those decisions will be ones we ourselves wouldn’t have
made. Again it’s important to remember the nature of representative democracy. The
entire structure of the UCC, in both its original and its restructured form, was designed,
vetted, amended, and ultimately approved by people like us-representatives of local
churches, including both laity and clergy-who believed they were collectively 0
following the guidance of the Holy Spirit. (This is very different from, say, a structure
that is created by councils of bishops or clergy only.) The UCC’s various social action
priorities and all structures that support them have also been approved by representatives
like us.

10. I’m a Congregationalist. I don’t want anyone telling me what to do. Why should
my local church have anything to do with this denomination? It’s a profound
misunderstanding of historic Congregationalism to think that autonomy was ever
absolute. In fact, from 1620 on, Congregational churches regularly met together and
mutually agreed to abide by common advisory decisions about matters of discipline,
mission, and ministry. Typically, “vicinage councils” were called when a local church
needed advice and counsel, and the decision of the vicinage council was generally
accepted voluntarily. (Today’s associations play a similar role in the United Church of
Christ.) Autonomy always has been coupled with accountability in the New England
Congregational tradition. The United Church of Christ represents a gathering of churches
that have agreed to be mutually accountable for the same good reasons
Congregationalists joined together historically: for the sake of discipline, mission, and
ministry-all of which can be done more efficiently and effectively in cooperative
settings.

Elizabeth C. Nordbeck
Moses Brown Professor of Ecclesiastical History
Andover Newton Theological School

---

Old South Church
645 Boylston St.
Boston, MA 02116