"Covenanting Together"
An agreement between two parties, where both say they will do something or
refrain from doing something is, today, usually, thought of as a contract -
or, if between countries, a treaty.
In earlier times, when religion was the center of a person's life, like T.V. and
text messaging are today, another word, “covenant”, was frequently heard.
The word “covenant” is usually heard
today only when one is referring to an agreement where one of the participants
is God. UUs, thus, seldom use the
word at all.
The bible relates that God covenanted with Adam
and Eve, with Noah, and
with Moses. Later he would also covenant with
other Jews, Christians and Muslims. The
term has been used when a prophet or a group of people agree to obey God's laws
and God, in turn, agrees to be "their" God – their protector and the one to whom
they could approach in prayer, like a father, strict but benevolent.
Prayer is a request that God remember his
side of the covenant.
When one enters into a covenant, whether with God or another person, there is
often an understanding that some sacrifice is implied -
a sacrifice like the sacrifice of the first fruits of the harvest or,
perhaps, the sacrifice of one’s unfettered freedoms.
A covenant, unlike a contract, however,
is not a legal obligation. The two
sides have no legal requirements, only an acceptance of moral commitment. The difference between a contract and
a covenant as one of obligation for the contract versus commitment for the
covenant.
One place where our society still understands the meaning of covenant is our
understanding of marriage. The vows
of marriage require a legal obligation, so the state steps in to sanction the
marriage. But, more importantly, a marriage is a commitment - a covenant. Perhaps, for this reason, marriage
should be taken out of the hands of the government which treats it as only
a legal obligation, and return it to the religious community where it is
understood to be a religious rite. Religion understands the distinction between
contracts and covenants. The
government has the power and authority to enforce legal contracts. It is able to legally decide
who shall be eligible to enter into contracts.
But, in being the sole arbiter of who can commit oneself to whom,
it is out of its league. It is
religion’s, not the government’s, prerogative, in my opinion, to affirm the
marriage of, that is to say the covenant between, those who wish to honestly and
deeply commit themselves to another.
This is why UU ministers, for at least the last thirty years, have been
enthusiastically celebrating gay and lesbian weddings. Commitment, covenanting, has nothing
to do with ones gender.
One does not support and encourage and champion another, one does not care for
and comfort one another, out of obligation, but out of love and commitment. One does not stick by one’s marriage
partner, even in the face of moral lapses and wrongs, out of obligation, but,
rather, out of love and commitment - covenant.
When the commitment is discovered to have become only obligation,
when love has become less than like, the legal severing of the relationship,
that is, divorce, though regretted and, perhaps, made demanding, should not be
prevented by the state or religion. There
are, of course, some instances when even after the legal obligations have been
severed by divorce, the moral commitment of covenant has remained, such as when
divorced parents continue to maintain amiable joint custody of children and
continue to have concern for one another’s well being. Another place where the word
“covenant” may still have some usefulness is the process of becoming a member of
a religious congregation.
For Unitarian Universalists, not unlike other religions, the covenanting process
is often slower and more gradual than one may be aware. It may begin when someone first walks
into a UU church. A person who hears
about a church, whether he or she has been a UU in the past or not, enters on a
Sunday or attends an evening Adult Education class with a tentative feeling and
may simply be interested in checking it out. This
person may be curious about what the congregation does, what kind of people
attend and what ideas and opinions the members have. This person, usually, is not prepared
to make any kind of commitment or covenant. This is but the first stage on the
road to covenanting with a church.
It might be called "window shopping ". Some
of the questions that the “window shopper” might ask are “Do I like these
people?" and "Are these people doing something that I want to do?"
A smile, a friendly chat, and/or an
interesting event might encourage the window shopper to consider coming back.
Yet, like any window shopper, what the
congregation displays may not be what the window shopper is seeking. If the window shopper is looking for
an Evangelical
Church or a Quaker Meeting or a Political Caucus
he or she may not return no matter how friendly we are.
On the other hand, a cool greeting or a sense that the members of the church are
much more affluent or much less affluent, not very intellectual or too
intellectual, etc. may turn off a window shopper. Even if everything else seems
agreeable, a major turn-off for the window shopper can be visible dissention
among the members.
It is like when a real estate agent shows a house where the kitchen sink is
filled with dirty dishes. Most
people have better things to do with their time than to covenant with a group
that is fighting and disdainful of one another.
(You may have noticed that the first thing that Interim Ministers are
expected to work on with the congregation is the healing of old wounds.)
There is no such thing as a church that will satisfy everyone. Yet, if this church, for instance,
is what they are seeking, it is important that we let them know who we are. It is for this reason that we need to
put our best foot forward every Sunday.
Newcomers don’t just show up at holiday times or when we put the welcome
mat out. In fact, one of the largest
crops of visitor this year was when the snow and ice kept most of our members at
home. Their churches were closed and
we were open.
There are many different things that a church can offer but all a church can
honestly do is present itself at its best.
And, therefore, every Sunday must be a UU Sunday. Even if we have a speaker from
another religion or from a social justice organization or in some other way not
specifically representative of Unitarian Universalism, the Worship Service
itself needs to be uncompromisingly UU.
If the first impression is positive and the person chooses to return he
or she might now be like a "theater goer". The
theater goer is interested in returning but only in the sense of passively
viewing what is going on in the congregation without making any commitment.
A small contribution at the offertory, a
purchase of sermons or pamphlets or, even, a contribution of a small item to the
yard sale may be made as the price of admission.
This is a very fragile stage. At
this stage a person may gradually become interested in becoming more involved
or, on the other hand, may discover that the full season series is not to their
liking. Sensitivity to the person needs
and listening to his or her questions and fears is, perhaps, more important here
than anywhere else. Someone at this stage
needs to be introduced to the minister and/or DRE and/or leaders of the church. At this point, they may like what
they see but still not know if they wish to become more involved. Many people
remain at this stage and will continue to attend the church every once in a
while, perhaps for years. It is a
frequent occurrence that one spouse may remain a “theater goer” indefinitely
even while the other becomes more and more involved in the church.
Some people jump into becoming members
and make a pledge at this stage.
While there is no reason prevent it or to believe that such a move is
inappropriate, for some, the tenure may be short lived.
The next stage occurs when the newcomer finds that he or she really likes what
is going on and decides that he or she really is ready to enter into a
covenantal relationship with the community. By
the time they formally join some have already felt that, to paraphrase
Jimmy
Carter, they had already “covenanted in
their heart”. These new members may now
become enthusiastic "cheer leaders". Cheerleaders go to all of the church
activities, coffeehouses, adult education classes and pot-lucks as well as
attend Sunday services regularly. They may not yet feel that they are fully on
the team but they enjoy participating, playing their part.
And they with to contribute to the team
effort. Too often we welcome them
too fervently and ask them to become committee chairs at this stage.
Bad idea.
We must be careful! It is at this
stage that newcomers can take on too much and quickly burn out. On the other
hand, they may be the ones who are most effective at bringing in other new
people. A membership growth
committee is best staffed by people at this stage. Unlike many older members,
cheerleaders do not yet have all of their friends in the church. They still have an, often extensive,
friendship and family network outside the church.
And many of these friends and relatives may want the same thing that they
found in a religious community. They
are, often, the best recruiters for a “Bring a Friend” Sunday. In addition, when the newcomer begins
to become fully involved, the church community must make sure that the covenant
is two-sided. We must make sure that
the cheerleader is fully recognized and honored.
We must inquire of him or her whether we are meeting their needs.
Are we offering something that he or she
is unable get elsewhere such as participation in a discussion group with like
minded people or a book club or writers group or joining the choir or
participating in social justice project.
There are many ways that people can benefit from a church but it is up us
to make sure that the individual does not feel that he or she is just giving and
not getting. A covenant requires
both.
True membership in the congregation and a feeling that you are more than just a
consumer of services, after a period of time, months or years, can occur. A deeper involvement may be
wished. Some people are now ready to make a commitment to the people, principles
and life of the congregation. Something more than a token financial contribution
may now be pledged and there is willingness to participate fully.
This person might now be likened to a
ball player on a team. Like a third
baseman he or she may become the one who can be counted on to do his or her
tasks day in and day out in a competent and effective manner.
Some ball players are stars who hit home
runs but others might be lead off batters who hit safely more often than not.
The ball player can be counted on to chair a committee and not let the team
down. When a task needs to be done, they
just pitch in and do it. It is important to freely choose to be part of a church
in order to feel that we are part of a covenanting congregation.
Yet when that does happen, when we truly
join the team we know it and everyone else does too.
We become the backbone of the church and
it just won't run without us. The
covenanting community exists through and for the sake of the members of the
covenanting community. As a covenanted group of people, the members of the
church have an obligation to be a supportive community when any of the
individuals is in need, either physically or emotionally. The covenanting
church, also, has an obligation to try to meet the spiritual, questing needs of
its members.
One of the unique aspects, of covenanting is that it is not simply a
contractual relationship between two parties.
It is, rather, the paradoxical phenomenon that the more one contributes
the greater the rewards. Like the Chinese finger game where the harder one pulls
the stucker one becomes, in a church the more that one contributes in time,
energy and money the more one receives.
It is for this reason that a person's pledge usually increases the longer
he or she is a member. Initially one may
figure out what to pledge by adding up the cost of entertainment, meals and
classes that one has attended. While they
may wish to contribute their fair share, a fare share is often understood to
mean the price of a ticket. Only later
may it become apparent that the church is depending on each person for its very
survival. In the end, a person may
discover that he or she wishes to return to others the benefits that have been
obtained from the church. A pledge
such as this may be way out of proportion to one's fair share.
There are many people who contribute tens of thousands of dollars a year to UU
churches. They are certainly contributing
more that their fair share. Why would
someone do that? For some it probably has to do with the fact that the church
was there for them at a time when they needed it.
Perhaps they found here a family that they never knew they had. It may
have been because here they finally felt that they "fit in" - they no longer
felt like a religious black sheep (or frog!) of society.
Or it may simply be that they wish to
contribute to something bigger than they are. One of the important powerful
aspects of any religion is the grandness, the expansiveness, the cosmic quality
that a religion contains.
For, religion, as Alfred North Whitehead wrote:
is the vision of something which stands beyond, behind, and within the passing
flux of immediate things;
something which is real, and yet waiting to be realized;
something which is a remote possibility, and yet the greatest of present facts;
something that gives meaning to all that passes, and yet eludes apprehension;
something whose possession is the final good, and yet beyond all reach;
something which is the ultimate ideal, and the hopeless quest.
The value of a church covenant is that it is between the congregation and each
of us and yet, it is each individual who by his or her actions contribute to the
ability of this community to meet his or her needs.
UU minister, Rev. Robert T.
Latham, wrote:
As an individual human, while I am alive, it is my physical being that copes
with the demands of environmental change and serves as the carrier of my values.
However, institutions, as groups of people, have a fittest capacity that far
exceeds that of the single individual. The lesson is that if I, as an
individual, wish the values I cherish to survive my body’s demise, then I must
invest my resources in an institution that by virtue of its fittest capacities,
can guarantee their continuing perpetuation.
Another lesson is that all of the resources I expend seeking to initiate and
sustain social change will come to naught unless those resources are supportive
of institutional carriers whose values are reflective of the change I seek.
Further, any institution worthy of my resources will be committed to those
wisdoms and dynamics that create the kind of power that impacts the social
order.
If the Covenant is not as strong as we would like, if the congregation is not
meeting our needs, it is only we ourselves who can change that situation.
A religious community, ultimately, is not the building, not the minister, not
even the values upon which it is built, noble as they may be, but the
individuals that make up the community.
Those individuals, in covenant with one another, create something larger
and grander and more significant than any alone could hope to be alone.