A Journey of Renewal—Minister’s Report to the Cambridge Unitarian Church AGM, 2026

A Journey of Renewal

I wish to begin by thanking our trustees—Celia James, Sue Tombs, Jacqui Carnall, and Elden Horner—who have worked extremely hard to navigate the significant administrative burden entailed by our transition to a Charitable Incorporated Organisation (CIO). Their diligence in transferring our financial assets and ensuring our buildings are correctly registered with the Land Registry has been invaluable. Additionally, I would like to thank Courtney Van de Weyer, David Burns, and our administrator, Thomas Carlisle, for their vital assistance to the Trustees throughout this process. 

Our Shared Purpose

As a CIO, all our work must be centred around our “Object,” which aligns with that of the General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches:

    Preamble 

We, the constituent congregations, affiliated societies and individual members, uniting in a spirit of mutual sympathy, co-operation, tolerance and respect; and recognising the worth and dignity of all people and their freedom to believe as their consciences dictate; and believing that truth is best served where the mind and conscience are free, acknowledge that the Object of the Assembly is:

    Object    

To promote a free and inquiring religion through the worship of God and the celebration of life; the service of humanity and respect for all creation; and the upholding of the liberal Christian tradition.

To ensure we remain capable of fulfilling this mission in uncertain times—times which are becoming considerably less conventionally religious and, arguably, less free and inquiring than at any point since the Second World War—we have been forced to pay urgent attention to two interconnected areas: the clarity of our vision and the sustainability of our home.

Clarifying our Tradition 

The first task has been to define what it means for us to “uphold the liberal Christian tradition” today. To do so is to engage in a dynamic, evolutionary process rather than a static preservation of dogma. It is rooted in a historical-critical theology that recognises all faith as a syncretic, human phenomenon, and an anti-dogmatic commitment to rational inquiry that values the “unanswered question” over the “unquestioned answer.”

Ours is a tradition that fosters a non-sectarian openness, acknowledging that our heritage is porous and interconnected with the world’s diverse spiritual and secular philosophies. Ultimately, it affirms individual religious experience within a cooperative community—a trinity of self, others, and community—that allows our faith to remain unobstructed by sectarian boundaries. By loyally following this path, we find that our tradition naturally transcends itself, moving towards a free-religious spirituality that honours the generous spirit of the human Jesus alongside all great religious teachers. We have sought to articulate this by focusing on the “Principles of Living” by Imaoka Shin’ichirō and the “Ten Advices” of Norbert Fabián Čapek. Another way we have articulated it is through the draft text we submitted to the Charity Commissioners. We told them we were meeting together for:

“The advancement of a free and inquiring religion based on the Liberal Christian heritage which draws also on Radical Enlightenment philosophies, religious naturalism, other religious traditions and humanism; the celebration of life through service to humanity and respect for the natural world; the promotion of religious and racial harmony, inclusivity, equality and diversity.”

Ultimately, the Charity Commissioners did not accept this as an acceptable Object, but regardless of their decision, the statement continues to stand as our interpretation of what “upholding the liberal Christian tradition” means for us today.

[To understand a little better what I am talking about here please read my short thought for the day given to the Cambridge Unitarian Church in November 2023 called: “Why ‘upholding the liberal Christian tradition’ need not be the same thing as upholding Liberal Christianity”.]

Stewardship of our Resources

This theological clarity is vital because it informs the second urgent matter: the state of our buildings. Currently, our premises—particularly their insulation, roofs, and windows—are in a poor state of repair. The cost of heating them is becoming unsustainable, and we are unable to rent them out effectively in the current climate.

We firmly intend to maintain a secure home for a free and inquiring religion in Cambridge, serving as a hub for a tolerant, secular civic society. However, we recognise that we must “cut our coat according to our cloth.” After extensive consultation with the congregation, we have concluded that to achieve this we likely need to sell our hall. This would provide the necessary funds for a proper refurbishment of the church and the conversion of the old manse into community rooms, an office, toilets, and a kitchen.

Success in this endeavour would mean maintaining two buildings that are fit for purpose, rather than three that are a burden. While it is sobering to note that almost every other denomination is facing similar struggles, we are heartened by the local support for this vision.

Looking Ahead 

At present, we possess the financial, material, and personal resources to attempt this transition. We are fortunate to have what is known in business as a “runway”—sufficient time and capital to secure our future before the situation becomes unsustainable. I am deeply grateful to the Trustees and the congregation for awakening to this urgent need.

All the administrative and practical shifts I have mentioned are keyed to one goal: ensuring we continue to uphold our Object for years to come. A free and inquiring religion is precisely what the world needs today, and we remain committed to providing it.