Tag: MFC notices

Follow up to a clergy misconduct allegation

Back in 2022, I mentioned in a year-end blog post that Rev. Kathryn J. Rohde had been removed from fellowship by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). Now it turns out there’s a (publicly available) sequel.

The following year, 2023, Rohde sued the UUA for removing her from fellowship, and further for ending the retirement stipend she received from the “Unitarian Service Pension Society” (an organization I didn’t even know existed). You can read the basic court documents here, but I read about the case in a blog post by Daniel Dalton on the website of Dalton-Tomich, a law firm specializing in “religious properties” (a legal speciality I didn’t even know existed).

According to the court filings, and Daniel Dalton’s blog post, Rohde got in trouble because of a social media post made in 2020:

“In 2020, Rohde posted in a private Facebook group with about 1,200 members. Three individuals found her posts offensive and reported them to the UUA.  The UUA allegedly initiated a disciplinary process against Rohde, despite her being retired. Rohde claims the process was politically motivated, driven by a ‘woke’ faction within the UUA. She was stripped of her ministerial credentials and retirement stipend, with no clear violation of UUA policies cited.”

[Parenthetical note: “private Facebook group” is an oxymoron; social media is never private.]

[Another parenthetical note: Both the court filing and the Daniel Dalton blog post state that Rohde alleged she was the victim of sexual harassment early in her ministerial career — an allegation I would expect to be true, based on what older women ministers told me about the way they were treated by male ministers and denominational officials in the late twentieth century.]

Daniel Dalton goes on to reveal what the court decided; or rather, didn’t decide:

“In a ruling on July 11, 2025, Judge Mary Kay Costello issued a mixed ruling on the defendants’ motion to dismiss based on the ministerial exception to the First Amendment. Rev. Rohde’s claims of defamation, invasion of privacy (false light);  tortious interference with contract, and breach of contract (specifically regarding her removal from fellowship and alleged procedural failures) were dismissed without prejudice. However, her claims of breach of contract, related to her retirement benefits, breach of contract against the Unitarian Service Pension Society and promissory estoppel were allowed to continue. The court also granted Rohde the opportunity to file an amended complaint by July 25, 2025, consistent with the court’s decision.”

I have not been able to find out whether Rohde filed an amended complaint. I did find out that the usual vocal critics of the UUA — the Fifth Principle Project, the North American Unitarian Council, etc. — have been trumpeting Rohde’s case as another example of how “wokeness” has overtaken the UUA. Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post also picked up the story, using it to castigate so-called cancel culture.

Daniel Dalton, however, draws different conclusions from this case. First, he points out that most of Rohde’s claims were dismissed, not necessarily on their merit (or lack of merit), but rather on the legal notion of “ministerial exception.” As I interpret this, the dismissal, then, does not necessarily represent a judicial judgement (for or against) on Rohde’s claims.

Second, he notes that the Rohde case “prompts questions” in the area of “governance and accountability” regarding disciplinary procedures. Such question could lead to “greater transparency in internal investigations.” While Dalton seems to direct this comment at the UUA, I would imagine that local congregations should also pay attention to this — disciplinary procedures should always be clear and transparent.

Among other conclusions, Dalton points out that this case highlights the need to balance freedom of expression over against “community values.” Dalton suggests: “UU congregants and leaders may need to find ways to balance inclusivity with respecting diverse viewpoints.”

Dalton also highlights “ideological splits within the denomination,” and he then speculates if this might prompt “wider discussions on political polarization, identity politics, and theological diversity” within Unitarian Universalism. I think we Unitarian Universalists try to ignore the divisions among us, but Dalton shows us just how visible those divisions are to outsiders.

So that’s the inconclusive sequel to the 2022 removal of Kate Rohde from ministerial fellowship. Yet even though this sequel is inconclusive, there’s one conclusion I’d like to draw. Expanding on what Daniel Dalton says, I think it would be good to have additional clarification on Unitarian Universalist disciplinary policies for ministers (at both the denominational and local levels), as well as “greater transparency in internal investigations” (again, at both the denominational and local levels). The problem is that I don’t know how to make that happen. Our individualism means we find it hard to work together. 25 years of budget cuts have left the UUA understaffed in some key areas. Wider American society has grown polarized, and people are tender and raw. All these factors are going to make it extremely hard to come together to talk openly about a difficult topic like how we discipline clergy.

12 Oct. 2025: Minor edit made that didn’t change basic content (added brackets and intro phrase to the second parenthetical note).

Another

Email piled up while I was on vacation. I missed the fact that the Ministerial Fellowship Committee sent out another notice back on July 16:

“With regret, I am writing to inform you that the Rev. Kaaren Anderson has resigned her fellowship during a full fellowship review with the UUA’s Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) for bullying and abusive behaviors in the workplace including in prior ministries. This fellowship review occurred after a full investigation by an independent investigator. The Executive Committee of the MFC met with the Rev. Anderson in early July and recommended removal from fellowship, necessitating a full fellowship review. It was during this process that the Rev. Anderson resigned.”

As I’ve said before, I do wonder who the independent investigator was. Does the UUA have enough money to pay for an outside law firm or consulting firm to carry out these reviews? If not, who is the independent investigator? In any case, Kaaren Anderson has her own website, where you can her employment history.

MFC/RECC action

The Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) and the Religious Education Credentialing Committee (RECC) of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) sent an email dated July 9. It reads:

“This email is to inform you of recent decisions of the UUA’s professional credentialing bodies. The Religious Education Credentialing Committee (RECC) has terminated the religious educator credentials of Gregory Carrow-Boyd. This determination was upheld by the Board of Review, upon appeal. The RECC was referred this case, following a decision by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee to remove Mr. Boyd from ministerial aspirant status because of conduct unbecoming of a minister, pursuant to UUMA Ethical Standard 13 – specifically sexual misconduct connected to consent, boundaries, and power dynamics. The MFC affirmed the findings of the thorough, independent investigation, which found a persistent pattern of these boundary violations and misconduct over many years.”

He was most recently the combined minister and director of religious education at the UU congregation in Honolulu. As always, by posting this I’m making no judgement about the facts of this particular situation. I post these on my blog simply because not everyone gets these emails. In addition, the page on the UUA website where these decisions are listed now appears to be hidden from public view and available only by application to the UUA; presumably this is part of the UUA’s decision to hide names and identifying information from bad actors. While making it more difficult to see this page is probably the right thing to do (in our current tumultuous socio-political moment), it also makes it easier to overlook this important repository of MFC judgements.

There is one thing in this email that I’d like to know more about. The email references a “thorough, independent investigation.” It makes sense to have an independent investigation, but I’d like to know who made this investigation. Identifying the investigating body would increase transparency, and consequently increase trust in the overall process.

On another topic — I don’t remember getting an email from the Religious Education Credentialing Committee before. I didn’t know that they could terminate religious education credentials. It makes sense that they can do so; I just didn’t know about it.

Update 15 July 2025: Added a sentence that got left out by mistake in the editing process.

Sigh. Not again.

I got one of those emails today, informing me that a Unitarian Universalist minister has been removed from fellowship. It read:

“The Ministerial Fellowship Committee voted recently to remove the Rev. John Saxon from fellowship for actions and behaviors constituting bullying, creating a hostile environment, and conduct unbecoming a minister.”

A quick web search (including what appears to be his Facebook page) shows John L. Saxon as a professor of public law and government at UNC-CH, retiring from there in 2010. He graduated from Meadville/Lombard Theological School in 2009, serving as hospital chaplain for Alamance Regional Medical Center, beginning c. 2010. He was assistant at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Raleigh, N.C., beginning in 2010, then later lead minister; he left the latter position in 2017. From 2017 to 2020 he was Executive Director of the Unitarian Universalist Social Justice Ministry for North Carolina, and then apparently from 2020 to 2022 he was president of the organization (online sources are not clear). One brief bio of him says he retired in 2022, so it’s not at all clear where he allegedly engaged in the actions that led the Ministerial Fellowship Committee to remove him from fellowship.

As usual when I publish these announcements, I’m making no judgements on the truth of the allegations. I’m publishing these because up until a few years ago the UUA did not maintain a public list of this sort of thing; and since then it has become increasingly difficult to find out where the accused ministers have worked.

I will make one general comment, though, which is that removing a minister from fellowship for bullying now appears to be more common than removing a minister from fellowship for sexual misconduct. Does this mean I believe UU ministers are no longer engaging in sexual misconduct? No, I suspect it’s simply more difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to come forward. [Plus as I outline in a later post in this series, there are societal factors leading to more bullying.]

First in a series of posts on clergy and bullying — Sigh. Not Again. — What ministerial bullying looks like — What ministers didn’t learn in theological school — When clergy get bullied — The opposite of a bullying boss

Another one

Well, sadly the Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) just sent out another notice of a minister removed from fellowship.

I keep on posting these notices here, just so there’s more of an online record of these events. By posting this, I’m not making any judgement about the minister in question, nor about the MFC’s decision. Since I’m not privy to the facts of the case, there’s no way I could make a judgement. My only purpose in posting this is to hopefully increase transparency just a teeny bit when ministers are removed from fellowship.

Here’s what the email from the MFC said:

“The Ministerial Fellowship Committee voted recently to remove the Rev. Kelly Spahr from fellowship for violation of MFC Rule 26, which requires ministers to notify the MFC immediately of any complaint of abuse and/or neglect of a child or any other person brought against the minister, and/or any complaint of domestic violence, harassment or request for a restraining order brought against the minister.”

Note that Rule 26 doesn’t appear to mean that a minister has engaged in, or been convicted of, abuse, domestic violence, etc.; the rule merely says that a minister must notify the MFC if such a complaint is lodged against them; i.e., even if there’s a false accusation, a minister still has to notify the MFC. This makes sense. But this also makes me realize that I haven’t read the MFC rules in a couple of decades, and if I ever knew about this rule I’ve long since forgotten it. Now I feel ignorant. And it looks like I had better review the MFC rules in the very near future.

Update, 10/23: Another email from the MFC came in at 7:56 yesterday evening: “The Ministerial Fellowship Committee voted recently to remove the Rev. David Kohlmeier from fellowship for egregious violation of the MFC’s rules and UUMA Guidelines, as well as our fundamental Unitarian Universalist values.” Kohlmeier had already been suspended from fellowship in 2022. Online, you can find plenty of news stories about Kohlmeier, but here’s a quick summary: In September, 2022, he was arrested in a sting operation and charged with using social media to solicit sex from minors. In March, 2024, he pleaded guilty to “felony attempted involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child under 16.” To make an obvious point: in this case, the legal facts are clear. Kohlmeier worked at the Falmouth, Mass., UU congregation from 2017 to 2021, and at the Harrisburg, Penna., UU congregation from 2021 t0 September, 2022.

June, 2025: Edited.

Minister out of fellowship

The Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) just sent an email to congregational leaders saying:

“The Ministerial Fellowship Committee voted recently to remove the Rev. Dr. Marian Stewart from fellowship for violating the terms of her probation. These terms were set in 2023 by the Committee based upon a complaint against Rev. Dr. Stewart. Refusal to adhere to those terms violates Rule 21 of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee, which requires ministers in fellowship to fully cooperate with the terms of their probation.”

Marian Stewart has already been removed from the online UUA database of professional staff. But her name is not listed on the UUA webpage “UUA Clergy Removed of Resigned from Fellowship with Completed or Pending Misconduct Investigations.” So maybe this is not misconduct? If so, then what’s this all about? Your guess is as good as mine as to why she was removed from fellowship.

Another website says that Stewart is retired from active ministry. So the violation of MFC probation could be anything from she just didn’t bother filling in MFC paperwork (because: retired), to — who knows what.

I understand the desire for transparency has to be balanced with the need for privacy and confidentiality. But somehow this email makes me feel that the balances have tipped well away from transparency in this case.

I also understand how hard it can be to come up with a process that covers all eventualities, so I’m willing to cut the MFC a fair amount of slack. But still, this email feels like it’s aimed at insiders, people who are already in the know — and those like me who are not insiders are left outside wondering what’s going on.

Part of my angst here is that I’ve spent a good part of my career in Unitarian Universalism cleaning up after clergy misconduct (and misconduct by other paid professionals). Clergy misconduct, in my view, thrives in secrecy and ambiguity. Thus when I see ambiguous statements like this one coming from the UUA, it bothers me.

Oh well. Listen to me whining. Heck, lots of things bother me. Just because something bothers me, don’t let it bother you.

More alleged misconduct, and a glitch in the notification system

I received an email today signed by Sarah Lammert, the executive secretary of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC) of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). The MFC was notifying congregational leaders that Rev. Stephen Furrer had resigned from fellowship with the UUA rather than face a “Full Fellowship Review…for sexual misconduct.”

Mostly when these emails are sent out, there is just the simple notification that the minister has either resigned from fellowship before charges could be brought, or was removed from fellowship. Unusually, this email added: “The Rev. Furrer served many congregations as a settled or interim minister over more than four decades as a minister. In reviewing his record, it became clear that the Rev. Furrer had a broader pattern of boundary violations which impacted at least four of these congregations in differing degrees.”

Presumably the UUA will contact those four congregations. And perhaps the UUA will contact all the congregations the Furrer served. But there are others of us who might have reasons for wanting to know if Furrer had served a particular congregation — for example, a minister or DRE thinking of accepting a job at a congregation may want to do a little research to see if a congregation has a history of past clergy misconduct (something congregations frequently neglect to tell job applicants). Or, for another example, congregational leaders wondering if Furrer once served a nearby congregation, with possible effects on their own congregation.

So, out of curiosity, I checked the online UUA Directory of professional leaders. Not surprisingly, Furrer’s entry in that directory had already been removed, which is entirely appropriate. However, this leaves us with no official record of his employment history. His own personal website still happens to provide a listing of his ministerial positions up to 2018. That list follows, with my annotations in square brackets []:

1981-1982 Asst. Minister, Berkeley, CA [not clear if this is the Berkeley fellowship or the Berkeley church Confirmed this was the Berkeley church]
1983-1987 Settled Minister, West Redding, CT
1987-1988 Interim Minister, Saco, ME
1988-1991 Settled Minister, Vineyard Haven, MA
1991-1993 Interim Minister, Berlin, MA
1993-1999 Settled Minister, East Suburban Pittsburgh, PA [presumably part-time, combined with the following two contract positions:]
1994-1996 Contract Minister, Morgantown, WV
1996-1999 Contract Minister, Indiana, PA
1999-2000 Interim Minister, Binghamton, NY
2000-2009 Settled Minister, Santa Fe, NM
2009-2010 Interim Minister, Santa Monica, CA
2010-2011 Interim Minister, Long Beach, CA
2011-2013 Interim Minister, San Francisco, CA
2013-2014 Interim Minister, Redwood City, CA
2014-2016 Interim Minister, Fullerton, CA
2016-2017 Interim Minister, Rancho Palo Verdes, CA
2017-2018 Interim Minister, Livermore, CA
2018-???? Developmental Minister, Bellevue, WA [a quick glance at their website shows this was through at least 2021]

All this raises an interesting point. The UUA maintains an online list of ministers who have been removed from fellowship, or who have resigned from fellowship pending misconduct investigations. Once they’re out of fellowship, they disappear from the UUA Directory, which is appropriate. But the UUA Directory is the only place where you can find a public list stating which congregations a given minister has served. The unfortunate result is that histories of clergy misconduct may be obscured.

There’s a simple fix. The online list of ministers who have been removed from fellowship, or who have resigned from fellowship pending misconduct investigations, should include a list of where each minister had served, and when.

Oh, and here’s a caveat so I don’t get sued by someone — I have no personal knowledge of this case, and as far as I know this case has not been adjudicated in a court of law. Thus I cannot comment on the truth of the allegations. I’m simply using this case as an example to point out what I consider to be a flaw in the way the UUA reports cases of alleged clergy misconduct.

Update, 12/8: A sentence that got dropped during revision was restored (last sentence, third paragraph); two minor typographical errors fixed.

Another kind of misconduct

I recently received one of those emails from Sarah Lammert, the Executive Director of the Ministerial Fellowship Committee (MFC), saying that a minister has been removed from fellowship with the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). This email, sent to “Congregational Board Leaders and UU Religious Professionals,” informed us that Scott McNeill “was removed from UUA Fellowship by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee on April 11, 2021 for misconduct involving bullying/abusive behavior in the workplace.”

I can’t remember hearing about any other minister removed from fellowship for bullying and abusive behavior in the workplace. I’m not able to confirm that, because apparently the MFC doesn’t maintain a comprehensive, publicly available list of who’s been removed from fellowship. But in combing through old email, here’s what I came up with:

In 2020, the MFC removed Todd Eklof from fellowship “based on the Rev. Dr. Eklof’s refusal to engage with the fellowship review process.” In 2019, Jason Shelton resigned from fellowship “due to self-reported [sexual] misconduct” (and the MFC infamously sent out Shelton’s self-excusing explanation of his resignation). In 2018, David Morris was put “on a three-year probation” due to “a complaint of child abuse.” In 2017, Ron Robinson was suspended from fellowship following his arrest on child pornography charges, with the proviso that if he were found guilty, he would be removed from fellowship (I have no email stating he was removed from fellowship, though I found news stories stating that he pleaded guilty).

Prior to 2017, the MFC sent out these notifications via U.S. Postal Service. Thinking back, I don’t remember any other removal from fellowship due to bullying and abusive behavior in the workplace. Based on my research into UU history, I’m pretty sure workplace bullying by ministers is nothing new, but in the absence of a comprehensive listing of ministers removed from fellowship I can’t be sure how many ministers were actually removed from fellowship by the MFC for bullying and abusive behavior.

So the question for me remains: Is it a new development for the MFC to discipline a minister for bullying and abusive behavior?

In a subsequent post, I’ll write about what bullying and abusive behavior by ministers looks like.

Update, 25 Feb. 2022: All of a sudden I’m getting comments on this post, from people who obviously did not read the post. It looks like I have to explain to careless readers what this post is about…. This was the first time I remembered hearing about the MFC removing someone from membership for bullying. That is all this post is about. This post is not about whether the MFC make the correct judgements in any of these cases, and if you want to argue about that you’re going to have to go somewhere else because I’m closing comments. Why am I closing comments? Simple. I don’t allow off-topic comments.