Grant, I fully understand where you are coming from. Yet I want to quibble even though I do not know the circumstances as to how Cindy came to be ordained this way. To me this only represents a marker on the path of spiritual growth.
This so called "ordination" of the ULC only represents a theological statement related to the priesthood of all believers. Therefore, let's just take it as it is. I would not want to renounce my belief in the "Priesthood of all believers." I would only renounce my affiliation (if there ever was any) with the ULC.
In my youthful college days as a Jesus Freak, I once found a United Pentecostal group that insisted that one had to be baptized by immersion by "JESUS NAME!" as in the Book of Acts and not by the formula offered at the end of the Book of Matthew. At the time, this made sense to me, so I was baptized, but never joined that church. But even if I had joined that church and then come back the UCC (which I did), none of this mattered to my Church and Ministry Committee. What mattered to them most was my Faith Journey, and my current theology.
After all, most people have a bit of weird stuff happen to them on the way in our faith journeys. What matters is where we are now, and what direction we are going.
If someone would have asked me to renounce that baptism in “Jesus’ Name.” I would not have done so. Anyone can see that there is actually more Biblical proof that it was the preferred formula in the early church, before the tradition and doctrine of the trinity became such an issue for people who had a stick shoved up their back side. Thankfully, my committee was wise enough to just discuss the various beliefs of the trinity that they all had and decided that I was well within acceptable bounds.
If I were sitting on Cindy’s ordination committee of ordination and a fellow member asked her to renounce that ordination, I would kindly ask them to step out of the room and gently remove the stick that was protruding out of their back side.