Skip to main content

Do Unitarians believe in the unity of religions?

I've been mulling something over. Peacebang asks if this is the best statement we can make about Unitarian (Universal)ism.

I've been thinking about the language used here: different people identify with different beliefs; this is fine because we're non-creedal, and we have principles that unite us. It's a negative way of putting it I think. It seems to suggest to me that beliefs don't matter. You can be a Christian or a Buddhist or a Pagan, but that's secondary, what unites us is our principles, therefore they matter more.

Yet how can we say that following Jesus is a secondary thing? How can we say that taking refuge in the dharma of the Buddha is an unimportant thing? These are life-transforming things. These are things that shape the entirity of one's life. And these are exactly the things that I go to church to to talk about, and to practice.

So how can these things live side by side in one community? There are three posibilities: one: they cannot, pluralist religion is impossible; two: for us to live side by side, religious belief must become secondary to basic ethical principles that don't really have the power to be life changing; or three: we hold a belief that there is something that unites all religions, there is the possibility of a unifying reality beyond all genuine experiences of enlightenment.

The third option is not without it's problems. And it may need more work to articulate is theologically, yet I would maintain that it's better than the other two options. It's sort of hinted at by some things that Unitarians say, and yet it doesn't quite seem to be something we've committed to wholeheartedly. Maybe there are good reasons for that. But I think the other option is to degrade the importance of all religions to maintain unity in diversity.

Wouldn't a better way to put it be to say that we affirm the unity of all religions and that we're engaged in a search for the unifying reality behind all religions, and that some of us do this by choosing and praticing one particular tradition? This seems to affirm the importance and power of religious traditions, while the language on the UUA website seems to degrade their importance. In short, we aren't united despite our diffferent religious committments, but because of them and through them.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Good luck figuring this one out. The seven principles are completely humanistic, as are many UUs, so maybe for most members this issue simple does not come up because Jesus and Buddha are of some modest interest, but not a focus of attention.
Dudley Jones
jonesdudley@hotmail
Anonymous said…
Particular religious traditions are important to you. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily important to all Unitarians. I for one, am not looking for the truth behind all religions. I find some religious practices and teachers helpful, and that's it.

Trouble with Unitarianism is that when you think you've cracked it, someone comes along and says that they disagree ;)

Popular posts from this blog

What does it mean to be non-creedal?

Steve Caldwell says "The problem here isn't humanism vs. theism for theist Unitarian Universalists -- it's the non-creedal nature of Unitarian Universalism" This is a good point. We need to think much more deeply about what it means to be a non-creedal religion. The first thing I want to say is that there is more than one possible understanding of non-creedalism. The Disciples of Christ are a non-creedal church, they say here : " Freedom of belief. Disciples are called together around one essential of faith: belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Persons are free to follow their consciences guided by the Bible, the Holy Spirit study and prayer, and are expected to extend that freedom to others." Quakers are also non-creedal and say here : Quakers have no set creed or dogma - that means we do not have any declared statements which you have to believe to be a Quaker. There are, however, some commonly held views which unite us. One accepted view is that th

LOST and theology: who are the good guys?

***Spoiler alert*** I'm continuing some theological/philosophical reflections while re-watching the series LOST. One of the recurring themes in LOST is the idea of the "good guys" and the "bad guys." We start the series assuming the survivors (who are the main characters) are the "good guys" and the mysterious "Others" are definitely bad guys. But at the end of series 2 one of the main characters asks the Others, "Who are  you people?" and they answer, in an extremely disturbing way, "We're the good guys." The series develops with a number of different factions appearing, "the people from the freighter" "the DHARMA initiative" as well as divisions among the original survivors. The question remains among all these complicated happenings "who really are the good guys?" I think one of the most significant lines in the series is an episode when Hurley is having a conversation with

What is Radical Christianity?

Radical Christianity is about encountering the God of love . It is first and foremost rooted in the discovery of a universal and unconditional source of love at the heart of reality and within each person. God is the name we give to this source of love. It is possible to have a direct and real personal encounter with this God through spiritual practice. We encounter God, and are nourished by God, through the regular practice of prayer, or contemplation.  Radical Christianity is about following a man called Jesus . It is rooted in the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet living under occupation of the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. It understands that's Jesus' message was the message of liberation. His message was that when we truly encounter God, and let God's love flow through us, we begin to be liberated from the powers of empire and violence and encounter the  "realm of God" - an alternative spiritual and social reality rooted in love rather th