B
Boulder257
Guest
Well said.
- Status
C
cheese_sdc
Guest
Hey y’all,
One thing to remember is that, while many UU’s support abortion rights, not all do.
I can point to myself as an example - y’all have to understand that outside of the Seven Principles, there is no “litmus test” for being a UU (and there is argument about even the applicability of the 7 Principles - seriously). In my own congregation, there are those that support abortion rights, and those that don’t. There are those that support wide ranging gun control, and those that don’t. Etc.
I can say that I come a better understanding of why people support abortion, and I count that experience as valuable.
To the point about UU ministers mostly voting democratic - one of the core ideas of the UU is “the Freedom of the pulpit and the freedom of the pew”. As it was explained to me, this means that whoever is in the pulpit has the freedom to preach what he (or she) believes to be true, however those in the pew are equally free to accept it or not. I know that sounds strange to a Catholic’s ears, but that what it is.
And I can say that I’ve never heard a UU minister publicly (or privately) endorse a particular candidate.
One thing to remember is that, while many UU’s support abortion rights, not all do.
I can point to myself as an example - y’all have to understand that outside of the Seven Principles, there is no “litmus test” for being a UU (and there is argument about even the applicability of the 7 Principles - seriously). In my own congregation, there are those that support abortion rights, and those that don’t. There are those that support wide ranging gun control, and those that don’t. Etc.
I can say that I come a better understanding of why people support abortion, and I count that experience as valuable.
To the point about UU ministers mostly voting democratic - one of the core ideas of the UU is “the Freedom of the pulpit and the freedom of the pew”. As it was explained to me, this means that whoever is in the pulpit has the freedom to preach what he (or she) believes to be true, however those in the pew are equally free to accept it or not. I know that sounds strange to a Catholic’s ears, but that what it is.
And I can say that I’ve never heard a UU minister publicly (or privately) endorse a particular candidate.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
Good lord, don’t you want to make this place as close to heaven as possible…? I read a book by Rob Bell, and he mentions an idea… not sure if I’m gonna get this right… It would be a bad thing if one became so obsessed with the afterlife, that they neglected the here and now. If they never did anything in this world, with the limited time that we have. I do ponder the afterlife, certainly. But that’s an unknown. While I’m here, I’d like to as much as I can to alleviate grief and suffering. I’m sure you do as well…? Isn’t that just a different way of saying ‘make this place like heaven’? Perhaps you’d prefer to say it a different way? More like the Garden of Eden?
Who said I was replacing God? Granted, we have fundamental differences here in our worldviews and definitions of God. But, I could never replace God. Contrary to Catholicism, however, I am willing to consider ideas like pantheism. But even then, that would not place me higher than God.
S
SteveVH
Guest
No, but it would place God’s creation above himself and would amount to idolatry. One does not worship the Creator by worshiping his creation. Pantheism is a very misguided theology.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
thank you, Andrew.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
Words have meaning, sir. You should be familiar with their definitions. I respectfully suggest that you find an objective definition of “cult”, and cite an example of how Unitarian Universalism meets that definition. Until you do, I suggest that you refrain from repeating it. If I am wrong, I will eat my words. Will you do the same ?
.I hope you can channel your anger and disgust into something constructive.
S
SteveVH
Guest
I would suggest that you find a new way to communicate. The UU is certainly not a cult, and whether you agree with their doctrines (or lack thereof) or not, they are still people who deserve to be treated with dignity. Your message gets lost in your anger.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
As I briefly mentioned in Post #75, yes, we do actually believe things. The amount of things that are left to the interpretation of a Unitarian are far greater than that of a Catholic, certainly. I suggest, though, that it’s a difference of scale, not a difference of a kind.
If you’ve been reading the headlines lately, you may have read the article about a Catholic priest that was beheaded in Syria. That was wrong. That violates the ideal of recognizing “the worth and dignity of every person”, a core principle of ours. Is there a particular way that I can restate it to be clearer? It was wrong. I would not rationalize that act away.
No, I would have a problem with that. NAMBLA is not my area of expertise, but if it involves people under 18, major problem-o there. If you’re not of decision-making age, sexual manipulation (or any other kind of manipulation) is verboten. This too would violate the idea of respecting another’s worth and dignity.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
Hmm, I’ll have to ponder this a bit more before I respond. However, I think at best it would be placing God and his creation on par, not placing the creation above God…
S
SteveVH
Guest
Would you consider a painting on the same par as the painter?
M
Miriam1947
Guest
Pete Singer:
Singer argues that newborns lack the essential characteristics of personhood—“rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness”[26]—and therefore “killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer
Is this what the UU believes and practices?
Singer argues that newborns lack the essential characteristics of personhood—“rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness”[26]—and therefore “killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer
Is this what the UU believes and practices?
M
mek42
Guest
Is the need to be right so strong in most Christians that a group that overtly espouses that many answers are unknowable and that seekers of truth may learn from one another even if they have found different truths, is such a group so much of a threat to most Christians so as to warrant this level of hostility?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that someone once said, Blessed be the peacekeepers. With rare exception in this thread, it does not appear that those who claim to follow He who spoke those words are in danger of receiving that blessing.
To the OP if you are still around, or whomever else might be able to answer, would UU be a good place for someone interested in upholding the Covenant of Noach?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that someone once said, Blessed be the peacekeepers. With rare exception in this thread, it does not appear that those who claim to follow He who spoke those words are in danger of receiving that blessing.
To the OP if you are still around, or whomever else might be able to answer, would UU be a good place for someone interested in upholding the Covenant of Noach?
M
Major_Tom
Guest
Thank you for your post. I went through similar circumstances with both parents, so I can sympathize with your experience. It was surreal to have to make decisions that I never wanted to make.This is what would be, to an orthodox and morally traditional Catholic or other Christian tantamount to usurping the power of God to say what is right or wrong.
It is understandably a stumbling block to many people to consider placing their trust in the Catholic Magisterium, or the Southern Baptist Convention, or similar body as the storehouse and interpreting authority for what God has revealed.
Speaking for myself, I don’t covet God’s job or the Pope’s. :nope: I’ve been reading this Vatican II document Dignitatis Humanae recently in connection with the US Bishops’ Fortnight for Freedom. It’s amazing to me how timely it is for what our country is going through.
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html
Equally noteworthy are the things it has to say about the freedom of the individual conscience. So when I say I don’t want to try to figure out God’s will on my own but prefer to follow the Catholic Church’s guidance, it’s not that I am simple minded. I’ll admit that a large amount of responsibility in making moral decisions gives me trepidation, because I grasp the seriousness of moral decisions, and don’t want to screw up. But I also want to know that what I do (or what I avoid doing) will have a chance at bringing about a positive good.
Experiential anecdote: When my mother was in her final years I had to make some weighty decisions as her medical power of attorney and I prayed and also sought priests’ advice. And I went with the benefit of the doubt and had her put on a feeding tube when some priests even were saying just let her die. (One priest didn’t and he was also the most dedicated and helpful, God bless him!) My mother and I had 4 years of priceless memories we would not have otherwise had - and some trials and tribulations as well - and she herself told me, when her condition improved, that she was glad I did what I did.
Moral discernment is not easy for anybody. I am thankful to be Catholic and not have to reinvent the wheel, I guess is what I’m saying.
I don’t feel that I (or Unitarians in general) are reinventing the wheel. Quite the contrary, we (like you) draw on our huge common history of civilization for wisdom. Like Newton said, we stand on the shoulders of the giants who came before us. I may give more weight to some thinkers than you do (Carl Sagan and Hans Kung are propped up on my reading stand), but neither one of us is alone.
M
Major_Tom
Guest
To no one in particular: Thanks for your interest in UU, and in the thread. Ours is not a big contingent, certainly, but I think it deserves awareness. When we (as Americans) ponder public policy and religious issues (“Are we a Christian nation?”, “Should we display the Ten Commandments?”…), recall that John Adams (Unitarian) and Thomas Jefferson (very Unitarian in his writing/beliefs) were two of our seminal Founding Fathers, as well as authors of the Declaration of Independence. (“Class, why did Jefferson write ‘We are endowed by our Creator’, instead of writing ‘We are endowed by our God’? Discuss.”)
M
Major_Tom
Guest
Sorry for not commenting sooner. Things were moving fast!
On a really high, philosophical level, I agree with that. You mention science. Excellent. I think that science and God are inseperable. Just as is the division between math/science/physics/geometry, etc. It’s all the same thing. As we understand the world and universe better, so we better understand God.
However, on a more pragmatic level, I disagree. It’s not evident that Capital-T ‘Truth’ informs us on the minutiea (sp?) of daily decisions, nor even of some larger issues. Your understanding of science/Truth might tell you that climate change isn’t occurring, or that creationism is valid. My pursuit of science/Truth tells me otherwise.
At present, your faith doesn’t direct you to believe in a literal seven-day creation vs. a symbolic, longer creation, does it? That is, you are free to decide on that issue for yourself? ‘Truth’ has not been revealed? And two Catholics might hold contrary points of view on that matter, and neither is considered wrong? Your scientific and religious points of view have led you to different conclusions. Isn’t that relativism?
3
3DOCTORS
Guest
For me as a Catholic, I guess the difference would be a sense of cohesiveness in the Church’s Magisterium. I know there have been things even there that involve continuing discernment - for example I think there was a Pope in medieval times when witchcraft was being cracked down upon who issued a Papal Bull against black cats too. But obviously that was not retained; Pope Benedict XVI was a cat lover.
Human wisdom is to be commended, and I certainly draw from it myself in many areas, but I filter it through the Catholic catechesis I was fortunate to receive (as many of my late Baby-Boomer peers were not). I sift and sort and retain what is moral and leave what is not.
Right now I’m in a process whereby I’m doing a lot of study about evolution, for instance, since I’m writing a science fiction novel and it’s pertinent to the broad backdrop of the story’s theme. I’m catching up on areas I didn’t study in high school or college. Plus there are cutting-edge discoveries in everything from astronomy and other solar systems, to the genomes of various species - tons of knowledge.
In some ways it does challenge my Catholic faith but there’s something that we Catholics are able to do and that’s embrace mystery. We do it with the Transubstantion of the Eucharist at every Mass for instance. And speaking for myself, when it comes to topics like the Big Bang, or exactly who (and when) Adam and Eve were and how to reconcile that with evolutionary science, sometimes I’m okay with just saying, “Well, Lord, I wasn’t there with a ringside seat when You did it, so I don’t know, but you know, and you know why, and I’m cool with that.”
The big place where science and human wisdom vs. Church teachings (Catholic or of any faith) intersect is fraught less with historical implications, though, than moral ones. I remember some years ago there were headlines about how human males supposedly just weren’t evolutionarily cut out to be monogamous.
Well, if you extrapolate that and say that a husband should get a free pass to cheat on his wife, I say, no. That’s reductionistic, that’s playing one card out of the deck and ignoring all the others. We are capable of using our higher brains to help us make spiritual and intellectual commitments for a higher good. And then there is something from God, known as grace, another “mystery” if you will, to assist us in that. (Also, if my husband cheated on me, there is such a thing as a rolling pin, LOL
)I sort of got on a roll . . . hope it was not too hard to follow . . .
L
LeftyDisciple
Guest
I am not sure I am quite clear of your point here. If it is a religion’s ties to politics, has the University of Akron’s Green or anyone that you know of done research on how many Catholic priests especially those under the age of 50 or 60 identify more with the Republican Party today? Or any samples done on Catholic lay political involvement?
L
LeftyDisciple
Guest
I can’t speak for most Christians. But speaking as just one disciple who seeks to walk in the spirit of the loving and embracing Christ Whom I believe in, no, the need is not so strong for some of us to warrant the level of mudslinging or hostility you refer to. The only thing such mudslingers do for me is make it less likely I would be interested in their brand of faith. I frankly am not convinced mud is any better than stones. I have though previously considered UU but I am probably too much of an orthodox Christian, ie, believe in the Trinity, the Resurrection, Ascension, and an afterlife as just a few examples, to be UU. But I have noted the UU’s haven’t slung mud here.
L
LeftyDisciple
Guest
To any Unitarian Universalists still remaining here: If I recall correctly when I was looking into UU, at my local UU fellowship, membership was done by signing a membership book and I believe there was a minimum 2% annual pledge. Is this pretty much standard to membership or does it vary from church or fellowship?
Also I have seen a survey showing 90% of UUs today do not consider themselves Christian. Given the Christian background of Unitarian Universalism, what happened to make this so? Nevertheless I commend you for the good work you do in serving the least amongst us and in striving for peace. A Christian pastor once told me he doesn’t believe one can be a Christian without that emphasis. And apparently not a UU either.
God bless.
Also I have seen a survey showing 90% of UUs today do not consider themselves Christian. Given the Christian background of Unitarian Universalism, what happened to make this so? Nevertheless I commend you for the good work you do in serving the least amongst us and in striving for peace. A Christian pastor once told me he doesn’t believe one can be a Christian without that emphasis. And apparently not a UU either.
God bless.
S
StudentMI
Guest
Jesus is loving and embracing, but He was (and is) relentless in speaking the truth. Let’s not forget his sermon on the Pharisees in Matthew, with it’s refrain of “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites.” Or John chapter 6 where he did not soften what he said about eating His Body and Blood even when it caused many to leave Him.
- Status