Ask a Unitarian Universalist

[3DOCTORS]

I think this is the most common misperception that I’ve run into. “You people don’t believe anything…!”. Sure we do, it’s right there in the principles posted earlier. In your example (violence, rape), that fundamentally opposes our covenant “to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person”.

Again, for emphasis, no, not everything is permitted. As noted earlier, there is not much hierarchy here in unitarianism. We do a lot more policing of ourselves. I think this unnerves a lot of people. “But who’s gonna, you know, tell you what you’re doing wrong?” Ultimately, you are the one responsible for your actions. Not your parish priest, not the Pope, you make the final call as to what is right, what is wrong, and what your course of action is.

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.

 

[NowHereThis]

I agree with every one of those values completely. But I am not a UU. But I did go to meetings at a UU congregation briefly.

My problem was that I was going to a “religionless” church. Not a prayer was said at all, the only thing that resembled a religious rite was when the chalice was lighted at the beginning. The talks at this fellowship were about things like memes and other intellectual ideas, but never about religion. It was all over my head.

It was like a debateing society on ethics, but sorely lacking when it came to religion. I just needed much more than they gave.

Yes, I can totally understand how that would be unsatisfying.

At our church, we have the chalice lighting, but we also have the silent meditation, the lighting of candles for joys and concerns, singing, sometimes prayers.
It’s not terribly different from the American Baptist church I used to attend (except that the ABC church had communion once a month, and for obvious reasons, this UU church does not).

We do have water communion once a year (bring water from somewhere you’ve been over the summer to put in a common jug), and flower communion every so often (bring a flower to put in a common vase). And we have a very beautiful winter solstice service.

 

[NowHereThis]

NowHereThis - thanks for answering questions with aplomb!

I have to admit that the premise of “A Unitarian Universalist walk into a Catholic discussion group” would be a good beginning to a joke somehow…

When I was in my larval agnostic stage of life, I was always puzzled by the Unitarians as it seemed to me that no ‘structure’ would be needed. Could you describe any spiritual or intellectual growth you’ve had that would not have occurred had you remained a solitary individual outside the UU ‘church’?

What a fantastic question!

I’m getting married in my church very shortly. In our church, we meet with the minister several times in a way that encourages us to really reflect upon the meaning of marriage. By designing our ceremony in that atmosphere of reflection and meaning, we are going deeper than we would have if we were just being married by a justice of the peace.

Another big thing for me has been being able to join the choir. It’s been a life-long dream of mine to learn to be a better singer, and being in the choir has helped me do that and exposed me to pieces of music that I would have never heard on my own.

Also, I give away more money because the opportunity to do so when the collection plate comes around arises more often than it otherwise would. Some of it goes to the church, but a lot of it goes to special collections for other organizations working on issues like violence against women or poverty.

I do study a lot on my own, but the sermons bring up spiritual topics that I wouldn’t necessarily pick myself. They are nonetheless fruitful for me to hear. And it’s very comforting to be in a community where I don’t have to leave if my spiritual ideas change.

 

[NowHereThis]

I’m fully aware that the UU are not Christians but that doesn’t dim my criticism of them. No actual Christian would be a part of such a group, no Christian with an actual grasp on actual Christian theology anyway.

There are many people in Unitarian Universalism who do identify as Christian because they value what Jesus taught as they understand it apart from the dense metaphysics that grew up around his message. Rejecting that theology does not inherently mean a lack of understanding.

In so far as the principles are concerned, if they are not binding you have a problem. Morality and such principles are entirely subjective, you cannot object to the person who thinks it okay to rape, or does evil actions proudly. There is a universalism but at what cost? A denial of basic good and evil, everything is permitted and everything is expedient and in order to be “unified” you will sacrifice what is good on the altar of pluralism.

They are binding through agreement that flows from a shared human nature of finitude and sociability, and the recognition of that shared nature. As for someone who kills and rapes, even that person recognizes the right of self-defense, because they exercise it for themselves. Therefore, they cannot object if the people they place in danger also exercise it.

I’m also not convinced that your UU is not anything more but a glorified social club, get together and do something which a flower right? Read some texts that contradict and what is accomplished? Then talk and eat? You could do that local town club, except they gather for a specific purpose and point.

We come together to live life deeper, in contact with our tradition of spiritual exploration and growth.

 

[NowHereThis]

What does a UU say is a human life?

With respect, you’ve been using the term “human life”, so it’s not unreasonable to ask you to explain your understanding of it. Me answering the question won’t say anything about your understanding, so that doesn’t get us anywhere.

 

[NowHereThis]

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 was once urged by several close friends to consider becoming Catholic. I declined because I did not want what I considered to be a pre-packaged set of answers to the great questions of life, the universe and everything. I felt that I would be losing something if I did not personally engage those questions and find answers for myself. That was almost a decade ago. I know now that I made the right decision, even as I also see that my understanding of Catholic thought was limited at the time. My thinking has shifted multiple times over those years as I experienced the personal engagement I sought. If I had joined the Catholic church, I would have just had to leave again, or be subjected to the label of “cafeteria Catholic”.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I think this is the most common misperception that I’ve run into. “You people don’t believe anything…!”. Sure we do, it’s right there in the principles posted earlier. In your example (violence, rape), that fundamentally opposes our covenant “to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person”.

Again, for emphasis, no, not everything is permitted. As noted earlier, there is not much hierarchy here in unitarianism. We do a lot more policing of ourselves. I think this unnerves a lot of people. “But who’s gonna, you know, tell you what you’re doing wrong?” Ultimately, you are the one responsible for your actions. Not your parish priest, not the Pope, you make the final call as to what is right, what is wrong, and what your course of action is.

So which is it? Are the principles infallible? Not able to be contradicted if one wants to remain a UU? In which case you are not universal. By definition you exclude evil. It seems you are changing your answer (at first it was we have principles, then it was they are not absolute and not required and now you are acting as if they are required in some way). So either you include everyone, including people who desire to do evil, or you exclude evil people and become exclusive.

But if the individual is the one who decides what is wrong and what is right then it seems you can have no real objection to people desiring harm to others to become UU.

I also ask what is the difference between a book club and a UU gathering? I suppose in the book club something of merit is accomplished.

 

[NowHereThis]

So which is it? Are the principles infallible? Not able to be contradicted if one wants to remain a UU? In which case you are not universal. By definition you exclude evil. It seems you are changing your answer (at first it was we have principles, then it was they are not absolute and not required and now you are acting as if they are required in some way). So either you include everyone, including people who desire to do evil, or you exclude evil people and become exclusive.

But if the individual is the one who decides what is wrong and what is right then it seems you can have no real objection to people desiring harm to others to become UU.

I also ask what is the difference between a book club and a UU gathering? I suppose in the book club something of merit is accomplished.

1. You’re now talking with two different people, me and Major Tom. He and I may treat the same issues in different ways. That doesn’t create a contradiction in the same way that it would if one person treated the same issues in two different ways.
2. I’m confused about what you are imagining when you imagine the process through which someone decides that they want to be a part of a UU congregation. People generally want to join UU because they agree with all or most of the principles already, not because they want to turn UU into the League of Supervillains through arguing moral subjectivism. And, as I’ve said, self-defense is a permissible form of “exclusion” that even a moral subjectivist would recognize, because they use it for themselves.
3. Universalism comes from our ancestral relationship to the Christian doctrine of universal salvation, not the idea that “every man for himself” has to be treated as equal to “we are all part of one interconnected web”. We have no problem excluding “every man for himself” from our seven principles. We’d listen if someone wanted to play devil’s advocate, but it probably wouldn’t be very persuasive.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

We do have “specifics”, as well, for what it’s worth! Social activism is a major underpinning of many of our activities. In lieu of investing a lot of time in discussions of heaven/hell, we like to invest a lot of time trying to make this place ‘heaven’.

Ah so you want to take the place of God and make your own heaven on earth.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

1. You’re now talking with two different people, me and Major Tom. He and I may treat the same issues in different ways. That doesn’t create a contradiction in the same way that it would if one person treated the same issues in two different ways.
2. I’m confused about what you are imagining when you imagine the process through which someone decides that they want to be a part of a UU congregation. People generally want to join UU because they agree with all or most of the principles already, not because they want to turn UU into the League of Supervillains through arguing moral subjectivism. And, as I’ve said, self-defense is a permissible form of “exclusion” that even a moral subjectivist would recognize, because they use it for themselves.
3. Universalism comes from our ancestral relationship to the Christian doctrine of universal salvation, not the idea that “every man for himself” has to be treated as equal to “we are all part of one interconnected web”. We have no problem excluding “every man for himself” from our seven principles. We’d listen if someone wanted to play devil’s advocate, but it probably wouldn’t be very persuasive.

Except you have abandoned universalism in that Christian sense. You have abandoned Christianity. How can you claim any ties to it? Your group is not Christian, period, it is a liberal subjectivist group which allows any viewpoint except apparently for a viewpoint of objectivity within the organisation as whole. You cannot speak for all UU,in fact why take this title in the first place when it doesnt describe anything about you? A UU could be a pagan sacrificing to Zeus after all or a rigid atheist who hates the concept of God in the first place.

Also who is right? Is everything absolutely allowed in the UU? Or are some excluded because they don’t abide by the principles? If everyone is saved as you claim from your “christian” background surely they must be accepted as well. Must the princ(name removed by moderator)les be accepted in order to become UU? If so you exclude people, people you argue from the historic meaning of universalism are just as secured as you are.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

There are many people in Unitarian Universalism who do identify as Christian because they value what Jesus taught as they understand it apart from the dense metaphysics that grew up around his message. Rejecting that theology does not inherently mean a lack of understanding.

They are binding through agreement that flows from a shared human nature of finitude and sociability, and the recognition of that shared nature. As for someone who kills and rapes, even that person recognizes the right of self-defense, because they exercise it for themselves. Therefore, they cannot object if the people they place in danger also exercise it.

We come together to live life deeper, in contact with our tradition of spiritual exploration and growth.

They may identify as Christians, like Nancy pelocy identifies as a Catholic, it doesn’t mean anything to me. There is a general consensus amongst Christians that you ought commune with people who actually believe and confess the same Christ, reject what is worldly and follow him. So what is then a UU Christian? I would say a liberal who most likely rejects most elements of historic christianity and thus is not Christian in any meaningful way, but in name only. The Apostle Paul is quite clear on this point, what do the pagan gods have to do with Christ? How can one have their sacrifices and Christ’s eucharist? Likewise how could a Christian gather with atheists and a plethora of other groups which contradict the Christian beliefs in an attempt for unity when they could be worshipping the trinity instead? Why have a goofy ritual with a flower in which there is no meaning except that which the congregation decides to give it when you could have divine liturgy or mass? No actual Christian, a Christian in deed not merely by name should commune with such a group.

Now you mention a shared human nature, but within that shared human nature is the potential and often proneness for such a thing. You may claim it is for self defence, for the sake of your people, but in the end you are contradicting the very thing you seek to uphold, that is a plurism in which everyone is accepted and nothing is rejected. You want to include everyone but for practical reasons won’t allow evil people to join? Are they not “saved” is their view invalid? Their indifference wrong? I doubt evil people would want to join you in the first place but this is purely hypothetical mind you.

You come to gether to to grow in spirituality? Really? What is spirituality, what is truth? Im sure some UU think there is no such thing as truth, what do you do with them? THeir purpose is surely a social visit and nothing more. Talking and offering contradicting themes don’t make a place that seeks spiritual growth, it makes a social club and thats all the UU are.

 

[NowHereThis]

Except you have abandoned universalism in that Christian sense. You have abandoned Christianity. How can you claim any ties to it? Your group is not Christian, period,

You are correct, we are not an officially Christian organization, though as I said, we have people who identify as Christians. However, it is a historical fact that our group is the successor organization to two denominations that were Christian. Those are the connections.

it is a liberal subjectivist group which allows any viewpoint except apparently for a viewpoint of objectivity within the organisation as whole. You cannot speak for all UU,in fact why take this title in the first place when it doesnt describe anything about you? A UU could be a pagan sacrificing to Zeus after all or a rigid atheist who hates the concept of God in the first place.

Yes, I know I can’t speak for all UU. That was in the post that started this thread. And you’re right that we have diverse theologies. But being UU describes our commitment to live and learn and grow together with respect for those differences.

Also who is right? Is everything absolutely allowed in the UU? Or are some excluded because they don’t abide by the principles? If everyone is saved as you claim from your “christian” background surely they must be accepted as well. Must the princ(name removed by moderator)les be accepted in order to become UU? If so you exclude people, people you argue from the historic meaning of universalism are just as secured as you are.

It’s not that we turn people away, it’s that people don’t try to join if they don’t agree with the principles. No need for formal requirements.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Why does one have to grow? Why does one have to learn? Why do they have to respect each other? Are these absolutes? Why can’t one be obstinate and contradict others and outright dismiss others in your group as arrogantly as possible? Perhaps because it violates the idea that anyhting ought be held as true. The one thing subjectivists hate more than anything is someone actually convinced of truth and ironically they don’t tolerate this.

Now since there are no requirements, you cannot refuse anyone can you? Hypothetically you should and must accept the open Pedophile Nambla man right?

 

[NowHereThis]

They may identify as Christians, like Nancy pelocy identifies as a Catholic, it doesn’t mean anything to me.There is a general consensus amongst Christians that you ought commune with people who actually believe and confess the same Christ, reject what is worldly and follow him. So what is then a UU Christian? I would say a liberal who most likely rejects most elements of historic christianity and thus is not Christian in any meaningful way, but in name only. The Apostle Paul is quite clear on this point, what do the pagan gods have to do with Christ? How can one have their sacrifices and Christ’s eucharist? Likewise how could a Christian gather with atheists and a plethora of other groups which contradict the Christian beliefs in an attempt for unity when they could be worshipping the trinity instead? Why have a goofy ritual with a flower in which there is no meaning except that which the congregation decides to give it when you could have divine liturgy or mass? No actual Christian, a Christian in deed not merely by name should commune with such a group.

What if they don’t believe in the doctrine of the trinity, as our unitarian ancestors did not? What if they find tax collectors and sinners to be more loving company than the “theologically correct” religious authorities?

Now you mention a shared human nature, but within that shared human nature is the potential and often proneness for such a thing. You may claim it is for self defence, for the sake of your people, but in the end you are contradicting the very thing you seek to uphold, that is a plurism in which everyone is accepted and nothing is rejected. You want to include everyone but for practical reasons won’t allow evil people to join? Are they not “saved” is their view invalid? Their indifference wrong? I doubt evil people would want to join you in the first place but this is purely hypothetical mind you.

Where have I said that we support “pluralism in which everyone is accepted and nothing is rejected”? That might be your interpretation of what we are and what we do, but you can’t expect me to adopt and defend your interpretations.

You come to gether to to grow in spirituality? Really? What is spirituality, what is truth? Im sure some UU think there is no such thing as truth, what do you do with them? THeir purpose is surely a social visit and nothing more. Talking and offering contradicting themes don’t make a place that seeks spiritual growth, it makes a social club and thats all the UU are.

Thank you for a most interesting discussion.

 

[KingJohn]

I’ve studied your cult, it is sick.

Your cult outright OBJECTS Jesus is lord and that he died for our sins, yet, you claim to have Christian elements.

Your cult claims that God will restore all humanity and that eternal torment in hell is a fabrication, not supported by the Bible. Even though Unitarians and Universalists originally viewed the Bible as an authority, there is currently much variety regarding its authority and sacredness.

It’s sick. My Bible clearly states HELL.IS.REAL. HELL.IS. NOT A THOUGHT. I’l get to that in a moment.

You support killing babies within the womb. If it’s kicking, if it’s trying to save itself, it’s alive.
Your cult believes Heaven and Hell is a thought, and hell is not supported by the Bible.

Matthew 10:28 - And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

Revelation 20:14 - And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Since your cult used to look up to the Bible as an authority, why does your cult seem Heaven as a state of mind?

Philippians 3:20-21 But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.

I’m tolerant of other religions. I am. Even with Islam, which has disgusting texts, pagans, voodoo, etc. But when you break into my Religion, take our triditional values, beliefs and scriptures and twist them, I get angry.

 

[andrewstx]

Apparently no-one here is interested in the Unitarian Universalist church, But most here seem to be interested in hostility over the only issue that matters, abortion.

I am not a UU, but I was very interested in them at one time. They were practically the only church in town not involved with the religious right (religious wrong to me).

Now the hostility has ran the OP off in record time. I hope people are proud of themselves.

I am opposed to abortion myself, but that is not the only issue that matters.

Oh the Unitarians are NOT a cult, what a preposterous idea.

 

[Country_Gal]

Apparently no-one here is interested in the Unitarian Universalist church, But most here seem to be interested in hostility over the only issue that matters, abortion.

I am not a UU, but I was very interested in them at one time. They were practically the only church in town not involved with the religious right (religious wrong to me).

Now the hostility has ran the OP off in record time. I hope people are proud of themselves.

I am opposed to abortion myself, but that is not the only issue that matters.

Oh the Unitarians are NOT a cult, what a preposterous idea.

I agree. The mudslinging has become distasteful

 

[3DOCTORS]

I was once urged by several close friends to consider becoming Catholic. I declined because I did not want what I considered to be a pre-packaged set of answers to the great questions of life, the universe and everything. I felt that I would be losing something if I did not personally engage those questions and find answers for myself. That was almost a decade ago. I know now that I made the right decision, even as I also see that my understanding of Catholic thought was limited at the time. My thinking has shifted multiple times over those years as I experienced the personal engagement I sought. If I had joined the Catholic church, I would have just had to leave again, or be subjected to the label of “cafeteria Catholic”.

Guess that’s why I’m Catholic and you’re Unitarian. At some points in my younger life for one reason or another I had moments of asking myself point blank if I wanted to stay a Catholic. Once was a time of temptation and another was a time of scrupulosity - kind of opposite spiritual battles, as it were. I weighed the options and chose Catholic. Many years later one of my favorite Bible passages is this:

But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him. And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.” As a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him. Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?” Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.” John 6:64-69

This gives me great assurance and certainty. :yup:

 

[Boulder257]

Apparently no-one here is interested in the Unitarian Universalist church, But most here seem to be interested in hostility over the only issue that matters, abortion.

I am not a UU, but I was very interested in them at one time. They were practically the only church in town not involved with the religious right (religious wrong to me).

Now the hostility has ran the OP off in record time. I hope people are proud of themselves.

I am opposed to abortion myself, but that is not the only issue that matters.

Oh the Unitarians are NOT a cult, what a preposterous idea.

Yep. I too was pretty ashamed by the actions of some of my fellow Christians.

 

[3DOCTORS]

Some folks don’t get the basics of how to conduct a dialogue of inquiry between people of opposiing viewpoints. I am not claiming to be perfect at it, or that my feathers have never been ruffled or that I’ve never gotten snarky.

While I can certainly understand my fellow Catholics’ and others passion for pro-life, and I share it, yet to immediately go to that or any other issue and just hammer away at the OP seems counterproductive. By so doing, you kill any chance to learn something about the other religion, why they believe what they believe, why the OP (who is also created in the image and likeness of God, don’t forget) believes what he believes - and how that insight might help us to present our own beliefs persuasively.