Unitarian Christians- true or not true?

[cheese_sdc]

It would have been better if you had offered some caveats, such as: I don’t really mean people can believe ANYTHING. And I don’t really believe that their sincerity is what’s of great import. And, in fact, I do believe that there are SOME THINGS that people ought not believe because it’s WRONG.

And I’m sure that you sprinkle all of your conversations with qualifications on exactly what you mean.

Actually, it has a very rigid belief system. It just doesn’t have as many “rigidities” as the CC does.

So it would appear that you are not opposed to rigidity, but merely how many theological doctrines a particular denomination espouses.

I find that quite, well, rigid.

You seem quite persistent in your deliberate misunderstanding. But that’s okay.

You are certainly free to have that misunderstanding. But the truth of the matter stands that every Sunday, atheists, agnostics, pagans, christians, jews, Buddhists, etc all manage to come together to learn from each other.

 

[cheese_sdc]

What about, say, my right to throw my beer can in the ocean?

Are you opposed to that?

I thought you were Catholic? I wouldn’t want you to go against your own bishops.

 

[SteveVH]

I thought you were Catholic? I wouldn’t want you to go against your own bishops.

Oh that? That’s old information. I think there was a recent encyclical that now allows us to throw our beer cans in the ocean. Are you for real?

 

[andrewstx]

I’m not familiar with the Unity Church. I checked their Wiki and it looks too Christo-centric for my tastes. But I’m also concerned with the resurgence of “God Language” in my own congregation. shrugs

As far as the “Why don’t they merge?” I dunno. The UU’s merged in the 1960’s, maybe the Unity Church didn’t want to.

---

The Unity Church rose from the early new-age movement in the late 19th century. They are related to ‘Christian Scientists’ and Science of Mind movements.

I seriously doubt that either group would be interested in uniting.

 

[robwar]

Yeah, I should not have used the word Protestant. When I wrote that I was thinking about the history of the Unitarians. They started out as Congregationalists (the descendants of the Puritans) who came to reject the doctrine of the Trinity.

So, they have Protestant origins, but they do not currently fall outside of what most people consider Protestantism by not believing in the Trinity.

That is my understanding of them as well. They were a split off of Congretationalists. Their doctrine or non-doctrine fall outside of trinitarian Christianity and I view them in the same mode as Mormons, JW, Seven Day Adventis, Christian Science and oneness pentacostals.

 

[andrewstx]

Le sigh.

Every time I say that someone mentions the KKK or Nazis. At least you’re original. To a point.

Check out the 7 principles of the UU Church:

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Is he ACTING according to those principles? Nope. Am I tolerant of his beliefs? Nope. Do I allow him his free speech? Yep.

When we say “We don’t care what you believe, we care how you believe” it has a deeper meaning. We care how you treat your fellow man. Are you respectful? Do you fight to make this a better world?

The individual above is a extreme version of Christianity. All the Westboro Baptist [censored] are doing is spewing their twisted version of Christianity. Should I judge your religion based on his example? Should I judge the Anti-abortion movement based on Michael Griffin? Or James Kopp?

And if you come back with “Well, he believes he is fighting for a better world.”

Double Le sigh.

Point out to me one respected religious tradition that advocates the same beliefs he does and also that is concerned with basic human rights, the respect of law, the respect of basic human dignity.

Have I covered all the bases?

You know I agree in most part with the seven principles. But the UU fellowship I attended for a time just did not go far enough to suit me. They never prayed, ever. They had no baptisms (but it was a small fellowship with no children born). Their idea of Mass was “flower communion”. They did light a candle in a chalice as the only form of ritual or liturgy.

Basically the different members gave ‘talks’ that were way over my head intellectually. And that put me to sleep.

Since then I have had a bad stroke, limiting my cognitive abilities even more. The UU church was not for me then, and is even less so know.

 

[revert_jen]

Unitarians tend to be more “Christian” without their trinitarian beliefs than many trinitarian Christians I have known in my life.

Nope.

Christian is not a generic term of commendation. It is a descriptive term, and it describes someone who believes in the Trinity, including that Jesus Christ is God. Lots of Christians are bad people, and lots of non-Christians are good people. But if they don’t believe in the Trinity, they’re not Christian. You can say that Unitarians tend to be nicer than trinitarians (in your experience). Or you could use “Christ-like” there, if that is what you mean.

I’m all with C.S. Lewis, in the preface to Mere Christianity, where he says (basically) that a “spiritual” use of the word Christian just means nobody can ever really use it without implying something that we can’t possibly know: the state of someone’s soul. (the relevant quote showed up here on a Google search: glenn.typepad.com/news/2003/08/cs_lewis_on_the.html) So we either use the word to make a statement of fact about someone’s beliefs, or we stop using it altogether.

Truth is how one lives, not necessarily how one “believes”. A “belief” that in no way causes one to speak more gently to others, a “belief” that in no way causes one to show mercy and forgiveness when wronged is of no use to anyone. A “belief” that does not consider the stewardship of the Earth to be a God-given responsibility has no use in our real world.

How could you possibly know how harshly I would speak without the help of sacramental grace? I could be a harridan.

You may well be a nicer person than I am. That doesn’t make Christianity false. See C.S. Lewis’ “Nice People or New Men” Mere Christianity, book IV ch. 10, for more discussion of this. For example, there is the idea that it’s not reasonable to expect Christians to be better than other people, only to expect them to be better than they would be if they weren’t Christian. But a lot of broken people, like myself, are drawn to the redemptive love of Christ, so we might have been a lot worse than you were to start with.

–Jen

P.S. No, it is not normal for me to quote C.S. Lewis twice in the same post (or even in the same month), although I love his writings. It just happened that way this time.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Oh that? That’s old information. I think there was a recent encyclical that now allows us to throw our beer cans in the ocean. Are you for real?

lol.

I am very much for real, yo.

 

[cheese_sdc]

You know I agree in most part with the seven principles. But the UU fellowship I attended for a time just did not go far enough to suit me. They never prayed, ever. They had no baptisms (but it was a small fellowship with no children born). Their idea of Mass was “flower communion”. They did light a candle in a chalice as the only form of ritual or liturgy.

Basically the different members gave ‘talks’ that were way over my head intellectually. And that put me to sleep.

Since then I have had a bad stroke, limiting my cognitive abilities even more. The UU church was not for me then, and is even less so know.

UU isn’t for everyone. I’m glad you’ve found a faith home that fits you better.

One of the weaknesses I’ve found in the UU is that sometimes members like to show off just how smart they are. I guess no place is perfect.

 

[MarcoPG]

Truth is how one lives, not necessarily how one “believes”. A “belief” that in no way causes one to speak more gently to others, a “belief” that in no way causes one to show mercy and forgiveness when wronged is of no use to anyone. A “belief” that does not consider the stewardship of the Earth to be a God-given responsibility has no use in our real world.

Life as Truth is only true for Jesus, one’s life may be sinful, and it would be truth? It is a truth, relativism.

If my belief doesn’t cause me to speak more gently to others, I discard it. When we accept fatih, we don’t become puppets with a faith cd-rom inserted (or floppy disk, since it was 2000 years ago ). We say yes, I do want to live that way.

I may use forgiveness and mercy. When could I be wrong by doing that? If the other person tricks me, she doesn’t do her part (repenting), but I did mine (forgive). So it is never wrong, as Jesus said. Sure the other should repent.

And I don’t see why preserving what has been given to us is pointless in the real world. It is clear that we want things to last, not just for us but for the future.

In general, since a faith which doesn’t act is a dead faith, the way that one lives IS the way that one believes, for Christians it should be!

 

[PRmerger]

Nope.

Christian is not a generic term of commendation. It is a descriptive term, and it describes someone who believes in the Trinity, including that Jesus Christ is God. Lots of Christians are bad people, and lots of non-Christians are good people. But if they don’t believe in the Trinity, they’re not Christian. You can say that Unitarians tend to be nicer than trinitarians (in your experience). Or you could use “Christ-like” there, if that is what you mean.

I’m all with C.S. Lewis, in the preface to Mere Christianity, where he says (basically) that a “spiritual” use of the word Christian just means nobody can ever really use it without implying something that we can’t possibly know: the state of someone’s soul. (the relevant quote showed up here on a Google search: glenn.typepad.com/news/2003/08/cs_lewis_on_the.html) So we either use the word to make a statement of fact about someone’s beliefs, or we stop using it altogether.

How could you possibly know how harshly I would speak without the help of sacramental grace? I could be a harridan.

You may well be a nicer person than I am. That doesn’t make Christianity false. See C.S. Lewis’ “Nice People or New Men” Mere Christianity, book IV ch. 10, for more discussion of this. For example, there is the idea that it’s not reasonable to expect Christians to be better than other people, only to expect them to be better than they would be if they weren’t Christian. But a lot of broken people, like myself, are drawn to the redemptive love of Christ, so we might have been a lot worse than you were to start with.

–Jen

P.S. No, it is not normal for me to quote C.S. Lewis twice in the same post (or even in the same month), although I love his writings. It just happened that way this time.

:tiphat: :clapping: :bowdown:

 

[PRmerger]

I thought you were Catholic? I wouldn’t want you to go against your own bishops.

Oh, let me be quite clear: I would NEVER throw a beer can into the ocean. Never.

My point in bringing that up is that IF we espouse YOUR paradigm which is: everyone gets to believe what she wants, and there is no right or wrong belief (except for, curiously, the beliefs that you get to say are right or wrong, but I digress), then how can you tell me that I don’t have the right to throw beer cans in the ocean?

As a Catholic, I absolutely do believe that we MUST tell people what’s right or wrong.

But as a UU you are being inconsistent. You don’t get to tell the CC, “You can’t take away my rights!” and then say, “You have no right to do [A, B, and C!]”

 

[cheese_sdc]

Oh, let me be quite clear: I would NEVER throw a beer can into the ocean. Never.

At least you are admitting to using a specious argument in an attempt to get a rise out of me. That’s dishonest and insulting.

But as a UU you are being inconsistent. You don’t get to tell the CC, “You can’t take away my rights!” and then say, “You have no right to do [A, B, and C!]”

I’m done with you. For someone to give littering and a constitutional right (the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment) equal weight isn’t interested in engaging in a serious discussion.

Good day to you.

 

[PRmerger]

At least you are admitting to using a specious argument in an attempt to get a rise out of me. That’s dishonest and insulting.

It was a hypothetical, cheese. And a logical application of your argument.

I’m done with you. For someone to give littering and a constitutional right (the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment) isn’t interested in engaging in a serious discussion.

Good day to you.

That’s too bad that you can’t offer a reasoned refutation of my position.

If you need to bow out, that is certainly your right. But I hope that I have planted the seeds that you cannot reserve for yourself the right to do that which you object to in others.

 

[cheese_sdc]

That’s too bad that you can’t offer a reasoned refutation of my position.

Equating littering with a “Right” isn’t a reasoned argument and you know it.

If you need to bow out, that is certainly your right. But I hope that I have planted the seeds that you cannot reserve for yourself the right to do that which you object to in others.

 

[schaeffer]

UU isn’t for everyone. I’m glad you’ve found a faith home that fits you better.

One of the weaknesses I’ve found in the UU is that sometimes members like to show off just how smart they are. I guess no place is perfect.

I attended a UU fellowship for a number of years. They draw from various religious traditions, and certainly they teach about various religious traditions.

They think it’s awesome that OTHER people practice the spirituality, but they treated those within the fellowship who practiced a faith or spirituality as rather quaint and strange.

The church (which they called themselves though many do refer to their group as a fellowship) was active in the community and active in social justice issues, but they did treat those among them who had faith beliefs and practices as a bit stupid and backwards.

Being of congregational parity, this attitude differs from fellowship to fellowship and can be quite strongly influenced by the particular minister at a congregation. But having received their magazine and been active on forums, it does seem to be a prevailing attitude among UU’s.

 

[PRmerger]

But the truth of the matter stands that every Sunday, atheists, agnostics, pagans, christians, jews, Buddhists, etc all manage to come together to learn from each other.

Except for the egregious exclusion of the Westboro Baptist Church folks, or the KKK, or Neo-Nazis.

This sounds like what is being espoused in the UU community:
“We include everyone, except for the ones we exclude!”

and

“We object to the CC not including every belief system”

and

“Well, we reserve the right to exclude some belief systems”

 

[PRmerger]

Equating littering with a “Right” isn’t a reasoned argument and you know it.

No one has “equated” littering as being the same as “civil rights”.

What you are doing is expressing an inability to understand analogies.

Let’s say I propose:
Christmas trees : ornaments :: earlobes : earring.

And someone says, “How dare you equate a magnificent Christmas tree with a fleshy piece of cartilage! That’s offensive. And that means that your analogy is false”.

Cleary,this “someone” does not have the ability to think in the abstract and understand that Christmas trees and earlobes are alike as ANALOGS only. No one is “equating” them as being, well “equal”.

 

[PRmerger]

How could you possibly know how harshly I would speak without the help of sacramental grace? I could be a harridan.

You may well be a nicer person than I am. That doesn’t make Christianity false. See C.S. Lewis’ “Nice People or New Men” Mere Christianity, book IV ch. 10, for more discussion of this. For example, there is the idea that it’s not reasonable to expect Christians to be better than other people, only to expect them to be better than they would be if they weren’t Christian. But a lot of broken people, like myself, are drawn to the redemptive love of Christ, so we might have been a lot worse than you were to start with.

–Jen

P.S. No, it is not normal for me to quote C.S. Lewis twice in the same post (or even in the same month), although I love his writings. It just happened that way this time.

The above reminds me of similar stories I’ve encountered regarding curmudgeonly Catholic old men:

One day, a brave woman dared to ask him: ‘Mr. Waugh, you say such horrible things to people, I cannot believe you are really religious. How can you behave as you do, and still remain a Christian?’

He replied with grim sincerity: ‘Madam, I may be all the things you say. But believe me, were it not for my religion, I would scarcely be a human being.’

Johnson, a serious historian, is a pretty reliable source. In fairness, Walker Percy might have said something similar. I’m sure lots of Catholics, even writerly Catholics, have had call to think themselves saved from complete depravity by their faith. I love both writers (The Second Coming is maybe my 3rd favorite book of all-time) but know a lot more about Waugh so he immediately came to mind.

Again, you would not know what these Catholics would be like were it not for the sacraments. Maybe their reception of the sacraments has saved them from being a down-in-the-gutter drunk. Or an adulterer. Or an even ruder and meaner person.

Incidentally, that reminds me of a story about writer Walker Percy, a curmudgeonly old Catholic. Apparently, after an encounter with a snippy woman in which he was gruff–and, perhaps rude, boorish, curt–this woman sniffed, “And you call yourself a Catholic!” to which he replied, “My dear, you should imagine what I would be like were I not a Catholic.”

 

[SteveVH]

UU isn’t for everyone. I’m glad you’ve found a faith home that fits you better.

And this says it all. The only thing that really matters is if one feels comfortable and therefore we should all go out and find a faith that fits us better.

There are many things that make me uncomfortable within the Catholic religion. I am uncomfortable each and every time I feel compelled to go to confession. I am uncomfortable each and every time I sin. I am uncomfortable and tired after providing music at my third Mass each and every weekend and then having to teach youth for two hours on Sunday evening.

Its not about what fits one best. It is about finding Truth and conforming my life to that Truth.