What is wrong with Unitarian Universalism?

[asd72]

Yes, that was pointed out a couple of times. Sorry, I was less than clear.

In the first instance, I was referring to the principles we, as UUs, use as guides for our fellowship with other UUs and our gathering as a congregation.

An example is the first principle, which states we believe IN THE INHERENT WORTH AND DIGNITY OF EVERY PERSON.

Now, if someone perhaps were a racist and believed someone of a different race was inferior, that person would not be supporting that first principle. He would probably not feel comfortable in a UU congregation where we. as a fellowship, try to treat each other with respect as equals.

In other words, the first example was our using of the principles to help guide us in our dealings with each other as a fellowship or congregation, and, extrapolating from that, how we try to interact with those outside our church walls.

The second example refers to our individual search for truth and meaning, whatever path that might take.

For example, I recently attended a UU retreat where one of the officiating UU ministers follows Buddhist beliefs. She is an ordained UU minister, and believes and supports the seven principles, but she herself is a practicing Buddhist, and that is her spiritual path she has chosen in her search for truth and meaning.

In this case, we, as UUs would never tell this minister she had to drop the Buddhist beliefs and be only a UU, or any other belief for that matter.

The second example was how we view individual choice and personal growth and searching for our own spiritual path.

I hope that makes things clearer.

Peace,

Seeker

Does your religion believe in the dignity and worth of the unborn child?

 

[cheese_sdc]

Ah, very good, then.

This piques my curiosity. Would a UU church permit a person to preach on a concept of a finite god?

Depends on the individual church, actually. My particular church is quite fond of the idea that God is evolving. I like to think of it not as God is evolving, but our understanding of the Divine is becoming more refined as our understanding of It changes.

 

[CMatt25]

Depends on the individual church, actually. My particular church is quite fond of the idea that God is evolving. I like to think of it not as God is evolving, but our understanding of the Divine is becoming more refined as our understanding of It changes.

Good point. I know the United Church of Christ has the slogan “God is still speaking”. But you make a good point that our understanding evolves. It is afterall a lifelong journey we walk.

 

[PRmerger]

Depends on the individual church, actually. My particular church is quite fond of the idea that God is evolving.

How would one distinguish this doctrine: “God is evolving”

from this: “Our understanding of God changes” (as you propose)

or this: “We decide how to apply God’s unchanging revelation to different aspects of our changing lives”

or this: “We decide that we want God to be like because it’s more palatable and attractive, and we don’t want to change our lives, so we decide that God has changed. And then we don’t have to change!”

 

[PRmerger]

This piques my curiosity. Would a UU church permit a person to preach on a concept of a finite god?

Depends on the individual church, actually.

Would it be the “pastor” of the UU church who gets to decide if a person can preach on the concept of a finite god?

If so, does this particular preacher have to submit his sermon to the pastor beforehand?

 

[CMatt25]

How would one distinguish this doctrine: “God is evolving”

from this: “Our understanding of God changes” (as you propose)

or this: “We decide how to apply God’s unchanging revelation to different aspects of our changing lives”

or this: “We decide that we want God to be like because it’s more palatable and attractive, and we don’t want to change our lives, so we decide that God has changed. And then we don’t have to change!”

PR, seekers on their faith journeys toward the truth, distinquish, decide as they are led in faith by God’s spirit. The same as you felt led in faith and I’m guessing by your parents, your catechism instruction, etc, and thus the placing of your faith in the Catholic Church.

 

[CMatt25]

Would it be the “pastor” of the UU church who gets to decide if a person can preach on the concept of a finite god?

If so, does this particular preacher have to submit his sermon to the pastor beforehand?

Catholics sure seem to like quotation marks. Many here will put them around the term Catholic to describe someone perhaps less faithful than they are even though both are Catholic. And now PR I do not know why you use them here. The UU clergywoman at my local UU fellowship actually uses the title reverand which many pastors do.

 

[PRmerger]

Catholics sure seem to like quotation marks. Many here will put them around the term Catholic to describe someone perhaps less faithful than they are even though both are Catholic. And now PR I do not know why you use them here. The UU clergywoman at my local UU fellowship actually uses the title reverand which many pastors do.

Oh! Sorry! I simply used quotation marks in case I was corrected and told, “The UU church does not have pastors.”

I simply didn’t know.

 

[PRmerger]

PR, seekers on their faith journeys toward the truth, distinquish, decide as they are led in faith by God’s spirit. The same as you felt led in faith and I’m guessing by your parents, your catechism instruction, etc, and thus the placing of your faith in the Catholic Church.

So it’s possible to believe all that God is evolving yet not evolving at the same time?

(I was going to put evolving in quotation marks in the above question but decided against it, based on your admonition. And I feel I actually need to put quotations around evolving in this paragraph, but I am feeling your negative energy on this, so am refraining. Hope I am able to get my thoughts across without the use of them.)

PR “Who Aims To Please My Friends” Merger.

(Oops! Sorry about the quotation marks!)

 

[CMatt25]

Oh! Sorry! I simply used quotation marks in case I was corrected and told, “The UU church does not have pastors.”

I simply didn’t know.

Good point PR. I might have to look to see as I didn’t know my local UU clergy went by Reverand until I checked. I just know many pastors also go by reverand.

 

[CMatt25]

So it’s possible to believe all that God is evolving yet not evolving at the same time?

(I was going to put evolving in quotation marks in the above question but decided against it, based on your admonition. And I feel I actually need to put quotations around evolving in this paragraph, but I am feeling your negative energy on this, so am refraining. Hope I am able to get my thoughts across without the use of them.)

PR “Who Aims To Please My Friends” Merger.

(Oops! Sorry about the quotation marks!)

PR your humor has me . That was funny. I’m pretty sure I know though your thoughts are that God is not evolving.

I thought Cheese said “My particular church is quite fond of the idea that God is evolving. I like to think of it not as God is evolving, but our understanding of the Divine is becoming more refined as our understanding of It changes.”

Had to use quotations there PR to quote Cheese.

So some in Cheese’s church are fond of the idea that God evolves and Cheese thinks of it as understanding involving. What is possible is they like the rest of us are all just on their journeys to finding the truth PR. I know you believe you’ve already found it though. God bless you PR and all who seek to find.

 

[PRmerger]

So some in Cheese’s church are fond of the idea that God evolves and Cheese thinks of it as understanding involving.

Right. And this is fine in the UU church. One person proclaims “A” and another proclaims “Not-A” and both beliefs are tolerated.

Except there are somethings that are not fine in the UU church. For example, saying that I will respect Mother Earth on Christmas and Easter, but the rest of the time I can dump oil into the ocean.

And I’m trying to figure out who decides what’s fine and what’s not in the UU church.

 

[CMatt25]

Right. And this is fine in the UU church. One person proclaims “A” and another proclaims “Not-A” and both beliefs are tolerated.

Except there are somethings that are not fine in the UU church. For example, saying that I will respect Mother Earth on Christmas and Easter, but the rest of the time I can dump oil into the ocean.

And I’m trying to figure out who decides what’s fine and what’s not in the UU church.

PR, perhaps you are making it more difficult than it needs to be. Look at this way. Of course both beliefs are tolerated because they understand both are on the journey of seeking the one truth. And they understand the difference between* belief and faith *in what that is vs *knowing with 100% absolute certainty *at this point on their journeys. But if they are seeking the one truth, perhaps not dumping oil into God’s ocean is something by and large they agree on.

 

[PRmerger]

But if they are seeking the one truth, perhaps not dumping oil into God’s ocean is something by and large** they agree on**.

On that, I am certain. No “perhaps” about it. (QMs are definitely required here. Do I have your permission, BTW, to use them ad lib? )

But the question has still not been answered: who gets to decide what’s a tolerated doctrine/belief and what’s not in the UU church?

 

[Irish_Pride]

I think you need to examine your own beliefs .To decide wether this church or another is right for you.If you have write them down,and compare the unitarian or any other until you find the right fit. I wish you the best.

 

[CMatt25]

On that, I am certain. No “perhaps” about it. (QMs are definitely required here. Do I have your permission, BTW, to use them ad lib? )

But the question has still not been answered: who gets to decide what’s a tolerated doctrine/belief and what’s not in the UU church?

PR, you have my “permission” Just try not to use them around the word Catholic like so many do because that’s confusing in light of who the Catholic Church teaching calls Catholic.

Well PR, I think you answered your own question. Since you are certain there is no “perhaps” in regards to agreement about the ocean among the UU faithful, what is tolerated and what is not “might” depend on where everyone is on their journeys toward the one truth. I bring you back to the real concept of belief and faith vs knowing with certainty. But now if the walks of the faithful have converged on the ocean, then to want to dump oil into the ocean “might” not be tolerated.

I use QMs around the word might only because I am not UU. We need someone like Seeker who is better versed than I in UU belief. I’m just “winging” it. (I’m not a bird and literally do not have wings.)

 

[PRmerger]

Just try not to use them around the word Catholic like so many do because that’s confusing in light of who the Catholic Church teaching calls Catholic.

Just so we’re clear, can you cite the document to which you’re referring when the CC teaches what we can call others regarding their Catholicity?

Well PR, I think you answered your own question. Since you are certain there is no “perhaps” in regards to agreement about the ocean among the UU faithful, what is tolerated and what is not “might” depend on where everyone is on their journeys toward the one truth.

Could you please elaborate? I’m not following. I don’t really need to know necessarily what the UU teaches on polluting Mother Earth.

I am still unclear *who *gets to decide these things. Who gets to decide if a white supremacist can preach in a UU church? What about a transvestite?

And, what if it was a gay, transvestite white supremacist? “Would” he be allowed “to” preach there?

:ehh:

 

[CMatt25]

Just so we’re clear, can you cite the document to which you’re referring when the CC teaches what we can call others regarding their Catholicity?

Could you please elaborate? I’m not following. I don’t really need to know necessarily what the UU teaches on polluting Mother Earth.

I am still unclear *who *gets to decide these things. Who gets to decide if a white supremacist can preach in a UU church? What about a transvestite?

And, what if it was a gay, transvestite white supremacist? “Would” he be allowed “to” preach there?

:ehh:

PR who said a thing about “Catholicity”??? In our discussion of QMs I referred to who can be identified as a Catholic according to the answers of Catholic Church teaching. And I believe you know what the Church’s answer is.

And PR, how in the world would I know if a gay, transvestite white supremist would be allowed to preach in a UU fellowship? I have great respect for UUism because of their compassion and their understanding of the difference between seeking the one truth in faith and belief vs thinking we know with absolute certainty. But I have yet to attend a UU service, let alone be a UU member. So I can only guess. But my guess is most if not all UU journeys have converged on that point.

See who decides PR might depend on how much the journeys have converged on a particular point. And I’m just guessing the journeys of most if not all UUs have converged on not supporting white supremacy. So a white supremist in that case might not be allowed.

But to me it seems you almost still have some difficulty understanding that UUs are seeking and are on a journey to the one truth just like you are. A difference is you believe you already “know” the truth.

OMs needed in the above too PR because having faith and belief in the one truth does not equate to “knowing” it with absolute 100% certainty. That’s why these things are called faiths and beliefs.

Look at it this way. Take you and I. I’m assuming you and I converge in faith on the belief that Jesus, Who in the Scripture we place faith in called Himself the Truth, shall come again. We believe it. We have faith He shall. We will know if and when it happens. Peace to you PRMerger.

 

[PRmerger]

PR who said a thing about “Catholicity”??? In our discussion of QMs I referred to who can be identified as a Catholic according to the answers of Catholic Church teaching. Period. And I think you know what the Church’s answer is.

Could you please cite what the Church teaches on this and the source?

And PR, how in the world would I know if a gay, transvestite white supremist would be allowed to preach in a UU fellowship?

I am awaiting an answer from someone who knows.

But to me it seems you almost still have some difficulty understanding that UUs are seeking and are on a journey to the one truth just like you are. A difference is you believe you already “know” the truth.

Are you certain about this, Matt? Or are you speaking on faith here?

It certainly sounds like you believe what you type. But maybe I’m wrong and you really don’t believe everything that you’ve professed here?

OMs needed in the above too PR because having faith and belief in the one truth does not equate to “knowing” it with absolute 100% certainty. That’s why these things are called faiths and beliefs.

And this? Here it also sound like you believe what you’re professing. It sounds like a belief to me.

I don’t understand why you get to profess your beliefs, but Catholics can’t.

 

[CMatt25]

Could you please cite what the Church teaches on this and the source?

Sigh. Well PR if you truly need me too. But then lets get back to UU. If you need to further comment, probably best you start a new thread or join the one I started to which I will provide the link below. Otherwise we are straying too far off the topic of this one I fear.

So anyway our own Catholic Answers apologist Michelle Arnold as a source for starters:

“A person who is **baptized a Catholic **(and thus born again) is made a member of Christ’s body, the Church. Baptism imparts a supernatural character upon his soul **that can never be lost even if the person apostasizes from the faith **”

Michelle Arnold goes on to say “because the supernatural character of baptism can never be lost, it is indeed possible but unfortunate that there are people who can be called non-practicing Catholics.”

Non practicing can define the Catholicity you spoke of PR. But QMs can appear to question whether one is a Catholic when they are. They might be non practicing as a bishop once told me and as Michelle Arnold attests to. But their Baptism made them members of the Catholic Church with an indelible mark and they are Catholic.

You can also see the thread I started where it is explained one “always remains part of the Body of Christ, the Catholic Church”.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=597641

Which brings us to this source:

CCC 1267 “Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ”

CCC 830: Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church. In her subsists **the fullness of Christ’s body **"

So PR if one is made a member of Christ’s body, the Church, and this character can never be lost, and if the Catholic Church is the Church Christ instituted and is the fullness of that body, then such a person is a Catholic.

I hope that helps!