Comments on: Whither Independent Affiliates Of the UUA ?

By: Steven R

Steven R — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:23:28 +0000

Jasmine asked me “What a curious comment. Have you asked poly UUs what our goals are?”
I suspect you are not reading my comment the same way I wrote it(although it’s hard to tell from your comment). Try “If a group has a goal for the mainstream culture, getting UUs aware of them is not likely to be helpful for their goals.”
But yes, plenty of polys have been telling their goals in these recent blogging threads….

By: Jeff W.

Jeff W. — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 05:16:29 +0000

Tinythinker, if we adhere to my original rules strictly I think we can satisfy PeaceBang: just name it LUUV: Lifting Unitarian Universalist Voices. It spells a word, includes UU, and is far, far too sickly sweet! I’m almost tempting to propose such a group just to get people to make a queasy face.

Eric: I don’t think your scenario will come to pass. The UUA has no ability to determine the theology of individual UU churches or individual UUs. And both UU theism and UU humanism are entrenched in the denomination. Therefore I predict both positions will live on for a long, long time within UUism, neither coming to dominate the UUA and without either position being able to push the other out. I think your predicted conflict will never reach the crisis level you expect and will never be resolved. I also think UU Christians will never be faced with just the two options you suggest or that a moment necessitating such an urgent choice on the part of every UU Christian will come to pass. At most, we may see some local communities that split, with theists or humanists leaving one UU congregation to found another nearby that is more to their liking, without giving up on UUism or the UUA. Of course, only time will tell which of us is correct.

By: Steven R

Steven R — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 01:21:43 +0000

No, I think they threw out what some of us think is the baby when they threw out the bathwater. The majority of the Independent Affliate Organizations seem to be such that I personally fail to see why an UUA affiliate group was needed.
The hyphenated theology ones are the only ones that you see people talking about…. which suggests something about the other 50….(and I suspect the theology groups might figure out a way back in).

By: Jasmine

Jasmine — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 00:56:59 +0000

David wrote:
It was more “Why do they come?”…What I’m asking is what we offer to a non-trinitarian Christian who walks thru our doors for the first time. One who has other choices.

1) our teachings of “Revelation is not sealed,” and “The prophethood of all believers.” 2) the opportunity to be part of theologically diverse church, worshiping along with Theists, humanists, mystics, Buddhists, pagans. 3) The religion of Jesus rather than the religion about Jesus.

David’s three reasons are among my reasons for coming to UUism from Southern Baptist while still being Christian. Another reason is Universalism. I just never could come to terms with eternal hell for unsaved souls.

Another important reason — maybe THE most important reason — is that in UUism, it’s safe to say out loud, “I don’t know whether I really believe that.” I visited a wide variety of churches after leaving the Baptist church, and never felt safe enough to voice my doubts or questions until I came to UUism. In UUism, the response is likely to be, “Tell me more,” or “Is it important to you to believe it?” Something to help me further explore whatever it is I’m wrestling with. In any other church I visited, the response would have been more along the lines of, “GASP! Let’s kneel down right here and now and pray for your poor lost soul.” And that’s no way to affirm or encourage a free and responsible search for my own relationship with Christianity.

One reason I visited a UU church in the first place is that UUism seemed like a place it might be safe to let my church know who I really am, poly and all. And it has been just that, in a weird, scary, paradoxical, caught-in-the-maelstrom sort of way.

But that wasn’t enough by itself. I desperately needed the affirmation that revelation is not sealed, the religion OF Jesus, the theological diversity, the final harmony of all souls with God, and most of all, the freedom to voice my doubts without fear. And I never found any of these anywhere else.

Steven R wrote:
Polys would be closer to meeting their goals getting LDS to reconsider, than to get mainstream America to take UUs seriously).

What a curious comment. Have you asked poly UUs what our goals are?

Jasmine

By: Eric Stetson

Eric Stetson — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 19:05:46 +0000

Steven,

Thanks for correcting me. In that case, then there is probably a different explanation than what I suggested. What could it be? Do you think perhaps the UUA wants to encourage greater uniformity, rather than the phenomenon of “hyphenated” UUs? If so, I wonder what such uniformity or “pure UUism” would look like?

Eric

By: Steven R

Steven R — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:51:29 +0000

Eric, what you’re saying would be possible / likely if it were only the theological organizations that were nixed. Instead around 56 groups were nixed - most of which were not theological and include general liberal politics and “humanistic value” groups.

By: Eric Stetson

Eric Stetson — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 06:59:15 +0000

Should have put this link in my last comment, but I forgot. So here it is now for anyone who may be interested.

The Christian Universalist Association: http://www.christianuniversalist.org

Eric

By: Eric Stetson

Eric Stetson — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 06:55:51 +0000

It seems to me that the disaffiliation of the theological organizations by the UUA suggests that the UUA wishes to move in the direction of becoming an even more non-theistic organization than it already is. I see this as a disturbing development for a denomination that is already the butt of jokes about how “the Unitarian church is for people who want to go to church but don’t believe anything.”

The UUA is going to face a very important period of soul-searching and decision-making during the next several years: return to an embrace of spirituality and let the secular humanists leave, or totally embrace secular humanism and let the spiritual/theistic people leave. The status quo of a denomination that includes both believers in the spiritual and those who reject spiritual things like God, an immaterial soul, an afterlife, etc., is an inherently unstable and tenuous mixture. It seems the UUA may now be beginning to make their choice of which direction they will go in — and from my point of view, it is the wrong one.

For Christians particularly, this could be a painful time to be in the UUA. I would urge the UU Christians to consider two options: (1) stand up and fight vocally and vigorously to reclaim the UU denomination as a church that has a healthy respect for Christianity and fully embraces Christians who adhere to the original type of Unitarianism and Universalism (i.e. the Christian UU traditions). Or (2) exit the UUA and become non-denominational Christians, or perhaps join a liberal Christian denomination such as the UCC.

Either way, the booming ecumenical Christian Universalist movement will probably be looking much more inviting than the denominational world of the UUA for increasing numbers of UU Christians. Take a look at new independent organizations such as the Christian Universalist Association (http://www.christianuniversalist.org). Several UU Christians serve on the board of directors, along with Mainline Protestants, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, etc.

Ultimately, the difference between being a theist or a non-theist is so major that a single denomination can’t really sustain a unified religious culture that includes both. That’s why the UUA is in turmoil and will continue to be until this inherent internal conflict is resolved, one way or the other. The UUA is going to have to decide what it stands for about spiritual matters. Sticking to liberal politics and generic humanist values is not enough to sustain a religious movement in the long term.

JMHO.

Peace to all,
Eric Stetson

By: tinythinker

tinythinker — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 00:33:27 +0000

I realize the original meaning of the term, but I was taking advantage of the broader usage to fulfill Jeff’s requirement for a silly, too-cute umbrella label. I was really stuck on the “E”. :^)

(Just trying to keep the spirit light given the serious nature of recent topics.)

By: PeaceBang

PeaceBang — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:37:22 +0000

Tiny, that’s sweet, but ecumenism refers to unity within the Christian church. It is often used as a synonym for “interfaith,” but erroneously. In deciding to identify itself as Other than Christian in the contemporary era, Unitarian Universalism, has, in fact, rejected the ecumenism that was the dearest hope of its American founders.