• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Unitarian Universalism

crimresearch said:
I apologize for not getting back to you.

The 'holistic birthing center' type of New Age midwfery that I've come across uses incense, piped in dolphin and whale sounds, crystals, aura readings, Reiki...anything and everything except prenatal medical care.

Heard one of them in Florida talk about losing a 'patient', because the talked her into having the baby far away from doctors and hospital equipment that might have made a difference when the unexpected occured...they blew the death(s) off as 'God's will'.

Left a bad taste in my mouth.
Click to expand...

I understand. Yeah, that sounds pretty awful. I only asked because a very close friend of mine is heavily involved with the Australian College of Midwives and I've never heard anything particularly wooish about them.

However, I have heard some horror stories about "traditional" medical practice that really set my teeth on edge. Like did you know that about 46% of all births in Australia last year were by caesarian? That shocked me.

Hmm. That website appears to be down. Probably because my friend is at the dentist's today.
 
My wife and I went to the local UU Church in Kirkland, WA for about a year before we went married, and had the local minister officiate our wedding ceremony. We both liked it a lot, and I've been back a few times since, but my wife likes to sleep in on the weekends, which makes it difficult for me to be motivated to go on my own.

It was very open, and polite. Only once did I hear a rather crotchety old guy get politely told to be respectful of other's opinions, but he was putting someone down pretty rudely. The view points were liberal, but more socially aware liberal rather than politically liberal. At one Service, the topic was animal rights. I thought that was kind of bogus, but it was informative to hear some thoughts on both sides of the issue. At another, a woman gave a talk about notions of Heaven, and commented that "you never hear anyone talk about Sex in Heaven. I don't know if I want to go to a Heaven where I can't have Sex." There were lots of nodding heads in the audience, which was amusing.

Over all, I think it's one of the most comfortable churches I've ever attended. I like the idea that at the end of the main talk, the audience members have an opportunity to speak their own mind on the matter, and can openly disagree, as long as they are polite about their disagreement. I'd really like to start going back, both for the social and informational aspect.

Of course, the no-pressure, everyone-is-welcome attitude is also very nice, since anyone can go, see if it's for them, and then make up their own mind.
 
Thank you for your comments, Static.

I find my UU is something I can't stay away from, though I don't know how I'll feel in a few months or years. It is just so educational. The "sermons" are always so good I hang on every word. One Sunday a Jewish man came and taught about their high holy days. As I believe I may have said earlier in this thread, the minister is an evolutionary biologist. It seems to attract the sharpest minds, that's for sure. Occasionally the forums irk me with their paranormal content, but even then I learn more about critical thinking from the skeptics in the group. I think I'm going to sign the book tomorrow. Oh, by the way, I go alone. The only thing I ask of my husband is that he comes occasionally. I find coming as a single-though-attached very comfortable there. ---SherryA.
 
arthwollipot said:
Like did you know that about 46% of all births in Australia last year were by caesarian? That shocked me.
Click to expand...

I have to retract this. In Australia the actual percentage of caesarian births is 23%. The WHO recommendation is 2%.

In Chile, the rate of caesarians is 96%.

Read that again. It is not a misprint. 96% of all childbirths in Chile are by caesarian section.

The website is back up now.

http://www.acmi.org.au/
 
When you consider UU churches, you have to keep in mind a saying that I was taught in a "New U" class I went through at a UU church I attended for a while.

"When you've been to one Unitarian church, you've been to one Unitarian church."

There are huge differences between the different churches. In the three that I have attended with any regularity, I encountered almost no "woo" stuff. No reincarnation. No crystals. None of it. On the other hand, I've attended individual services at churches where that sort of thing seemed very common.


Comment on unitarianism from a Christian friend of mine:

What do you call an atheist with children?
A Unitarian.



(Refers to the fact that a lot of people are perfectly happy not going to church, until they have a family. I intended to start going back to one when my kid hit the appropriate age, but my Jewish wife suddenly got more spiritual on me, so now we go to Reform Jewish temple. Reform Jews and Unitiarians are a lot alike. Our Rabbi is really uncertain on the whole question of the existence of God.)
 
Thanks, Meadmaker. That was very helpful!
How are Unitarians and Reform Jews similar? I think I know, but I may know wrong! -- Sherry A.
 
Upchurch said:
more :D
Click to expand...

I though this one was great.

Jesus said to them, "Who do you say that I am?" The Unitarian Universalist Christian replied "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the kerygma of which we find the ultimate meaning in our interpersonal relationships." And Jesus said "What?"
 
SherryA said:
Thanks, Meadmaker. That was very helpful!
How are Unitarians and Reform Jews similar? I think I know, but I may know wrong! -- Sherry A.
Click to expand...

It's hard to characterize Reform Judaism, because there are a lot of differences of opinion. The practioners range from agnostics to fervent believers. None that I know are literalists, and few believe in the literal truth of the miracles of the Old Testament, but actual opinions range from agnostic to passionate believer. In the case of Moses, the opinions range from the idea that these are just old stories to the idea that Moses was a real person who created the laws under divine inspiration.

The reason I say that UUs are similar is that within reform Judaism, there seems to be room for an agnostic. Also, they are not stuck on doctrinal differences. In reform Judaism, the laws aren't "laws", they are customs to be followed, but the emphasis is on cultural tradition, not divine will. For example, they don't require followers to keep kosher, but many do, and among those who don't, they might still avoid pork, out of respect for Jewish tradition. Like UUs, they seem to want the practice and appearance of religion, while allowing plenty of room for interpretation on the part of the individual.

Also like UUs, the real emphasis in the temple is largely about community and social justice, as opposed to doctrine and following religious rules. At an Orthodox Bar Mitzvah, they will talk about how the boy of honor studied the Torah extensively, at a Reform Bar Mitzvah, they will talk about the community service project performed.
 
UU/Reform Judaism

Thanks, Dave! I appreciate the explanation. ---SherryA
 
Meadmaker said:
When you consider UU churches, you have to keep in mind a saying that I was taught in a "New U" class I went through at a UU church I attended for a while.

"When you've been to one Unitarian church, you've been to one Unitarian church."

There are huge differences between the different churches. [snip]
Click to expand...
I'll second Meadmaker. I lasted in UU for only about 6 months but during that time I was on the road a lot and attended UU services from South Carolina to Boston to LA and some in between. The service in Charleston, SC was indistinguishable from a mainstream christian church...gospels choir, bible readings, etc.

The LA service was almost wooish. In my own home town, the head guy (don't know what the right title is) was quite an inspirational speaker and I he prompted much thought on my part. Then he got caught with his member in another member. That was bad but he got canned when it turned out he had done several women, some in the course of pastoral counseling. Nasty stuff, that.

I left because it was too much like church. Sunday morning meetings, singing, hymms, choir in robes, blah, blah, blah. But it was populated with excellent people.

I have read lately of a trend toward even more overt religion. Is the head guy (Sinkford?) pushing for recognition of a wishy-washy god?
 
Thanks, SezMe.

The "member in the member" issue you describe is a concern of mine. I've often wondered if the UUs, with their fluid ideas of conventional morality, might be more susceptible to that than other groups. I confess I'm an old-fashioned girl (well, 50 year old girl) in that way.

So far, I've found the people in UU to be extraordinary. It surely does attract the sharpest minds and the deepest thinkers. I see UU as an opportunity to learn about science from scientists, as much as anything else.

Yes, the head UU guy, Sinkford, has re-emphasised "god-language" though it seems to me the overwhelming majority of UU's who are okay with god language mean Einstein's "god," ie, the one who "does not--[although of course it evidently does]--play dice with the universe." Nature. The Cosmos. Not necessarily a sentient, intelligent being.

Einstein's words: "to know that that which is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty" best describes that idea of god, I think. (As you know, Einstein was adamant that he not be misunderstood as another Billy Graham!) Not a god who micro-manages or cares what color SUV you want. Not a god, unfortunately, who seems to care where your missing child is, either. There's also evidence to suggest this god has a shadow side, based on the evidence of what he/she/it allows to go on. I should say that I may be projecting what I think onto the UU perspective, in hopes that they agree with my view. That's a human tendency, I've found, and one I try to be aware of. But so far, that seems to be the majority view.

Paul Harrison's pantheism website describes all this very well indeed.

The term religious is used a lot in my UU, to be sure, but in the sense our minister uses it, it is religious in the sense of being passionate, ecstatic even, about the natural world. Always, always, the natural, not any supposed supernatural, world.--- SherryA.
 
"So far, I've found the people in UU to be extraordinary. It surely does attract the sharpest minds and the deepest thinkers...."

Is this in comparison to any other group in particular?

I've noticed that many university communities have members of faculty who also are members of local congregations...why would those who choose UU be sharper and deeper thinkers than say, those who chose Quakerism or Buddhism?
 
Unitarians brighter than others?

Yes, Crimesearch, it's in comparison to other religious groups with which I've had cursory dealings. Most of them have at some point cut off the flow of the intellectual search. Of course it doesn't necessarily mean they're less intelligent, just that the UUs have kept going, kept thinking, kept talking. They haven't given up articulating about everything. On the other hand, I have found many of the discussions so rigorous that people who live less in the mind get lost pretty quickly.

Yes, it's true that many UUs are near universities, but I live in a retirement community. Many of the people are retired folks from the "thinking professions" in other parts of the country and the world. --- Sherry A.
 
I've been attending a UU church for about 10 years.

Uhoh, I think I've just blown my cover for all those people who were quizzing me on "What the hell kind of Christian are you?" in various other religious threads.

I'm a self-identified Christian UU, which makes me one of a small minority within UU (something under 20%, I think). My view of Christianity doesn't fit too well with a lot of what people think Christianity means, but I like to think it's inline with UUism.

On those online tests of what religion you are based on your philosophical views of various issues, I tend to test as either UU or Quaker. I admire the Quakers a great deal, and I think there's a lot of overlap. One discussion I've had with other UUs is whether being UU requires one to be a pacifist (I'm not). Being Quaker certainly does, but I think UU gives me a little wiggle room.
 
Christian Unitarian

Thanks, Rppa. I'd like to hear more about your Christian UUism.
How about starting with the golden oldie question "What does Jesus mean to you?" What is Christian Unitarianism to you? I may be one, too, for all I know.---SherryA.
 
"...whether being UU requires one to be a pacifist (I'm not). Being Quaker certainly does,"

Quakerism has no such requirement.

It is a result of a common misunderstanding of the traditional Quaker 'harmony testimony' and the promotion of a fabricated 'Peace testimony' by political activists who have found Quakerism to be a bully pulpit.

Like UU, many but not all Quaker meetings have an 'All are welcome' policy....

And that is without even getting into splitting hairs over what is meant by 'pacifism'.
 
crimresearch said:
"...whether being UU requires one to be a pacifist (I'm not). Being Quaker certainly does,"

Quakerism has no such requirement.

It is a result of a common misunderstanding of the traditional Quaker 'harmony testimony' and the promotion of a fabricated 'Peace testimony' by political activists who have found Quakerism to be a bully pulpit.
Click to expand...

Not even historically?

On a tour of a historic meeting house here in Philadelphia, my wife was told that a large schism occurred at the time of the American Revolution over the issue of whether it was permissible even to give money to American soldiers, since this would be supportive of war.

Isn't it the case that Quakers typically take the conscientious objector route for military service? I guess you're saying that there have been Quakers who served in the military, and that this was hunky-dory with their congregations. I can't speak to that.

It's certainly the case that most of the most dedicated pacifists I've known or heard about, for instance 80-year-old women willing to go to jail for participating in anti-Iraq protests, have been Quakers. I guess you're saying that people who are dedicated political activists aren't "real" Quakers?

Not to derail this conversation too far. Let me speak from UUism:

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

I think that many would argue that at least the First, Second, and Sixth principles make a strong case against a UU being willing to shoot another human being in wartime, or even to participate in the defense industry.
 
SherryA said:

So far, I've found the people in UU to be extraordinary. It surely does attract the sharpest minds and the deepest thinkers. I see UU as an opportunity to learn about science from scientists, as much as anything else.

Yes, the head UU guy, Sinkford, has re-emphasised "god-language" though it seems to me the overwhelming majority of UU's who are okay with god language mean Einstein's "god," ie, the one who "does not--[although of course it evidently does]--play dice with the universe." Nature. The Cosmos. Not necessarily a sentient, intelligent being.
Click to expand...

One time at a church I attended, the pastor gave some statistics on percentage of UUs who had graduated college, had Master's degrees, etc. The numbers were much, much, higher than for the general population. That doesn't mean they had "the sharpest minds", but they sure are an educated lot, if that means anything. (And call me an elitist if you wish. I think it does.)

The churches I attended were very much not into God. The first pastor occaisionally referred to "the G word", but the second used "God language" quite a lot, despite occaisionally noting that he didn't believe in God. He did talk about Pantheistic beliefs a lot, and I am pretty sure that's what he meant when he talked about God, which made me pretty comfortable with his sermons. I describe myself variously as atheist, pantheist, and Buddhist, and don't see any contradiction between any of them. That's why I liked Unitarian churches, and I would be attending them now, except that I can't see going there when my wife and child are at the Temple.
 
Meadmaker, years ago when I lived in Montreal, the UU Church didn't use god language. I think maybe it got too dry for many people's taste, as I've heard humanist and ethical societies can be. To me, the religious aspect brings back the passion for the cosmos thing, Carl Sagan was so wonderful at expressing.

You could attend some of the things at the UU without actually going there minus your family. I've found many people do that. I've been going regularly to the meetings discussing this thing of creationism creeping into the schools. Also, I like the nature-based Solstice gatherings they have.---SherryA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom