Re: Is Unitarian Universalism a Religion?

Matthew Gatheringwater wrote:

> Al,
> 
> Thanks for your response. I'm inclined to disagree with the extremely
> open definition of UUism for several reasons. Here is one in
> particular that comes to mind:
> 
> Both Unitarians and Universalists showed the greatest periods of
> growth during times when they stood in distinct contrast to other
> religious bodies. As many mainline churches absorbed more liberal
> theologies, however, both Unitarianism and Universalism became less
> distinctive. Universalism, especially, was criticized for offering
> nothing more than a negative critique of a specific doctrine.
>
> If Unitarian Universalism is to be a sustaining, cradle-to-grave kind
> of faith, then I think UUs will have to first recognize that they are
> much less theologically diverse than they think they are and then
> recognize that their implicit theologies are not only distinctive, but
> worth sharing.

I won't pretend to know enough about the contention that UU may have
implicit theologies within it to make comment at this time, other than UU
might be less attractive to me if it were.  

Is it desirable, though, that UU is to be a sustaining, cradle-to-grave kind
of faith via distinctive theologies? It isn't important to me that UU
provides distinctive theologies. The value of UU to me is exactly that it
doesn't, but instead provides a forum in which I might explore those issues
amongst others. Tis the journey that's important here, not the destination.

> Anyway, the poll results are in and, according to most people who
> responded, Unitarian Universalism is not a religion.

There was discussion Elsewhere about whether "String theory" is science or
philosphy, given that the theory is not falsifiable (as required by
science), yet is a field whose actors are scientists. No conclusion was
reached (and might only be of interest to dictionary makers if it had), but
my take was that perhaps the definition of what science is needs new
scrutiny.

Similarly, if Unitarian Universalism is not a religion, it could be that it
isn't. Or it could be that it is, and the definition of 'Religion' needs
new scrutiny in the light of progress. I'd go with the latter.

> More interesting,
> perhaps, are the many definitions of UUism offered by folks who didn't
> feel their view fit into the poll answers. You can read all the
> responses at http://matthewgatheringwater.blogspot.com

Heh! I like these replies...
-- 
Al
--
soc.religion.unitarian-univ is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], and see http://sruu.iecc.com for the FAQ and posting policy.