Sam Harris

I just finished reading The End of Faith, and overall, I think Mr. Harris makes many good points concerning the atrocities and consequences of organized religion. However, as a Unitarian Universalist, I wondered while reading where spirituality such as mine fits into his scheme. No doubt, dogma of any kind directly or indirectly leads to violence of a physical, emotional, or spiritual sort. But what of a religion without dogma, such as UU?

Peace,

I think that humanity has to find some way to express its spirituality, even when secular and totally atheistic, and that it’s as much a disaster when it doesn’t (as in communism in the Soviet Union, for example) as when it expresses itself in dogmatic religions. But I don’t know anything about Unitarian Universalists, so I can’t comment on that. Can you tell us a little about it?

UU’s may be the exception to this all.  I’ve talked to UU “ministers” ?? and they say, “in our pews, you’ll find atheists sitting next to very liberal believers”.

The UU is the real deal as far as somehow melding belief with REAL life.  IMHO.

JL

UU information can be found at http://www.uua.org

UU information can be found at http://www.uua.org[/quot.e]

What are the qualities of the UU god?  Do you use the Christian bible?

Thank you.

UU information can be found at http://www.uua.org[/quot.e]

What are the qualities of the UU god?  Do you use the Christian bible?

Thank you.

From the UUA FAQ section:

In most of our congregations, our children learn Bible stories as a part of their church school curricula. It is not unusual to find adult study groups in the churches, or in workshops at summer camps and conferences, focusing on the Bible. Allusions to biblical symbols and events are frequent in our sermons. In most of our congregations, the Bible is read as any other sacred text might be-from time to time, but not routinely.

We have especially cherished the prophetic books of the Bible. Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and other prophets dared to speak critical words of love to the powerful, calling for justice for the oppressed. Many Unitarian and Universalist social reformers have been inspired by the biblical prophets. We hallow the names of Unitarian and Universalist prophets: Joseph Tuckerman, Dorothea Dix, Clara Barton, Theodore Parker, Susan B. Anthony, and many others.

We do not, however, hold the Bible-or any other account of human experience-to be either an infallible guide or the exclusive source of truth. Much biblical material is mythical or legendary. Not that it should be discarded for that reason! Rather, it should be treasured for what it is. We believe that we should read the Bible as we read other books (or the newspaper)-with imagination and a critical eye.

We also respect the sacred literature of other religions. Contemporary works of science, art, and social commentary are valued as well. We hold, in the words of an old liberal formulation, that “revelation is not sealed.” Unitarian Universalists aspire to truth as wide as the world-we look to find truth anywhere, universally.

Peace,

Hi Daniel,

After leaving the religion I was formerly part of, I looked into the Universist movement from my readings on Deism. I think the Universist movement started off as a deist organisation and then gradually evolved into what it is now.

I like alot of what Deism had to say but then I saw this branch of the movement evolve and I didn’t like it. I found far too many Christian references (priests, congregations, ‘prophets’ as you said etc). I was born in a Christian family, converted to Islam as a late teen, then apostated a few years ago for reasons I won’t go into here. I found that the Christian references in UU were very off-putting for people of other backgrounds and then I decided what’s the need for an organised religion even if it’s as faithless as you described. There are still central tenants in which one must profess and if you go against the rhetoric, you’ll find yourself an outcast. I’m not sure if this is entirely the case in UU, maybe you could advise me.

For example, from what you have said, you seem pretty open to *everything*, having respect for scriptures of other faiths etc. But I’m with Sam on this one, I think many scriptures do not deserve respect, such as ones that exhort people to intolerable violence, or ones that pretend to speak on behalf of cosmogony, science etc that are blatantly erroneous. Would you take such a stand and would the other UU’s denigrate you for that?

Thanks Daniel and welcome.

[quote author=“lorenzium”]Hi Daniel,

After leaving the religion I was formerly part of, I looked into the Universist movement from my readings on Deism. I think the Universist movement started off as a deist organisation and then gradually evolved into what it is now.

I like alot of what Deism had to say but then I saw this branch of the movement evolve and I didn’t like it. I found far too many Christian references (priests, congregations, ‘prophets’ as you said etc). I was born in a Christian family, converted to Islam as a late teen, then apostated a few years ago for reasons I won’t go into here. I found that the Christian references in UU were very off-putting for people of other backgrounds and then I decided what’s the need for an organised religion even if it’s as faithless as you described. There are still central tenants in which one must profess and if you go against the rhetoric, you’ll find yourself an outcast. I’m not sure if this is entirely the case in UU, maybe you could advise me.

For example, from what you have said, you seem pretty open to *everything*, having respect for scriptures of other faiths etc. But I’m with Sam on this one, I think many scriptures do not deserve respect, such as ones that exhort people to intolerable violence, or ones that pretend to speak on behalf of cosmogony, science etc that are blatantly erroneous. Would you take such a stand and would the other UU’s denigrate you for that?

Thanks Daniel and welcome.

I cannot speak for all UUs, since UU is a very diverse denomination. However, I can say that most UUs (especially those in ministerial positions) exclusively use scripture which highlights peace and justice issues, such as various portions of the OT prophets and the Sermon on the Mount in the NT. We do likewise for scriptures from other faiths. For me, UUism is comprised of a rich tapestry of traditions, since it does not rely on one tradition or any tradition as a sole dispenser of truth. There may be Sundays when no scripture is used, but a sermon is an editorial on a newspaper article of a science journal study. For us, truth is gained wherever it may be found. We do not close any doors, nor do we say any one door is exclusively truthful. Even UU Christians would not be considered such by evangelical Christians, or by most mainline denominational Christians. I think Sam, though not doing so, comes dangerously close to throwing the baby out with the bathwater (to use a tired expression). The Bible and other scriptures are certainly no good to be used as an overall moral standard; however, there are some rich stories and lessons to be learned in each. If we can take those lessons to heart without claiming allegiance to any doctrine of inspiration or infallibility beyong normal human standards, then I think it is wise to do so.

Peace,

Also, from the UUA website:

We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote:

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.

The living tradition which we share draws from many sources:

Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.

Grateful for the religious pluralism which enriches and ennobles our faith, we are inspired to deepen our understanding and expand our vision. As free congregations we enter into this covenant, promising to one another our mutual trust and support.

The comment was made earlier as to whether one UU would denigrate another for having a view opposed to her own. I cannot say this would never be the case. It may well be, though I have never experienced it personally. However, the general principles of the UU are pretty clear, that even in disagreement, learning can and should occur. I would be very sad (and bored) to belong to any organization, religious or secular, in which everyone agreed with me. What opportunities for learning are there. I think one of the great things about the UU is that is provides a safe place for conversation, in which one can learn from another.

Peace,

Hi Paynedaniel,

Just curious how the religion of Thomas Orr, the prophet, would fit into the spirit of the Unitarian Church.

Personally, I am of very favarable opinion on UC although I don’ t have the sufficient knowledge of the church to make any judgments.

http://www.freedomgates.net/tomorr.html

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr

[quote author=“paynedaniel”]Also, from the UUA website:

We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote:

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.

The living tradition which we share draws from many sources:

Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.

Grateful for the religious pluralism which enriches and ennobles our faith, we are inspired to deepen our understanding and expand our vision. As free congregations we enter into this covenant, promising to one another our mutual trust and support.

The comment was made earlier as to whether one UU would denigrate another for having a view opposed to her own. I cannot say this would never be the case. It may well be, though I have never experienced it personally. However, the general principles of the UU are pretty clear, that even in disagreement, learning can and should occur. I would be very sad (and bored) to belong to any organization, religious or secular, in which everyone agreed with me. What opportunities for learning are there. I think one of the great things about the UU is that is provides a safe place for conversation, in which one can learn from another.

Peace,

Daniel,

I second your comments about the Unitarian Universialists. When I attended a UU congregation our first minister was an atheist. Our second minister was gay. The current minister is a woman. The makeup of the congregation itself is very diverse. I must say this congregation was/is like an oasis in the fundamentalist desert surrounding us.

Let me add that the UUs allow their individual congregations to choose the emphasis of their community. Some are diverse like the one I attended. Others can choose to specialize as a Christian congregation or something else. There was another congregation in our area that decided to be a pagan/wiccan congregation.

In liberty and reason,

Sagan

Sagan, Paynedaniel,

After reading your posts I am already a big fan of the UU. My wife is bugging me to expose our son to some religion/spiritual tradition. Knowing my sentiments she mentioned the UU church. I said OK but told her not to expect any initiative from me, I would just go along.

Well, maybe I will take the initiative after all. Our son was attending the kindergarden run by the UU church. Initially I was put off with the church-like settings of the building, Jesus Christ on the walls (but Buddha, too), but our overall experience was good.

Now, I am wondering if the political system I am trying to put together isn’t something the UU church already is on the spiritual side of the spectrum.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

One cannot accuse me of being unfriendly to atheists. However, there is such thing as dogmatic atheism and I am not a fan of it.

My vision of secular society is not an atheist society. It is a tolerant, open minded society where religions are both engaged (the UU church way) and controlled, and where atheists enjoy the same status and respect as people of faith.

Secular means that laws and ethics are based on humanitarian   values and undermining them in the name of the sacred imaginary authorities is not tollerated. It also means that people are protected against any form of religious intrusion.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

I’m not a fan of dogmatic atheism either, and I’ve posted about this in this forum. I’m hardly a fan of dogmatic anything.

On your website you write: “Finally, I have received the official title of ‘The Spokesman for God, Jesus Christ and Apostles in Truth and Spirit, Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and End’. Interestingly, I am at this moment the only surviving member of the group that bestowed this title upon me.”

What was the name of that group? Why exactly do you call yourself a “prophet?”

[quote author=“MJ”]
What was the name of that group? Why exactly do you call yourself a “prophet?”

I joined the group in 1969 and left in 1973. Although I ruined my career by doing this, now I look with appreciation at the experience. The name of the group was “The throne of the Lamb and of the Apostles in Truth and Spirit, Alpha Omega, The Beginning and the End” - well, consult the Bible, Revelation of St. John, I did the quick translation from Polish as the group operated in Poland.

Many people were encouraging me to write about the experience of the life in the group. Then about two years ago I got the idea of writing a book about my vision for a better society. Like Sam Harris I saw the problem with religions as well as with the entrenched political ideas, which I thought should be broken in order to make room for better ideas I was working on. Of course, when you look at the task of changing the society you see all the impossibilities of it. Even to get heard is extremely difficult. One day, inspired by books like The DaVinci Code, a thought came to me: why not use my title of the prophet as a good story that can help me to push the book out. In addition, my claim to the title of the prophet is not less valid than the religious titles, prophets or otherwise, people assume for their wicked purposes. Well, why not to use my somehow legitimate title for a good purpose for a change. And this is how Thomas Orr, the prophet was born.

If you read The True Religion carefully you will notice that I am not making any untrue statements there. Some disgression I make actually reflect my own convictions regarding the spiritual matters, so there is no cheating there either.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

All religions claim they’re True Religions, don’t they? I’m not all that likely to take your advice and read “The True Religion” all that carefully, I’m afraid, since the last thing in the world I’m looking for is yet another True Religion.

Are you using this as an advertising gimmick to sell your book, or are you serious about this? Or some of each? I’m not exactly looking for yet more political dogma, either.