For example, after sauntering through the Loop and encountering a 12 story office building named the I AM TEMPLE, with a remarkable image (for me, creepy) of St. Germain in the window and an elderly woman at a small reception desk in the dimly lit lobby, I became curious about the I AM movement of the 1930s. Their teachings about the Ascended Masters, including Jesus, who bring special messages to Earth, now focuses on activities at Mt. Shasta in California. And like Sears, I AM has moved its national headquarters from the city to Schaumberg.
I enjoy arcane religious history of the American experience.
My big takeaway from this encyclopedia of American Religions concerned the Unitarians. The encyclopedia made a section transition from what it called the Conservative Family to the Liberal Family of Protestantism. The Liberal Family included the likes of the Ethical Society and the Religious Humanists. Unitarian Universalism sat on the transition line. The encyclopedia wondered whether UUism was the most liberal faith organization of the conservative tradition, or was it the most conservative organization of the liberal religious tradition.
I vote for the former: the most liberal faith tradition of the conservative tradition. Our roots are in the New England Pilgrim/Puritan Congregational Church. We are independent congregations joined into an association. We have ministers trained in traditional seminaries, including Harvard Divinity School, the first in America and once Unitarian. We meet on Sundays and listen to sermons and sing hymns. And so on.
Here’s my understanding of liberal religion as it applies to Unitarianism. 1) We were conceived in and emerged from the Age of Reason—the Enlightenment. Freedom of belief and freedom of conscience remains central. 2) We value the worth and dignity of each and every person. In this regard, our founder William Ellery Channing spoke emphatically that the human condition was made in the image of God. A generation later, Emerson urged us to “Trust thyself” in a celebrated essay “Self Reliance.” 3) We have no creed. Nothing must impede the free mind and hamper free will. But we do need education and an adventurous life full of experiences to best use our freedom. 4) We believe in progress, the endless seeking of perfection of the individual (character) and of society (justice). 5) Democracy is the best form of government to achieve social progress, while continually nurturing the individual in the ways of freedom and responsibility.
Generally, and so it applies to religion, I see liberalism as the means of liberation of the human personality, in which liberalism implicitly trusts. In contrast, conservatism has a dimmer view of the human condition, what I see as Calvinistic. Humankind in this old Protestant view is essentially depraved (original sin or at the very least fallen from grace plays here). In the conservative view, the individual and society needs all sorts of controls to maintain order and condition goodness. (I might be able to trust in me, but I’m not sure that I can trust you, is the conservative bottom line. So, follow my rules, though they might not absolutely apply to me.)
My mantra is, “I’m a religious liberal for me and for you.”
Let our spirits soar!
Posts
5 comments:
Thank you. This helps me see my own religious liberal leanings more clearly.
Why I’m a Religious Liberal (but a political conservative)
I’d have to say my “epiphany” was comparatively, much more recent. On Sept. 11, 2001, when the buildings fell. Upon listening to the conjecture that islamic extremists were responsible, my mind went reeling, not in anger over a religion I had very little knowledge or understanding of, but in anger over extremism. My mother’s extreme catholisism, which I had accepted over the years, instantly became the focus of my rage. My diatribe included such hurtful rhetoric as “It’s people like you that caused this!” Our relationship further soured after that, never to be recovered. But that is another story.
I too, studied various religions, albeit at a slightly later stage in my life than you Ed. My curiosity stemmed not from a historical perspective, but from a wonder of…Why? Why do people believe what they believe? Naturally my attention turned to the question of god, or a god, since most religions seemed to focus so much on a deity. Ultimately, I discovered the Epicurean Dilemma. My logical/scientific (call it what you will) background found his treatise very appealing. It made sense to me.
My next “find” was Unitarian Universalism. Here was a religion that allowed me to believe in the concepts of “free and responsible search for truth and meaning”. No dogma, no… “you can’t be one of us!”. My worth and dignity would be accepted. Some have called Unitarian Universalism a do-what-you-want religion; some have called it a cult (oh those catholics!) I call UU’ism freedom, freedom to think openly about religion, unencumbered by dogmatic constraints, and be accepted for (or despite of) those thoughts or even open expressions. Religiously, to me, Unitarian Universalism is exhilarating!
Now to my second opinion. I have been so disheartened by the political discourse, the non-acceptance of political diversity that pervades Unitarian Universalism as a whole. Where we go religiously, we can’t seem to go politically. Understanding and acceptance of those with differing political opinions reminds me of the christian dogmatism we so try to distance ourselves from. I find myself asking, again…Why? Why do UUs preach one thing, yet, only practice it half way? Are we enlightened, or just another sect of “enlightened” hypocrites? I love what I’ve found in UUism. I want others to discover what it means to be free in thought. How do we, as Unitarian Universalists, convince “others” that we truly accept (if not necessarily agree with) their ideas? How do we accept, ourselves, that diversity truly enhances life’s experiences, if we don’t “practice what we preach”? As for me, in the words of (One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest) Chief Bromden, “I’m too small” to do it.
Ed, I must disagree with your assessment of the conservative view. More precisely, I separate the political vs. the religious view. Religiously, I agree with your treatise. The “faith” dictates order and goodness, and everyone must abide (or be ostracized). Politically, I maintain the conservative view currently (and I stress currently) desires less control from “above”. To wit, more personal freedom from an over reaching government. I have always viewed that as a liberal agenda. At times I find it disconcerting that the movement that denigrated the government in the sixties for being oppressive, now accepts the likes of government run healthcare and a useless war in Afghanistan.
Finally, your mantra is the same as mine “I’m a religious liberal for me and for you.” I stress religious in that mantra.
Thank you again, Ed, for inspiring me, and allowing me, to opine. Jay.
Jay, thanks for this version of your odyssey.
As you know, my POV has been heavily influenced by neuroscience, including an analysis of innate morality. Most studies suggest that self-identified conservatives have greater allegiance to the moral colors of purity and authority than do liberals, who are skewed toward the moral colors of justice and compassion for life. These studies suggest that conservatives are well-balance along the span of five moral colors: sense of life, purity, justice, authority, and community.
Jay, thanks for this version of your odyssey.
As you know, my POV has been heavily influenced by neuroscience, including an analysis of innate morality. Most studies suggest that self-identified conservatives have greater allegiance to the moral colors of purity and authority than do liberals, who are skewed toward the moral colors of justice and compassion for life. These studies suggest that conservatives are well-balance along the span of five moral colors: sense of life, purity, justice, authority, and community.
Post a Comment