Who said, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge"?

Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Buddhist

Last updated on: November 1, 2011 at 3:02 pm by James Ford

2011-11-01T15:02:58-07:00 James Ford

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

THE WAY OF LIBERAL RELIGION

A Meditation on Unitarian Universalism’s Principles & Purposes

3 April 2011

James Ishmael Ford

First Unitarian Church

Providence, Rhode Island

Text

The Way that can be followed is not the eternal Way.

The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The nameless is the origin of heaven and earth

While naming is the origin of the myriad things.

Therefore, always desireless, you see the mystery

Ever desiring, you see the manifestations.

These two are the same—

When they appear they are named differently.

This sameness is the mystery,

Mystery within mystery;

The door to all marvels.

Tao Te Ching, Chapter One, Charles Muller translation

This week I’m drawing again on that fascinating treasure trove, the pile of queries left over from our question box Sunday, where, if you recall, members of the congregation were asked to write questions you thought I might be able to address. Or, at the very least that might make me look silly trying to answer. Last week I addressed the most repeated question. There were, however, other repeated questions. One asking about our UU Principles and Purposes and whether they are a creed and, whatever they are, what do Unitarian Universalists believe anyway? This is what I’ll try to address today. It’ll be up to you to decide whether this was something I can answer, or just what makes me look silly.

I know I mentioned this before. But it’s particularly relevant for today’s reflection to repeat right at the beginning of this exploration. Back when I was preparing for the Unitarian Universalist ministry, like all such aspirants pretty early on I was required to see a psychologist and undergo a battery of tests. Near as I could tell, this was mainly to make sure our candidates are unlikely to be axe murderers. Frankly, given the various aggravations of parish ministry, this is probably a good thing. All in all it was an interesting experience. For instance it was my first actual encounter with the Rorschach test, which until that time I’d only encountered in comedic skits. The main course, however, was something called the California Psychological Profile, which is an abbreviation of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, a comprehensive survey of character and quirk.

The results were printed out as a long graph with a mid-line and two outer limit lines. Along the way were markers for the various personality traits they tested for. In between the lines, all was cool. Outside the lines, well, it depended. As it turned out, and as many of you probably have already figured out, I’m what might be described as a strong personality. In most categories I would bounce along just on the “acceptable” side of the top line. With one interesting exception, at least I think it interesting. When it came to conformity, the graph spiked way down. Turns out I was nonconformist, seriously nonconformist.

Now the psychologist who ran these tests did it for clerical candidates for a number of denominations, and was quite familiar with differing expectations. When we came to this point about nonconformity, he looked up at me and said, “You know, Mr. Ford, if you were an Episcopalian, this would be the end of the ride.” He paused and then added, “However, as a Unitarian Universalist, I suspect you may go far.”

How goes that popular paraphrase of old Will Rogers? I don’t belong to an organized religion; I’m a Unitarian Universalist. As such, I suspect as a spiritual crowd I’m kind of describing most of us here. We, largely, don’t like to be fenced in. We’re, for the most part, not going to be told what to believe. Not by a church hierarchy. Not by the minister. And certainly not by some ancient formula meant to be recited liturgically. No creed. No “We believe.” Now, according to that test this suits me to a “T.” And, I’m pretty sure, suits most of us here, as well. If you don’t like organized religion, welcome. We’re the barely organized religion.

Still, our barely organized crowd, the Unitarian Universalist Association, consisting of some thousand congregations, a couple of hundred thousand adults and many more children and youth, are all banded together to some purpose. And there hangs the question. What exactly is the purpose of this gathering of spiritual nonconformists? These are the questions. Who are we? And what is it we’re about?

Now, in our Western culture we are inclined to think a religion needs a good summary statement, a creed, if you will. Something you can point to and say, you believe it and you’re golden. You don’t, and well, you aren’t ours. In fact as a “not ours,” we probably need to assign our ethicists to consider whether we can hurt you. This isn’t our game. No test of belief to join this crowd.

Not that we don’t sometime try. One of the more distressing lines I’ve heard over the years is “That’s not UU.” Usually addressed at a fellow UU holding views that the speaker disagrees with. Natural enough. But also it is an attitude very much contrary to our deep inclination to resist hard definitions, to resist creeds.

Of course this resistance is confusing, when speaking of religions it is counter intuitive. After all in the West everyone has a creed. It’s a central marker of a religion. “I or We believe in One God…” “Hear, oh Israel…” “There is no god but God…” However, if one pulls back just a bit we discover these summary, proscriptive statements describing sheep and goats are actually pretty rare. Hindus don’t have such a thing. Nor do Taoists. Nor do Confucians. Some would say the Buddhist four noble truths is a creed, but that only became a way Buddhists commonly identified themselves in response to Christian missionaries in the nineteenth century. Bottom line, not having a creed is much more common among religions than having one.

Still, we’re Westerners, and even nonconformist, even full on anti-authoritarians as we might be, we still like summary statements, so long as they’re descriptive rather than proscriptive, that is so long as they are a snap shot of what we think, most of us, right now, and are not to be construed as a test for eligibility to join us.

All that said, somehow, we’ve pulled it off, we’ve in fact managed to come up with a common statement. You’ve seen it, the Principles and Purposes. However, getting to it, as you might imagine, has been a rough process. In brief, in 1961, at the time of consolidation, when representatives of the Universalist Church of America and the American Unitarian Association struggled to write some statement of common purpose, the whole thing nearly fell apart over how to express our historic connection to Judaism and Christianity.

The specific question was how to acknowledge that ancient line about Love of God and neighbor attributed to numerous sources and enshrined in the New Testament as Jesus’ great commandment. The Universalists for the most part were quite clear on their debt to Christianity, while the Unitarians for the most part thought not so much. For a while it looked like the whole thing was going to fall apart. After an all day meeting that became an all day and all night meeting, at pretty much the very last possible minute, a final compromise was found, shifting this acknowledged source from being “our Judeo-Christian heritage” to being “the Judeo-Christian heritage.”

Considering all the turmoil and even hurt surrounding the adoption of an inaugural summary statement of common principles, when it came time for a revision, and as it is a summary statement of what the majority among us currently think, it does need to be revisited from time to time, its surprising how easy, relatively speaking that revision was.

The initial impulse was correcting the relentless masculine by preference language of the original document drawn up, as it was in the middle of the century. In 1977 the UU Women’s Federation called on the Association to draft a revised document. No good deed goes unpunished and they were charged with coming up with some language. In 1981 a revised draft Principles & Purposes document was presented to the Unitarian Universalist General Assembly. The responses revealed many of the same tensions around the place of God and that same troubling and compelling great commandment that proved thorny the first time around. This time the compromise placed the phrase along with other sources as a sort of appendix.

With that compromise a final document quickly came into place and with a single major change was passed by votes in the General Assembly in both 1984 and 1985. That the final vote registered a single no is something that probably counts as a UU miracle.

But there was something else, something really, really important. The single major shift from the document as presented in 1984 was changing the seventh principle from a statement about ecological concern to that phrase we probably all know now, “respect for the interdependent web of existence, of which we are all a part,” a line offered from the floor. And with this a startling theological assertion was made. Even more startling, perhaps, was that we embraced it with considerable enthusiasm. It spoke our truth.

In my opinion the first and seventh principles articulate the genius of Unitarian Universalism as a spiritual path, as a way of life. We acknowledge the uniqueness and preciousness of the individual, while noting our individuality births out of, is sustained by, and finds it’s the ultimate source within some mysterious, radical and complete interdependence. Those and the fourth principle, which calls us to a free and responsible search for truth and meaning, and which, I believe, hints at the methodology of free religion, give us a sense of a real spiritual path. If you will, as I said: a way of life.

Time passes, and remember this is not a creed, but rather a description of what most of us see as commonly held among us at some given moment. And so toward the end of the first decade of this century, a standing committee of the Association, the Commission on Appraisal, was charged with exploring and possibly bringing forward a new draft statement of Principles and Purposes.

I was drawn into the debate fairly early on as an opponent of draft language enshrining the phrase “cultural appropriation” as unethical behavior. That could make for another sermon. And someday, may. I was, however, increasingly enthusiastic about most of the other possible changes, including a trending toward a more spiritual cast of language throughout the document. This more spiritual cast turned, most controversially, on the substitution of the word “reverence” for the word “respect” in the phrasing of the seventh principle, calling us to reverence for the interdependent web. The proposed revision failed by just a few votes to achieve the super majority that was required at the 2009 General Assembly. So, we’re good with the current language for another decade or two.

I would have preferred that change, but absolutely can live with the current statement. Because, I think it calls us to something we know deep within us as who we are and what it is we’re about. Whether we are Humanist, Christian or Jewish, Buddhist or Pagan, our major self-identities, or whatever miscellaneous other, and there are a lot of those, as well; we’re for the most part all of us tied together by an intuition of deep interconnection.

And what’s so powerful about this, I feel, is that we can come to it any number of ways. We can bring our heads into the matter, investigating how we emerge in the great evolutionary arc and understand our existence is completely contingent upon a great and ultimately fragile web of relationships. Or, we can follow our hearts and look into our beings and at each other and find there some deep sense of family, of relatedness with all of life.

If we consider the interplay of our individuality, precious, unique and so fragile, emerging out of the web of connections, of causes and conditions that tie us all together, a whole raft of ethical considerations emerge. How we need to walk gently upon this planet, and how we are related to all things. If you know ants and birds are cousins, how do you treat them? If you know the very soil is made up of your ancestors, how do you choose to walk on it?

Bottom line. We don’t need no stinkin’ badges. We don’t need no stinkin’ creeds. Yes they can have limited usefulness. But ultimately we don’t need anything written down on a piece of paper. This wisdom that is our way is written on our hearts, it is a body knowing. All we need to is open our eyes, open our ears, open ourselves, and we can find what we need. Everything we need.

It is all here.

This, dear ones, is what I understand is Unitarian Universalism.

Amen.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

April 2, 2011

Advice for Someone Seeking a Spiritual Guide

Next Post

April 4, 2011 Yoga for Yankees

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category A Christmas Carol Abolitionist African-American Ahmadiyya Alan Watts Aldous Huxley Allen Ginsberg Amedkar Jayanti American politics American Zen Anaheim Zen Sangha Anglican Annie Besant April Fool Armageddon Art and Religion artificial intellegence Atheist Awakening B R Ambedkar Barlaam & Josaphat Beatnik Between Bhagavad Gita Bible biography birthday bodhisattva Bodhisattva Precepts Book burning Book of Common Prayer Book of Mormon Brahmo Samaj Buddha Buddhism Buddhist Buddhist Lord's Prayer Butterflies Calendars cartoons cat ChatGPT Chicken Tortilla Soup choices Christian atheism Christian mysticism Christian origins Christian Science Christian Zen Christianity Christianity and Buddhism christmas Christmas Truce Christopher Isherwood Church of Later Day Saints Cinco de Mayo circus covenant critical thinking culture D. T. Suzuki Dalit Buddhism Daniel Defoe Desert Fathers and Mothers dharma talk Dogen Donald Trump Dongshan's Five Ranks Dorothy Day dream Duty Easter ecology Edwin Arnold emptiness Empty Moon Zen Network Episcopal Church Eternal Now Ethics evolution existentialism Faith fantasy Fathers Day film film review fire Five Ranks Folk music food Form and emptiness Four Seals Francis of Assisi Francis Xavier Free thinker friendship George MacDonald Gerald Heard Glenn Taylor Webb God Good Friday Gospel of Gospel of Mark Gospel of Thomas grace Graduate Theological Unioin Graduate Theological Union Guanyin H R Blyth Hakuin Ekaku Hanamatsuri Hanukkah Harada Yasutani Zen Heart Sutra Henry David Thoreau Hermann Hesse Hinduism History and Religion history of religion Holy Spirit home Hospitality Icon Ides of March Isaac Newton Islam Islamic mysticism Jack Kerouac James Luther Adams Jiddu Krishnamurti Joan of Arc Johannes Gutenberg John Donne joke Judaism justice karma kensho King James Bible koan Koun Yamada Kyoto School Lewis Carrol Liberal Christianity Liberal Religion Life Plan Community Liminal literature Literature and Religion Liturgy Lord's Prayer Love Mahatma Gandhi Mahayana Martin Luther King Jr Mary Baker Eddy Mary Magdelene Mary Oliver Mayflower Compact Meditation memories memory metaphor money money and religioin Mormons Mother's Day movie review mysticism mythic Neighborhood Unitarian Universalist Church New Thought Nichiren Buddhism Nonduality not knowing Omar Khayyam Pacific School of Religion pagan Palm Sunday Passover peace Pentecost perennialism Phantastes Philip Kapleau philosophy Pilgrimage poetry Poetry and Religion politics Prayer Precepts Printing Press prophecy prophetic spirituality psychology Pure Land Queer religion queering religion Quietism Ram Mohan Roy rebirth recipe Relationships and religion religion religion and history Religious syncretism Resistance Retirement Retreat review Rissho Kosei Kai Ritual Robert Aitken Roshi Robert Ingersoll Rohatsu Romani religion Rosie the Riveter saints samadhi SanboZen Sangha Satyagraha science science and reigion science and religion science fiction seminary sermon Sesshin Sex and Religion Shinran Sikh Sikh tradition silence Social Justice Socially Engaged Buddhism Society and religion Soto Zen soul spiritual community spiritual practice Spirituality Sufism Suicide superstition Taoism Television Teresa of Avila Thanksgiving theological schools Theosophy Thomas Merton Time Transcendentalism Transcendentalist Trinitarian Trinity Uncategorized unitarian Unitarian Christianity Unitarian Universalist Universalism Vajrayana Vedanta Walking war Willa Cather William Ellery Channing wisdom women and religion women in religion World Teacher Writing zazen Zen Zen Center Zen inspired retriement zen meditation Zen Precepts Zen women

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Moses Solomon Paul Job