How does your church stand on homosexual marriage and abortion?
In the United States, Unitarians are overwhelmingly in favour of gay marriage and the denomination often gets involved in campaigns which support its legalisation. In fact, a few years ago two Unitarian ministers in the US were arrested and prosecuted for attempting to marry gay couples. Likewise, I would suspect that Unitarians in the United States would largely take a pro-choice stance on abortion.
In Britain, gay marriage and abortion are not such high-profile socio-political issues like they are in the US, so churches often don't really feel the need to take such an obvious stance on them. However, I know that many of our ministers are openly gay. Actually, when I was at the denomination's annual meetings earlier this year, my friends and I were looking at photographs of a trip that some of them (not me) had been on to a conference in the US the previous year. They'd been swimming outside whilst they were there, and there was a picture of a young man that they'd met in his swimming costume. As we were looking at it, one of the (male) ministers came in, saw the picture and said 'wooah, he's fit!' in a Northern Irish accent. I thought that was rather amusing. So, it would appear that the general consensus here would be 'yes' as well.
As for abortion here, I'd imagine that a majority of Unitarians would not personally like abortions, but would not wish to ban them or impose that view on others, as we tend to be socially liberal people.
Quote:
I recognize Jesus as God's son. I don't believe in the trinity, but I believe that Jesus was sent by his father, God, to fulfill a purpose on earth, which was to sacrifice his life that all men may gain everlasting life, and to preach the news of God's kingdom. I say Jesus was definitely of divine origin, just not God himself.
You sound like you could be a 'classical' Unitarian. This is still the main form of Unitarianism in Eastern Europe and India, and was the main form of Unitarianism in Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa until about 40 years ago. Unitarian congregations and individual Unitarians of that persuasion definitely still exist in both Britain and the US — and there's nothing wrong with that! — but they'd definitely be a minority in the US and probably also in Britain today as well. But as they say — everyone is a minority within a Unitarian congregation! ;)
Well, then, Unitarians don't view the bible as the foundation of their faith then? The bible is not their guideline? Being totally accepting of gay ministers sounds a little contradictory to the bible. What about the scripture which lists men who lay with men, among other sinners, which also states that they will not inherit God's kingdom? _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
I'll just stress that whenever I talk about 'Unitarians', I am essentially talking about Unitarians in Britain, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. As I've said, there are quite a lot of Unitarians in Romania, but there a bit different, and I know very little about them so I can't really comment on what their views might typically be.
Porthos wrote:
Well, then, Unitarians don't view the bible as the foundation of their faith then? The bible is not their guideline?
Simple answer — no. Not since the 19th century. However, we do still read the Bible in our services.
Quote:
Being totally accepting of gay ministers sounds a little contradictory to the bible. What about the scripture which lists men who lay with men, among other sinners, which also states that they will not inherit God's kingdom?
1. As I say, a majority of Unitarians today would view that as somewhat irrelevant.
2. The passages which you've mentioned can be interpreted in a number of different ways. Many Biblical scholars do not jump to the same conclusions about these passages as your average Evangelical preacher might.
3. There are openly gay priests in the Church of England anyway, although it is a more controversial issue for them.
Of course, like in most denominations, one can sometimes find that there is a gap between those who are heavily involved within the denomination and those who simply attend on Sundays. Our congregations are not filled with gay couples and I'd imagine (for a variety of reasons) that the members of my congregation would actually have mixed attitudes towards gay relationships. A majority of Unitarian ministers here would be prepared to bless same sex unions though, I'm sure.
Well, how is it a Christian religion then, if you don't even care what the bible says anymore? If you don't believe that the bible is God's word, then how do you put faith in something that you don't beleive, or question. Are unitarians of the belief that you are "once saved, always saved", and that our actions or sins do not matter, so long as we ask God for forgiveness? _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
I don't think I actually said that Unitarians were Christians. Our roots lie firmly within Protestant Christianity, but the question of how 'Christian' we actually are now is rather controversial at the moment. There was a survey in the US a few years ago which revealed that only about 10% of Unitarians there considered themselves Christians, and the received wisdom is that the equivalent figure for Unitarians in Britain might be about 50%. In Romania, however, it would be more like 99%.
Quote:
if you don't even care what the bible says anymore?
It isn't so much that we don't care 'what the Bible says'. It's more that we no-longer view the Bible as a source of authority, even though we accept that we can learn a lot from it.
Quote:
If you don't believe that the bible is God's word, then how do you put faith in something that you don't beleive, or question.
I'm not quite sure that I understand this question. What is the something which you think we put faith in but neither believe in nor question?
Quote:
Are unitarians of the belief that you are "once saved, always saved", and that our actions or sins do not matter, so long as we ask God for forgiveness?
I'm afraid that this isn't really applicable. Unitarians don't get 'saved' as such. I tend to think that most of us would not put much emphasis on the afterlife anyway.
What I meant is that the bible is the foundation for the Christian faith. That is where all of christian history is documented. That is where christian teachings originate. If it weren't for the bible, there would be no religious guidelines, no religious structure, and no religious doctrine within Christianity. It's supposed to be the basis of all Christian belief. Simply put, without the bible, there would be no Christianity. I'm glad most unitarians don't identify as Christians, when they don't even regard the bible as a moral authority in most cases. I just don't know how a Christian denomination could evolve to such an extent. I am confused as to what Unitarians actually believe then. Do they just congregate together, and talk about their problems amongst each other in a form of comfort? Do they just encourage others to be good neighbors, and call it a day? Because from what I've heard so far, it seems like there are no established right or wrongs in Unitarianism, nor is there any international standard structure and norms. And there seems to be a lot of disunity within the church on an international level, since you describe such extreme differences in stances on moral issues between unitarians of different countries. It seems to have evolved out of a very liberal philosophy. In fact, it seems like it is just that, a philosophy, and not a religion in the true sense of the word. Somewhat similar to Budhism. _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
What I meant is that the bible is the foundation for the Christian faith. That is where all of christian history is documented. That is where christian teachings originate. If it weren't for the bible, there would be no religious guidelines, no religious structure, and no religious doctrine within Christianity. It's supposed to be the basis of all Christian belief. Simply put, without the bible, there would be no Christianity.
All of those above points are debatable, but that's really for another thread. I'll just say that it's important to remember that Christians existed before much of the New Testament was written, and long before what we now call 'The Bible' was compiled.
Quote:
I'm glad most unitarians don't identify as Christians, when they don't even regard the bible as a moral authority in most cases.
It seems that you associate 'Christian' very strongly with 'Bible-believing'. Personally, I associate 'Christian' with 'disciple of Christ', which in itself could have many interpretations.
Quote:
I just don't know how a Christian denomination could evolve to such an extent.
I suppose we just gradually became more and more liberal. Although traditionally a very rationalist and intellectual church, there has recently been a movement towards non-propositional spirituality and even mysticism. You could say similar things about Quakers, at least in Britain.
Quote:
I am confused as to what Unitarians actually believe then.
So are most Unitarians. ;)
Quote:
Do they just congregate together, and talk about their problems amongst each other in a form of comfort? Do they just encourage others to be good neighbors, and call it a day? Because from what I've heard so far, it seems like there are no established right or wrongs in Unitarianism,
nor is there any international standard structure and norms.
Our religion is based upon the principles of Freedom, Reason and Tolerance. We affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person. We have a free and enquiring religion in which people are encouraged to make up their own minds about spiritual and ethical issues, providing that they accept that others will do the same and may not necessarily reach the same conclusions. For us, the ultimate source of authority is the Conscience.
Some Unitarians have suggested the following for understanding our faith. Although some Unitarians would be uncomfortable with the terminology used, the essence of it largely applies:
Whilst other Protestants often emphasised the priesthood of all believers, we took it a step further and emphasised the prophethood of all believers. That is to say that all of us can be inspired by something greater than ourselves. No individuals represent unique authority within Unitarianism.
Quote:
And there seems to be a lot of disunity within the church on an international level, since you describe such extreme differences in stances on moral issues between unitarians of different countries.
I don't think I described 'extreme differences' in moral issues between Unitarians in different countries. But it is important to remember that the various Unitarian groups throughout the world all have their own histories and are in different social contexts. Having said that, most of us are united by the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists, of which the Rev Gordon Oliver from South Africa, former mayor of Cape Town and anti-apartheid campaigner who welcomed Nelson Mandela when he was released from prison, is the president. (I'm meeting him later this month at a conference in Germany).
Quote:
It seems to have evolved out of a very liberal philosophy.
It has become increasingly liberal over time.
Quote:
In fact, it seems like it is just that, a philosophy, and not a religion in the true sense of the word. Somewhat similar to Budhism.
All religions have an underlying philosophy. When we add specific rituals, like building churches, ordaining ministers, singing hymns, praying/meditating and lighting chalice candles, it becomes religion.
Let's have a look what dictionary.com has to say:
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7. religions, Archaic. religious rites.
8. Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion: a religion to one's vow.
I'd say that 6 definitely applies. I'd personally say that 2 and 3 apply as well, although I accept that not everyone would necessarily agree.
Well, I don't want to get in a long endless debate with you Benjamin, but, there is one fundemental flaw in this form of philosophy. Men are imperfect, and sometimes, inherently evil. Our conscience is a trained guide. It can be molded and shaped, it can be strengthened, or it can atrophy, like anything else. You don't use it, you lose it. So for those who are influenced by unfavorable circumstances and surroundings, and who commit terrible acts repeatedly, their conscience graduallys grows numb to what is wrong, until eventually, they feel no remorse in commiting such heinous crimes as murder, or rape. So, if what is right or wrong is left entirely to the viewpoint of an individual, who knows what people would be capable of? The Bible was written for a reason. It is "beneficial for teaching, reproving, and setting things straight". It was written aforetime with examples and lessons of right and wrong. The latter half of the bible, the new testament, was completed by Jesus' very apostles, within one lifespan of his death, in the 1st century A.D. And most christians believe that these were divinely inspired. It doesn't take a great leap of faith to believe that the new testament was of divine origin, if one already believes that Jesus was of divine origin, and therefore that his teachings were also. Under your philosophy, I can go out and rape girls, kill some people for their trendy shoes, and live a life of debauchery, all without consequences, simply because I am my own judge of right and wrong. There is a problem with such a belief. But by removing the bible (God's message to mankind), in one swift act, you have erased all accountability to God and his laws. That's what it all boils down to. The vast majority of people, do not want to be accountable for their actions. They want to be able to do whatever they want, and still feel like they have a positive relationship with God. _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
Well, I don't want to get in a long endless debate with you Benjamin, but, there is one fundemental flaw in this form of philosophy. Men are imperfect, and sometimes, inherently evil.
Imperfect, yes. I understand that the idea that people are 'inherently evil' is taught by some Christian groups, although that is not a view which I can accept, as the belief that humans are hopelessly doomed would not 'affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person'.
Quote:
Our conscience is a trained guide. It can be molded and shaped, it can be strengthened, or it can atrophy, like anything else. You don't use it, you lose it. So for those who are influenced by unfavorable circumstances and surroundings, and who commit terrible acts repeatedly, their conscience graduallys grows numb to what is wrong, until eventually, they feel no remorse in commiting such heinous crimes as murder, or rape.
It is certainly true that one's behaviour can be influenced by one's surroundings. However, we could argue endlessly to what extent we actually behave according to our 'Conscience'.
But I probably didn't make myself entirely clear. The notion of the Conscience alone as the ultimate authority applies mainly to matters of theology. For ethical issues and behaviour, we tend to go by what we believe 'affirms and promotes the inherent worth and dignity of every person'. Which in itself is ultimately decided by the Conscience, but then again, so is someone's decision to ascribe authority to a sacred text such as the Bible.
Quote:
So, if what is right or wrong is left entirely to the viewpoint of an individual, who knows what people would be capable of? The Bible was written for a reason. It is "beneficial for teaching, reproving, and setting things straight". It was written aforetime with examples and lessons of right and wrong. The latter half of the bible, the new testament, was completed by Jesus' very apostles, within one lifespan of his death, in the 1st century A.D.
I know. I fully accept that the Bible is an amazing collection of documents, which are definitely worth reading.
Quote:
And most christians believe that these were divinely inspired.
I would definitely agree that much of the Bible is divinely inspired.
Quote:
Under your philosophy, I can go out and rape girls, kill some people for their trendy shoes, and live a life of debauchery, all without consequences, simply because I am my own judge of right and wrong.
No, because it wouldn't affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person.
Quote:
There is a problem with such a belief. But by removing the bible (God's message to mankind), in one swift act, you have erased all accountability to God and his laws. That's what it all boils down to. The vast majority of people, do not want to be accountable for their actions. They want to be able to do whatever they want, and still feel like they have a positive relationship with God.
I think that the reason why you have this opinion is because you seem to be of the view that traditional Christianity is the default mode for all people. I would argue that wanting to 'escape accountability to God's laws' is an entirely irrelevant (and also rather bizarre) concept for Unitarians.
Born again Christians have this, once saved always saved outlook, whereby they can do whatever they want, so long as they pray and ask God for forgiveness. I don't believe you can have your cake and eat it too. Catholics go to confession, say a few hail marys and our fathers and call it a day. A lot of mainstream Christians feel that way about accountability. It just seems that Unitarians have taken it one step further. _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
Would you say that Unitarianism is, in general, more about learning how to live in this world and how to be a good person, rather than concentrating on what there is beyond this world and how the world is created? Do you think that you place more importance in the acceptance of all faiths than on professing to believe a single faith? If so, could you really conclude that Unitarianism is, in fact, a religion, and not just an ethical system to determine a way of living, much in the same way that something such as Confucianism was in ancient China?
Would you say that Unitarianism is, in general, more about learning how to live in this world and how to be a good person, rather than concentrating on what there is beyond this world and how the world is created?
To some extent, yes. There is no one accepted 'Unitarian view' of the nature of God(s) or how the universe came to being, and although many Unitarians would have some sort of individual opinion on this, they would accept that there is quite a high possibility that they were wrong.
Equally, we tend to place most importance on conduct during life, and tend not to focus on what might happen when we die at all. I suspect that a majority of us would generally take the view that death is probably the end of our lives.
Quote:
Do you think that you place more importance in the acceptance of all faiths than on professing to believe a single faith?
We are committed to the values of the Unitarian movement, although you're right that we'd place more importance on the acceptance of many different religious beliefs, rather than encouraging people to subscribe to specific religious ideas.
Quote:
If so, could you really conclude that Unitarianism is, in fact, a religion, and not just an ethical system to determine a way of living, much in the same way that something such as Confucianism was in ancient China?
I tend to think of Unitarianism as a way of being religious without being pressured by others to accept anything as the absolute truth simply because they say it is.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
