A poll for UUs only, please

[Green Gaia]

I ask that only UUs vote in this poll, the votes are public so that I can ensure that this is followed.

Something has been bugging me for a while about where I placed the UU forum within the structure of RF's religions forums (can't blame this one on Rex!). We had it in Abrahamic beliefs for a while, but that didn't seem quite right. So when we added more religions I moved it so that it's now it's in Modern beliefs, and that still doesn't seem exactly right to me either. I'm been thinking that maybe Secular beliefs is the best place to put us, but still that's not exactly a perfect fit.

So, in true UU style, we're gonna take a vote! Where in the structure of RF does the UU forum belong? I would love to hear your explanation of your choice as well.

Thanks for your help.

Amy

 

[Davidium]

Hey Maize,

I voted "Other"... because I think there should ideally be another catagory.... "Non-Creedal Religions".

We are a different kind of faith tradition, in that we are "Covenental" in nature. In fact, that could be an even better catagory title "Covenental Religions". If we do not want a new catagory, then I would leave it in "Modern".

But I think that "Covenental Religions" would be the best catagory to put our "Church of All Souls".

Yours in Faith,
David Pyle

 

[Green Gaia]

That's an interesting thought, David. I had not considered a "Covenantal Religions" forum before. What other religions could we add to that as well? The only Covenantal Religions I can think of, traditionally, are Christianity and Judaism.

 

[PantaRhea]

Hi Maize,

I voted for "other" also. We are, of course, not the only "non-creedal" sect out there (Disciples of Christ, for instance), but most of those would be Christian. There are many religious groups that would say they were bound by covenant - does that really say what we're about? We're not necessarily all of a "modern" persuasion (some of us would prefer to say that our beliefs are "post-modern"), and we are definately not united by a belief system. If anything, I think we find a common value in pluralism. What about "Pluralistic Religion"?

 

[Green Gaia]

Thank you, PantaRhea! "Pluralistic Religions" is one we will consider as well.

 

[Ciscokid]

Where would Humanism be categorized? UU could almost be aligned with Humanism no?

 

[Green Gaia]

Hi Cisco!

We have our Humanism forum in the Secular beliefs catagory. UUs do value humanism and have many humanist ideals, but we are not exclusively humanistic.

However, our strong humanist side is why I thought about moving the UU forum to Secular beliefs, but again, it just didn't seem to completely fit.

 

[Ciscokid]

Hi Cisco!

We have our Humanism forum in the Secular beliefs catagory. UUs do value humanism and have many humanist ideals, but we are not exclusively humanistic.

However, our strong humanist side is why I thought about moving the UU forum to Secular beliefs, but again, it just didn't seem to completely fit.

Neither do we.......that's why we're UU's. :woohoo:

Sorry wanted to say something that sounded so profound.

 

[Green Gaia]

Neither do we.......that's why we're UU's. :woohoo:

We can be a difficult people at times.

 

[Davidium]

I could go for "Pluralistic Religions" as a catagory...

On Cisco's comment... I was at a UU Conference about a year ago, and they handed me one of those name badges to fill out. I kept going outside the line when writing my name.

When I asked for a new one, the older lady at the registration desk took my hand and said "Son, its ok... if you could stay in the box you wouldnt be a UU!"

Too True....

Yours in Faith,

David

 

[lilithu]

Hi Maize, namaste.

I voted to keep us where we are now. First off, I get a perverse kick out of the fact that we are lumped in with the New Agers, Satanists, and Scientologists - my three least favorite spiritual traditions. (Yes, this UU has her biases, and I would argue that they are rooted squarely in my UU value system.)

Second, while David and PantaRhea make good arguments for moving us into a new category, whether based on covenant or on pluralism, I would be resistant to moving to any category where we are the only representative. Adherents of every faith feel that theirs is special and can give reasons for why it stands alone. Yet RF places them into categories bases more or less on objective criteria. As special as we think we are, we should be held to the same standard.

But while we're talking about it, frankly, I don't understand why Sikhism is placed under Eastern beliefs. It is as much Muslim as it is Hindu, (and as much a reaction against Hinduism as it is a reaction against Islam). Nor do I understand why Baha'i is placed under Abrahamic beliefs, given that Bahai's recognize spiritual authority from sages not within the Abrahamic tradition. Yes, they arose out of Islam, but UU arose out of Christianity.

So if RF were to make a new category, I would argue that UU, Baha'i and Sikhism could fit into a new category, based on our syncretic tendencies. (UU is pluralistic, yes, but we also have some syncretism going on.) But for all I know the Baha'i and Sikhs may be happy with where they're listed now and I wouldn't want to move them just for us.

 

[Green Gaia]

Well, I haven't had any complaints from the Sikhs or Baha'i and along with UU, they were some of the harder religions to place. I do try to accommodate people when they disagree where we've put their religion, but some of them are not clear cut.

When faced with a religion that seems to go several places, I've fallen back on other sources for where it should be placed. One of those sources is Wikipedia's list of religions. Which is why Baha'i is under Abramhamic and Sikhism is under Eastern (wikipedia list this catagory as Dharmic religions). They list UU as a Syncretic religion, like you suggested.

The only problem with starting a new catagory is I need more than one religion to put in it. My issue with this doesn't really have to do with making us stand out as special, but simple forum administration.

So I would be in favor of making a new catagory called Syncretic religions with Baha'i, Sikhism and UU in it. What do the rest of you think?

 

[PantaRhea]

Syncretic... I like it. Then again, how about a category for a religion that integrates and then transcends?

 

[lilithu]

One of those sources is Wikipedia's list of religions. Which is why Baha'i is under Abramhamic and Sikhism is under Eastern (wikipedia list this catagory as Dharmic religions). They list UU as a Syncretic religion, like you suggested.

Well, as I said, Baha'i sprang from Islam but they recognize teachers outside of the Abrahamic tradition. Sikhism is a Dharmic faith, along with Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism. But Sikhism has a very personal conception of God, unlike the other three. It is also quite a bit younger, being only about 500 years old as opposed thousands of years old. Looking at it as an outside observer, it is clearly the product of the mixing of Islam and Hinduism in northern India.

So I would be in favor of making a new catagory called Syncretic religions with Baha'i, Sikhism and UU in it. What do the rest of you think?

As I said, it depends on what the Sikhs and Baha'i think. I'm all for letting people define themselves. My guess is that they would be more comfortable where they are now than lumped with us.

If Wikipedia lists UU as a syncretic religion, what other faiths do they list in that category?

 

[Green Gaia]

If Wikipedia lists UU as a syncretic religion, what other faiths do they list in that category?

* Arès Pilgrim Movement
* Cao Dai
* Falun Dafa (Falun Gong)
* Huna
* Konkokyo
* Law of One
* Manichaeism
* Unitarian Universalism
* Universal Life Church
* Tenrikyo
* Theosophy
* Seicho-No-Ie


The only ones of those I could really even consider adding to the forum at this time would be Tenrikyo and Theosophy.

 

[lilithu]

* Arès Pilgrim Movement
* Cao Dai
* Falun Dafa (Falun Gong)
* Huna
* Konkokyo
* Law of One
* Manichaeism
* Unitarian Universalism
* Universal Life Church
* Tenrikyo
* Theosophy
* Seicho-No-Ie

Hey, I'm a minister of the Universal Life Church! (They'll ordain anyone that applies online.)

I'm not sure that the above list is much better company than what we have now. As I said, I vote to stay where we are. I take a certain perverse pride in being part of a fringe religious cult. Pass the koolaid.

 

[Davidium]

Hey, I'm a minister of the Universal Life Church! (They'll ordain anyone that applies online.)

Our Household Goddess, named Athena (aka, our cat) is also a Minister of the Universal Life Church! I have her ordination certificate right next to her Kitty Adoption certificate.

Thought about having her marry us.....

Yours in faith,

David

 

[lilithu]

Our Household Goddess, named Athena (aka, our cat) is also a Minister of the Universal Life Church! I have her ordination certificate right next to her Kitty Adoption certificate.

Well I'm in good company then! I'm also an ordained minister of some online Humanist church, but they aren't nearly as colorful as Universal Life. If you pay the Universal Life Church money, you can pick a religious title. What d'ya think? Should I make "High Priestess of Cheese" my official title?

I haven't printed out my ordination certificate yet since I don't have a color printer, but when I do, I'm thinking of putting it next to my certificate that proves that I climbed the Great Wall of China, which I bought from a lady with a little stand at the highest part of the wall. Not only did she climb the same distance that I had while carrying all her stuff, but I don't think she had much to show for it either, since very few other tourists bothered to climb the steep and uneven steps.

Thought about having her marry us.....

Does she give a discount to family members?