UU Roots

[keithnurse]

Much the same here. though I could say I learn more heavily towards Universalists than I do Unitarian. It's more exact to call me eclectic.

I voted "both" but lean more toward Universalist. I didn't become UU because of rejecting the trinity because I don't reject it, just the idea that the trinity or any doctrine can describe what a god literally is. Since I am not sure about what happens after death the old Universalist idea of heaven for all is not one I relate to. "Universalist" to me is honoring the universe and the interconnectedness of all.

 

[lilithu]

I voted "both" but lean more toward Universalist. I didn't become UU because of rejecting the trinity because I don't reject it, just the idea that the trinity or any doctrine can describe what a god literally is. Since I am not sure about what happens after death the old Universalist idea of heaven for all is not one I relate to. "Universalist" to me is honoring the universe and the interconnectedness of all.

But that's not what Universalist originally meant. If you are going to change the meaning of it and then say you lean more in the Universalist direction, you could just as easily change the meaning of Unitarian - say, the Unity of all things - and say you lean more in the Unitarian direction.

 

[bicker]

There really is no need to confuse things with such wording. Revering the Universe as divinity, and honoring the interconnectedness of everything, already has a name: Pantheism.



And Pantheists assuredly find a very copacetic home within Unitarian Universalism.

 

[EverChanging]

I voted for both because I consider myself to be both a Unitarian and a Universalist, thus a Unitarian Universalist.

That's interesting. The Episcopal church and wider Anglican communion teach the doctrine of the trinity as defined in the Athanasius creed (though it is considered, above all, a mystery -- I'm reading A History of God right now.) How do you interpret the trinity, or do you simply not believe it at all?

 

[EverChanging]

I voted neither. I could not describe myself as either a Unitarian or Universalist in the traditional sense of the terms, and I don't re-interpret them, yet I call myself a Unitarian Universalist. I guess that just reflects the uniqueness of this tradition.

 

[keithnurse]

In that case I would need to vote neither since I don't align myself with what either of those terms originally meant.

 

[Storm]

I have mixed feelings on it. They don't really apply to my beliefs, assuming theism, but I also have no trouble expressing myself in less-than-accurate theistic terms, at which point they're close enough.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

In that case I would need to vote neither since I don't align myself with what either of those terms originally meant.

Both, in this context, means either both as they existed historically or both as they are currently combined to mean. I probably should have separated them out but hindsight is 20/20.

 

[uu_sage]

I am Universalist and Unitarian in the classical sense of the terms- one God whose nature is love bringing ALL SOULS, Christian or not, to salvation.