Why not a UU

[lilithu]

I found this sermon accidentally online while searching for UU mysticism. I personally don't agree with this guy's conclusions but I thought it would be interesting to discuss.

It does take a unique kind of person to be a UU. It takes someone who is comfortable with uncertainty.

WHY I AM NOT A UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST

by Larry Reyka, Humanist Chaplain
Humanist Society of Friends

===================================================================

INTRODUCTION:

This was my last sermon preached from a Unitatian Universalist
pulpit, it was delivered in 1985 or so at The First Unitatian
Universalist Church of Columbus (OH), and in it I share my, shall
we say, misgivings about the Unitarian Universalist movement.
Around that time is when I resigned from membership in that
church.

==================================================================

The reasons for NOT being Unitarian Universalist may be as diverse
as the reasons for coming here in the first place.

I've been told by a Unitarian Universalist minister acquaintance
of mine that the average "stay" within the Unitarian Universalist
church is about five years.

In that sense, it seems to me the church is like a train station,
a place to be between where you're leaving from and where you're
going to. This led me to a working title for my talk today,
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISM, THE TRAIN STATION RELIGION, OR PARDON ME
BOY, IS THAT THE CHATTANOOGA U-U?

My personal stay as a MEMBER of the church was approximately two
years. My doubts began, in reality, about the time the ink was
drying on my name in the book, but it took me a number of
experiences, some of which I detailed in my sermon on my religious
odyssey, to realize that I am, in fact NOT a Unitarian
Universalist.

The historical roots of the Unitarian Universalist Church have
produced a religion with a unique flavor. The combination of
residual Christianity and disguised Humanism found in this
denomination is to be found nowhere else. The hospitality to
atheists as well as to believers in mysticism, flying saucers,
pyramid power and all manner of foolishness is amazing. You do
provide a church home for a lot of people who simply would be
without one otherwise. I am attracted to many things, and most of
the people here. Hence, my reason for still being about as a
FRIEND.

However, as a Humanist, I find certain aspects of Unitarian
Universalism to be frustrating. The principle of affirming no
creed is, I believe, less than forthright. Agreeing to disagree
is an appropriate principle for our pluralistic society as a
whole, but it is not appropriate for a religious community
dedicated to celebration and action as a community. Groups that
stand for everything stand for nothing or else they deceive.

The alliance of convenience between residual Christians and Closet
Humanists is inhibiting - to both groups. Neither theists nor
atheists may act boldly or creatively on their convictions out of
fear of offending the other. For Humanists, the result is a timid
humanism that spends more time keeping peace with the god
believers in the church than meeting their own needs as Humanists
and reaching out to other Humanists in the larger community.

The Unitarian Universalist Hymnal - a hymnal for both Protestants
and Atheists - is not a miracle; it's a disaster. This hymnal to
me is a symbol of the watered down religion so often offered in
the U-U church.

The willingness on the part of the Unitarian Universalist Church
to TOLERATE my Humanism is far from enough for me. My need is for
an organization that AFFIRMS my Humanism.

So, while I will remain a friend of the Unitarian Universalist
Church and of all of you, as long as you'll have me, I cannot for
reasons above consider myself a member of your congregation.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

A very interesting Sermon. I support this fellow’s views and desire to be a Humanist amongst other Humanists but I am close to taking offense at some of the comments about UUs. Our Hymnal is NOT a disaster, how a hymnal can even be considered a disaster is beyond me. And we can stand for multiple things without deceiving. This statement was close to calling us all liars. Having no creed is my favorite part of being UU and I consider myself very forthright.

Bottom line, I hope this fellow finds happiness among his fellow Humanists and I’m glad he is still friendly to the UU church that helped him find his Humanism. I just wish he wasn’t so bitter about the UU church not being the perfect place for him. All the reasons he isn’t a UU are the exact reasons I am.

 

[MaddLlama]

It sounds like he's blaming his issues with that particular congregation on the whole religion. I certainly got a vastly different impression from visiting UU churches in the past. And, to me, saying that UU's have no creed is kind of misleading, and misrepresentative; maybe I'm wrong, but I consider the UU principles to be something valuable, and something worth trying to live up to. Just because it's a set of principles that know no religious boundaries does make it bad.

And, one thing that gets me about this is the fact that he seems to be upset that the congregation gives more attention and respect to Christianity than Humanism (or, possibly anything else). There's a logistical problem with this - he was the minister, yes? Well, if he was so upset about it, he could have done something to help change the congregation from the pulpit. Why did he choose to leave instead?

 

[applewuud]

There's been a lot of change in the position of HUUmanists in the past 21 years. The integration that has been, and is still taking place, is to see religion and belief as part of our human heritage. Mid-20th century humanism rejected a lot of spirituality as superstition; it's evolved a pretty complex theology/humanology that is not just "agreeing to disagree" since then.

Having said that, we do have problems moving in a direction as a movement by trying to take every possible belief stance with us. The best statement of this challenge was made by the former president of Starr King seminary: when we merged Unitarianism with Universalism, we didn't really integrate our theological ideas into something truly coherent and redemptive as a movement. (I'll find that link if it's still up.)

The hymnal is a real achievement of syncreticism...oh, that's another thread...

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

he was the minister, yes?

Not necessarily, he could have just been a member who was speaking at the pulpit that day. My church is lay lead and pretty much anybody can get behind the pulpit, and believe me they do. :yes:

 

[Stairs In My House]

This was my last sermon preached from a Unitatian Universalist
pulpit, it was delivered in 1985 or so at The First Unitatian
Universalist Church of Columbus (OH), and in it I share my, shall
we say, misgivings about the Unitarian Universalist movement.
Around that time is when I resigned from membership in that
church.

Well, that's my church (assuming "Unitatian" is supposed to be "Unitarian"), but I have no idea what the situation was 22 years ago. I'm pretty comfortable saying that "pyramid power" no longer dominates our congregation's discourse. Also, I think the congregation must have been a lot smaller then, because I doubt one person's break-up letter to the church would make it into even a lay-led summer service these days, especially for someone who had been a member for only two years. Nowadays we'd be all like, lol get over yrslf n00b.

I gotta say, though, that this kind of attitude from some (but certainly not all) humanist types--typically expressed by the frequent pairing of the words "mysticism" and "foolishness" or "nonsense"--really hacks me off. He's definitely right that someone who thinks that he has all the answers and everyone who disagrees is stupid does not belong in a UU congregation.

Anyhow, the first service I went to at that church, back in the summer of '05, was specifically about finding the common ground between humanists and Christians (I can't remember why it was specifically Christians, but it was lay-led so whatever), so the integration applewuud mentioned has definitely been underway here.

 

[BrandonE]

We had a schism in our congregation in the not-distant past (before I was there though) over a similar source of division. According to those left in the church, those who left felt that Social Justice did not receive a great enough emphasis, so they left to start their own (smaller) UU fellowship. I've heard those remaining say of those that left that "social justice WAS their religion".

I can certainly understand that UU isn't for everyone, but I seriously question his assertions that most church members are short term. Maybe that's true, afterall, I've only been one for a year, but we have members now who restarted our congregation (after a 100 year discontinuity) in the 1950's. I'd say that the majority of our members are longtime members. Only recently have we started to see an influx of new members.

 

[Stairs In My House]

I can certainly understand that UU isn't for everyone, but I seriously question his assertions that most church members are short term.

Yeah, his source is not much better than "some dude told me one time, I think." In fact, a few months ago my wife and I went to a dinner at First UU Church of Columbus celebrating church history and honoring long time members. There were some 40-year and 50-year members, and quite a few younger people who had grown up in the church. I wonder if any of them remember Mr. Reyka.

 

[lilithu]

A very interesting Sermon. I support this fellow’s views and desire to be a Humanist amongst other Humanists but I am close to taking offense at some of the comments about UUs. Our Hymnal is NOT a disaster, how a hymnal can even be considered a disaster is beyond me. And we can stand for multiple things without deceiving. This statement was close to calling us all liars. Having no creed is my favorite part of being UU and I consider myself very forthright.

Bottom line, I hope this fellow finds happiness among his fellow Humanists and I’m glad he is still friendly to the UU church that helped him find his Humanism. I just wish he wasn’t so bitter about the UU church not being the perfect place for him. All the reasons he isn’t a UU are the exact reasons I am.

Hi Trey,

Well the sermon was delivered in 1985 so I would hope that he's found happiness, yes.

The guy raises several issues that I think are still relevant today:

1. "I've been told by a Unitarian Universalist minister acquaintance of mine that the average "stay" within the Unitarian Universalist church is about five years.

In that sense, it seems to me the church is like a train station, a place to be between where you're leaving from and where you're going to."

We do have a very high turn-over rate. Some of this I think is due to the type of people whom we attract, people who are suspicious of orgnanized religion in the first place, and who identify as "outsiders", not joiners. To truly become part of the UU community requires a redefining of one's own identity. At least it did for me.

Some it is also due to people not being comfortable with our creedlessness. They want to know that the people in the room all agree on the same thing. Differences in belief for them are a barrier to emotional closeness. I was like that when I was younger. I couldn't imagine loving and trusting someone who didn't agree with me politically and philosophically.


2. "The hospitality to atheists as well as to believers in mysticism, flying saucers,
pyramid power and all manner of foolishness is amazing. You do provide a church home for a lot of people who simply would be without one otherwise."

I think he might have been exagerating just a tad but when I first came to UU, I used to describe it to my non-UU friends as a "refuge for religious rejects." I have since come to believe that we are much more than that.


3. "The alliance of convenience between residual Christians and Closet Humanists is inhibiting - to both groups. Neither theists nor atheists may act boldly or creatively on their convictions out of fear of offending the other."

Related to point number 1, I personally know several UUs who have left because they wanted to be able to more fully express their identity as atheists or as Christians. I don't necessarily consider our being a "train station" a bad thing. We are helping people explore their own spirituality. Otoh, that by itself is not enough. UU is about more than just helping people explore and formulate their own creeds, and then agreeing to disagree on our different creeds. There is value in not having the creed in the first place. There is value in always being open the possibility of being wrong, and a creed tends to negate that kind of view.

I'm not really offended by the criticisms (I've heard them all before and more), but the bottom line is that I agree with you Trey. Our creedlessness is a large part of why I am and remain a UU. Our creedlessness is part of our identity and our ideals, not an impediment to them.

I think that if there is validity to people feeling "deceived," it's probably because we don't do a good enough job of articulating our UU values. We just tell people, "Hey we'll welcome you where others have turned you away." But we don't explain what it means to be a diverse community, what is needed of them to make this work. We don't tell people what it means to be a UU - not a humanist or a Christian within in a UU congregation, but a UU. So people bring their own expectations and are sometimes angry when their own expectations are not met.

That sermon was given when Unitarian Universalists was only 24 years old, and it's now been another 22 years. Do people here feel that our UU identity has gotten stronger? Do we identify as UUs first? Or are we still a congregation of Christians and Jews and Hindus and Humanists and Pagans, etc who happen to all belong to UU congregations?

 

[Stairs In My House]

When you say we have high turnover, what's your basis for comparison? Is it really reasonable to compare our turnover rate to religions where the majority of the members have been born and raised in their religious traditions?

A lot of new UUs say they feel like they've "come home" when they first start attending a UU church, but it really isn't "home" in the same way Baptist or Catholic churches are for people who grew up going to them. To extend the analogy a little further, the funny thing about home is that it's still home even if you're suddenly not welcome there anymore or you no longer wish to be there, and it takes a while for a new place to really feel like home.

I wonder what the turnover rates of those non-denominational megachurches are like. I wouldn't be surprised if they were pretty high, too.

 

[lilithu]

When you say we have high turnover, what's your basis for comparison? Is it really reasonable to compare our turnover rate to religions where the majority of the members have been born and raised in their religious traditions?

Is it reasonable to compare? I don't know whether it's reasonable to compare but even if it isn't, that doesn't negate the fact that we have a high turnover rate.

Honestly, I'm surprised that this claim would be in dispute. Of all the things the sermon said this is not one that struck me as controversial. Every year, Unitarian Universalism attracts tons of new people, yet our numbers have stayed pretty constant. That can only mean that for all the new people whom we attract we are losing people as well. The number of our youth who grow up within the faith and then drift away is much higher than when compared to Christian denominations. Surely that's a fair comparison? Surely that indicates that there's room for improvement?

 

[lilithu]

There's been a lot of change in the position of HUUmanists in the past 21 years. The integration that has been, and is still taking place, is to see religion and belief as part of our human heritage. Mid-20th century humanism rejected a lot of spirituality as superstition; it's evolved a pretty complex theology/humanology that is not just "agreeing to disagree" since then.

At my first GA in Ft. Worth I was dismayed to find that several of the humanist workshops that I had marked to attend consisted mostly of people griping about how UU was being overrun by irrational theists, and not about the strengths of humanism. Last year in St. Louis, however, I did attend a really uplifting workshop led by a humanist minster talking about how there can be space for both in his congregation and they did it. I'm also heartened to see Bill Schulz's reflections on what he now considers to be the shortcomings of earlier humanism while still lifting up its strengths now.

Having said that, we do have problems moving in a direction as a movement by trying to take every possible belief stance with us. The best statement of this challenge was made by the former president of Starr King seminary: when we merged Unitarianism with Universalism, we didn't really integrate our theological ideas into something truly coherent and redemptive as a movement. (I'll find that link if it's still up.)

:yes: I'd say that's what we most need now. And I see small steps in that direction from a number of wonderful people. If there is anything that I can contribute to this religion that I love, this would be it.

The hymnal is a real achievement of syncreticism...oh, that's another thread...

I'll admit there are parts of the hymnal that make me cringe, but that's the price I pay for worshipping in a diverse community. Overall, I agree that it's an achievement.

 

[Stairs In My House]

Every year, Unitarian Universalism attracts tons of new people, yet our numbers have stayed pretty constant. That can only mean that for all the new people whom we attract we are losing people as well. The number of our youth who grow up within the faith and then drift away is much higher than when compared to Christian denominations. Surely that's a fair comparison? Surely that indicates that there's room for improvement?

I'm saying that it might just be the way the game has to be played for a religion of converts (mostly). Isn't it still the case that aside from megachurches most major religions in the US are experiencing declining membership? I seriously doubt the various humanist associations are growing by leaps and bounds, either.

As for the youth who drift away, many of the ones who post on the Facebook UU groups say that they haven't drifted away from the religion, just from going to church because they're too busy with college or new careers or the typical things young twentysomethings have going on. Anecdotally, at least, there seems to be a pattern where youth drift away when they first enter adulthood and return when they start to have families (the old "atheists with children" joke).

I'm not trying to say that these things aren't problems, but that I don't think they should be automatically assumed to be problems particular to UUism.

Also, I feel kinda bad for picking on Mr. Reyka, who apparently passed away in 2003. I'm sure he was a decent guy who did a lot of good.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I think we have a high turnover rate for more than one reason. First, some people come to us because they don't know what to believe, and through the UU Church they can explore a multitude of religions and spritualities. Over time they find what it is they are looking for and choose to move on to a group that is more focused on that one belief. Another reason that I see a lot of is the desire to move back to a more Christian church. Many find that they miss the traditions and beliefs that they grew up with. I have no problem with either of these reasons and I am happy if these folks found some peace and assistance on their journey while in our Church.

I think those of us who stay UU are the ones who are more interested in the journey than the destination and aren't necessarily looking for a single belief to devote themselves too. I love the constent study and exploration of the spiritual path and can't imagine the idea of it coming to an end.

 

[lilithu]

I'm saying that it might just be the way the game has to be played for a religion of converts (mostly). Isn't it still the case that aside from megachurches most major religions in the US are experiencing declining membership? I seriously doubt the various humanist associations are growing by leaps and bounds, either.

Not quite; most mainline protestant churches are experiencing declining membership. Catholicism had been declining but began to grow again under Pope John Paul II. (We'll see if that trend continues under the new pope. :sarcastic) Mormonism is growing by leaps and bounds. And according to an analysis of us done by the Mormons (when GA was in Salt Lake City), if we were half as good as they are at retaining newcomers we would be growing twice as fast as they are. But we're not.

As for the youth who drift away, many of the ones who post on the Facebook UU groups say that they haven't drifted away from the religion, just from going to church because they're too busy with college or new careers or the typical things young twentysomethings have going on. Anecdotally, at least, there seems to be a pattern where youth drift away when they first enter adulthood and return when they start to have families (the old "atheists with children" joke).

I'm also quite sure that a lot drift away and don't come back. They wouldn't bother to post on the Facebook UU groups.

I think it goes back to what applewuud was saying, we need to be better about developing a more articulate message of what we stand for. Not a creed. But the unifying thing that makes us UU.

I'm not saying "Omigawd!! this is so awful!! we need to take drastic measures!!" I think we're great. I just think we could be even better, and we're soooo close to it. Really. Just a little shift in attitude and we could be witnessing the beginnings of a UU revival.

Also, I feel kinda bad for picking on Mr. Reyka, who apparently passed away in 2003. I'm sure he was a decent guy who did a lot of good.

He looked like a nice guy.

 

[uufreespirit]

In UU World, May/June 2003 issue, Rev. Sinkford wrote a piece called "The Most Church in America." If you'd like to read along, it's at the uua.org website...just add /2003/03/calling. Anyway, here's a bit of it...

"When we held our General Assembly in Salt Lake City in 1999, the Rev. Stefan Jonasson, now the UUA's coordinator of services to large congregations, met with the head of missionary work for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Knowing that several thousand of us were coming to town, this Mormon official had done his homework, and he told Stefan something interesting: Proportionate to our size, he said, Unitarian Universalists do a better job of attracting visitors than do the Mormons. But, he added, we do a terrible job keeping them. "If your churches were half as successful at integrating and retaining members as we Mormons are," he concluded, "then Unitarian Universalism would be the most dangerous church in America."

Without getting into another of my rants/dissertations on the deficiencies and potential of our so-called "Faith of the Free," I'll just say that I believe that with greater focus on what it really means to be a part of "liberal religious community" (Davidson Loehr's phrase), where liberalism is seriously treated as more of a personal discipline than a kind of license...and if we could come to a little better general grasp of our "tradition and legacy" and what is unique and potentially life-changing about it, I think we actually could improve on our ability to keep our newcomers. I agree with Dr. Sinkford: A lot of folks, from Baptists to Mormons are counting on us never reaching that stage.

 

[uufreespirit]

... "the Most Dangerous Church in America."

Sorry. (Does this board have an edit feature, by any chance?)

 

[lilithu]

In UU World, May/June 2003 issue, Rev. Sinkford wrote a piece called "The Most Church in America." If you'd like to read along, it's at the uua.org website...just add /2003/03/calling. Anyway, here's a bit of it...

"When we held our General Assembly in Salt Lake City in 1999, the Rev. Stefan Jonasson, now the UUA's coordinator of services to large congregations, met with the head of missionary work for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Knowing that several thousand of us were coming to town, this Mormon official had done his homework, and he told Stefan something interesting: Proportionate to our size, he said, Unitarian Universalists do a better job of attracting visitors than do the Mormons. But, he added, we do a terrible job keeping them. "If your churches were half as successful at integrating and retaining members as we Mormons are," he concluded, "then Unitarian Universalism would be the most dangerous church in America."

Yeah, I was thinking of Stefan Jonasson when I wrote my last post.

Without getting into another of my rants/dissertations on the deficiencies and potential of our so-called "Faith of the Free," I'll just say that I believe that with greater focus on what it really means to be a part of "liberal religious community" (Davidson Loehr's phrase), where liberalism is seriously treated as more of a personal discipline than a kind of license...and if we could come to a little better general grasp of our "tradition and legacy" and what is unique and potentially life-changing about it, I think we actually could improve on our ability to keep our newcomers.

Agreed. We need to emphasize that with liberty comes responsibility, and that freedom isn't the freedom to do whatever we want but rather what our consciences call us to do. We need to be able to say that we actually do stand for something, which we do. We don't have to change who we are, just how we talk about it.

I agree with Dr. Sinkford: A lot of folks, from Baptists to Mormons are counting on us never reaching that stage.

I really don't think that we are in competition with Baptists and Mormons for the same potential new members so it's not an issue.:areyoucra


And you should be able to edit your own posts via a button towards the top right hand corner of your post.

 

[Stairs In My House]

I dunno, I think "The Most Church in America" makes a pretty good slogan. For somebody. Probably not for UUs. :areyoucra

 

[des]

Well aside from other things mentioned, I like the UU hymnal. I think it has a neat balance of "spirit oriented" hymns, somewhat traditional music and different words.

>>1. "I've been told by a Unitarian Universalist minister acquaintance of mine that the average "stay" within the Unitarian Universalist church is about five years.

>We do have a very high turn-over rate. Some of this I think is due to the type of people whom we attract, people who are suspicious of orgnanized religion in the first place, and who identify as "outsiders", not joiners. To truly become part of the UU community requires a redefining of one's own identity. At least it did for me.

I did get the opinion also that it takes awhile for people to really *like* the UU church. I found it very large, so that is my problem with it. Otherwise, I'd probably join up right away. But attracting people who are suspicious of organized religion probably is an issue. You know that once they find out it an organized religion-- which I have to admit it is.

>Some it is also due to people not being comfortable with our creedlessness. They want to know that the people in the room all agree on the same thing.

I have no issue with that. But I can see why some people would find it one.

>>]"The hospitality to atheists as well as to believers in mysticism, flying saucers,
pyramid power and all manner of foolishness is amazing. You do provide a church home for a lot of people who simply would be without one otherwise.

>I think he might have been exagerating just a tad

A bit more than a tad I think.
I think he describes New Age more than UU. Just a guess. Perhaps there are very New Agey churches out there, but if there were you'd think NM would be the place to find that. I definitely did not see this. A range of atheism, humanism, agnostism, Ethical Christianity, paganism, Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. We know though there are common ethical strains in many of these, enough for commonality, if you were looking for it. Most of the "big 3" do not hold traditionally, say Christian or Jewish views anyway.

>>"The alliance of convenience between residual Christians and Closet Humanists is inhibiting - to both groups. Neither theists nor atheists may act boldly or creatively on their convictions out of fear of offending the other."

I don't really know why that is. Unless you wanted Humanist to agree entirely with you as a "residual Christian". I personally don't even care if "residual Christians" agree with me. I would think that would be more of an issue. The thing is that I see right on this webpage how nicely this can work. This is the nicest place on this whole webpage, imo. It's the most open, the most tolerant, the most friendly, etc. I sure can't say the same for some other non-debate areas.

> There is value in not having the creed in the first place. There is value in always being open the possibility of being wrong, and a creed tends to negate that kind of view.

It is the ultimate of the priesthood of the believer (so much so you can be the non-believer). I'm not sure exactly how you can be 'wrong". That presupposes there is some kind of right on the whole thing. ;-)


I'm not really offended by the criticisms (I've heard them all before and more), but the bottom line is that I agree with you Trey. Our creedlessness is a large part of why I am and remain a UU. Our creedlessness is part of our identity and our ideals, not an impediment to them.

>what is needed of them to make this work. We don't tell people what it means to be a UU - not a humanist or a Christian within in a UU congregation, but a UU. So people bring their own expectations and are sometimes angry when their own expectations are not met.

OTOH, I went up the membership table at the UU. I'm not sure I like the group that well to belong. But they basically gave me a warning, something like it was very cognitive. I have gotten that impression. ;-)
It probably is a little too cognitive, but then again it may be the particular church. There is a small church fellowship I might try but it disobeys my biggest rule for church membership. Never join a small church.

In response to another post. I don't think the turn over at megachurches is that big. But I might be all off on that. I think that they pull them in a certain way that we in the wild and left regions of religion can only dream on.

--des