tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post4566724851213138516..comments2024-02-19T10:15:55.380+00:00Comments on CAUTE — Making Footprints Not Blueprints: The Edict of Torda, Francis David, Arne Naess and a distinctive way to do liberal religion (far more than just a history lesson . . .)Andrew James Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-597555883580722962013-05-26T15:41:01.411+01:002013-05-26T15:41:01.411+01:00Dear Will,
Thanks for this comment and your affir...Dear Will,<br /><br />Thanks for this comment and your affirmation. It is much appreciated. I look forward to your further thoughts on the subject. <br /><br />One thing I'll add here is that Pap Maria asked me to contribute a chapter to a new book being published by the Hungarian Unitarian Church. An honour indeed.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-11466044557572160362013-05-25T22:47:58.678+01:002013-05-25T22:47:58.678+01:00I shall come back since this conversation is very ...I shall come back since this conversation is very meaningful. In the meantime:<br /><br />"...but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve."<br /><br />I approve!Will Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-4540826741154644252013-04-29T09:50:38.486+01:002013-04-29T09:50:38.486+01:00When I do planning, it is not an entirely rational...When I do planning, it is not an entirely rational process (for example, planning a ritual should allow for serendipity, divine inspiration, and will certainly involve emotions). I think, however, that "existential wrestling" is an excellent (and much more memorable) name for level 3. Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-32138380555677767842013-04-29T09:40:18.404+01:002013-04-29T09:40:18.404+01:00Dear Yewtree,
I'm delighted for you to use it...Dear Yewtree,<br /><br />I'm delighted for you to use it he idea - it's really Arne Naess' idea anyway! I have long been impressed with the thought that "there is no end to what we can achieved when we don't mind who takes the credit" and that wisdom should be wholly open source - especially the kind of wisdom that helps us both meaningfully to work together and retain our distinctive identities. I'm very pleased (even honoured) to be working in a way that may help the wider pagan community in its own thinking. <br /><br />I enjoyed your post. However, although "planning" does occur at level three I'm not sure this word really does the job (though I take your point about preferring to use a word rather than a number). Because it involves the playing through of deeply held norms and values rooted in level 1 (your "irreducible diversity") it's more than just planning and more like an existential wrestle with other realities showing up around you. Planning makes it sound a wholly rational activity and, though a good deal of emphasis should be placed upon the use of reason at this level, it's also about our embodied feelings concerning the universe and the world. Does that makes sense?Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-66578591596954018682013-04-29T09:08:37.873+01:002013-04-29T09:08:37.873+01:00In a way, I think the name GA of U&FCC, whilst...In a way, I think the name GA of U&FCC, whilst being too long, emphasises the diversity. The problem, as you rightly point out, is labelling it an "ism" which tends to imply a coherence which does not exist.<br /><br />That's why the ending "ity" would be better. (Interesting that in French, Christianity is "Christianisme", if I recall correctly, which seems a more accurate label.)<br /><br />I have used your 4-stage model as the basis for a <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/04/heinz-57/" rel="nofollow">blogpost about Paganism</a>, as I think it is very applicable (and I have linked back here). The model was just so applicable to the ongoing discussion about Pagan identities.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-70262482691439627362013-04-28T21:50:56.854+01:002013-04-28T21:50:56.854+01:00Your point is well made. My "game over" ...Your point is well made. My "game over" comment refers to the whole GA of U&FC churches in so far as it continues to try to be an -ism - i.e. Unitarianism. In so far as it stops trying to do this and becomes a much more clearly a level 2 common platform for liberal religious communities then, perhaps, something like the GA might (though renamed) might have a chance. But I'm not hopeful about that even though I am hopeful individual congregations may survive and even thrive.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-73698031044492708752013-04-28T21:29:52.204+01:002013-04-28T21:29:52.204+01:00I don't know whether it is "game over&quo...I don't know whether it is "game over" or not, but I do think there needs to be a clearing-up of the confusion between level 1 functions and level 2 functions (the same applies in Paganism, where Paganism, as an umbrella term, is not really a religion, but a level 2 common platform for a number of different religious traditions; and yet there are groups and people who want to talk about Paganism as a coherent collection of ideas).<br /><br />The thing about Unitarianism is that it has always contained these tensions. In the 19th century, there were seventeen (!) different Unitarian hymnbooks. The movement included about 3000 spiritualists who joined en masse (according to an article by Vernon Marshall in F&F 2006); the Free Catholics; the Free Christians; the Transcendentalists; the more traditional Unitarians; the Cookites; the General Baptists; etc etc. Of course many churches can trace their origins back to these groups and are proud of the connections.<br /><br />I think the idea of a church working out what its distinctive philosophical and theological stance is, and running with that, seems to work. It has worked for New Unity and Kingswood and various others that have taken that approach. It almost does not matter which of the various strands of the U&FC movement a church focuses on, as long as it has a distinctive focus.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-22833430445959143012013-04-19T16:34:55.713+01:002013-04-19T16:34:55.713+01:00I think that you are absolutely right about the di...I think that you are absolutely right about the difficulties faced by some present day small, local congregations (and, actually, some larger ones) but this is, for me, an indication that, as far as the U&FC family of churches as a whole is concerned, it's game over. Which is not, however, to say that some individual churches might not be able to find ways to move coherently into the future as meaningful level 1 liberal churches (and whether expressly Christian or not). Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-23440337098636719222013-04-19T16:20:25.010+01:002013-04-19T16:20:25.010+01:00orsrtp 304Aha, right, I get it. Others have also s...orsrtp 304Aha, right, I get it. Others have also suggested having some sort of flavour for local congregations - indeed some congregations are of a particular flavour.<br /><br />The only problem with suggesting that local congregations try to achieve a coherence that would usually characterise a level 1 body is that in practice, many congregations are a mixed group of eclectic people and people whose primary focus is a single tradition (sometimes humanism, sometimes Christianity). The problem (to my mind) is the people who don't want to accommodate others' spiritual interests (whether that happens to be communion or earth spirit rituals). In large congregations, there can be affinity groups for specific interests. This is probably too difficult for small congregations.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-7584717286953354032013-04-18T15:47:03.625+01:002013-04-18T15:47:03.625+01:00Dear Yvonne,
That is, I think the right question...Dear Yvonne,<br /><br />That is, I think the right question to ask and once asked the real confusion begins to show up.<br /><br />The GA should be acting as a small scale level 2 common platform. However it is acting (sometimes consciously, sometimes not) as if it were a level 1 body. <br /><br />It's membership (made up of what should be coherent local level 1 bodies) tends to think that when the word "unitarian" is used that it refers (or should refer) both to themselves and to the GA and that they are the same thing. What happens is that you get level 1 bodies (local congregations) thinking they are really expressing some kind of level 2 common platform and, simultaneously, you have a level 2 body (the GA) thinking it can impose upon its level 1 members some kind of corporate theological identity. Not only that many of our level 1 bodies and the GA often believe they represent some proto universal religion that is able to subsume all level 1 bodies into a new level 1 - namely a universal level 2 body. But, as I indicated in my address this is a kind of colonialisation of what should be an open, plural public space.<br /><br />It's a complete mess.Andrew James Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02693417061963197121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-44568101302184942702013-04-18T14:37:09.168+01:002013-04-18T14:37:09.168+01:00It might be helpful to formulate this in terms of ...It might be helpful to formulate this in terms of religious identity and membership - a sense of belonging to a specific community, which is usually reciprocated by that community recognising you as a member of it. It may include adherence to a specific set of ideas about the divine, but in liberal religious communities, is more likely to represent interest in a particular mythology (in your case, Christian mythology; in my case, Pagan mythologies), and a particular set of religious practices, values, and a shared history. You can be a Christian without believing in God as a supernatural entity (so can Brian Mountford); I can be a Wiccan without literal belief in deities. But we both belong to a community with its own shared values, practices, and history. As it happens, Unitarian values have a lot in common with Wiccan values - but shared values are not actually enough for communal ritual, though they are certainly enough for participation in social justice projects.<br /><br />I am not sure that one can be *fully* a member of two religious communities -- one can *participate* in more than one, but given the time constraints of modern life, it would be hard to do both fully; and unless the beliefs and values of each are entirely congruent, it would be hard to reconcile the worldviews of the two traditions - especially if they are in different "dharma-spaces". I use the term ”dharma-space” to mean a group of religions with compatible or similar world-views (even though they may regard themselves as competing versions of the truth).<br /><br />I wrote a series of blogposts in January about dual-faith identity issues - might be of interest:<br /><br />January 24, 2013 <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/01/dharma-and-sangha/" rel="nofollow">Dharma and sangha</a> Yvonne<br>January 22, 2013 <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/01/dual-faith-practice-4/" rel="nofollow">Dual-faith practice (part 4 of 4)</a> Yvonne<br>January 20, 2013 <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/01/dual-faith-practice-membership-identity/" rel="nofollow">Dual-faith practice (part 3 of 4)</a> Yvonne<br>January 18, 2013 <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/01/dual-faith-practice-subjective-turn/" rel="nofollow">Dual-faith practice (part 2 of 4)</a> Yvonne<br>January 16, 2013 <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/sermonsfromthemound/2013/01/dual-faith-practice-1/" rel="nofollow">Dual-faith practice (part 1 of 4)</a> YvonneYewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5144051388547159240.post-40179833239447427192013-04-18T13:27:15.006+01:002013-04-18T13:27:15.006+01:00Another thought - are you suggesting that the Gene...Another thought - are you suggesting that the General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches is a level 1 body? or is each individual Unitarian and/or Free Christian community a level 1 body? <br /><br />I would have thought that the General Assembly could be a level 2 body - because there are some differences between Free Christians Unitarian Christians, universalists/pluralists within British Unitarianism and Unitarians (let alone Unitarian humanists, earth spirit, etc). <br /><br />It depends where you want to draw the line; but I would say that Unitarian Earth Spirit (which, by the way, isn't really my cup of tea) is distinctively Unitarian and has roots in both Transcendentalism, and the views of Norbert Capek, Theodore Parker, Frank Lloyd Wright, and even Servetus. When Jo Rogers researched this, she found that most members of the Unitarian Earth Spirit Network identified as Unitarian and didn't belong to a tradition outside of Unitarianism.Yewtreehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02028699564003381058noreply@blogger.com