At General Assembly in 2005 the Unitarian Universalist Association adopted the Study/Action issue Moral Values in a Pluralistic Society. It will be voted on as a Statement of Conscience at this summer’s GA. A Google search located very few sermons on this topic, although there were a lot of classes and workshops being offered on it. Below are links to the draft of the statement of conscience, three sermons, one discussion on a UU blog site and an article from UU World magazine.
Moral Values in a Pluralistic Society: Draft Statement of Conscience
By: UUA Commission on Social Witness
Date: August, 2006
The draft statement asks us to reclaim our tradition of advocacy on moral issues. To do so we must be clear about the moral grounding of Unitarian Universalism. The draft statement emphasizes two major moral principles – Immanuel Kant’s Ends Principle, which is the basis for our first principle of inherent worth and dignity, and the Golden Rule. These principles correspond closely to the American principles espoused by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The draft statement asserts the need to work with other faith traditions to defend the freedoms expressed in these documents. It concludes with a list of actions we can take as individuals, as congregations, and as an association to become proactive in the public dialogue on moral values.
"Through the exploration, discernment, and articulation of our moral values in concert with affirmation and celebration of the pluralism of our society, we will rediscover our faith as a living tradition whose grounding and practice will then be visible, audible, and valued in the public square."
Moral Values in a Pluralistic Society
By: Rev. Mark Hayes, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Centre County, PA
Date: September 25, 2005
Rev. Hayes shares the concern of many religious liberals that religious conservatives have dominated civic discourse in recent decades. He feels that we have the right to raise our voice on the moral implications of political issues. He cautions that our positions should be grounded in our core moral values. He also reminds us that we live in a pluralistic society which makes it difficult to balance competing values that are prioritized differently by different segments of society. We can avoid the trap of viewing issues in absolute terms of right and wrong by basing our positions on our moral values and recognizing that others have different values. Rev. Hayes then discusses at length the theory of linguist George Lakoff that uses the metaphor of ‘society as family’. In Lakoff’s theory the liberal worldview is based on a Nuturant Parent Model that emphasizes empathy and responsibility. The conservative worldview is based on the Strict Father Model which emphasizes security and obedience. With such divergent worldviews it is not surprising there is such a radical difference of opinions on social programs, health care, same-sex marriage, and many other political issues.
"We should not be taking positions simply because of the support of a particular political party, or of a particular special-interest group, or even of the Unitarian Universalist Association headquarters in Boston. We should take positions because they are consistent with our espoused values. Being a pluralistic community ourselves, we may not always be able to come to a unified collective position. In that case, however, we can still express ourselves as individuals. And we can use our disagreements as an opportunity to be in dialogue and to examine more deeply our values and our ways of applying them."
Reclaiming Moral Values
By: Rev. Amy Freedman, Channing Memorial Church, RI
Date: January 15, 2006
Rev. Freedman says that the tendency of Unitarian Universalists to be very independent people can make it difficult to act collectively and respond to public issues as a faith community. This puts us at a disadvantage to religious conservatives who are often well organized and better able to influence public policy. She specifically warns about the Christian fundamentalist worldview known as "Dominionism" which has as its goal to "reclaim America for Christ." She suggests that religious liberals need to reclaim moral values to uphold those values which were the basis of this country. That may appear to be a daunting task, but Rev. Freedman feels that each of us can help bend the moral arc of the universe, using Theodore Parker’s phrase. By discussing the moral issues of our times among ourselves and with other churches and community organizations we can begin to make our voice present in the world.
"How is it possible to bend the moral arc of the universe? The reality is that social change begins with the dedication of a single human heart. Our own ability to express and share our own moral values will increase the likelihood of positive change. Our own lives may seem insignificant when compared to the entire world, but each one of us can help bend the arc toward justice."
We Believe We Can Make a Difference
By: Rev. Nancy O. Arnold, Unitarian Universalist Church of Akron
Date: July 9, 2006
Activities in the state of Ohio have forced Rev. Arnold to come out of political retirement. Two Christian conservative groups are working to transform Ohio politics. They plan to evangelize over a million Ohioans and register 400,000 of them to vote through a network of "Patriot Pastors." Their goal is to create "Christocrats – citizens of both their country and the Kingdom of God." These groups have already succeeded in banning same-sex marriage and eliminating sex education in public schools and they continue to push for anti-abortion and anti-evolution legislation. So some UU ministers have joined others in founding a group called We Believe Ohio to unite diverse religious voices to achieve social justice. Rev. Arnold offers several suggestions on how we can begin to accomplish this mission , how each of us can witness for religious pluralism.
"The Mission of We Believe Ohio states:
We are called as people of faith and loyal Americans to be united in dialogue and action to say:
YES to justice for all
NO to prosperity for only a few;
YES to diverse religious expression
NO to self-righteous certainty;
YES to the common good
NO to discrimination against any of God’s people;
YES to the voice of religious traditions informing public policy
NO to crossing the lines that separate the institutions of Religion and Government. "
Moral Values
By: Phillip Lund, Phil’s Little Blog on the Prairie
Date: August, 2006
Phil Lund is currently the Lifespan Program Director for the Prairie Star District of the Unitarian Universalist Association. These four blog entries describe some of the material he covered in his workshop on Liberal Religious Moral Values at Camp Unistar in Minnesota. (The log entries are presented in reverse chronological, so you will need to start at the bottom and work up.) In the first two blog entries he addresses the first study question from the Moral Values in a Pluralistic Society resource guide. This question concerns different aspects of morality, and Phil cites references to Avishai Margalit, George Lakoff and Rabbi Lerner. The third blog addresses a different study concerning building bridges in a pluralistic society. Phil describes the moral values that motivate various types of liberals and progressives, including socioeconomic progressives, identity politics progressives, environmentalists, civil libertarians, anti-authoritarians, and spiritual progressives. The fourth blog provides an exercise for prioritizing a shared set of values.
"I suggest that when we gather in religious community to talk about moral values, we need to consider ourselves first and foremost spiritual progressives, and that we should try to uphold those values when discussing issues that are important to us. I also believe that we need to instill in our children spiritual progressive values within the context of our religious communities. For those of us who are Unitarian Universalists, that means linking our family values to our religious values. "
Who's afraid of freedom and tolerance?
By: Doug Muder, UU World magazine
Date: August 15, 2005
In this article from UU World magazine Doug Muder, author of the blog Free and Responsible Truth, argues that UUs and other religious liberals need to understand the basis for the worldview of religious conservatives. One book that provides such insight is by James Ault Jr., who locates the core of their worldview in their vision of family. Ault describes an extended-family system where the members are enmeshed in a network of mutual obligations and the survival of the society depends on everyone fulfilling their obligations. This leads to an absolutist moral values system. Muder points out that the liberal worldview is based on choice rather than obligation. It is not surprising that religious conservatives reject, or even fear, the liberal worldview – as our insistence on freedom to choose is viewed as running from our obligations rather than running towards something and committing to it. Muder concludes that when the fundamentalists of all stripes respond in anger to the changes in society brought about the liberal values of freedom and choice we must not respond in kind and perpetuate a vicious cycle of polarization. We must offer a message of hope and portray the virtues of the committed life, a life that is ours by choice not by obligation.
"If there is one basic thing conservatives do not understand about religious liberals, it is this sense of commitment. They see us champion choice over obligation, but misunderstand our reasons. They understand us to be advocating a superficial and nihilistic way of life. They think we want to choose our own moral codes so that we can pick easy ones that rationalize our every whim. They believe that we want the freedom to define our relationships so that we can walk away from anything that looks difficult."
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Saturday, January 6, 2007
Religion and Science
Religion and science are often viewed as being in conflict. Others say they should be viewed as separate from each other, addressing completely different questions. Unitarian Universalism, however, is a religion which embraces science. Our living tradition draws from many sources incuding the "guidance of reason and the results of science." Here are eight interesting sermons on the relationship between religion and science.
Is Science a Religion?
By: Rev. Mike Young, First Unitarian Church of Honolulu
Date: February 9, 1997
Rev. Young challenges the claim made by evolutionary scientist Richard Dawkins that science can’t be a religion because religion requires faith – belief without evidence. Rev. Young argues that Dawkins has bought into the popular notion of religion which is too narrow. Liberal religion recognizes that human knowledge is always uncertain and incomplete which gives us space to grow and change. Science and religion are human enterprises that maintain their vitality by preserving a quality of tentativeness about the answers they offer.
"Faith is not about believing what you know ain't so, and it's not about believing despite a lack of evidence or in the face of contradictory evidence. Faith is the courage to go ahead and, by golly, make the decisions even though you know perfectly well that the last word is not in and that you may be making a mistake. It is that act of trust in the face of uncertainty. "
Reconciling Science and Religion
By: Rev. Samuel A. Trumbore, First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany
Date: January 9, 2000
Rev. Trumbore discusses philosopher Ken Wilber’s theories for reconciling science and religion. It has been shown that our mind progresses through stages of awareness as we mature and Wilber proposes that there are other more expansive states of consciousness that correlate to the mystical experiences which some people are able to achieve through meditation or other spiritual practices. Wilber suggests that the integration of science and religion can be achieved by emphasizing direct, repeatable experiences that can be verified by a community of practitioners.
"Where religion and science can meet once again and find common ground is the center of the scientific method - direct, repeatable experience. Just as the laws of the movement of objects can be directly witnessed and repeated by anyone sufficiently trained in the scientific method, so too are methods taught by spiritual leaders that also lead to direct, repeatable experiences that can be verified by a community of practitioners. Enlightenment can be approached with the same precision as a scientific experiment."
Is Science Religion? Stories of the Overlap of Religion and Science
By: L. Russell Alberts, Ph.D., Second Unitarian Church of Omaha
Date: March 6, 2006
In this sermon Dr. Alberts points out that both religion and science are engaged in telling us stories that explain the world. The tension is less between religion stories (myths) and science stories (theories) but more about how literally we interpret the stories of religion. Good religion, as defined by theologian Karen Armstrong, allows for different interpretations of its scriptures and focuses on the underlying meaning of the story. Bad religion, however, requires a strict literalness to its stories and is intolerant of any differences when religious and scientific views clash. This can lead to strong, and sometimes violent, reactions on hot-button issues that overlap science and religion. Dr. Alberts discusses how these differences have surfaced in the areas of abortion, cloning and homosexuality.
"We need myth, the stories that give us transcendent truth beyond the truth or fiction of their actual occurrence. We need the theories of science, the stories that tie together the observable facts of the actual universe we live in. Because once we know the facts, we can discuss what to do with them and we can decide what they spiritually mean to us."
No Need of That Hypothesis
By: Rev. Edmund Robinson, The First Church in Belmont (MA), Unitarian Universalist
Date: September 18, 2005
The title of this sermon echoes the response of LaPlace to Napolean when the emperor asked the French mathematician where God was in his description of the mechanics of the solar system. Rev. Robinson is responding to the anti-evolution proponents of Intelligent Design that he has no need for their hypothesis of God as a clockmaker – designs the universe and then walks away. Nor does he agree with the scientism of some opponents of ID that the scientific view of the world is the only true one. He echoes Ian Barbour’s view that religion and science may relate to each other in four ways – conflict, separation, dialogue, or integration. Rev. Robinson favors dialogue or integration as he believes religion and science have many insights to offer each other.
"But today in the popular mind, the debate has become polarized between atheistic scientists defending evolution and Biblical fundamentalists attacking it. What I hope to show is that liberal religion needs to be heard in this debate, to show that one can be both an evolutionist and spiritual, that the middle ground is quite broad and desperately needs to be defended."
The Religion Called Science
By: Burns Fisher, Unitarian Universalist Church of Nashua
Date: December 2, 1990
Mr. Fisher, a scientist by profession, presents the view that scientific theories are metaphors that describe the natural world. A theory must correctly describe data that has been collected through experimentation and it must be able to predict future experiments. However a theory doesn’t have to be explanatory and more than one theory can be used to describe the same phenomenon. For example, the theory of gravity doesn’t explain how it works and different aspects of light can be described using theories of light as a wave and as a particle. Both science and religion use metaphors to describe the world and to answer the questions within their purview. Both science and religion must provide the freedom to select the metaphors which are most appropriate to a given context.
"To me, the freedom from one single orthodoxy, be it that of science, or of traditional religion is the very essence of being a Unitarian-Universalist. Both science and traditional religion provide metaphors to think about the world. As Unitarian-Universalists, we must recognize that many seemingly conflicting traditions and teachings are useful in different contexts. Further, we must recognize that if we stubbornly chain all our innermost thoughts and beliefs to one metaphor we are hobbling our ability to express ourselves, and even our ability to think and feel. "
The Elegant Universe
By: Rev. David Owen, Unitarian Universalist Church of Corpus Christi
Date: unknown
Rev. Owen suggests that religion and science share a common need to reveal the hidden forces beyond the appearances we perceive. Both attempt to find that which unites and grounds all reality. Although attempts to find a common ground for religion and science have been mixed Rev. Owen is hopeful because he sees a similarity in the core story that each tells us. That story describes a distant past when everything was unified and in harmony but then became separate and estranged. Science and religion offer us pathways to reconnect with the universe and live in harmony.
"Our lives exist in an exquisite mystery, and science and religion move hand in hand in revealing the supreme elegance of the universe we live in. Science may not be able to provide us with doctrines on how to live. But how we live may be influenced by understanding just how delicate, and even precarious our place in the universe is."
Science Pursues The Real; Religion, The True
By: Rev. Catharine Harris, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Boulder
Date: February 18, 2001
Summary: Rev. Harris has benefited from the scientific advances of our age as medical technology enabled a hole in her heart to be repaired. However she is concerned that our emphasis on science has left a hole in the heart of our culture. She understands that those involved in science, like religion, are motivated by a desire to understand life’s mysteries and often experience awe and wonder before life. Her concern is with "fundamentalist science", also known as scientism. Rev. Harris describes scientism as the view that all knowledge and wisdom must be derived from the scientific method and that the only reality is the physical reality. She believes that science is not capable of dealing existential and global questions human beings have. Overemphasizing the role of science at the expense of religion has left us feeling empty and anxious, with a hole that needs to be repaired.
"Religion deals with six things--meanings, values, final causes, invisibles, qualities, and superiors. These are aspects of life that science cannot get its hands on. I will give you a couple of examples. Every Sunday, I strike my singing bowl after the announcements. Dick can tell me the sound is pleasurable because it is a nearly perfect sine wave. However, it is we humans who hear it as an invitation to leave our quotidian affairs and enter a deeper level. Similarly, we light the chalice. We can describe that saying we strike a match and light the wick in oil. We don't light it because we need light. We are inviting we humans without tedious explanations to move to a deeper level where we remember the entire span of UU history, the people who have gone before, of the other UUs worldwide who are lighting their chalice today, of the children who will follow us, of our UU values of love, truth, and action and much, much more."
The Religion of Science
By: Dr. Davidson Loehr, First UU Church of Austin
Date: 25 February 2001
Dr. Loehr believes that Science has become the dominant religion of our culture. First he describes the pre-scientific world view of a scant 200 years ago. This is followed by a description of how the scientific advances of the nineteenth century undermined that world view. During that process, Dr. Loehr argues, Science itself became a religion and he offers a list of the "Top Ten things that Science took over from religion in the 19th century." The success of science was achieved by limiting its scope to questions of fact and eschewing questions of meaning. But those questions persist and for Dr. Loehr it is necessary to have a religion which satisfies our minds and our hearts.
"I think the primary reason our sciences have been so successful is because they have, from the start, limited their focus to matters of fact rather than matters of meaning. Sciences have intentionally ignored the existential and subjective questions. They may be essential to us, but they are not scientific questions. No one can make a scientific pronouncement on what we should love, how we should treat our neighbors, whether it is more moral to have an abortion or to bring an unwanted child into an uncaring environment, or a thousand other moral, ethical, subjective questions."
Is Science a Religion?
By: Rev. Mike Young, First Unitarian Church of Honolulu
Date: February 9, 1997
Rev. Young challenges the claim made by evolutionary scientist Richard Dawkins that science can’t be a religion because religion requires faith – belief without evidence. Rev. Young argues that Dawkins has bought into the popular notion of religion which is too narrow. Liberal religion recognizes that human knowledge is always uncertain and incomplete which gives us space to grow and change. Science and religion are human enterprises that maintain their vitality by preserving a quality of tentativeness about the answers they offer.
"Faith is not about believing what you know ain't so, and it's not about believing despite a lack of evidence or in the face of contradictory evidence. Faith is the courage to go ahead and, by golly, make the decisions even though you know perfectly well that the last word is not in and that you may be making a mistake. It is that act of trust in the face of uncertainty. "
Reconciling Science and Religion
By: Rev. Samuel A. Trumbore, First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany
Date: January 9, 2000
Rev. Trumbore discusses philosopher Ken Wilber’s theories for reconciling science and religion. It has been shown that our mind progresses through stages of awareness as we mature and Wilber proposes that there are other more expansive states of consciousness that correlate to the mystical experiences which some people are able to achieve through meditation or other spiritual practices. Wilber suggests that the integration of science and religion can be achieved by emphasizing direct, repeatable experiences that can be verified by a community of practitioners.
"Where religion and science can meet once again and find common ground is the center of the scientific method - direct, repeatable experience. Just as the laws of the movement of objects can be directly witnessed and repeated by anyone sufficiently trained in the scientific method, so too are methods taught by spiritual leaders that also lead to direct, repeatable experiences that can be verified by a community of practitioners. Enlightenment can be approached with the same precision as a scientific experiment."
Is Science Religion? Stories of the Overlap of Religion and Science
By: L. Russell Alberts, Ph.D., Second Unitarian Church of Omaha
Date: March 6, 2006
In this sermon Dr. Alberts points out that both religion and science are engaged in telling us stories that explain the world. The tension is less between religion stories (myths) and science stories (theories) but more about how literally we interpret the stories of religion. Good religion, as defined by theologian Karen Armstrong, allows for different interpretations of its scriptures and focuses on the underlying meaning of the story. Bad religion, however, requires a strict literalness to its stories and is intolerant of any differences when religious and scientific views clash. This can lead to strong, and sometimes violent, reactions on hot-button issues that overlap science and religion. Dr. Alberts discusses how these differences have surfaced in the areas of abortion, cloning and homosexuality.
"We need myth, the stories that give us transcendent truth beyond the truth or fiction of their actual occurrence. We need the theories of science, the stories that tie together the observable facts of the actual universe we live in. Because once we know the facts, we can discuss what to do with them and we can decide what they spiritually mean to us."
No Need of That Hypothesis
By: Rev. Edmund Robinson, The First Church in Belmont (MA), Unitarian Universalist
Date: September 18, 2005
The title of this sermon echoes the response of LaPlace to Napolean when the emperor asked the French mathematician where God was in his description of the mechanics of the solar system. Rev. Robinson is responding to the anti-evolution proponents of Intelligent Design that he has no need for their hypothesis of God as a clockmaker – designs the universe and then walks away. Nor does he agree with the scientism of some opponents of ID that the scientific view of the world is the only true one. He echoes Ian Barbour’s view that religion and science may relate to each other in four ways – conflict, separation, dialogue, or integration. Rev. Robinson favors dialogue or integration as he believes religion and science have many insights to offer each other.
"But today in the popular mind, the debate has become polarized between atheistic scientists defending evolution and Biblical fundamentalists attacking it. What I hope to show is that liberal religion needs to be heard in this debate, to show that one can be both an evolutionist and spiritual, that the middle ground is quite broad and desperately needs to be defended."
The Religion Called Science
By: Burns Fisher, Unitarian Universalist Church of Nashua
Date: December 2, 1990
Mr. Fisher, a scientist by profession, presents the view that scientific theories are metaphors that describe the natural world. A theory must correctly describe data that has been collected through experimentation and it must be able to predict future experiments. However a theory doesn’t have to be explanatory and more than one theory can be used to describe the same phenomenon. For example, the theory of gravity doesn’t explain how it works and different aspects of light can be described using theories of light as a wave and as a particle. Both science and religion use metaphors to describe the world and to answer the questions within their purview. Both science and religion must provide the freedom to select the metaphors which are most appropriate to a given context.
"To me, the freedom from one single orthodoxy, be it that of science, or of traditional religion is the very essence of being a Unitarian-Universalist. Both science and traditional religion provide metaphors to think about the world. As Unitarian-Universalists, we must recognize that many seemingly conflicting traditions and teachings are useful in different contexts. Further, we must recognize that if we stubbornly chain all our innermost thoughts and beliefs to one metaphor we are hobbling our ability to express ourselves, and even our ability to think and feel. "
The Elegant Universe
By: Rev. David Owen, Unitarian Universalist Church of Corpus Christi
Date: unknown
Rev. Owen suggests that religion and science share a common need to reveal the hidden forces beyond the appearances we perceive. Both attempt to find that which unites and grounds all reality. Although attempts to find a common ground for religion and science have been mixed Rev. Owen is hopeful because he sees a similarity in the core story that each tells us. That story describes a distant past when everything was unified and in harmony but then became separate and estranged. Science and religion offer us pathways to reconnect with the universe and live in harmony.
"Our lives exist in an exquisite mystery, and science and religion move hand in hand in revealing the supreme elegance of the universe we live in. Science may not be able to provide us with doctrines on how to live. But how we live may be influenced by understanding just how delicate, and even precarious our place in the universe is."
Science Pursues The Real; Religion, The True
By: Rev. Catharine Harris, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Boulder
Date: February 18, 2001
Summary: Rev. Harris has benefited from the scientific advances of our age as medical technology enabled a hole in her heart to be repaired. However she is concerned that our emphasis on science has left a hole in the heart of our culture. She understands that those involved in science, like religion, are motivated by a desire to understand life’s mysteries and often experience awe and wonder before life. Her concern is with "fundamentalist science", also known as scientism. Rev. Harris describes scientism as the view that all knowledge and wisdom must be derived from the scientific method and that the only reality is the physical reality. She believes that science is not capable of dealing existential and global questions human beings have. Overemphasizing the role of science at the expense of religion has left us feeling empty and anxious, with a hole that needs to be repaired.
"Religion deals with six things--meanings, values, final causes, invisibles, qualities, and superiors. These are aspects of life that science cannot get its hands on. I will give you a couple of examples. Every Sunday, I strike my singing bowl after the announcements. Dick can tell me the sound is pleasurable because it is a nearly perfect sine wave. However, it is we humans who hear it as an invitation to leave our quotidian affairs and enter a deeper level. Similarly, we light the chalice. We can describe that saying we strike a match and light the wick in oil. We don't light it because we need light. We are inviting we humans without tedious explanations to move to a deeper level where we remember the entire span of UU history, the people who have gone before, of the other UUs worldwide who are lighting their chalice today, of the children who will follow us, of our UU values of love, truth, and action and much, much more."
The Religion of Science
By: Dr. Davidson Loehr, First UU Church of Austin
Date: 25 February 2001
Dr. Loehr believes that Science has become the dominant religion of our culture. First he describes the pre-scientific world view of a scant 200 years ago. This is followed by a description of how the scientific advances of the nineteenth century undermined that world view. During that process, Dr. Loehr argues, Science itself became a religion and he offers a list of the "Top Ten things that Science took over from religion in the 19th century." The success of science was achieved by limiting its scope to questions of fact and eschewing questions of meaning. But those questions persist and for Dr. Loehr it is necessary to have a religion which satisfies our minds and our hearts.
"I think the primary reason our sciences have been so successful is because they have, from the start, limited their focus to matters of fact rather than matters of meaning. Sciences have intentionally ignored the existential and subjective questions. They may be essential to us, but they are not scientific questions. No one can make a scientific pronouncement on what we should love, how we should treat our neighbors, whether it is more moral to have an abortion or to bring an unwanted child into an uncaring environment, or a thousand other moral, ethical, subjective questions."
Welcome to UU Perspectives!
In this blog I will provide links and summaries of Unitarian Universalist sermons and other writings on various topics that are available on the internet. If you are not familiar with our religion you may learn more about it at http://uua.org/newcomers/index.html.
I decided to create this blog to facilitate the Credo Forum monthly discussions we hold at my UU church. It is dedicated to my friends who participate in that forum for the friendship and intellectual stimulation they provide each month.
I decided to create this blog to facilitate the Credo Forum monthly discussions we hold at my UU church. It is dedicated to my friends who participate in that forum for the friendship and intellectual stimulation they provide each month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)