05-18-2007, 12:44 AM
I wonder if there are any "theologically" notable Unitarians of this or the 20th century whose photo could be added to our AUC Forum of historic leaders. I am trying to think of some pre-merger Unitarian or Universalist who would be worthy of our admiration...but I am drawing a blank...I am sure there are some candidates. Here are some slim pickings -
See: http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...x.html
Sad, no real theological stars....notable Unitarians in different fields..but only a couple of ministers listed... Frederick Eliot May AUA President, a humanist...no thanks. John Haynes-Holmes..most notable for social action...pacifism etc...no thanks. A. Powell Davies 1902-57...hmm..at least he wrote religous books and said:
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...avies.html
"The United States, he said, "not only began with a revolution; it is a revolution, and its faith in human freedom is the only faith which can unite the world."
"His devotion to free religion and to the democratic system which it nurtured was manifest in the movement known in his words as “Unitarian Advance”: Unitarian churches are founded upon individual freedom of belief, discipleship to advancing truth, the democratic process in human relations, universal brotherhood undivided by nation, race or creed, and allegiance to the cause of a united world community."
""Why should any of us be confined within a single area of religious culture?" he asked. "When I read Amos and Jeremiah, I say 'Would to God I were a Jew.' When I read the Parable of the Good Samaritan, I say 'Would I were a Galilean.' When I read the 13th of 1st Corinthians, I wish with all my heart that I might be a Christian after the manner of the Apostle Paul. When I think of Buddha and his Eightfold Path, I say, 'I, too, would be a Buddhist.' And when I remember the trial of Socrates, I say in awe but with exalted spirit, 'Oh that I might be so brave a humanist.' And thus at the end, there is nothing I can say but that, like Emerson and Channing, I want to live with the privilege of the illimitable mind.”
Abridged from a statement by the A. Powell Davies Memorial Committee of All Souls Church, Unitarian, Washington DC.
I don't know enough about him...but he might be a candidate.
Also...Charles Hartshorne - Process Philosophy
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...horne.html
CHARLES HARTSHORNE: THE EINSTEIN OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT
1897-2000 By John B. Cobb, Courtesy of the Center for Process Studies, Claremont, California,
http://www.ctr4process.org
"Hartshorne argued on two fronts. Against classical theism he insisted that its views were neither coherent nor religiously satisfactory. He taught that the idea of divine perfection embodied in the tradition affirmed only one side of what is truly involved in perfection, that is, the element of immutability and absoluteness. But true perfection includes perfect relatedness and thus change. What remains changeless is God's perfect responsiveness to all that is changing."
"Hartshorne opposed the classical doctrine of omnipotence. In its clearest form this implied that all events, just as they occur, are determined by God. This tradition cannot affirm creaturely freedom or avoid depicting God as directly responsible for all sin and evil without inconsistency. Hartshorne taught, in contrast, that God creates the conditions that provide the optimum balance of order and freedom. Within the limits set by God, creatures determine the details of what happens. Much that occurs takes place by chance interactions of diverse decision-making creatures. This, too, expresses the divine perfection."
"The other front on which Hartshorne argued was against the widespread loss of confidence in reason. This expressed itself in the dominant philosophical community as an abandonment of metaphysics and of constructive philosophy generally. In theology it led to fideism. Hartshorne showed that traditional arguments for the existence of God could be formulated cogently when the idea of God for which they argued was a coherent one. He gave special attention to the ontological argument in this regard. He insisted that either God necessarily exists or it is necessarily true that God does not exist."
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...adams.html
Would James Luther Adams doesn't really fit ...being classically UUA in spirit...he is credited as the 20 centuries "leading Unitarian theologian" -
"The entire quest of Adams's professional career may be seen as transformative responses to his childhood religion in two basic respects: first, his quest as a theologian for "an examined faith" -- a faith subject to self-criticism and growth—and second, his quest as an ethicist for a faith that "takes time seriously" -- a faith that seeks to embody its ethical commitments in history."
See: http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...x.html
Sad, no real theological stars....notable Unitarians in different fields..but only a couple of ministers listed... Frederick Eliot May AUA President, a humanist...no thanks. John Haynes-Holmes..most notable for social action...pacifism etc...no thanks. A. Powell Davies 1902-57...hmm..at least he wrote religous books and said:
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...avies.html
"The United States, he said, "not only began with a revolution; it is a revolution, and its faith in human freedom is the only faith which can unite the world."
"His devotion to free religion and to the democratic system which it nurtured was manifest in the movement known in his words as “Unitarian Advance”: Unitarian churches are founded upon individual freedom of belief, discipleship to advancing truth, the democratic process in human relations, universal brotherhood undivided by nation, race or creed, and allegiance to the cause of a united world community."
""Why should any of us be confined within a single area of religious culture?" he asked. "When I read Amos and Jeremiah, I say 'Would to God I were a Jew.' When I read the Parable of the Good Samaritan, I say 'Would I were a Galilean.' When I read the 13th of 1st Corinthians, I wish with all my heart that I might be a Christian after the manner of the Apostle Paul. When I think of Buddha and his Eightfold Path, I say, 'I, too, would be a Buddhist.' And when I remember the trial of Socrates, I say in awe but with exalted spirit, 'Oh that I might be so brave a humanist.' And thus at the end, there is nothing I can say but that, like Emerson and Channing, I want to live with the privilege of the illimitable mind.”
Abridged from a statement by the A. Powell Davies Memorial Committee of All Souls Church, Unitarian, Washington DC.
I don't know enough about him...but he might be a candidate.
Also...Charles Hartshorne - Process Philosophy
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...horne.html
CHARLES HARTSHORNE: THE EINSTEIN OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT
1897-2000 By John B. Cobb, Courtesy of the Center for Process Studies, Claremont, California,
http://www.ctr4process.org
"Hartshorne argued on two fronts. Against classical theism he insisted that its views were neither coherent nor religiously satisfactory. He taught that the idea of divine perfection embodied in the tradition affirmed only one side of what is truly involved in perfection, that is, the element of immutability and absoluteness. But true perfection includes perfect relatedness and thus change. What remains changeless is God's perfect responsiveness to all that is changing."
"Hartshorne opposed the classical doctrine of omnipotence. In its clearest form this implied that all events, just as they occur, are determined by God. This tradition cannot affirm creaturely freedom or avoid depicting God as directly responsible for all sin and evil without inconsistency. Hartshorne taught, in contrast, that God creates the conditions that provide the optimum balance of order and freedom. Within the limits set by God, creatures determine the details of what happens. Much that occurs takes place by chance interactions of diverse decision-making creatures. This, too, expresses the divine perfection."
"The other front on which Hartshorne argued was against the widespread loss of confidence in reason. This expressed itself in the dominant philosophical community as an abandonment of metaphysics and of constructive philosophy generally. In theology it led to fideism. Hartshorne showed that traditional arguments for the existence of God could be formulated cogently when the idea of God for which they argued was a coherent one. He gave special attention to the ontological argument in this regard. He insisted that either God necessarily exists or it is necessarily true that God does not exist."
http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unit...adams.html
Would James Luther Adams doesn't really fit ...being classically UUA in spirit...he is credited as the 20 centuries "leading Unitarian theologian" -
"The entire quest of Adams's professional career may be seen as transformative responses to his childhood religion in two basic respects: first, his quest as a theologian for "an examined faith" -- a faith subject to self-criticism and growth—and second, his quest as an ethicist for a faith that "takes time seriously" -- a faith that seeks to embody its ethical commitments in history."