My spiritual journey has taken many an interesting twist and turn as of late. A few months ago I made the decision to return to calling myself a Christian, and to return somewhat closer to orthodoxy. To tackle my “return to Christianity” first: Part of this was a practical decision based on the difficulty I had with a more generic, free-form belief (as Steve Jones once said to me, “it’s difficult to get excited over a generic universalism”). I found little satisfaction in a generic form of spirituality, and while I continue to be infatuated with the multiple religious traditions of the world I am painfully aware that trying to make religious pluralism into an actual religion of its own doesn’t have a good track record (the Ba’hai Faith, Unitarian Universalism, New Age movement, and the Theosophy movement have all attempted it and all ended up failing miserably at developing a religion that truly synchronizes the parts). So from that standpoint I needed a specific religion and Christianity fit the bill for a few reasons namely:
--It is the religion of my heritage and culture, so it was already “home”
--From a moral and spiritual perspective I find Christianity most satisfying: It pushes the boundaries of love and service further than Judaism; has a loving, intimate parental God unlike Islam; and unlike Buddhism it doesn’t make peace with suffering in the world but instead vows to defeat and overcome evil and suffering
--Finally, there remains something incredibly alluring about Jesus. As writer N.T. Wright has said there was just something “different about Jesus”.
I think the biggest problem I had with retaining a more Unitarian understanding of Christ was that I am unable to view Jesus as just another prophet or great teacher. I do believe it is important to understand Jesus of Nazareth as a historical man; and that of course he was a moral and spiritual Teacher-the greatest, IMO. But there was something unique about Jesus as well, that makes him rise above other religious masters like Buddha or Muhammad. From the beginning there was an acknowledgment that God seemed present in an unusually powerful, profound and palpable way in Jesus. As Marcus Borg described it, where most religions find God in the teachings of a religion in Christianity God was embodied not only in the teachings but also in a person: Jesus was, in a sense, a human sacrament of God. (I also admit to being a believer in the Resurrection, though I admit exactly how it worked is unclear to us).
The view of Jesus as a sacrament of God is the best summation of my own views. I will say a bit more on that in a moment, but to further explain my religious a bit more: I still consider myself moderate-progressive in my beliefs. While reading pages on the Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship website I came across this particular article:
http://www.uuchristian.org/for-visitors/...hristians/ I realize that I embody, in a sense, all 3 of the primary categories of liberal Christian described in this article: Classical (simple personal beliefs); Catholic (a broad and inclusive view of the church); and Liberation (a way of living and engaging the world). I have found several sources that nourish me spiritually and that meet each of these 3 categories. They are as follows:
Classical: I now consider myself a Christian Universalist and would say my views here are best summed up by the 7 Principles of the Christian Universalist Association (
http://www.christianuniversalist.org/beliefs.html). This is a broad view of universalism that believes in Universal Salvation (and, more broadly, the restoration of all of creation), while also counting among its principles a view of God as Love and Spirit; the Universal Commandment being to love and serve one another as we love ourselves (the Golden Rule); karma and life after death; the idea of salvation being transformation; faith being a mystery; and that divine revelation is found in many, many places, that the Spirit of God lies within each of us (similar to the Quaker view of the Inner Light), and that we should all be free to pursue truth. Christian Universalism sees the Christian story through the lens of this Universalist spirituality.
Catholic: I chose the Episcopal Church/Anglican tradition for its broad and inclusive view of Christianity, a.k.a. the Via Media. I have always had a preference for the Sacraments and Liturgy, and a respect for tradition, yet a tolerance for dissent and new understandings. This view (as articulated by the UUCF and practiced by ECUSA) seeks out the best from all of Christianity. It is ecumenical, moderate, and retains the richness of the Christian tradition. I have found ECUSA best fits this model.
Liberation: As distinct from liberation theology (of which I am most decidedly not believer of) Liberation Christianity presents Christianity as a way of life, of relationships and of engaging the world at large. I have found the best summation of these views to be the Phoenix Affirmations, 12 principles that take a moderate-progressive view of the Great Commandment (understood as the threefold love of God, Neighbor and Self). These principles call for a full way of living a Christian life. The principles may be found here:
http://www.crosswalkamerica.org/PhoenixA...fault.aspx
As such my definition of Christianity is a set of simple beliefs (and as a Universalist my views a broad view of spirituality), a way of living within the Church (also broad) and of engaging the world (at large).
A few more thoughts on these matters:
Logan, good luck in your spiritual journey. The Episcopal church has some attractive qualities....yet, for me, despite the church being progressive etc. to be a member still requires accepting certain things that I cannot in good faith do. In the near future, I wonder if the church will become something "new". The conflict is clearly between those who want to retain historic understandings and authority against those pushing for more "progressive stances." Until the progressives are willing to cut loose from certain required orthodox beliefs...and essentially become a new church...the conflict will remain.
This was an interesting matter for me too, and I suppose one thing I like about the Episcopal Church is that it is not rigidly creedal. Yes, it retains the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds, and there is a Catechism that describes an outline of the faith, but the church nonetheless also values reason and experience and tends to view tradition in a more “organic” way than some other churches. As such I find the teachings serve more as guidelines than as actual rules. I also find that there are ways to interpret and understand ancient teachings in a different way in the modern world-retaining the creeds but finding new meanings/understandings of them for instance. There are different approaches of course: One can be like John Shelby Spong and try to throw out all the language; or one could be more like Marcus Borg and try to find a new understanding for old truths. I think the tradition provides an anchor and grounding for the faith, while keeping it open at the same time. In addition the tradition provides a rich and bountiful source of worship, liturgy and other forms of practicing the faith, which appear (to me at least) to be more important in the Anglican tradition than dogma or traditional doctrines. I can understand what you mean about affirming some things as a member. I am simply able to reconcile them by saying that they mean different things to me than to others.
In becoming an Episcopalian, are you inclined to theologically remain a Unitarian (and possibly Universalist)? An acquaintance of mine here who used to be in the UUCF is a member of the ECUSA and also a Unitarian, and Tom Harpur is an ordained Anglican priest in Canada who is decidedly not a trinitarian. And then, of course, there is King's Chapel.
I attend an Episcopal cathedral here very frequently. It makes a point of welcoming people no matter where they are on their spiritual journey. I don't recite the traditional creeds at all. I really enjoy the spirit of the place. I'd love to be part of a congregation of God loving Unitarians and Universalists, but it may not develop here in my remaining years.
John
Theologically I am most definitely a Universalist, as noted above. As far as the Unitarian definition goes, I am uncertain at this time whether to retain that label for myself or not. When it comes to the Trinity and Deity of Christ, I do not fall easily into either category (orthodox or heresy). I tend to view the Trinity more as a metaphor for how God works in the world and a representation of different images of God as opposed to an actual schematic of God’s nature (technically this is the heresy of Modalism, but quite honestly most Christians I know are already Modalists, even if they don’t know it).
As for the Deity of Christ, as noted above my views here are not really Unitarian since I don’t see him as just another religious leader. The CUA views him as a sort of human sacrament, which fits my beliefs, as well as the archetypal Divine-Man. However, their view does not see his status as unique but rather as representative of the journey and destiny of all of humanity (in other Jesus isn’t the only Son of God by any means, he was simply the one chosen to set the pattern and “show the way” for the rest of us). This is a belief known as “theosis”. I have written about that subject for the CUA, which can be found here:
http://www.christianuniversalist.org/art...hrist.html Suffice it to say I am not really a Christian Unitarian, though I fall short of meeting the standards of Trinitarian orthodoxy as well (personally, I think the Unitarian vs. Trinitarian divide may not be such a divide as it is often made out to be).
Am I a Unitarian in the broader sense, similar to how I have a broad Universalist view of theology and spirituality? If by Unitarian you mean believing in only One God known by many names, I can say yes, absolutely I am. Rev. Dorris wrote an interesting view on Unitarian principles of faith (
http://americanunitarian.org/forum/showt...hp?tid=252). Of his 5 principles I affirm #s 2, 3, 4 and 5 quite strongly. In fact 4 and 5 together make up the 7th principle of the CUA, 3 is the 2nd principle of the CUA, and 2 is implied throughout (the Phoenix Affirmations directly affirms the value of other paths to God). I can’t really say that I affirm Principle #1, since I consider my tradition Christian, not Unitarian (though a Christian approach that is open to insights from, dialogue with, and has respect for, other religions).
So am I a Unitarian? I’m really not sure…
Being in the Georgia, we have tons of Episcopal &/or Anglican churches (since they sometimes come in different flavors; there's one part of town with a conservative self-styled Anglican church right next to a mainline Episcopal church; I try not to laugh out loud when driving by, but I can't help but wonder what it's like when both services end and the opposing teams head towards their respective parking lots? I envision Cranmer's BOCP being lobbed over the trees and knocking out a gay deacon on the one side, or alternatively an argyle golf sweater soaked in gin and tonic and let aflame being projected by the other side). I joke of course; I have a real interest in Anglicanism and my own dream church is a non-Christian, Unitarian theist Anglo-Catholic congregation with all the incense and robes one could stuff into it
Interesting perspective! (And a very funny joke, by the way). Like you I have a preference for Anglo-Catholic worship, though as I’ve noted above I’ve found the non-Christian Unitarian theism harder to work with…somehow I either find myself coming back to Christ (albeit in a more broad sense) or unable to sustain the religious fervor for long.
Thoughts anyone?
