Different Religions, Different Approaches at our gathering in March 2019 - #Unitarians mustn't sideline studying different faiths - thinking as well as experiencing has its place

At our gathering on 10 March we held a service designed with children in mind, though the children’s story was - like the best stories - multi-layered, with several messages for adults to unpick during the week to come.

Our gathering picked up on an aspect of the life of communities of faith that seemed to have been missing from the recent Festival of Unitarians in the South East, which we had attended as a group.  That aspect was a journey into comparative religion, or comparison of different theological perspectives from different world faiths.

We started with a Pagan creed, written by one of our own number, then heard readings from the Baha’i and Hindu faiths. We considered several points.

The first point was the particular theological difference highlighted in the two readings, namely that the Baha’i faith considers God the Creator to be completely distinct and separate from the created universe, with the two not in any way to be equated.  By contrast, the Hindu faith sees the ultimate creating principle, Brahman, to exist as Atman inside all that is created; and that a person who realises the Atman within has also realised Brahman, so may in all seriousness declare, “I am God.”  This may chime with some of the sayings of Jesus and other mystics, whose words are recorded in such a way sometimes to be unclear as to who is speaking.

Shrine of Bahā'u'llāh, the prophet of the Baha'i faith, in Acre, Israel

We also heard that whereas Western Christianity as known during the late Middle Ages seemed to stand definitively with the Baha’is on this issue, St Francis of Assisi challenged this with his reverence for all things created; and his legacy has come through to the present day.  Franciscan teachers such as Richard Rohr and those likeminded in his community feel able to make statements such as this, in the present day (the link below the image is to the source website):

https://cac.org/gods-body-2019-03-03/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2019-03-09%20DM%20Weekly&utm_content=2019-03-09%20DM%20Weekly+CID_a784b5dcb22d7cdb73902e25b33211c0&utm_source=Campaign%20Monitor%20Google%20Analytics&utm_term=Sunday

The second point considered was that when people of two theologies come into contact with each other, there are (at least) two possible reactions.  Religious people who are conservative in their approach may set up barriers in order not to dilute their message for the sake of certainty, and to keep their identity clear.  Religious people who are liberal (progressive) in their approach may seek to include both theologies in order to prevent boundaries being set up and to include more people.  We explored that as well as benefits, there are costs associated with each approach.  The actions of religious conservatives may instigate conflict.  The actions of religious liberals will require change within the group to accommodate new ideas, which is hard work, and can give rise to uncertainty regarding identity and who belongs.  We owe these ideas to Jonathan Haidt.  https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind#t-185395

The third point we looked at is the idea that being conversant with a range of different world faith theologies and concepts makes one multi-lingual in terms of religion.  As with languages of the world: some things can be said in one language that simply cannot be said in another language.  People who can only speak one language find this hard to grasp, but bilingual families will recognise this very well.  For much more on this fascinating subject see David Bellos Is That A Fish In Your Ear? Translation and the meaning of everything https://www.bookdepository.com/Is-That-Fish-Your-Ear-Professor-French-Studies-David-Bellos/9780865478763?ref=grid-view&qid=1552404573799&sr=1-2

If we can speak the lingo of another faith then, even with people whose theologies we cannot share, we can have some extremely interesting and civilised conversations. And more personally, in having a variety of different ways of speaking about faith we have a richer vocabulary in which to speak about the religious experience.

Rev Bill Darlison (a Unitarian Minister) has also touched on the idea of one’s early received religion as one’s mother tongue, in his book of essays The Penultimate Truth and Other Incitements https://www.bookdepository.com/The-Penultimate-Truth-and-Other-Incitements-Bill-Darlison/9781846858062

Woven into all this thinking in our gathering, we also did some experiencing.  We experienced our usual silent ritual of making a circle with a candle, bread, water, and a fan of feathers.  We sang a couple of hymns from our green hymn books, held a seven minute silence for meditation or prayer as we each needed, and lit candles of joy and concern.

June meeting

Whereas in May our worship service had looked at “compassion”, and how that must translate into practical, outward action in the world, on 14 June our service focused on an interior aspect of a life of faith.

One of the defining features of Unitarian thought is its focus on the “one‑ness” of the divine.  This was one of the ideas that caused a schism between ministers of religion in the 18th century.  There were those who – in the best tradition of Protestantism – read the Bible for themselves, deeply and carefully, yet could not find any authentic reference from the earliest time to the Holy Trinity of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.  They saw all the teachings of ancient Judaism and the more recent teachings of Jesus as consistently pointing to a holy One.

In our service we started with a reading from Hinduism, which also points to the holy One.  Hinduism struggles with the different ways in which God is felt by people, and this results in Hindu people choosing – from among many faces or names for God – the aspect of God that resonates best for them.  But God is still seen as whole and one.  Hinduism contrasts with the faiths of classical Christianity, Judaism, Islam and even the Baha’is, in all of which God is seen as quite separate from creation.  But Hinduism is in tune with Paganism and the more liberal branches of Christianity – in these the one‑ness of God is seen as extending right into the created universe and into we ourselves as humans.  The word for this is panentheism  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism .

We then silently shared a flame (light), bread, water, smoke (air), each placing our own private construction on the simple ritual.

Next we heard a reading from a Unitarian scholar and minister, Dr David Doel, who has written about what he sees as the nature of salvation.  He sees salvation (true peace) not as the reward for holding certain beliefs but as the fruit of an experience – the experiential recognition and acceptance of the love that lies at the heart of the universe and at the core of what it means to be human.

But this took us to the heart of our service.  The word “love” drives us to use the words “of”, “from”, “to”, “towards” or “between”; or else the name of what is loved.  The idea of love requires there to be two identities, with love as a draw or pull or flow between them.  So now we have ideas that apparently contradict.  The “one‑ness” of Unitarian panentheism and the “two‑ness” that the Unitarian experience of love points at.

We did not attempt to solve this problem.  But it was suggested that perhaps to make it possible to live with this contradiction would be to use the word “relatedness”.  Religion – a life of the spirit searching towards the divine that lies undiscoverable beyond existence – is perhaps about relatedness and mutual invitation.  And perhaps, at heart, this is what the idea of the Holy Trinity, with God playing as both parent and child and the flow between the two, was also trying to get at.

After hearing all this, we then used our customary seven‑minute silence as a time for our own private practice.  After candles of joy and concern we finished the service and made ourselves cups of tea.

During our service we had sung hymns about the different ways to view God (Hymns for Living no. 35) and how the church is a place of trust and searching (Hymns for Living no. 174).  We enjoyed the hymns tremendously; so much so, that after the service was over we carried on singing some more, using our hymn books and the recordings of the Unitarian Music Society.