5.19.2010

I went to church, can you believe it?

I went to a Unitarian Universalist church this weekend to hear my brother sing the baritone solos of Faure's Requiem. My brother ROCKS (he's 28, but he will always be my baby brother) and I was so incredibly impressed and proud. If you're friends with me on FB you can find a clip of him singing it a capella...but this performance was with a full orchestra and it was 100 times more powerful.

Anyhow, this performance was at a UU church. I have always been curious about UU, ever since I began this out of the box journey. I am grateful we have such people in the world, because they rock social justice and community service and acceptance like no one I know. But something about it was very strange to me, and no, it wasn't the obvious. I don't have a problem with the variety of faith traditions or the lack of any central beliefs, and I was perfectly comfortable there (at least as much as any introvert can be in a foreign place). Granted, I have always maintained that I don't want religion without the Jesus, I want Jesus without the religion, which is why in spite of my curiosity and living 3 blocks from another great UU church, I have never been. But I don't have any issue with those who practice their spirituality in any of a myriad of ways, as long as they don't harm others in that practice.

However, I have never understood why people will go to all the trouble to have church, with all the semblances of a mainline service, but wipe it clean of any core belief system. I don't mean that as a disparaging remark against UU's. I understand the sense of community and the value of the power of that community when they come together. I also value and respect the concept of acceptance and non-conformity. I get it all; as much as any outsider can.

My point is this: the service was decidedly like a mainline service. I don't mean in content, but in presentation. The invocation, the homily, the benediction...they were all there. They have a hymnal, very much like any traditional hymnal. They have responsive reading and a doxology. You get my drift. Yet, it's all been purged of almost anything that identifies with any particular religion or belief system. And what I wonder is why, if you're going to do something subversive and liberal, why do it exactly the same as something traditional and conservative? Is it a tribute to what we might have known as children? Is it for comfort? Or is it tradition simply for the sake of tradition?

Now, I understand the UU tradition goes back hundreds of years and that, like any religion, they do what they've always done. But I can't wrap my mind around this. Why work so hard to make it seem like "church", when it's not "church"?  And why call it "church", giving it a distinctly traditional tone and flavor, but having it actually be something else entirely, with a vastly different mission, content, and core? 

What is it about religion that causes us to wear masks? Why are we so afraid of not being accepted by others? Why wear a label that doesn't fit, or follow a pattern that doesn't do us justice?

I have to be clear, I didn't have any problem with it all and there is probably good reason for the system. It just got me to thinking about the comparisons. And then, I wonder too...we watch the "emerging" church movement, insisting they are something vastly different, but so often, they are just the same old theological thing, just wearing different clothes and with different presentation. 

So here we have a traditional thing wearing a liberal mask, and a liberal thing wearing a traditional mask.

Why?

Because here is what I wonder. Are we, as a religious humanity, really that incapable of doing something truly new? Must we always keep one foot anchored in the old thing in some manner, while timidly stretching beyond the borders of it? What are we afraid of out there in the wild blue yonder? Why pretend to be something that is still within the confines of "acceptable", even as we venture out beyond convention?

I must interject here that I do know some people who are doing entirely new things. But they are so rare. Why?

And again, I don't mean anything against the UU system. Just that it got me to thinking, which is always a dangerous thing. There are so many metaphors here, I don't even know where to start.  
Labels:

22 comments:

  1. Hi Erin,
    Those are exactly the questions I am asking. I think a lot of it has to do with our ability to imagine something new that doesn't still have the shape and texture of what is familiar. Mostly I think it is because those who are advancing these models are dependent upon the former structure and system (only with a newer, hipper facade). I have also noticed that many who claim to want something new and different really just a different flavor of the same old thing.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Fascinating.

    It always amazes me what a fearful lot we are. I don't think humanity as a whole really believes that we have a lot of freedom when it comes to publicly interacting with God.

    So I guess it's our conceptions of God more than anything that hinder us. I don't think we believe we are free to worship in ways that speak to us, because God is rigid. I still think that view of God is the one that holds sway over all overs. All those millennia of religion, they take a lot to wipe off the collective memory banks.
    ReplyDelete
  3. I grew up is a UU church so I know exactly what you mean. Good people. Good plans. But when I became a teenager, they couldn't take my questions. A couple of years later, I became a Christian. I still have lots of questions, but it's the relationship with Jesus I treasure. He seems ok with the questions :)
    ReplyDelete
  4. Grace - I'm sure you're right. It was more a rhetorical question...I don't know that there is an answer to it. I guess I was just struck by the similarities between this service and any mainline service.

    Nice to see you!
    ReplyDelete
  5. Sue - Exactly. I like that freedom. Three years ago I would have told you I could find that freedom in a UU church...but I have learned differently, and Sunday just cemented that for me. It's interesting...you say "ways that speak to us", and I am thinking that many Christians believe God speaks to us, but only that he only says "acceptable" things. Well, God told me to leave church to find him, and I did. And I find him in ways I never would have believed before.
    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree, Aphra, he is OK with the questions, and I have been unable to abandon Jesus for any other belief...but I don't like the rules. I guess I'm a rebel!
    ReplyDelete
  7. I think a lot of it has to do with familiarity, but I also think that it has to do with the benefits that come with doing certain things in a familiar way, as well. There is power in doing something familiar. And yes, I'm speaking of power in the sense of how a witch usually speaks of power.

    Drawing on a familiar and commonly used/similar liturgical structure is very much like following a well worn and carefully maintained road. The fact that it is drawn on so much imbues that structure with a certain kind of power that helps draw the person along the desired path to the desired results. It (theoretically) helps lead people to the state of mind that is most conducive to doing the necessary work -- thereby leaving the innovative energies more free and readily accessible for that work.
    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Erin,

    Jesus had a problem with man made rules too. Often denominations have their own rules over and above what is in the Bible and those are the ones usually stumble people and get confused. When we add to the Bible instead of just following it, it's confusing.

    Jesus came for a personal relationship and often this is left out of all the church programs, too much theology.

    P.S. Would you be interested in a link exchange.
    http://www.work-in-progress-online.com
    ReplyDelete
  9. Jarred - I understand what you're saying and it makes sense. I just can't understand why the UU church has chosen a liturgical style for their rituals. It would seem to me that kind of defeats the purpose of their mission - being open and affirming to all - if their ritual is clearly based on something generally viewed as restrictive in it's original context.

    Does that make any sense? It just seems like someone coming into the UU church who is not from a Christian background might feel somewhat disparaged. Which negates the idea that they are welcoming of all.

    It would seem better to have developed their own system of ritual that doesn't have it's roots in any one religious tradition.
    ReplyDelete
  10. Work In Progress - I agree, most denominations have added to Jesus' mission. Most of the ritual I see in any church I don't see in the bible.

    Thanks for visiting, I will check out your website and let you know.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Erin, I understand what you're saying. I'm just not sure there's any real solution to the underlying issue. As the saying goes, you can't please anyone. And I imagine that if the UU church did create a totally new and innovative liturgy, some members who are from a more Christian background and feel most comfortable with the mainline-style liturgy would feel unwelcome too.

    This goes back to a discussion I had a few years ago with a friend (Tracie, I think). I think there's a strong and important difference between saying that everyone is welcome and saying that everyone can or will be accommodated. The latter simply is not possible, in my opinion.

    The good news is that if a particular person comes to a UU church, is given a warm welcome, but does not feel that the style of worship (or anything else) of that particular church, then there's no harm and no foul (or at least there doesn't have to be). There can be a friendly parting of the ways (and even an agreement to keep in touch on a social level), and the person can look for something closer to what they want.

    As an interesting aside, I understand there's a somewhat interesting UU church a county or two over from me that has a quite a Spiritualist flavor to it. I'm not sure what their overall liturgical structure is like (I've never been there myself), but mediumship and direct messages from spirit apparently plays a significant role in their services. So in that sense, I think the UU church has one thing right: The liturgy can be tailored (and possibly even rewritten in total) according to an individual congregation's tastes and needs.

    Me, I think the UU's are great people and I love having coffee with them. But when it comes to worship and contact with the Divine, I'll stick to sacred circles. ;) (Though two of my fellow coven members also attend the local UU church...) And the UU church seems to be quite okay with that, too.
    ReplyDelete
  12. I suppose I would think they should borrow from many traditions, not just Christian ones. That's what really bothered me. It could just be unique to this particular church, as I haven't been to any others, but it sure seemed Christian-any mention of Jesus.

    It would almost be more interesting to me if they incorporated traditions from Buddhist, Muslim and/or Pagan faiths. Wouldn't seem so sterile.
    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey this was interesting. I have always been curious about UU services. You ask a great question - Why? Why not do something different from "a traditional thing wearing a liberal mask, and a liberal thing wearing a traditional mask?" Kind of seems too easy or safe or something.
    ReplyDelete
  14. I see your point, but I also have to note that those are some radically different traditions with quite different liturgies. For example, most Pagan traditions don't really lend themselves to the leadership(performers)/congregation paradigm inherent in the mainline Christian liturgy. (Of course, learning to adapt Pagan liturgy to work well with huge groups of Pagans is something that takes considerable skill and planning.) So I'd be curious to see how someone would figure out how to mix and match and what the result would look like.

    I may actually do my own blog post on this topic, the more I think about it.
    ReplyDelete
  15. In fact, maybe you could give it a try yourself, Erin. I'd be curious to see what you came up with. ;)
    ReplyDelete
  16. Jarred, I don't profess to have the answer, I was more making an observation that I was somewhat disappointed by their obvious failure to honor traditions other than Christianity. They've been doing this for 100 years (more?), so if they haven't found a way, I suppose there isn't one. And yet, based the mission they claim, I expected more.

    But I'd be interested if you wanted to tackle it!
    ReplyDelete
  17. I already have enough on my plate right now, thanks. In fact, I need to spend some time pestering "The Boss" about what she wants me to do for the Working in tomorrow night's ritual. :-P
    ReplyDelete
  18. Barbara - I didn't mean to miss your comment...I think in some ways Jarred has answered your question. Maybe rather than being too "easy" it would be too "hard" to mesh traditions...

    But then the spiritual climate here in Portland is such that it's more challenging to find a person who practices just one tradition than it is to find a person who follows multiple traditions...so I would think at leas us Portlanders could figure something out. We have a deep well of roll-your-own spirituality here, I would think a UU church would be able to pull them all together.
    ReplyDelete
  19. Oh, and actually, the UUA has only been around since 1961. The Universalits and Unitarians (both strongly Christian) were around since colonial days, but they didn't merge here in America (they're still separate elsewhere) until 1961. And even then, it was later that the secular humanists (first) and Pagans (the final) started joining the party. I'm not sure where Buddhists and such fit in, historically. But yeah, so the draw from other traditions is actually still relatively new, I think.
    ReplyDelete
  20. I hear you, and it makes sense, although I did understand that they were formed around the time of WWI. I checked and found that you are right.

    I still don't understand how the reality fits with the professed mission, though. :)
    ReplyDelete
  21. Boy am I sick of labels in the spiritual marketplace! Let's drop them all! Radical but much needed - might stop the rivalry between religious faiths and groups!
    ReplyDelete
  22. hi Prodigal Prophet. I agree that labels do more harm than good. I doubt the labels are going anywhere soon, but it would be interesting, wouldn't it?
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)