So I don’t know anything about Unitarian or Universalist history, and sometimes this makes me feel like I’m a bad Unitarian Universalist. Like I’m not smart enough to be in the smart people’s clique, and forced to sit at the kiddy table when I’m obviously too old for it. Event through the mixed metaphors, I’m sure you get my point.
When did it become practically a requirement to know every UU that’s ever lived, know all the major UU theologians, the countless martyrs who all seemed to be burnt by Calvin according to what I hear in the sermons? Did I miss that part of the joining ceremony? You must take twelve semester hours of UU history with at least a 3.5 before pledging or you don’t get paddled? Man I get tired of lectures that are hot and heavy on the theological history side. That’s all well and good but damn that just doesn’t help me answer life’s questions today. It’s just spectacular that Bubba the Great was burnt alive (by Calvin) to be UU’s thirty-second martyr to honor the one god principle that I doubt many Unitarian Universalists believe nowadays. [I don’t. Believing in one god involves believing in a god, and I haven’t drunk that Kool-Aid yet.] How does that knowledge that Calvin was a dick help me in my spiritual growth?
At the same time, I feel like I should know more UU history than I do. I’ve got no idea how to start that process though. Suggestions?
7 responses so far ↓
Philocrites // April 4, 2006 at 6:20 am |
One relatively painless way to pick up the basics is “A Chosen Faith” by Forrest Church and John Buehrens. It’s not long and it’s not at all academic. (The snobs will find various things to complain about, but it is still a good starting place.) Even shorter is David Bumbaugh’s “Unitarian Universalism: A Narrative History.”
If you’re willing to invest a little more time, the first 200 pages of David Robinson’s “The Unitarians and the Universalists” (available from the library) is a very good history of both denominations and the intellectual movements and main characters in each. (The second half is a biographical dictionary that people use as a reference work.) Most ministers know UU history primarily from this book; if you’ve read it, you know about as much as most of the pros.
stevenR // April 4, 2006 at 6:21 am |
Assuming your last paragraph invaladates the rant, start by reading UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISM; A NARRATIVE HISTORY by David E. Bumbaugh (2000) Meadville Lombard Press. A short book which even covers Servetus – there are several books out on Servetus, if you actaually want to know more about him. A MARTYR SOUL REMEMBERED edited by Clifford M. Reed (2004) ICUU even contains an essay on why Servetus wasnt much of an unitarian, he may have been an Unitarian Universalist (and thus help you in your spirtual growth?)
And of course what doesnt help your spirtual growth, may help others in theirs…. with or without koolaid.
In search of a good, short UU history at Making Chutney // April 4, 2006 at 4:07 pm |
[...] Matt Kinsi has a post up about UUs’ obsession with knowing (and insinuating that all UUs should know) the minutia of our history. [...]
Tom // April 4, 2006 at 11:27 pm |
I took a class for new UU’s at the first UU church I joined and I enjoyed it very much. Besides history, it was good to get a foundation on what the seven principles and interesting to learn about the different religious journeys of the other people in the class. The next batch of New UU classes at UUCA seem to be on Wednesdays in May. I know weeknights are not good for you, but perhaps we could ask to see when they’ll be doing something on, say, Sunday afternoons? I’d take the class with you.
kinsi // April 4, 2006 at 11:29 pm |
We have to take the New UU classes to be a member (aka, been there, done that.) Zero history on UUism was mentioned, although we did have a scavenger hunt that dealth with it, it was homeowrk and we never really went in depth on the story. I think Severtus’s burning, Clara Barton being a UU, etc. was on the sheet, but nothing substantial.
Louis // April 5, 2006 at 1:19 pm |
My position is read about something only if you’re interested in it, not because you are supposed to know it.
On the other hand, I personally find history very interesting and informative. We’re not the first ones to wrestle with the big questions, and people in the past had some very interesting things to say.
I would recommend starting with something that you already are interested in – some writer, thinker, or theologan – and then going deeper in that direction. For me, this person is currently Emerson (www.rwe.org).
Spirituality and Sunflowers // April 20, 2006 at 1:13 am |
[...] So I've been chewing on this one for a couple of weeks. I posted that FlUUnking History post, and my pal Chutney posted an elaboration on his blog, which can be seen here. And its on his point about "our prosetylization of the dead." I absolutely love that wording. In my New UU class, for example, we had a worksheet scavenger hunt on old famous UUs. The whole New UU class was rather pointless, and this just reiterated it. He may wonder why we're obsessed with declaring important dead people to be UUs, and actively pushing the fact, but it seems somewhat clear to me in my relative New-UUness. It seems twofold to me, neither which seem pretty to me. We want to seem more important than we really are, and we are so desperate to communicate with people outside UUism that we want to use a historical figure to explain it. Since we can't quite look to Jesus, Abraham, Mohamed, etc. [...]