We compare conservative Christianity and the UU movement below:
Beliefs of Conservative Christians In common with most other religions,
Evangelical faith groups expect their members to adhere to a list of beliefs concerning
the nature of God, of mankind, and of the rest of the universe. This usually includes the
following theological beliefs, derived largely from the literal interpretation
of biblical passages:
The original authors' writings in the Bible, were inerrant (without
Atonement: that through Jesus' death, the relationship between God and a
Resurrection: that after Jesus Christ's death and burial, he arose
Second coming: that Jesus' return to earth is imminent.
Incarnation: that God appeared on earth in human form as Jesus Christ.
Justification: an act of God in which any person who accepts that he/she
has sinned and
who believes that Jesus is their personal Lord and savior is forgiven of his/her sins and brought into a close
relationship with God.
Regeneration of the spirit: that a new believer undergoes a spiritual rebirth.
Inspiration: that the authors of the Bible were inspired
by the Holy Spirit.
The Trinity: the belief God is a single entity consisting of three
persons: the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Satan is a created being. He was once an angel but is now
an all-evil tormentor of humanity.
Salvation is attained by repentance of past sins, and trusting Jesus
Christ as Lord and Savior.
Heaven and Hell exist as places of eternal reward and
punishment after death.
Beliefs of Unitarian Universalists: Many people think that UUs
are required to believe that God is a unity and to reject the concept of the Trinity. This
is not true. Members are not required to hold any specific belief concerning God, Jesus,
heaven, hell, etc. As a result, UUs hold diverse beliefs about deity. Within a
single congregation, there will be some individuals who are unsure of the
existence of god(s) and goddess(es). Others believe in no deity, a single deity
or many deities. They hold various views on life after death, including complete annihilation of the
person, some form of afterlife removed from earth, or reincarnation. They are free to
have beliefs that parallel those of conservative Christians; but few do so. Approximately
10% of UUs
consider themselves to be Christians. These people typically share many beliefs about Jesus with
members of liberal Christian denominations.
Practices of Conservative Christians A main responsibility of all
members is to follow the "Great Commission" and attempt to win as many souls to Jesus Christ as possible.
Many are heavily motivated to do this, because they believe that anyone who does not repent of their sins and trust Jesus Christ as their
personal Lord and Savior will remain
lost for all eternity in the torture chambers of Hell,
and never attain heaven. Some faith groups
teach that men and women must function within specific roles in the family and
in church. Generally, women are restricted from exercising power and authority.
Some faith groups actively promote laws or practices that discriminate against
persons with a minority sexual orientation or gender identity, against same-sex committed couples, etc., and which limit people's choice in
abortion, euthanasia, etc. Some
believe that all non-Christian faith groups worship demons, and that their organizations are
either influenced by Satan or actually led by Satan. They tend to be politically conservative. They are
urged to avoid being "unequally yoked," by being married to
spouses who are not fellow conservative Christians.
Practices of Unitarian Universalists: UUs do little proselytizing.
They generally make few attempts to convert others to their religion. They believe that other
religions have value; they cherish religious diversity and freedom. UUs are generally
motivated by the principle of "liberty and justice for all" and believe
in the inherent dignity of each human, regardless of race, color, gender, sexual
orientation, gender identity, age, religion, nationality, degree of ability, etc. Starting in the
1950s, UUs were influential beyond what their numbers would suggest, in the battles to end
racial segregation. They have been actively involved in programs to promote equal rights for
women, as well as gays, lesbians and other oppressed minorities. They value their local congregation
as a place where they can help each other in their individual quests for spiritual
knowledge. They have a larger percentage of women clergy than any other religion (other
than Neopaganism). They were the first large faith group to have an office to promote equal
rights for gays and lesbians, including the right to marry. Most of their congregations
have solemnized unions of gays and lesbians. They tend to be politically liberal. Many
couples who were raised in different religions find that membership in a UU congregation
is an excellent environment in which they can share spiritual and religious experiences, while
maintaining their individual beliefs.
2001: USA: New president: On 2001-JUN-23, Unitarian Universalists
installed the Rev. William G. Sinkford, as president. According to the UUA
In his benediction as President, Sinkford said, in part: "We have gathered
here in Cleveland once again. We have gathered here in mystery, with the spirit
of life moving within us and through us and among us. We have gathered here to
listen for the still small voice of our calling, waiting to be heard. Gathered
here in struggle, and in the transformative power of religious community.
Gathered here to hear our history once again, and to know again the great hope
that this liberal faith we love offers us and our hurting world. … Let us leave
committed to respond to Your calling, to heal and not to harm, to help, and not
to hinder, to bless, and not to curse. Let us leave here committed to respond to
Your calling, and answer as the prophet did, here we are Lord. Send us."
President Sinkford is the first African American to lead the UUA or any
historically white denomination.
2002: USA: Renewal group: In a break with UU tradition, a small group of two dozen Unitarian
Universalists met in Virginia on 2001-APR-22, to discuss the founding of a new
Unitarian denomination. Their goal is to create a renewal organization for those
Unitarian Universalists who regard themselves as theists. They appear to have
much less concern with social justice issues than does the general UUA
membership. David Burton, attorney, Deist, and a
co-founder of the new group is quoted as saying: "The Unitarian
tradition...draws inspiration and sustenance from the divine. But Unitarian
Universalism as it's practiced today is almost devoid of religious
content." He then made a statement that is most unusual for a Unitarian:
"Atheists and theists can't be in the same religion." He
added that most attendees at the Virginia meeting were Unitarian Christians. He
said: "Jesus is central to their religion. In most UU congregations, if
you got up and started talking about Jesus, you'd be run out on a rail...The UUA
is extremely intolerant." [Author's note: This
comment sounds strange. I have been a UU for almost five decades. From my
experience, the UUA is among the most tolerant of religious groups towards the
beliefs of others. When they are intolerant, it tends to be directed to
actions -- not beliefs -- of others which harm people.]
The renewal group
unfortunately chose "American Unitarian Association" (AUA) to
be their group's name. The AUA was the name of the original Unitarian group from
1825 to 1961. At that time, it consolidated with the Universalist Church of
America to form the UUA. "...the Unitarian Universalist Association
was legally designated as the continuation of both organizations. The UUA
continues to receive trust income and bequests under the names of its
predecessor organizations. It uses both names in literature, at headquarters,
and on its own website." The UUA filed a
lawsuit in order to continue exclusive use of its name. The matter was settled
out of court on 2001-SEP-19. The reform group will be known as the American
Unitarian Conference. 1,2
The Christian Century magazine reported:
"Leaders of the AUA concluded that fighting a lawsuit would be too
expensive for their small, Virginia-based group and agreed to rename
themselves the American Unitarian Conference, but they have not dropped
their campaign. 'Our goal is to promote traditional Unitarianism,' said
David Burton, president of the group. 'That tradition holds that faith
in God, freedom, reason and tolerance should be central to the religious
"William G. Sinkford, the new president of the Boston-based church,
was pleased. 'It was never our intention to oppose the right of the
American Unitarian Conference group to exist, only to protect ... our
name,' he said." 3
2003: Canada: Canadian UUs: The UUA had always operated as a combined
American and Canadian organization. When the UUA was formed in 1961, so
was the Canadian Unitarian Council. The CUC remained, at first, "a
filing box in the bedroom of the secretary." Now it has grown to the
point where there is "a need to develop their own destiny and
to...[give] voice to their own religious community rather than having it
lost in the overwhelming presence of the American one." Rev. Kiely, a
UU minister from Edmonton, AB, was asked what he hoped for the CUC within
Canadian culture. He replied: "This is a Canadian body. Both the
Lutherans and the Bah'ai experienced significant growth after separating.
We hope this will happen to us, too." Canadian UU membership had
stagnated for the previous three decades at about 5,000. See:
2004: MA: Same-sex marriage: Same-sex marriage
became legal in Massachusetts on 2004-MAY-20. Unitarian Universalist
churches in the state took a major role in solemnizing same-sex
marriages, and celebrating the availability of marriage to same-sex
2004: TX: Unitarian Congregation denied tax exempt status:
Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has denied tax exempt status
to a Unitarian Universalist congregation in Denison, TX. The
Star-Telegram of Dallas states that the "...church
isn't really a religious organization -- at least for tax purposes. Its
reasoning: the organization 'does not have one system of belief'."
Jesse Ancira, the comptroller's chief lawyer, said that the government has
applied a consistent standard. For any organization to qualify as a
religion, members must have "simply a belief in God, or gods, or a
higher power. We have got to apply a test, and use some objective
standards. We're not using the test to deny the exemptions for a
particular group because we like them or don't like them."
Apparently, another reason for denying tax exempt status is the lack of
meetings open to the public. The Comptroller denied certification for a
New Age group and a Wiccan group because their
services were closed to the public. It appears that the government is
refusing to recognize religious groups which differ from the traditional
pattern. They must have a single system of belief; they must teach that
one or more deities exist; they must hold public services. Thus, Pagan,
Atheist, Agnostic, Ethical Culture, Buddhist, Mormon, Unitarian
Universalist, and similar organizations may not considered religious
groups by the state.
Church officials believe that this is the first case in the U.S. where a
Unitarian Universalist church has been denied tax exempt status because
of its religious philosophy. Dan Althoff, church board president said: "I
was surprised -- surprised and shocked -- because the Unitarian church
in the United States has a very long history." He noted that
father-and-son presidents John Adams and John Quincy Adams were both
Unitarians. So was Thomas Jefferson. Other Unitarian Universalist
congregations in the state were concerned that their tax exempt status
might be revoked at any time. 4
The Comptroller's decision triggered an outpouring of protest
from Unitarian Universalists and civil libertarians. It was overturned
2004: Two UU ministers cleared of
criminal charges for marrying couples: On 2004-MAR-6, two Unitarian
Universalist ministers in their 60s, Kay Greenleaf and Dawn Sangrey,
married thirteen same-sex couples in New
Paltz, NY. The town is located about 75 miles north of New York City.
They were charged with solemnizing marriages in which the couples did
not have a valid license. If found guilty, the clergy could have be
fined up to $500 and/or sentenced to one year in jail. On 2004-JUN-13,
Town Justice Judith Reichler dismissed all charges against the
ministers. She declared that the state had displayed an anti-gay bias.
She wrote in her decision: "There can be no constitutional rationale
for denying same-sex couples the right to receive the benefits that are
so lavishly bestowed on mixed-sex couples."
She called the
Federal Marriage Amendment which was intended to ban same-sex
marriage "shameful and alarming." (The
FMA was defeated multiple times in Congress). The state based its case
for restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples on tradition and
procreation. The Town Justice demolished the former by ruling that: "Tradition
does not justify unconstitutional treatment. Slavery was also a
traditional institution." She also noted that since infertile and
elderly couples are allowed to marry, that procreation is an invalid
ground to stop same-sex marriages.