Unitarianism versus Unitarian Universalism

[Gaura Priya]

I noticed that my church prefers to call themselves Unitarians since historically that is the church name. However, the church in the next city has no problem utilising 'Unitarian Universalist' in calling themselves. So what? So confusing!


As a Canadian, I feel that although yes, we are the spiritual inheritors of 'Unitarianism' I still feel that such a term holds on to our liberal Christian past: Unitarian Universalism seems more true to our philosophy and who we are as a religion.

However, I have heard that the term 'Unitarian' is used everywhere else in the English world; only in the United States of America, do they use Unitarian Universalism since there were many Universalists there.

Is there really any difference in using 'Unitarian' as opposed to 'Unitarian Universalist'?

Allah'u'Abha! :namaste

 

[Gaura Priya]

I know one joke to appease those who self-identify as Unitarians, or Universalists, or Unitarian Universalists, is to say U*U, or Unitarian*Universalist.

 

[doppelganger]

I thought that Unitarian Universalism gets its name from the merger of two rather open-minded and progressive traditions that decided they had enough in common to join up - the American Unitarians and the Universalist Church of America. Hence "Unitarian Universalism". Since "Unitarian" is the first word, it seems to get used as a short form for the religion, as in the "Canadian Unitarian Council," the governing body for Unitarian Universalism in Canada.

 

[Gaura Priya]

I thought that Unitarian Universalism gets its name from the merger of two rather open-minded and progressive traditions that decided they had enough in common to join up - the American Unitarians and the Universalist Church of America. Hence "Unitarian Universalism". Since "Unitarian" is the first word, it seems to get used as a short form for the religion, as in the "Canadian Unitarian Council," the governing body for Unitarian Universalism in Canada.

Yes... however, at least in Canada, two factors are here, a) there were not many Universalist congregations, if at all, in Canada during the merger in the United States, and b) many churches still adhere to the old identity or the old name 'Unitarian.'

This is the case with my particular congregation... and it does drive me a bit wild, lol.


Allah'u'Abha! :bahai:

 

[bicker]

I noticed that my church prefers to call themselves Unitarians since historically that is the church name. However, the church in the next city has no problem utilising 'Unitarian Universalist' in calling themselves.

I suspect there is either nothing going on, or something, but either way, not anything necessarily worthy of note. Most likely, one community is simply more casual than the other. Another possibility is that one church still sees themselves tied mostly to the Universalist tradition, and therefore doesn't engage in the relatively common practice of abbreviating "Unitarian Universalist" as just "Unitarian". Around here, you're more likely to hear us refer to ourselves as UUs (literally), but that carries with it an expectation that others will know what that abbreviation means - a better bet here in the Boston area than in many other places.

So what? So confusing!

Folks should always feel free to ask. We UU's have been challenged, on numerous occasions, to have our Elevator Speech ready, and practicing on each other is a great way of ensuring that we've got it tight and ready when it counts.

As a Canadian, I feel that although yes, we are the spiritual inheritors of 'Unitarianism' I still feel that such a term holds on to our liberal Christian past: Unitarian Universalism seems more true to our philosophy and who we are as a religion.

I'm not sure, though, that I understand why you so specifically see yourself as not a "spiritual inheritor" of Universalism. As I understand it, the CUC separated off from the UUA after Unitarians and Universalists came together in 1961.

However, I have heard that the term 'Unitarian' is used everywhere else in the English world; only in the United States of America, do they use Unitarian Universalism since there were many Universalists there.

Universalism, though, traces its spiritual roots back to the 3rd century. (Unitarianism, perhaps, could trace itself back to the First Council of Nicaea, a century later, though it could be argued that Unitarianism, itself, is really just "post-Judaism", and therefore clearly older.) However, your point is well-taken. Modern Universalism can be thought-of as an American invention, while modern Unitarianism clearly had European roots, i.e., Michael Servetus.

 

[JonathanCid]

With all due respect, I think maybe there's much ado about nothing here. What do the words matter so long as we know what we all stand for?

 

[Gaura Priya]

With all due respect, I think maybe there's much ado about nothing here. What do the words matter so long as we know what we all stand for?

Well, I agree with you... but some members of my community are touchy about being called a 'Unitarian Universalist' church and prefer to be called 'Unitarian'.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Here's a passage from the book 'The Elements of Unitarianism' by George Chryssides:

"It is perhaps worth mentioning that, although Canadian Unitarians and Universalists were involved in the 1961 merger, Canadians simply refer to themselves as Unitarian rather than UU. (Canadian Unitarians have a separate distinctive identity in the Canadian Unitarian Council [CUC].) There were considerably fewer Universalist churches in Canada before the merger, and all agreed to assume a less cumbersome title, even though this meant dropping the word 'Universalist.' In Britain, no question of any such merger ever arose. Although many mainstream Christians have in fact moved towards a universalist theological position, the last British Universalist churches died out in the early part of the 20th century."

 

[applewuud]

As a Canadian, I feel that although yes, we are the spiritual inheritors of 'Unitarianism' I still feel that such a term holds on to our liberal Christian past: Unitarian Universalism seems more true to our philosophy and who we are as a religion.

Specifically on this point: most of the historically Universalist congregations had more "Christian" trappings than the Unitarian ones: crosses on altars, stained glass in churches, etc.

Both of these names we "glued together" refer to theological controversies that don't really occupy much of our attention these days...I don't have problems with trinitarian symbology, I see the trinity in much the same way Baha'is have many names for different attributes of a single God.

The problem in our society is that "Unitarian Universalism" just isn't a very good, snappy name. We'll have to wait for some kind of breakthrough for us to evolve to a new one...I said my piece at the end of this old thread:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/unitarian-universalism-dir/82936-new-name-uu-2.html