What books would be in a UU canon?

[applewuud]

The Bible is a collection of books written by many different people at many different times. Ecclesiastes is very different from Leviticus; the Book of Revelation is very different from the Gospel of Mark. But what they hold in common is that at some point in history, a group of human beings (the Levites in the case of the Hebrew bible, and a group of Christian bishops at the Council of Nicea in 321? AD in the case of the "New Testament") said: these particular scrolls hold deep truths and should be in the canon; these other scrolls aren't sacred enough to be in the canon. (And then they went out and burned "pagan" libraries and any copies of the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary they could find.)

To UUs, revelation is not sealed. We can follow Paul's instruction: "Whatsover things are true, whatsoever things be of good report, then think on these things." We wouldn't burn any books. Still, some writings must be more valuable than others. When a friend needs comfort or information, you recommend certain books more than others.

My question to UUs in this forum is: what writings (besides the existing holy books of major religions) are "more sacred" to you than others? What authors seem to be more influenced by the Spirit of Life than others? If you had 100 books to put into a UU canon (which would have to be a loose canon, of course), what would they be? We're lucky we're forming our canon after the introduction of the printing press, so we have a lot more paper at our disposal.

It might help to think of the books of the Bible and what the UU equivalent might be. For example:
For Genesis: "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors" by Carl Sagan and Anne Druyan
For Leviticus: the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence
For the Epistles of Paul: the collected works of Emerson; perhaps collected sermons of A. Powell Davies
For the Psalms: poetry by Emily Dickenson and/or Mary Oliver (or perhaps, Singing the Living Tradition)
For Revelations: works by Carl Jung (anyone have a specific book?)
For Isaiah: books on the dysfunctions of the economy, like "Nickeled and Dimed" or "Screwed" by Thom Harttman.

I think we'd also find a special place for Thoreau's Walden, and Unitarian Christianity by William Ellery Channing.

A humanistic psychology book or two would be great in the canon. Carl Rogers' On Becoming a Person is the one most in tune with UU values. So many have been written in the past 50 years, each with great concepts, but no outstanding summation of them all...

This is just a mental exercise, of course, but it could be valuable. :rainbow1:

 

[BrandonE]

We're reading The Road Less Travelled by M. Scott Peck in an adult RE class at my church now. I'd definitely add it to my personal list.

Also, Living Buddha, Living Christ by Thich Nhat Hanh.

 

[Tigress]

I think the noncanonical Gospels, like the Gospel of St. Thomas, would be another great contribution, alongside the works of Emerson, Thoreau, King, etc.

 

[jamaesi]

I'd like to think The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry would be included, just for some lighter reading.

"Here is my secret. It is very simple: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."

 

[James the Persian]

a group of Christian bishops at the Council of Nicea in 321? AD in the case of the "New Testament

Is that question mark because you don't know the date of the Council of Nicea or because you don't know if the canon was decided there? If it was for the former reason (as I suspect), the council was actually held in 325. If it was the latter, then, no the canon was not decided at Nicea. I have absolutely no idea who first started bandying this myth about, but I'd conveniently forget my religion's injunction against murder and throttle the guy if I met him. There actually never was a council at which a canon was definitively decided, and there never even was a single canon that everyone agreed on. Most people agreed to the canon first suggested at the local council (so one which had no authority to set a universal canon)of Carthage some 70 years after Nicea but even then, there were three different NT canons (and even more variety in OT canons) all used simultaneously in the Church. Nowadays, the Ethiopian Church is the only one with a variant NT, but there are still 3 different OT canons in use. At the time of Nicea no council, local or otherwise, had come up with a definitive canon and Nicea did not even consider the issue.

James

 

[lilithu]

Is that question mark because you don't know the date of the Council of Nicea or because you don't know if the canon was decided there?

James, this is the Unitarian Universalist Discuss Individual Religions forum. UU is in the title of the thread.


applewuud, I like your model, taking the functions of the different parts of the bible into account. One of my professors once said that the bible should be read like a newspaper. There's the news, the op-eds, the comics, the style section, etc. And each is to be recognized for what it is and read as such. Otoh, I wouldn't assume that the bible is the best model for a canon. Just because that's the way that it was done in the canon with which we are most familiar doesn't mean that it is what would best suit us now.

Equating Emerson and Davies with Paul. Interesting.

I haven't put nearly as much thought into this as you. I only know that Emerson, and in particular his essay on "The Over-Soul" guides the way I live UU.

I understand why the DoI, BoR and even the Constitution are in there but I'm not keen on including books on dysfunction of the economy unless they come specficially from a religious (not necessariy theistic, but religious) viewpoint. For Isaiah and the prophetic voice, I would put James Luther Adams and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

And somewhere, you have to fit Alfred Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne into this. Where would process theology go? And the Existentialists, where do the existentialists go?

 

[James the Persian]

James, this is the Unitarian Universalist Discuss Individual Religions forum. UU is in the title of the thread.

So? I don't recall there being any rule that I cannot offer a friendly correction to the misrepresentation of a different faith in a DIR forum. Let's just see - no, there isn't one. I did not criticise anything in the main point of the thread, did not argue with you about your faith, did not proselytise. All I did do was offer correction for a factual error on the part of the OP. I couldn't care less where I see it happening, if my faith, not yours, is being obviously misrepresented I will correct it. If I had seen anything other than an honest mistake in the OP I would have reported it, as deliberate misrepresentation of a faith constitutes and attack on it and that is forbidden in DIR forums.

James

 

[Tigress]

One of my professors once said that the bible should be read like a newspaper. There's the news, the op-eds, the comics, the style section, etc. And each is to be recognized for what it is and read as such.

I rather like that analogy, actually. It's very fitting.

 

[des]

>applewuud, I like your model, taking the functions of the different parts of the bible into account. One of my professors once said that the bible should be read like a newspaper. There's the news, the op-eds, the comics, the style section, etc. And each is to be recognized for what it is and read as such. Otoh, I wouldn't assume that the

If that's the case, then I nominate Revelations as the sci-fi/fantasy section.


>Equating Emerson and Davies with Paul. Interesting.

I don't know, I have never really liked Paul. (You know except for a few things here an there).

>religious (not necessariy theistic, but religious) viewpoint. For Isaiah and the prophetic voice, I would put James Luther Adams and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

There are even some minor current prophets. My current prophet nominee is Scott Ritter, who was a weapons inspector in Iraq, and major outspoken critic of the buildup to war.

>Where would process theology go?

*Everyone* wants to know this.

BTW, someone mentioned Living Buddha, Living Christ. I love that book!!

--des

 

[lilithu]

me: Equating Emerson and Davies with Paul. Interesting.

des: I don't know, I have never really liked Paul. (You know except for a few things here an there).

That's why it's interesting.

Seriously, a lot of religious liberals have issues with Paul and I am no exception. But, for one thing, he did write beautifully about love. I can see Emerson there. And, for another thing, I think applewuud may have been focusing on the function of Paul's epistles. Paul gave advice on how a fledgling religion might work amongst themselves and in society. I can see Davies there.

 

[applewuud]

Is that question mark because you don't know the date of the Council of Nicea or because you don't know if the canon was decided there? If it was for the former reason (as I suspect), the council was actually held in 325. If it was the latter, then, no the canon was not decided at Nicea....... At the time of Nicea no council, local or otherwise, had come up with a definitive canon and Nicea did not even consider the issue.

James

Thank you, James, I was writing off the top of my head and knew the date was probably wrong, but I WAS under the incorrect impression that some canon-parsing took place there. It's good to get our facts straight. It was the place where the Nicene Creed was codified, and I assumed that's where they threw out the "noncanonical" texts. That's when the first suppression of the Unitarians (under Origen, I think) happened, so it sticks in my mind.

I welcome this input from you, because many liberals who are "hit over the head with the Bible" aren't familiar with its historical sources, and think it is a monolithic document that all conservative faiths agree on. My latest encounter with that was around Hannukah when I was looking for the story in the Book(s) of Macabees, and realized my Protestant bible doesn't include it.

Thanks for checking in on us...

This input shows how important collective thought is in saying certain texts "deserve to be in the canon". So, let's carry on with forming our "loose canon", having learned that the "orthodox" canon is looser than it seems...

 

[applewuud]

A friend pointed out that our canon needs parables and stories, like Jonah and the Whale, or the Book of Job...she proposed some books by the UU religious educator Sophia Lyon Fahs.

"A Christmas Carol" by Charles Dickens (a late-life Unitarian) deserves a place in our "Old Testament".

If I could put a movie in, I'd put "It's A Wonderful Life" to stand in for the Book of Job, and maybe "What the @#%! Do We Know" as mysticism...

I hear not wanting to put some economic polemic in, but David Korten's "The Great Turning" certainly places him as a prophet in the wilderness, calling society to turn away from the age of exploitation and empire towards earth community. I've heard him speak at GA and on NPR, but haven't finished his book yet.

A friend told me that Carl Jung's autobiography is the most accessible and comprehensive of his works. Anyone know the title?

Others told me that they consider the U.S. Constitution contaminated by patriarchy and classism, but I think in context of a time when the vast majority of humanity was in serfdom or slavery, it is still a watershed document that in its structure led to the elimination of slavery in the U.S. even though it codified and legitimated it at the time.

In any case, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights should definitely be added to the UU canon of sacred works.

 

[lilithu]

A friend pointed out that our canon needs parables and stories, like Jonah and the Whale, or the Book of Job...she proposed some books by the UU religious educator Sophia Lyon Fahs.

The problem here is that we are replacing short stories and parables with entire books - collections of stories. Job and Jonah are both remarkably short "books" with a lot of meaning packed into them.

If I could put a movie in, I'd put "It's A Wonderful Life" to stand in for the Book of Job, and maybe "What the @#%! Do We Know" as mysticism...

You would get a lot of resistance from me. I much prefer the suffering in Job over the sentimentality of "It's a Wonderful Life." And "What the @#%! Do We Know" is not mysticism, imo. It's a reductionist approach trying to explain mysticism.

 

[lilithu]

So? I don't recall there being any rule that I cannot offer a friendly correction to the misrepresentation of a different faith in a DIR forum.

The problem is that "friendly corrections" can easily turn into debates, and you yourself admit that the "myth" is widely believed.

If I had seen anything other than an honest mistake in the OP I would have reported it, as deliberate misrepresentation of a faith constitutes and attack on it and that is forbidden in DIR forums.

You're kidding me. So if a Muslim posting in the Islam DIR said that Christians worship three gods, you as a Christian would report that as an attack??

 

[lilithu]

I'd like to think The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry would be included, just for some lighter reading.

"Here is my secret. It is very simple: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."

Or "The Velveteen Rabbit."


"What is REAL?" asked the Rabbit one day, when they were lying side by side near the nursery fender, before Nana came to tidy the room. "Does it mean having things that buzz inside you and a stick-out handle?"

"Real isn't how you are made," said the Skin Horse. "It's a thing that happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real."

"Does it hurt?" asked the Rabbit.

"Sometimes," said the Skin Horse, for he was always truthful. "When you are Real you don't mind being hurt."

"Does it happen all at once, like being wound up," he asked, "or bit by bit?"

"It doesn't happen all at once," said the Skin Horse. "You become. It takes a long time. That's why it doesn't happen often to people who break easily, or have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don't matter at all, because once you are Real you can't be ugly, except to people who don't understand."

 

[dbakerman76]

I'd have to include Victor Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning" only because it shows how one can find meaning and purpose even in the most adverse situations.

 

[Tigress]

Or "The Velveteen Rabbit."


"What is REAL?" asked the Rabbit one day, when they were lying side by side near the nursery fender, before Nana came to tidy the room. "Does it mean having things that buzz inside you and a stick-out handle?"

"Real isn't how you are made," said the Skin Horse. "It's a thing that happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real."

"Does it hurt?" asked the Rabbit.

"Sometimes," said the Skin Horse, for he was always truthful. "When you are Real you don't mind being hurt."

"Does it happen all at once, like being wound up," he asked, "or bit by bit?"

"It doesn't happen all at once," said the Skin Horse. "You become. It takes a long time. That's why it doesn't happen often to people who break easily, or have sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time you are Real, most of your hair has been loved off, and your eyes drop out and you get loose in the joints and very shabby. But these things don't matter at all, because once you are Real you can't be ugly, except to people who don't understand."

Oh, I love The Velveteen Rabbit! Excellent choice!

 

[KSojourner]

I'd have to include Victor Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning" only because it shows how one can find meaning and purpose even in the most adverse situations.

I would have to agree with dbakerman that this is a book that would need to be added. I liked Frankl's point that the smallest of favors and simplest of pleasures took on a great importance for those forced to live in the camps. It is something that we take for granted.

I would also say that Anger by Thich Nhat Hanh would be a good one to add. TNH talks about how to acknowledge your anger without feeding into it. It also talks about how to express your anger in a constructive way that doesn't harm others emotionally and encourages you to take responsibility for your actions/reactions.

This is becoming more of a "reading list" than just one book. (I love reading lists. Keep those book recommendations coming!)

 

[des]

I would also say that Anger by Thich Nhat Hanh would be a good one to add. TNH talks about how to acknowledge your anger without feeding into it. It also talks about how to express your anger in a constructive way that doesn't harm others emotionally and encourages you to take responsibility for your actions/reactions.

This is becoming more of a "reading list" than just one book. (I love reading lists. Keep those book recommendations coming!)

I also liked "Living Buddha, Living Christ". It ain't your gramma's Christianity that's for sure.

--des

 

[KSojourner]

I also liked "Living Buddha, Living Christ". It ain't your gramma's Christianity that's for sure.

--des

I haven't read that one yet, but it is on my next-to-read list!