Reclaiming Unity's Christian Roots

There has been an ongoing conversation lately (and it's oftentimes been experienced as outright debate) within the Unity movement concerning the extent to which (or whether or not) this denomination is Christian. Myself a ministerial candidate coming from a perspective within Unity, I've witnessed quite a few changes occurring that are affiliated with this issue. In 2009 Unity World Headquarters and Unity Worldwide Ministries launched a branding research study which suggested that in order to appeal to certain sections of the population who share normative Unity values (inclusivity, progressive spirituality, individuality, etc.), the movement would do well to exclude language about "church," "Jesus," "Christ," "Christianity," "Bible," etc. and instead use language such as "spiritual community," "positive path," and other generic terms. Along with this branding element has been name changing - Unity School of Christianity is now Unity World Headquarters and the Association of Unity Churches is now Unity Worldwide Ministries (note the withdrawal of "Christianity" and "Churches" from both titles). Also, over the past few decades there has been an influx of the New Age movement influencing Unity individuals, churches, and publications, which has moved some sectors of Unity away from more obvious Christian language, ideas, and themes.

All of this seems to me and other ministers, leaders, and students I've spoken with to be evidence of Unity moving away from an explicit Christian identity. And yet, within Unity Institute and Seminary's curricula (the seminary that trains Unity ministers), Unity churches/centers/communities, Silent Unity (the 24-hr Unity prayer ministry), and much published material, Unity nonetheless retains some language that is historically and theologically Christian in many ways. The language of "Christ within," "Jesus our way-shower," "Bible our guidebook," etc. is still quite indicative of a Christian-influenced tradition, not to mention the fact that we meet on Sunday mornings, the sermon/talk is the center of the service, and often use an order of service that comes straight out of Christian (esp. Protestant) worship. In addition, Charles and Myrtle Fillmore, the co-founders of Unity, employed quite explicitly Christian language, terminology, and themes, although with rather free and open re-interpretation. All of this is to say that there is some tension, perhaps straight-up controversy, over whether or not Unity is or should be considered Christian or part of Christianity.

Since this topic of religious identity is an important and intriguing one, as well as being one in which I'm deeply invested as a Unity theologian and minister-in-training, I'd like to comment on and speak to this issue. I wish to state up front that I consider myself first and foremost a Christian, albeit a rather theologically liberal, pluralistic, and interfaith-minded Christian. I'm a Christian who is part of the Unity movement as a denominational affiliation and community of spiritual fellowship. As such, I come to this issue with a definite Christian perspective and identity. Thus, a sizable part of me would like to see Unity retain, embrace, and promote the elements of our Christian heritage. On the other hand, another part of me would like Unity to be able to remain a progressive, open-minded, interfaith-oriented inclusive denomination that welcomes people wherever they are on their respective spiritual journeys. Are both possible? If so, what might that look like within the movement theologically and in practice? Could Unity somehow both retain a Christian identity throughout the movement and yet be open, receptive, and inclusive of other religious traditions, spiritual practices, the New Age, new philosophical systems, etc.?

I think this is totally possible and feasible, so I'm going to take the rest of the space here to define what I mean by Christian and Christianity in such a way that is in integrity with the wider Christian tradition and would be acceptable, I think, to a majority of Unity and New Thought people. The rest of the series will entail posts about 1) Jesus and soteriology (the meaning and how of "salvation"), 2) ways forward in God-talk or (in Unity language) metaphysics about God, 3) possible new ways of "doing church" (with cues from the Emerging Church), and 4) the spiritual-transformative benefits of re-claiming certain traditional Christian teachings/doctrines.

So, my understanding of what it means to be Christian is pretty straight-forward and can be applied to individuals and communities of fellowship (churches, centers, organizations, etc.). I'm influenced by a range of liberal Christian theologians like Schleiermacher, Kierkegaard, Tillich, Cobb, and, one of my past teachers at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, Radford-Reuther when I say that being a Christian must involve Jesus somehow. Without the historical and/or literary presence of this person and his impactful spiritual-social influence on people's lives we wouldn't even have Christianity. (Sidenote: I know there are those in historical Jesus research like J.G. Frazer, G.A. Wells, and more recently Robert Price, who deny a real historical Jesus even existed. Though I take the position of most N.T. scholars that there most likely was a "Jesus of history," even if there wasn't I think the narrative-symbolic impact of Jesus' life, teachings, death, and resurrection have been enough to make his presence unique, remarkable, and central to any understanding of what Christianity is.) Therefore, for something to be called "Christian" means that Jesus is not only present but somehow significant.

Jesus has always been a centerpiece in Unity teaching, beginning with Charles Fillmore who made a statement that was, until recently, printed in Unity Magazine: "Unity is a link in the great educational movement inaugurated by Jesus Christ..." He even pulled Unity out of the International New Thought Alliance because he didn't think they were Christian enough - i.e. stressing the Bible, Jesus, and link with Christianity. Jesus has also been a key piece of the writings of other Unity leaders throughout the years, including L. Fillmore, H.E. Cady, J.D. Freeman, E. Butterworth, P.A. Laughlin, and T. Shepherd. Not only have most Unity leaders and writers included and placed importance on Jesus, most have emphasized that, following the Fillmores, Unity is a Christian religious system, albeit interpreted and lived out differently from the mainstream of Christianities. The teachings on God, Jesus, salvation/liberation, in Unity are understood in a different way (we'll get to some of that in later postings).

Ok, here is my definition of Christianity that I think would be palatable for most people both within Unity churches and in more "traditional" Christian churches: To be Christian is to be a follower of Jesus Christ, such that his life (teachings, actions, death, and resurrection) is spiritually guiding, influential, and thus edifying and transformative in the life of individuals or communities. Christian applies to any person or group of people who takes the person of Jesus seriously and who finds spiritual meaning, value, and personal growth from encountering his life.

I offer this to the public for comment, questioning, critique, and augmentation. It can be grasped and applied in different ways, depending on the particular individual and community, but I forward it as an ecumenical understanding of Christian identity. Hopefully, this can start a conversation that continues the dialogue about Unity and Christian identity. Peace.

Multiple Religious Belonging -- Possible?

In our current world of increasing globalization and religious plurality, there has been one particular issue that often goes un/under-treated:  multiple religious belonging. Investigations into people's expressions of what they've learned from other religious traditions and how other religions have influenced their self-understanding as a Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, etc., show that many have described themselves as having been so impacted that they "belong" not only to one tradition but, to some extent, the other tradition as well.

This raises a number of questions: What is meant by "belonging? Is it even possible to truly or honestly claim to be both Christian and Buddhist or some other combination? And how could a situation like this not lead to a kind of misappropriation or misuse of one or more religions or lead to a dispelling of the distinct uniqueness of each tradition? In the face of these issues, I want to suggest a different linguistic universe we might use for conversation. It is possible to genuinely and authentically make these kinds of multi-religious claims while also not denigrating the richness and uniqueness of any particular religion or heritage.

There is a growing amount of literature on this very theme. See Many Mansions: Multiple Religious Belonging and Christian Identity (Wipf & Stock, 2002), which is edited by Catherine Cornille and offers a number of Christian perspectives on the complexities of the problems that come with this topic. Also see the academic articles Peter C. Phan, "Multiple Religious Belonging: Opportunities and Challenges for Theology and Church," Theological Studies (2003), which argues for the possibility for multiple religious belonging through an "inclusive pluralism," and Gideon Goosen, "An Empirical Study of Dual Religious Belonging," Journal for Empirical Theology (2007), which presents a rather convincing case that such a phenomenon does, in fact, exist in the world.

My own understanding has been influenced significantly by German theologian Perry Schmidt-Leukel. His work sets out the possibility of multiple religious belonging grounded in an interpretation of religion and religious experience as fundamentally and primarily (though not exclusively) individual. This means that, while we are definitely social beings, our "religiosity" or "spirituality" is basically a personal, individual issue. Along with this claim, he offers a re-conceptualization of the language used to speak of this issue. Rather than speaking of "multiple religious belonging," which suggests that religions are these static, unchanging institutions to which we adhere and are either "in" or "out," we ought to speak of "multiple religious identity." This conveys a clear concern for the individual's subjective experience and expression of religiosity that is grounded in engagement with the continually developing and dynamically evolving social networks of meaning we call "religions."

With this framework we can speak of one's individual religious identity being composed of religious and spiritual elements encountered from more than one tradition or heritage. I'll use myself as an example. I'm not only a husband to my wife and a father to my son, but also a brother to my sister, a son to my parents, a friend to my friends and a colleague to co-workers. My individual identity is made up of a plurality of relational ingredients. 

This is also the case concerning individual religious identity. My identity is primarily shaped by the Christian tradition, and also more than one denomination within the Christianity, but my identity is also shaped and influenced by my interactions and exchanges with especially Buddhists, Muslims, Jews , New Age practitioners, and Atheists with whom I've come into contact about religious-spiritual truth. I have found religious elements within these traditions that I experience as good, true and beautiful. One is able to integrate and incorporate elements from the religious other into one's individual religious identity so that one might truthfully and authentically speak of having a multiple religious identity as an individual human person.


This multifaceted process is a type of transformation by integration of religious otherness and difference. One's religious worldview is enhanced, expanded and illuminated by these blesssed exchanges during interfaith encounter. such that multiple religious identity is not only possible but actual in the lives of people all over the world.

Beyond the God Gap

A new study by Public Religion Research and Third Way have produced a paper this week entitled "Beyond the God Gap: A New Roadmap for Reaching Religious Americans on Public Policy Issues." It deals with four major Christan religious groupings that dominate U.S. life and how a new but increasing array of diverse progressive religious voices is burgeoning, and how there is a broadening of political agendas among many people of faith.

With this kind of research and the amount of media attention dedicated to this issue, maybe it's time to rethink our assumptions about religious Americans and public policy.

Jim Kessler and Robert P. Jones of the Huffington Post have published a great article that reviews the "Beyond the God Gap" paper and the prominent issues concerning the growing chorus of progressive and liberal religious perspectives in the U.S. and how this affects public policy. Read it here.

Religious Roots of Liberal - Progressive Values

John A Buehrens has just written an excellent op-ed article in the Washington Post concerning the comeback of a recognition of the religious roots of liberal and progressive values.

Check it out and celebrate being simultaneously and inextricably religious and progressive!

Tom Shepherd on Unity and Doctrine

For those interested and aren't aware of Rev. Dr. Tom Shepherd's blog, he has recently written a post about Unity as a way of life rather than a set of prescribed doctrines. I find most everything Dr. Tom writes to be insightful, engaging, and forwarding a lively attitude of progressing Unity principles in new directions while also incorporating important ideas and language from traditional Christianity.

Tom writes about an increasing tendency in Unity to become dogmatic about Unity metaphysical teachings and language, even though we claim to be a movement grounded in openness and inclusivity that isn't bound to any particular set of doctrines or beliefs. This is why he points to Unity being better characterized as more of a way of life or manner of being rather than prescribed beliefs or teachings to follow.

In the end, my thoughts are simply that religion (including Unity) has always been more about experience and doing things founded upon experience rather than believing or adhering to dogma.

Read Dr. Tom's post here.

New Pew Forum Poll on Religious Belief in America

Americans are widely known now for our rather mix-and-match tendencies in religious approach and identity. Many people attend services of other religions than our own and blend Christianity with other religious practices like Buddhist meditation and New Age techniques.

This is no doubt a prominent approach within my denomination, Unity. We have always drawn inspiration and influence from other religious traditions from the very start when Charles and Myrtle Fillmore were reading about Indian religion and taking metaphysical cues from Emerson and other Transcendentalists. While Unity is not New Age, it is New Thought, which is a tradition that feels free to draw on New Age methods and beliefs to forward people on their spiritual journey, while often retaining much language, scripture, and culture from Christianity.

So this new Pew Forum poll is relevant to all Americans, but Unity occupies a unique place in American religious practice since it stands within the predominant Christian tradition yet draws on and incorporates much from other religions that constitute the rich plurality of religion and culture within the U.S.

The Pew Forum poll generally states that although the U.S. is an overwhelmingly Christian country, significant minorities say they hold beliefs of the sort found at Buddhist temples or New Age gatherings. Twenty-four percent of those surveyed overall and 22 percent of Christians say they believe in reincarnation, the idea that people will be reborn in this world again and again. Also, another piece in the poll relates that 1/4 of Americans say they sometimes attend services of a faith different from their own. (I am part of this 25% since, though I'm a progressive Unity Christian, attend Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Christian services often and I participate in Buddhist temple ceremonies and meditation gatherings from time to time as well.)

Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum, says, ''It is as much now the norm as it is the exception for Americans to blend multiple religious beliefs and practices." (Faith in Public Life)

This rather new but increasingly present phenomenon of multiple religious belonging is becoming a permanent and interesting feature of the American religious situation. Within Unity circles, multiple religious belonging is probably more common than in other denominations and is very much welcomed, which can be witnessed in public statements of the Association of Unity Churches and Unity Institute as well as local Unity congregational statements.
This is all a testament to the openness and inclusivity of the Unity movement (regardless of the internal disputes about Unity's "identity") and to the influence of the wonderful religious diversity of our current religious context in the U.S.

Read more about the Pew Forum Poll at Faith in Public Life.

New Study Shows Vitality of Religious Left

A new study from the University of Florida dispels some common fictions about the political power and presence of the religiously liberal and progressive in the U.S.

The study essentially states that, despite the lack of religiously liberal voices portrayed in the media, there is a burgeoning leftist religious population in the U.S. and dispels the known "God gap" theory that white Christians are conservative and most likely to vote Republican. Kenneth Wald of the U of Florida states: "We are able to uncover considerable evidence of a religious left among Christians, and the big news is that it matters electorally...Having a strong communitarian view of faith is associated with voting for Democratic candidates. Because of favorable political circumstances, we're in an age where we're likely to see a flowering of the religious left." (U of Florida press release)

Candace Chellew-Hodge says more at Religion Dispatches.

Airport chapels offer haven to more faiths

It seems that across the U.S. chapels that have been designed to offer passengers refuge and reflection in bustling airports are making changes. They are removing denomination-specific decor, adding special accommodations and hosting services geared to accommodate an increasingly diverse group of travelers flying with faith. While public chapels like those in airports used to be more Christian (and even denomination) oriented, now they are deliberately being made into more inclusive places for rest, contemplation, prayer, etc.

While I'm glad to see more inclusivity and openness being explicitly practiced as an adjustment to the great amount of religious plurality and diversity we have in the U.S., there's a part of me that enjoys the religious specificity of places of worship or prayer. I understand that the airports are attempting to be non-discriminatory and accommodating to the variety of people from many different faiths, it can turn a place of reflection and respite into a watered-down, rather generic, place to be. I think it can take away some of the spiritual uniqueness of a particular chapel if it is stripped of it's original religious affliliation. This is a different story if various religious relics, statues, pictures, and symbols from different traditions are being added to a chapel. This could serve to heighten the religious richness and depth to a sacred space. But I'm more concerned about displacing the "religiosity" and "sacredness" of a chapel by taking away specific religious things so as to make the place less "offensive" to other faiths and more "universal" in nature. But what's the meaning and use of a room that looks and thus feels just like any other room except that it says "chapel" on the doorway?

I know of a certain space at a school that used to be employed specifically for Buddhist meditation and ritual. But recently decisions were made to make this space more accommodating and appealing (non-offensive) for non-Buddhist students and most of the Buddhist paraphanalia were removed, leaving the room looking empty and feeling desolate and spiritually deserted. As a Christian, I would've rather prayed in a room that had Buddhist statues, paintings, and altars than in one that is totally devoid of any religious symbology.

Though this stripping away of religious symbols and texts is not what chapels are said to be doing (rather adding materials from different traditions), it's still an acute tendency in an effort towards openness and inclusivity. Let's celebrate plurality and diversity rather than take away all religious uniqueness and dilute spiritual expression to a "universal religion" or none.

Anyway, the Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story at Faith in Public Life.

Gandhi's Peace Prayers from the World Religions

Unity.org has posted a number of Mohandas K. Gandhi's peace prayers that he had developed according to his universalistic Hindu conviction of the diverse religions being pathways to the same destination.

These peace prayers could be used for interfaith ceremonies, dialogues, and engagements of different stripes. Though I haven't used Gandhi's prayers for the interreligious prayer services I've facilitated with Unity of Pasadena, CA in the past, I do plan to use them for interfaith circumstances in the future.

Read and meditate on Gandhi's peace prayers here.

(Image from www.teachnet.ie)

An Pew Forum Interactive Survey

The Pew Forum has put up an interactive survey about the differences in religious belief and American culture. Check it out at USAToday.com.

Kevin Roose Undercover at Liberty University

Brown University senior Kevin Roose spent a semester at Jerry Falwell-founded Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA, and chronicled his adventures in The Unlikely Disciple: A Sinner's Semester at America's Holiest University.

While most of his fellow students took a semester to study abroad, Roose decided to enter the evangelical fundamentalist stronghold of Liberty and document his experience there. He says didn't really know what to expect but thought maybe he'd encounter people who were staunch, unwaivering demagogues who went about spouting self-righteous dogma. However, after living with the students, eating in the lunch rooms, conversing on campus, studying in classes, and even going on a couple dates Roose confesses that they weren't at all like he thought. He says they are "normal people" who have the same kinds of concerns as the rest of us and are even quite reflective about their beliefs and practices.

Though he had to sign the university's 46-page code of conduct, which includes no drinking, cursing, or hugging for longer than 3 seconds, and admits that some parts of their lifestyle were challenging for him being raised a secular-liberal, he relates that he learned a lot and that he grew significantly as a person due to his encounter with people at Liberty.

Roose's story is an instructive lesson in what it means to really engage with the "other." Some of us who are rather progressive in our outlook sometimes criticize fundamentalism as not being open enough to other perspectives. However, even though many of us claim to maintain an an acceptive worldview, we must always be careful not to become intolerant and derisive of fundamentalists by failing to attempt to better understand and learn from their viewpoints. To be truly open and receptive we must not exclude conservative-minded people from our consideration. This doesn't, of course, means total agreement, but it does involve striving to imagine where they're coming from and seeing their perspective as having inherent value and importance.

Roose serves as a prime example of engaging with those who are different than yourself (in this case, evangelical fundamentalists) and how that can lead to surprising personal growth and development, which is integral to building a better, more peaceful world situation.

Read interviews of Roose by Newsweek and the RNS.

Newly elected Bishop also Embraces Buddhism

"Episcopal bishop-elect of Northern Michigan, who's come under fire from conservatives for his simultaneous embrace of Zen Buddhism." This speaks to the increasingly common modern/postmodern phenomenon of multiple religious identities and its controversial status among a certain sector of our population. Daniel Burke of the RNS has the story.