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.

A New Article I Wrote Published in SIS Journal

A recent article I've written has just been published in the peer-reviewed journal Studies in Spirituality, which approaches the subject of religious spirituality from a scholarly-academic perspective. My article is an outline and critical comparison of the Buddhist "perfection of wisdom" in The Perfection of Wisdom in 8000 Lines and the Christian "righteoused by faith" in Paul's letter to the Romans - both as paradigms of ultimate transformation.

To view abstracts and ordering information, visit here.

Dialogue on Oneness with Fellow Unity Colleague Ogun Holder

Ogun Holder and I have been exchanging ideas in a dialogue concerning the nature of Oneness. Check out the posts on his blogsite Living in the Question.