TRUTH IS ONE: THE WISE CALL IT BY MANY NAMES
Tom Owen-Towle
February 18, 2007
Starting today, for four straight weeks I will focus upon world religions. I can’t explore every worthy faith tradition, but I will address next week, Judaism, then Christianity, finally Buddhism. This series will hopefully demonstrate our unswerving commitment to religious pluralism as Unitarian Universalists. Keep bringing your friends, because I think it will reveal, most clearly, our way of doing religion!
In the middle of the 19th century, Unitarian Ralph Waldo Emerson and others began to reach out to Eastern traditions to articulate the concept of a universal religion. As the idea of “the free and responsible search for truth” became more central to Unitarianism and Universalism, our interest in religions of the East grew even more pronounced. Indeed, we were the first American faith to expand our horizons beyond the Jewish and Christian heritages, to draw from every living source, the world over.
Unitarians and Universalists were also instrumental in establishing the 1893 World Parliament of Religions’ gathering in Chicago where an estimated 150,000 individuals attended its various sessions. Although the conference was dominatd by Christian assumptions of superiority, we were among the leaders in encouraging diverse religions to sit down and truly learn from one another. For many, because of this first genuine attempt to embody religious pluralism, the Parliament was considered “a high-water-mark of human civilization.”
Seven years later, in 1900, we were prominently involved in founding what is now called the International Association for Religious Freedom, an organization headquartered in Frankfurt, Germany. Congresses of IARF are held throughout the globe every three years. IARF has been an effort at interfaith connectedness not conformity, unity not merger. For Unitarian Universalists believed then, as we do now, that no two centuries, no two communities, indeed, no two persons, will ever be religious in quite the same way.
There exist four basic responses to the faith traditions of other people. And, frankly, these four attitudes are relevant as well when responding to different political postures or ethical perspectives of other human beings, both here in America and abroad. A handy guide, if you will.
First, there’s outright hostility, an exclusionary position that has sadly dominated the practice of various religions throughout the course of human history. Such is the view of fanatics who declare their truth to be absolute, the one and only. Alas, the world is populated with countless such fundamentalists. Frankly, I’ve come to think that there probably exists no more pernicious and devastating human posture than that of fundamentalism: politically as well as religiously!
A second option practiced by missionaries is known as the doctrine of fulfillment. According to this theory, one religion becomes the culmination of all the others. This approach may be subtler and less noxious than the first position, but its goal is essentially the same: conversion.
The advocates of universal religion offer us yet a third option, one that’s been somewhat popular during the course of both Unitarian and Universalist histories. The task of universal religion is to peel off the unessential and divisive encrustations and to lay bare those basic truths on which women and men can build the “one world faith” we so desperately desire. Unfortunately, a universal religion usually becomes little more than an absolutizing of our own particular beliefs, taking those “essences” we favor and making them normative for all others. Again, such syncretism can end up being a disguised form of spiritual imperialism
The fourth option is the way of dialogue–a path that doesn’t expect us to surrender the uniqueness of our own faith. It requires no one to be less Christian, less Hindu, less Muslim or less Unitarian Universalist than we choose to be, but it challenges us, you see, to probe and revise our own affirmations in the light of other religious perspectives. For, remember, the litmus test in true interfaith dialogue is for each religious group to honestly critique its own tradition rather than find flaws in each other’s.
The way of dialogue, actually, is our quintessential manner in every thing we do as Unitarian Universalists. Dialogue among the generations, dialogue between partners, dialogue across racial gulfs, dialogue among persons of variant sexual orientations, dialogue among distinct religions. Dialogue always enables us to build bridges rather than walls!
Now, for me, the way to start and sustain beneficial dialogue is to ask of each faith a key question: “What to you is sacred?” All religions of the world will locate or describe their answers to that question mainly in one of three places. Primal religions will do so in the world of nature, Asian faiths in the world of consciousness, and the Hebraic traditions focus upon history and covenant. Of course, each religion is broad enough to speak to all three realms, yet different faiths have special ways of accessing these distinct realms. I say, we say: How magnificent it is that we dwell in a universe where women and men have located the sacred in such wondrous and diverse ways. We say: How blessed it is that we humans aren’t carbon copies of one another!
In sum, we Unitarian Universalists contend that inter-religious dialogue isn’t simply a good idea but essential to the realization of peace and survival in our world. Indeed, as theologian Hans Kung remarked, “There will be no peace in the world until there is peace among religions.” The protracted religious strife in the Middle East, in Ireland, and elsewhere furnishes ample evidence of this truth, doesn’t it?
Here in San Diego, during my nearly 30 years of combined ministries, there’s been but a flicker of interest shown in building true interfaith dialogue. The main, living room conversations are invariably held between Christians and Jews while others like the Bahais, the Muslims, the Buddhists, and yes, the Unitarian Universalists are usually relegated to the waiting chambers.
Blessedly, in very recent times, around peace concerns in Iraq, an authentic dialogue has been launching–one where there’s deep, attentive listening rather than constant chatter, humility not certitude, solidarity not lone rangerism. But we have miles to go in interfaith dialogue, before we can sleep. And the challenges in East County for our Summit congregation will be difficult but not impossible, if we reach out in dialogue and try to cultivate mutual esteem and understanding.
Raimundo Panikkar, a priest and mystic whose father was Hindu and whose mother was Spanish Roman Catholic, used to warn folks that most conversations between religious persons quickly go astray because participants begin advocating, comparing and defending…acting like hardened diplomats negotiating a self-serving treaty.
So, what Panikkar yearned for was more respect, for silence, for shared awe and openheartedness–where we wait and receive more than posture or pontificate. Remember that when Michelangelo did the Sistine Chapel, he painted both the major and the minor prophets from the Jewish heritage. And you know how you could tell them apart? Though there are cherubim at the ears of all, only the major prophets are listening!
In 1985 we evolved, then amended in 1994, our current UU principles which state that our living tradition draws from many sources. And you’ll be happy to know that as an evolving faith, we’re currently reviewing our entire statement of faith for potential changes. And you’ll have ample chances to share your viewpoints along the way, the process concluding in 2009 and 2010 with back-to-back votes at Unitarian Universalist General Assemblies.
I’m profoundly moved by and proud of the fact that Unitarian Universalism draws not from one or two religious traditions, but from an ever-growing, indeed illimitable, reservoir of sources. We draw from the mystical and rational traditions, from historical and nature-based religions, indeed from the treasuretrove of spiritual insights located in every corner of the cosmos. I don’t know, frankly, of any extant religion, West or East, big or small, that honors such breadth of spiritual insight. Such an inclusive grasp is precisely why I’m a Unitarian Universalist and precisely the kind of attitude we hope to engender among the little ones who belong to our Cottonwood clan. The way of dialogue and the way of ever-growing up and on religiously!
I hope someday in Summit’s future that you’ll consider fashioning a cluster of banners which visually demonstrates that we draw from all the world’s religions and more. I ask you: wouldn’t the world be in far better shape, if human beings grew up not subscribing to one faith dogmatically bur rather remaining in sincere dialogue with others, trusting that out of that dialogue would emerge a more compassionate way of treating one another as well as the earth?
Naturally, along the way of dialogue, there will be humorous, harmless mix-ups. Here are a few goofs that a teacher of college-level religion collected from exams and term-papers. “Among the eastern religions we studied were Confusionism and Harry Krishna. Some people think that Harry Krishna is a dangerous colt.” Or “the basic beliefs or tenants of a religion are what members of a religious conjugation think about when they come together to prey.” Or “the ancient Isrealights were warned by their profits that if they continued in their sinful ways, the raft of God would fall upon them.” Laughing about serious things like religion keeps things in perspective and checks us from ever becoming arrogant or grim crusaders.
The fact is that diversity is the reality of our contemporary world. And attempting to establish a monolithic world culture or a dominant world religion is not only inhumane but also doomed to failure. Religious pluralism is simply the best way to create and sustain the kind of universe that remains hospitable to the foreigner and compassionate to all living things.
But lest we wax naively about religious pluralism, there exist two major dangers in our Unitarian Universalist commitment to religious pluralism that need to be addressed. Neither is fatal if faced. First, there’s the danger of relativism. Being open of mind, we have to guard against becoming empty of mind. Relativism strikes whenever we claim that since there’s some truth in every corner of the globe, we don’t have to commit to anything in particular.
As Unitarian Universalist sympathizer Diana Eck puts it: “While we can recognize both the truth of other glimpses of the Divine and the power of other communities of faith, we cannot seriously commit to multiple centers, as much as we may appreciate them.” Unfortunately, the relativist often remains uncommitted, a perpetual shopper or seeker, ultimately suffering from spiritual apathy. I say: let’s live well with what we find, even as we keep an open mind. Stake yourself but keep growing!
Indeed, relativism is a problem in every phase of life: whether we keep floating from job to job, from romance to romance, or from parish to parish. We need to remember that robust religion has to do primarily not with philosophical convictions but with personal commitments. Religion has everything to do with giving of our time, our resources, our talents to a specific tribe in concrete ways. Lest we fall prey to relativism, we must commit ourselves, ground ourselves in a community, and give our loyalty and resources to it. For me and for most of you, that community, for better, for worse, perhaps forever is Unitarian Universalism as embodied here at Summit: this imperfectly healthy outpost of freethinking mystics with hands.
The second potential hazard of religious pluralism is our susceptibility, however well intentioned, to trivializing, even exploiting, other faiths. Consequently, when we utilize the symbols and rituals of different traditions, we must do so with sensitive reflection and deep reverence. Neither duplicating nor prostituting the original sources, be it a Christmas pageant or a Yom Kippur service, the Medicine Wheel or the Tea ceremony of Buddha’s birthday.
Indeed, some Native Americans, keenly aware of the destruction of their cultures by outsiders, resent “wanna-be-Indians” who, intentionally or unintentionally, profane their sacred traditions. Again, we pluralists are neither perfect nor pure as we integrate the resources of co-religionists in our own rituals and activities; but we can and must be reflective and respectful. We must bow in reverence before we borrow religious relics or customs from anyone.
However, lest we come down too hard on ourselves as religious pluralists, it’s important to remember that appropriation has gone on from the onset of history. The Jews adapted and reacted to Canaanite practices, and Christians consciously adopted material from the Jews, Greeks, Romans, Egyptians and Mithraists. So, I remain a Unitarian Universalist, who unashamedly and variously describes himself as a mystical humanist or naturalistic theist, as one who pays homage to wisdom from Jewish and Christian teachings, as one who draws deep sustenance from Asian lore and earth-based practices, and as one who is bathed in an existential temper of deep delight and angst, especially when waking up in the middle of the night. And that brief paragraph barely begins to describe my ever-evolving religious perspective.
I want to close with an Eastern story quite familiar to our Western awareness: the ancient Hindu saga of the blind persons and the elephant. One woman felt the elephant’s tail and said, “This is a rope.” A man felt its head and said, “this is a battering ram.” Another man felt the ear and said, “This is a large fan.” A second woman felt one of the elephant’s tusks and said, “This is a beautiful marble arm-rest.” Still another felt one of the legs and offered: “This is a tree trunk.”
Now each of the five women and men had a genuine encounter with a large reality, but the limitations of their experiences due both to their blindness and because of the limits of what each touched, left them confused about what the reality was as a whole.
Well, that’s the way it goes folks; that’s the way it is. No matter how spiritually astute any of us may seem, we’re all limited, like blind persons touching an elephant. Our perspectives are governed by who we are, by our backgrounds and biases, by where we’re standing and even by what our current emotions and thoughts are. None of us will ever possess the total picture of reality. As the passage from the Hindu scriptures reminds us: “Truth is one; yet the wise call it by many names.”
That evocative reminder is taped to my computer at home as a spiritual guideline for my journey, “Yes, truth is one, and the wise call it by many names.” And we Unitarian Universalists simply revel in using as many of those names as possible during this single glorious sojourn on earth!
Tom Owen-Towle
February 18, 2007
