Strained Bedfellows: Pagans, New Agers, and "Starchy Humanists" in Unitarian Universalism*

Sociology of Reli~on 1995, 56:4 379-396

Strained Bedfellows: Pagans, New Agers, and "Starchy Humanists" in Unitarian Universalism*

Richard Wayne LeeŸ

Universiry of Alabama in Huntsville

Despite the considerable resistance of its largely humanist membership, Unitarian Universalism in recent years assimilatedsudanew religiousmovements as neopaganismand new age. In accounting for this apparently unlikely development, I examine the historic.ddevelopment of Unitarian Univer- salism, its integration of new reli~ous movements, and the intemal confl/ct th/s provoked. I/denfify three factors that, in combination, make sociological sense of the significant impact on Unitarian Universalism of these movements.

Sociological study of American new religious movements (NRMs) has pro- duced a mass of research and theory on such issues as the social causes of their apparent proliferation since the 1960s, processes of conversion and commitment, and organizational dynamics. This article addresses a significantly less researched issue with respect to NRMs: their impact on long-standing religious bodies. Specifically, it analyzes the influence of recent NRMs on Unitarian Univer- salism (UU).

Known for decades asa "haven of starchy humanists" (Winston 1991), UU has in recent years assimilated a set of new cult movements. These include, most visibly, American Zen, new age, Native-American spirituality, and neopaganism (the latter subsuming goddess spirituality and witchcraft). This analysis of UU's remarkable turn toward "spirituality" is based mainly on secondary data gathered by the author during and aftera two-year study of a UU church in Atlanta, Georgia (1990-92).1

Unitarianism and Universalism (merged in 1961) arose in the early 19th century as denominations of Protestant Christianity. As fully discussed elsewhere

* Thanks ate due to Frank]. Lechner,Naney T. Ammerman, Steven M. Tipmn, Gary Alan Fine, RichardB. Rubinson, and R. Stel/aenWarner.

"1"DirectaUcorrespondencetoRichardWa3meLee,Univers~ ofAlabamainHumsvil~.

1 With approximately 900 members, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Atlanta (UUCA) is the largest UU congregation in the Southeast. Considered a beUwether in the North-American association of UU churches, it afforded favorable opportunities for close observation of continent wide trends ofchange.

379

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

380      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

(Lee 1995), both acquired salient cult characteristics (enumerated below) well before merger. UU retains important denominational features, however: (1) It is in a "positive relationship with society and accepts the legitimacy claims of other religious collectivities" (McGuire 1992:140), (2) The Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) manifests organizational structures common to American denominations (i.e., central and regional offices with full-time staff, regulation of clerical ordination, an exchange of dues and services between member churches and itself, etc.), and (3) UUs genemlly deem themselves members of a denomina- tion. On the other hand, UU resembles a cult in the crucial dimensions of belief and belonging.

In addition to prompting interest in the topics mentioned above, recent NRMs stimulated an active but still inconclusive effort by sociologists of religion to define "cult" in an analytically rigorous way, and particularly to clarify how it differs from "sect.''2 While scholars debated alternative conceptions of both, sensationalized media accounts applied the cult label to groups as sociologically disparate as "moonies" and neopagans. In popular usage, the term now suggests a deviant religious group composed of highly committed but troubled and/or brainwashed members under the powerful (even malign) control of a charismatic leader. An adequately sociological distinction between cult and sect is crucial to analyzing the influence of recent NRMs on UU. The definitions offered here synthesize elements frequently specified in social-scientific analyses of cults and sects.

The cult is a group composed of radically individualistic religious seekers. Consequently, it is loosely organized and its belief system is sufficiently minimal and/or generalized to permita high degree of ideological heterogeneity. The cult emerges asa "new" religious system; its innovation, however, mainly consists in eclectically combining beliefs and practices appropriated from various domestic and foreign sources. Though normally organized around a founding charismatic figure (who leads by example mther than fŸ    members largely determine for themselves which elements of belief and pmctice to accept or reject. As an al- ternative to conventional religion, the cult stands opposed to mainstream cul- ture, ah antagonista reciprocated by society toward the alien in its midst. The cult does not insist, however, that it possesses the truth. Upholding the religious authority of the individual m and relatively pluralistic itself in consequence m it instead confers varying degrees of legitimacy on the claims made by other reli- gious groups. (Contemporary examples: the Meher Baba movement, Vedanta, and Silva Mind Control.)3

The sect, on the other hand, is a highly solidary, ideologicaUy homogeneous religious group dedicated to a clearly specified doctrine. It generally forros asa breakaway group from a church or denomination, protesting the parent body's perceived compromise with a highly impeffect world. Though doctrinally related to mainstream religion, the sect's dissenting character engenders mutual hostility

2 Fora review of this work, see the section titled "Recent sociological conceptiom of 'cult" in Robbim ( 1988:150-160}.

3 For definitions of the cult generally consistent with this, see C.ampbell (1977), McGuire (1992), Rlchardmn (1979), Swatos (1981), and Wallis (1974).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 381

between itself and society. Normally under charismatic lay leadership, the disci- plined membership strictly adheres to all elements of belief and practice. Deviants ate commonly ostracized or expelled. The sect insists that it possesses the truth, rejecting all other religious groups as illegitimate. (Contemporary ex- amples: Holiness groups, the Unification Church, and David Koresh's Branch Davidians.)

UU embodies in institutional microcosm Emile Durkheim's "cult of the indi- vidual" (a.k.a. "cult of man"). Witnessing the apparently linked phenomena of increasing secularization and individuation, Durkheim at the turn of the century heralded traditional religion's displacement by a new common faith better suited to the secularity, individualism, and ideological pluralism characteristic of mod- ero western society. Assuming the functional necessity of some measure of soci- etal moral consensus, Durkheim argued that the diversity of modern thought and experience impelled a shift from traditional religious belief to the only alterna- tive possible under such conditions m a secular and ethical religion of the rights and dignity of the individual (Marske 1987).

Since human personality is the only thing that appeals unanimously to all hearts, since its en- hancement is the only thing that can be collectively pursued, it inevitably acquires exceptional vahe m the eyes of all. It thus rises far above all human airas, assuming a religiom nature (Durkheim 1951:336).

Consecrating the personas the object of supreme value, the cult of the individ- ual upholds justice and equity as its first principles:

The task of the most advanced societies may therefore be said to be a mission of justice .... Justas the ideal of the Iower societies was to create of maintain a common life as intense as possible, in which the individual was engulfed, ours is to inject an even greater equity into our social relationships... (Durkheim 1984:321).

Officially creedless, UUs pursue radically individual quests for "truth and meaning." UU churches dedicate themselves to supporting each member's per- sona/search for answers to life's ultimate questions. As a young woman pictured in a print advertisement prepared by the UUA puts it: "Instead of me fitting a religion, I found a religion to fit me." Members informally assent, however, to a set of "Principles," humanistic precepts broad enough to encompass UU plural- ism. First among these is "The/nherent ~orth and d/gnit~ of e~ry person." Second is "]ustice, equiry, and compassion in human relations" [emphasis added].4

Hence, a common devotion links UUs in their diversity, an implicit creed of the pammount value of the person. This fundamental doctrine entails, in tum, ah ethic of justice, equity, freedom of belief, acceptance of differences, personal

4 The remainder inr     "Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritua| growth in our congtegations; A ftee and regxmsible search for truth and meaning; The right of comcience and the use of democratic practice within our congregations and in society at large; The goal of world community with peace, libetw,andjmticeforall;Reg~ctfortheinterdependent webofallexistenceofwhichweateapan."

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

382      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

development, etc. In short, UU upholds with uncanny fidelity the central prin- ciples of Durkheim's cult of the individual.5

UU's assimilation of new cult movements is attributed here to the combined effect of ( 1) its vulnerability to extemal belief systems, (2) its ideological affinity with the movements specified above, and (3) demographic change. Though the integration of cults overtly opposed to its decades-old secular humanism appears anomalous, analysis will show that this is consistent with UU's character as a cult of the individual. To ground this analysis, we must first survey relevant as- pects of UU history.

UNITARIANS AND UNIVERSALISTS

American Unitarianism coalesced asa liberal-Protestant movement in the early decades of the 19th century as Harvard-trained Congregationalist clergy re- jected as unreasonablecentral tenets of Calvinism, i.e., predestination, human depravity, and the triune nature of God (Tapp 1973:3). Attracting a largely elite membership, the movement represented the expression within American Protestantism of the 18th century's critical examination of traditional doctrine.

Though branded heretics by the orthodox -- English evangelical William Wilberforce pronounced Unitarianism a "halfway house" between orthodoxy and "absolute infidelity" -- early Unitarians upheld the central Christian doc- trines of scriptural revelation, the divinity of Jesus, atonement, and resurrection. Reason as the arbiter of belief, however, elevated the religious authority of the individual above that of church or Scripture. Since individuals differed wŸ            re- spect to the reasonableness of particular beliefs, Unitarianism in less than a cen- tury fully vindicated the Wilberforce dictum.

Immediately after its organization in 1825 as the American Unitarian Association (AUA), Unitarianism faced an internal rebellion ~ transcenden- talism m that began "rational" Christianity's decline from core doctrine to one option among others (Ahlstrom and Carey 1985: xiii). Leading transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson resigned from the Unitarian ministry in 1832, complain- ing that the denomination's excessive emphasis on reason had turned it into a "religion of dry bones," anda "thin porridge [of] pale negations."

Transcendentalists identified religion with the inner life of the individual, with mystical experience, intuition, and feeling (Cauthen 1962:15-16). The di- vine permeated the universe, revealing itself in nature and in the human soul.

The soui was a person's temple, there were sermons in stones, the universe was divine, salvation was the realization and fulfillment of the divine in humankind (Ahlstrora and Carey 1985:29).

5 Westley (19"/8, 1983) contends that a number of the human potential movements of the 1970s (e.g., Scientology, Arica, Silva Mind Control, est) qualifi/as Durkheimian "cult of man" groups since they uphold the"centralbelief"thateachpersonembodies"... aHigherSe[ir,Essence,ofBeingthattranscendstheworld." Thm, d~e conc|udes, they "hold the human individual as sacred" (1983:25-32). As Durkheim detmed the cult of the individual, however, the "exceptional value" of the person does not depend on supematural of other extraofdinary qualitie,.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINEDBEDFELLOWS 383

Erupting in the mid-1830s and continuing into the following decade, conflict between liberal Christians and transcendentalists convulsed the fledgling de- nomination.

At mid-century, Unitarianism proved highly receptive as well to "spiritualism" (Burrill 1994:16-19). Seeking a reasonableexplanation of immor- tality and the supernatural, many religious liberals readily embraced the belief in communication (through human mediums) with the spirits of the dead.

␣          9          [S]piritualismpromisedempiricalevidence,proofthat couldbeseenandheard,that the deadlivedon anda worldbeyondthisone existed(Albanese1992:264).

Unitarian interest in spiritualism quickly dissipated in the 1890s, however, with revelations of mediumistic fraud.

By the end of the 19th century:

␣9        Unitarianism'stheologyhad becomeblurredand inclusive.Boththosewhoaccepted Scriptural revelation and those who positivelydenied it were received into the [American] U n i t a r i a n A s s o c i a t i o n ( M a r t y 1 9 6 1 : 1 5 7) .

The AUA in 1894 declared Unitarianism officially creedIess. Liberal Christians, transcendentalists, and humanists now found common ground mainly in com- mitment to ameliorating the negative social consequences of laissez-faire capital- ism (i.e., the "Social Gospel").

Universalism also arose in New England, forming a national organization in 1833. Early Universalism and Unitarianism differed only slightly with respect to belief. They differed significantly, however, in class composition, the main factor

discouraging merger. Universalism drew its members from the working and lower-middle classes of

New England society. Rather than an elite intent on liberalizing the Congre- gational Church, Universalism arose asa religio-economic rebellion against the taxes imposed to support New England's established religion (Robinson 1985:4).

Less educated than the Unitarians, Universalists initially offered stiffer resis- tance to nonbiblical movements (Cassara 1971:5). In response to transcenden- talism's growing influence in the denomination, the Boston Association of Universalists in 1847 adopted a model statement defining the official criteria for acceptance into Ch¡    ministry.

Resolved,that thisAssociationexpressitsso|eranconvictionthat, inorderforca~etobe regardedasaChristianministerwithrespecttofaith,hemustbelieveinthe Biblea            ~          of the |ife, teachings, miracles, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ (Cassara 1971:168).

Despite such resistance, transcendentalism steadily gained ground in Univer- salism, as did spiritualism.

Universalists also followed Unitarians in tuming from the world beyond to this world and its problems. By the end of the 19th century, members associated "Universalism" less with the theology of universal salvation than with a secular- ized millennial vision of global peace and justice (Robinson 1985:6). The 1917

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

384      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

Universalist Declaration of Social Principles and Social Programs signaUed a move away "from a conception of Universalism asa theological doctrine to a broadened notion of Universalism asa working philosophy aimed at securing the universal harmony of all individuals on earth" (Robinson 1985:140).

The humanist movement of the 1920s-30s surged into Unitarianism and Universalism. Congregations now accepted into fellowship even atheists op- posed to all forms of supematuralism as impediments to human progress. Unitarian ministers and theological students founded the organization that was to become the American Humanist Association; 14 of the 34 signatories to the

1933 Humanist Mani...           I were Unitarian ministers. As humanist influence grew, a new controversy divided members - - the "humanist-theist debate" over whether God is necessary to religion at all.

By the early 1950s, it was clear that the humanists had won.

Although the concept of God served still as an impiration to some, the bulk of Universalists and Unitarians had become the most basic of humanlsts. They believed, like Confucius, that although there may be a divine power in the universe, if man's problems ate to be solved he must solve them himself(Robinson 1985:41-42).

Humanism carried Unitarianism and Universalism "beyond Christianity" to the cult of the individual.

UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISM

Substantial upward social mobility on the part of Universalists in the post- war years reduced the class differeaces that for more than a century had blocked merger. Founded in 1961, the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) five years later undertook an analysis of its combined membership.

The results (UUA 1967) indicated that UUs ranked higher than all other American religious groups in levels of income and education, as weU as in per- capita employment in professions, management, and business ownership.6 The study found as well that a remarkable 89 percent of members had converted to UU, most either from liberal Protestant denominations (42 percent) of from nonaffiliated status (32 percent).

With respect to belief, 53 percent of respondents identified themselves as humanists; 44 percent defined Godas a "natural process within the universe, such as love or creative evolution;" while 30 percent deemed any concept of God either "irrelevant" of "harmful." (Only 3 percent professed belief in Godas

6Thisfindtngiscomisremwithsmdiesgoingaslarbackasthe 1920s.Anal~ingthereligiousaffiliadon ofpersomwhosebk␣91       appearedinthe 1926editionofW/to'sWlto/nAmer~, HuntingtonandWhimey (1927) foundthat, per 100,000adherents, Unitartans topped the list with 1,288biographies,followedby Universalisrs(413) and Episcopalians(174). Lehmanand Witw (1931) found81 timesas manudistinguished Unitarian scientistsas expectedacco,ding to the ptotx~ion of membt~sin the U.S. popuhtton. (Universalism andtheQuakersrankedsecond,eachwithseventimesasmanuasexpected.)Anal,q           ofthe 1985editiond ll~o's~/n Amerka(Selth1987)showedthatUnitarianUnivetmlistsledwtth503biolffaphiesper100,000 members,fDllowedb/the Quakers (208) and Episcopalians(175).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 385

a "supernatural being.") Regarding practice, 36 percent prayed "often" or "occasionally," and 64 percent "seldom" of "never."

Coincident with publication of the study, UU membership began a precipitous decline, falling from a high of 281,000 in 1967 to a low of 171,000 in 1982. Though the liberal Protestant denominations suffered severe membership losses over the same period (averaging 20 percent), UU's staggering 40 percent decrease appeared to threaten extinction. Conservative Christianity, on the

other hand, showed astonishing vigor anda new public assertiveness. While through the 1980s the liberal Protestant churches either continued to decline (at a reduced rate) of stagnated, UU membership grew to 204,000 in 1993 (UUA

1993). The association surveyed its members again in 1987 (UUA 1989). UUs re-

mained a high-SES group with respect to income (31 percent eaming over $40,000), education (50 percent completing 17 or more years), and occupation.7 Ir also remained a convert body (86 percent). A majority (55 percent) claimed a "humanist/existentialist" identity; 49 percent defined Godas "some natural pro- cess, etc.;" but now only 20 percent judged the concept irrelevant of harmful. (Four percent accepted a supernatural definition of God.) With the religious practice question changed to "meditate of pray," 57 percent performed one of the other "often" or "occasionally," and 43 percent "seldom" or "never."

Together, the two surveys show a predominantly humanist orientation since merger, but with significantly fewer members by 1987 either unconcemed with or opposed to concepts of the divine, and with a near reversal in the proportion engaging in personal religious practice (perhaps an artifact of adding the word "meditate"). Combining both surveys with the results of an intervening conti- nent-wide study (UUA 1979), responses to a question on Sunday services show a steady and marked increase from 1966 to 1987 in the importance to UU's of more conventional aspects of religion (see Table 1).

While the consistently high value assigned to "intellectual stimulation" in- dicates the continued salience of humanism, Table 1 also shows a striking in- crease over 20 years in the importance of "fellowship," "celebrating common values," and "participation and worship"[emphasis added]. The data suggest that this increase is linked to generational change; whereas older members in 1987 ranked intellectual stimulation higher than these other aspects of the church service, the reverse was the case for younger members (UUA 1989:18).8

7ThoughnowslighdybelowJewsinmedianannua[income,UUsstJllrankf'trstwhenoccupation, home ownership, education, and income ate combined to index "social standinr           (Kosmin and Lachman 1993:256- 67).

8Unfortunately, thereportstmplydichotomizedageasaboveofbelow30yeats.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

386      SOCIOLOGYOF RELIGION

Aspect

o...Sen•

Intelectual Stimuh~on

Fellowship

Celebrating Common Values

Group Experience of Participation and Worship

TABLE 1

Combined Survey Responses to the Question: "How important to you are the following aspects of attending church service? (Circle one on each line.)"

Ve~j     Some~hat        Not

Year     lmportant        Important

Importara

1979    75 1987 74

1967    45 1979 61 1987 65

1967    30 1979           51 1987 60

1967    24 1979           44 1987           44

22        3 24 3

47        8 32 4 32 3

49        21 43   7 35 5

43        33 45   11 43   12

Sources: UUA 1967, 1979, 1989.

1967    74% 23% 3%

UU leaders in the 1980s began to call for the association's "spiritual" revital- ization. At the height of humanist hegemony in the 1960s, UU activista in the civil rights and antiwar movements imbued members with a sense of shared identity and purpose. In the 1970s, however, UU joined the liberal Protestant churches in retreating from projects of large-scale social change. Members fo- cused on personal growth, introducing into UU the various self-development systems of the human potential movement. It was during this decade that the liberal churches experienced their steepest decline in membership. Its prime cause soon became clean the baby-boom cohort's massive defection from orga- nized religion (Hoge and Roozen 1978; Wuthnow 1976).

Anticipating substantial reaffiliation as the children of the "sixties genera- tion" reached church-school age, UU leaders in the 1980s implemented a growth strategy targeting the cohort. Central to this effort was opening UU to a "new spirituality" consistent with the residual countercultural values of many in this generation. These include "direct experience and intuition" over "abstract reasoning," awareness of the "true inner self," and "living in accord with the monistic assumption that all life is united and all existence is one" (Tipton 1982:14-20). In BoroAgainUnitarianUniversalism,prominent UU minister and theologian F. Forrester Church issued an urgent appeal.

What is called for, today more than ever before, is something like a new spiritual con- sciousnegs. A consciousness of our interdependencies, upon one another and between our- selves and all that lives and sustains life here on earth (1987:69).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 387

Female ministers served as an important channel for this message at the con- gregational level. Constituting 38 percent of seminarians studying for UU min- istry in 1976, by 1979 females outnumbered males at 51 percent. The upward trend continued into the 1990s: 1984 (57 percent), 1989 (63 percent), and 1991 (67 percent). 9 As the clergy feminized, new cult movements gained support and legitimacy in UU churches.

A New Spirituality

While the liberal Protestant denominations partially ingested elements of recent cult movements (e.g., meditation, healing rituals, religio-therapy, feminist conceptions of divinity, etc.), UU swallowed many of them whole. Several of these movements won official recognition by the UUA Board of Trustees as Independent Affiliate Organizations (IAOs), with chapters in UU churches across North America. 10

Despite their apparent variety, these movements share a "monistic meaning system" affirming "the latent metaphysical unit, or oneness, of all existence..." (Robbins and Anthony 1990:491-93). Similarly, Beckford (1984:269) identifies an imagery of "holism [that] provides a context of ultimate meaning for human life by stressing the interdependence between the bodily, spiritual, and material dimensions of the human life-world." Like transcendentalism, the cult move- ments now active in UU are forms of mysticism. As such, they espouse what may be termed a theology of interdependence and immanence -- the view that reality is an interconnected whole whose essence is divine; that human beings embody a "seed" or "spark" of the divine; and that, therefore, each person is sacred.

Personal observation of the 1991 UUA General Assembly (June 20-25, Hollywood, Florida) confirmed the high visibility of recent cult movements at the association level. The exhibit hall offered a veritable smorgasbord of infor- mation on contemporary cults, with staffers in colorfuUy decorated booths dis- tributing literature on Zen Buddhism, Native American spirituality, new age, and neopaganism.

A pamphlet distributed by the Covenant of Unitarian Universalist Pagans (CUUPS) described neopaganism as a "usually pantheistic or polytheistic, and almost always earth-centered [spirituality] which borrows and adapts from the best of pre-Christian paganism, as well as utilizing (sic) the thought of contem- porary religious thinkers." A Psi Symposium flier announced a program spon- sored 1ayits Greater Boston Chapter titled "Making Sense of the World's Poli- tical Climate Through Astrology:"

This program will combine the effects of both astrology and spirituality on the world situa- tion. [The speakers] will discuss the effect Phto's transit is having on the world, the coinci-

9 Source: Ann Scott and Carolyn Kemmett, UUA, Boston.

10 After gaining IAO status in 1970, the Unitarian Universalist Psi Symposiumshifted in the 1.980sfrom an initial focus on paranormal phenomena to new-age concems, e.g., metaphysics, astrology, holistic heaith, spiritualdevelopment, meditation, auras,chakras, crystals,etc. The CovenantofUnitarianUnivetsalist Pagam (CUUPS), an IAO since 1987, links LRJs involved in the various divisions of neopaganism.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

388      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

dences binding the USA's and Iraq's political leadership, and how all this is affected by sun signs.

Judging by the stir it created, the high point of the assembly carne not at any of the scheduled events but at an impromptu summer solstice celebration led by CUUPS members at midnight on the beach behind the conference hotel. Parti- cipants danced and chanted inside a ring of seaweed. The following day a UU minister led a program called "What's Spirituality and How Can I Get Some?"

Field research conducted by the author from 1990 to 1992 at UUCA in At- lanta indicated the inroads made by the new spirituality at the church level. A locally controversial meeting-place in the 1950sand 60s for liberals active in the civil rights and antiwar movements, UUCA remained predominantly humanist by the late 1980s.11 By the early 1990s, however, members involved in new cult movements enjoyed the active support of the church's senior and associate ministers. Male and female, respectively, they promoted Native-American reli- gion and neopaganism as analogs to their principal doctrine: process theology.

A CUUPS chapter formed, as did a Zen study group. A new age group ("Explorations in Spirituality") promised in a repeating newsletter blurb to teach interested members "everything you always wanted to know about mandalas, mantras, meditation, chakras, colors, crystals, music, energy balancing auras, healing, and more."

The Humanism-SpiritualityConflict

UU's active in the various new cult movements face a common internal an- tagonist m secular humanists. Starting in the mid-1980s, the "dogmatic" hu- manist commitment to rationalism came under increasing attack by UU clergy, conference speakers, and letter writers to the association journal, World. For their part, humanists denounced the new spirituality as regressive, a backward slide to superstition. The humanism-spirituality conflict was joined.

Simmering tensions came to a boil when an article by UUA President William Schulz titled "Unitarian Universalism in a New Key" appeared in the World (January/February, 1990:4-7). Signaling the turn toward spirituality, he offered a decidedly religious definition of UU.

Unitarian Universalism affirms that Creation is too grand, too complex, and mysterious to be captured in a narrow creed....        At the same time our convictions about Creation lead us to other affirmations: That Creation itself is Holy -- the earth and all its creatures, the stars in all their glory; That the Sacred or Divine, the Precious and Profound, ate made evident not in the miraculous of supernatural but in the simple and everyday; That human beings, joined in collaboration with the gifts of Grace, are responsible for the planet and its future....

Schulz's remarks generated considerable controversy. A subsequent issue of the World (November/December, 1990) devoted a special section to reader re- sponses, pro and con. On one hand, a reader found Schulz's definition "beau-

11 Seventy-three percent of those responding to a Congregational Identity Survey ranked "intellectual stimulation" above all other reasons given for attending church services and meetings (UUCA 1988).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 3 8 9

tifully expressed and cogent." Another said that Schulz had distilled "the clearest, most articulate essence of Unitarian Universalism known to me." Yet another applauded his "recognition that our movement cannot move forward without articulations of our faith."

On the other hand, a writer asked "whether Schulz's music can be arranged so as not to sound discordant to those of us who do not capitalize 'CreatŸ            who don't know what he means by 'the very evidences of God,' and who are not in- clined to supplement reason with 'the Holy.'" A self-identified humanist chal- lenged Schulz's assertion that UU essentially affirms the "complex majesty of Creation" rather than freedom of religious belief.

MostemphaticallyIproposethatthe"bedrock"isindividualfreedom.First, wemustbefreeto seek knowledge and develop our beliefs; only then can we understand and appreciate the universe.

A lifelong member complained:

I was bom a Unitarian and for yearshave thought of myselfasa Unitarian Universalist, so it is worrisometo find that the headof the denomination drawsa circle that excludesme. . . .

Another critic objected to Schulz's apparent proclamation "that spiritual touchy- feely theology is the future direction of our denomination and that atheistic-ag- nostic hardheads better get the message," adding:

I got the messageand I don't like it one bit. I do not agree that our denomination must go in the spiritual direction in order to gain membership. In fact, I think that is a way to lose current membersand alienate potential ones.

F. Forrester Church poked a stick into the core of the humanist anthill when he delivered a speech titled "A New Humanism" (Church 1991:3-13) to the 1990 General Assembly meeting of the Fellowship of Religious Humanists (FRH), the IAO for humanist UUs. Church provocatively denounced the "old

humanism" as "elitist, snobbish, intellectually driven, and individualistic in its thrust." At the following year's meeting, the FRH president lamented the widespread and irate criticism within UU of humanism.

Humanists have been put down in the movement and we do not deserve to be put down. We are absolutelycommitted to pluralismin the denomination.

Oriented to scientific-technical rationality, UU humanists naturally reacted with particular hostility to cult movements associated with premodernity and in- cluding occult elements (i.e., neopaganism and new age). A single issue of the World (January/February 1992) containing an article about a "UU witch" and another titled "Celebrating the Goddess Within" provoked the following reader responses:

Once I was proud to be an Unitarian Universalist, and I could not understand why others thought us silly. But after reading the article on [a] self-proclaimedwitch, anda commentary

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

390      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

on worshipping the goddess within, I not only understand, I agree. . . .        I aro disturbed by the increase in mysticism and "new age" philosophy in our churches....      There are limits to tolerance (Wor/d May/June 1992:3).

And:

... I am concemed about a revival of witches and witchcraft, even in the earliest meaning of wise woman/healer.... UU's ate often considered a far-out sect; let's not gire our critics a chance to level more derision our way.

At mid-decade, humanists generally appear to regard asa fait accomplithe as- sociation's assimilation of new cult movements. Indeed, rather than criticize the new spirituality, UU humanists now tend to denounce their own past intoler- ance, seek conciliation, and even beg for mercy. The featured speaker at the

1991 FRH meeting anticipated this chastened attitude in his concluding re- marks.

Humanist thinking needs to add to its rationalist preoccupations an appreciative acknowledg- ment of those tacit expressions of knowing and understanding that constitute the so-called transrationa112 realm. Without this development, humanist rituals and ceremonies -- in short --humanist aesthetics, will mmain truncated (Arisian 1991 ).

Under the title "Confessions of a Bigoted Atheist," the World (November/De- cember 1993-21 ) published an emblematic expression of humanist contrition.

For many of us, including me, agnosticism and atheism were synonymous with Unitarian Universalism, and we'd fight for them with little tolerance for other views.... I'm glad to report that in the last few years this situation is tuming around.

Offended by this writer's "predictable description of humanists as intolerant fighters of a war on spiritualists for church control," an "affirmative humanist" concluded his letter to the editor with a plaintive appeaL

Please stop stereotyping humanism by painting all those who ascribe to the belief system as intolerant, disruptive, and confrontational. Leave a place for humanists. We need sanctuary in this society more than most (Wor/d March/April 1994:4).

From the bishop's palace to beggingsanctuary at the church door, UU hu- manism's fall from grace vividly indicates the powerful impact on UU of recent cult movements.

12 The concept is central to the theology ofF. Forrester Church: For too long, those of us with skeptical temperaments have contented ourselves with a false distinction, namely that anything not susceptible to rational proof is by definition irrational. What we tend to ovedook is that beyond the rational and irrational liesa transrational realm. The rational realm includes everything that can be ascertained as fact, the irrational eve~thing that can be disproved according to the same criteria; distinct from both, the transrational realm arches beyond the scope of our analytical capacity to parse the creation ( 1991:10-11).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 391

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Though beginning life as two liberal Christian denominations, UU emerged genetically disposed, as it were, to manifest cult characteristics. Its distinctive- nessatinceptionconsistedinmakingreasonthe testofbelief.Differingoverthe reasonableness of particular elements of traditional doctrine, liberal Christians embraced the principle of individual freedom of belief, as well as its corollary m acceptance of differing views. These opened the movement to a pluralizing series of new religious and secular belief systems. In 1894 Unitarianism issued its decla- ration against creed, and in 1917 Universalism adopted its Declaration of Social Principles and Social Programs. No longer the movement's unifying doctrine, rational Christianity became one option among others.

The ideological center then shifted to secular humanista. Sunday services in the 1960s resembled academic gatherings. Typically addressing philosophical, psychological, or sociopolitical issues, "sermons" prompted sometimes highly ar- gumentative "talkback" sessions, pitting ministers against congregants, and con- gregants against one another; taboos proscribed the use of language associated with traditional religion (e.g., God, holy, sacred, grace, etc.). Reporting the re- sults of the UUA's first survey after merger, Newsweek in 1967 derisively termed UUs "atheists who have not shaken the church habit."

But the principles of individual authority and acceptance of differing views eventually forced even UU humanism to acquiesce in its own deposal after new cult movements breached its defenses. Exemplifying the process Talcott Parsons termed "value generalization" (1977:307-13), the UU "Principles" adopted in

1985 codified a system of meaning and value sufficiently catholic to encompass liberal Christians, secular humanists, Zen practitioners, and latdy even new agers and neopagans. Members displayed bumper stickers proclaiming, '~I'oques- tion is the answer," a motto eminently suited to mdically individualistic seekers united only in their devotion to the worth, rights, and development of the per- son.

Vulnerability to External BeliefSystems

UU retains dex~ominational structures, but it behaves in cultlike fashion with respect to belief and belonging. As to belief, individual authority permits members to pick and choose as they like from religion, philosophy, and science in customizing a personally satisfying worldview.

"Epistemological individualism" accommodates the seekers UU attracts, but it also results in an ill-defined identity and indistinct boundaries (Wallis 1974:304-5). 13 Cult identity is vague because "[t]here is no locus of authority beyond the individual which is vested with a right to determine heresy;"

13 Recognizing this dilemma, the association three decades ago wamcd that UU mtght appear to outsiders as "|ittle more than a chee~ affirmation of everlrthing in general and nothing in particular" (LIUA

1%3:164).

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

392      SOCIOLOGYOF RELIGION

boundaries in turn are indistinct because leaders may not apply "authoritative tests of either doctrine or practice." Like the cult, UU is in principle open to all who at least minimaUy affirm its diffuse system of belief.

Concerning belonging, radically individualistic seekers are far more inter- ested in what the re|igious community can do for them that in what they can do for the community.

Cultic movements face a problem of commitment. Each is viewed as one among a range of paths to truth or salvation rather than asa unique path. . . .   The involvement of the membershipthustendsto betemporary,occasional,and segmentary(Wallis1974:307-8).

UU clergy and association officials perennially bemoan low commitment on the part of the membership. A few indicators suggest its severity: The second-highest income eamers among North American religious groups, UUs rank lowest in fi- nancial giving to their churches; approximately 95 percent of those mised UU eventually disaffiliate; and three-fourths of those responding to the latest conti- nent-wide survey (UUA 1989:38) admitted that their church participation was either moderate (24 percent), low (24 percent), or nil (25 percent).

Given such fragile bonds, UU churches violate the principle of acceptance of differing views at their peril. 14 However unwillingly, members who define UU as an "Enlightenment-scientific-democratic syndrome of values" (Bartlett and Bartlett 1968:8) must either share the sanctuary with new agers and neopagans of switch to the American Humanist Association.

Ideolo~al Affiniry

Potentially open to a range of external belief systems, UU assimilated only a particular set of new cult movements: American Zen, new age, Native American spirituality, and neopagnism. Though differing in important ways, these move- ments share the mystical theology of interdependence and immanence. Mysticism facilitated their entry into a group dominated by secular humanists in four ways: (1) as heirs to the mystical tradition established by tramcendentalism, they inherited both its legitimacy and its constituency; (2) they affirmed the exceptional value of the person; (3) they upheld the authority of the individual and the acceptance of differing views; and (4) they embodied a religiosity compatible with modem rationality.

Belief in a supematural God had aU but disappeared in UU when humanism consolidated control in the early 1960s. According to the UUA, among the surviving "theological emphases" was "mystical religion," a slightly updated ver- sion of the tmnscendentalism of Ralph Waldo Emerson.

[UU mysticsate] focusedupon attaining direct intuitions of oneness and relatednesswith nature and/orthe divine.The universeischaracterizedbya unitythat manmayexperim directlybycultivatingthe propersemitivitie~Suchexperi~,   forthe mystic,ateofgreamr vahe than anysubsequentintellectualformulations(UUA 1963:25-26).

14Thesamesurveyindicatedthatmembersrankacceptanceofdifferingviewssecxmdonb/to individual authori~ascharacteristicofUU.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINEDBEDFELLOWS 393

The spirituality of UU's new cult movements is similarly centered on intu- ition of the presumed unity and interdependence of reality; it also regards nature as particularly evocative of mystical experience. Theological kinship with the spiritual tradition founded by Emerson conferred a measure of legitimacy even on new cult movements associated with premodernity and "tainted" by occult elements. Though a mystic constituency apparently existed in UU before inte- gration of these movements, its size cannot be estimated.

Mystics affirm, on theological grounds, the exceptional value of the person. Ir "all finite beings have their existence within God, who is the ground of the soul, the 'seed' or 'spark' of all creatures" (Campbell 1977:382), then humans not only embody divinity but, as self-aware beings, may nurture it to the point of achieving personal identity with the divine. As mystics, UUs invotved in the new cult movements sacralize the individual because they regard the inner per- son and the divine as one (cf. footnote 5).

Liberal Christians embraced freedom of belief and tolerance because indi- viduals differed over the reasonablenessof doctrine. Mysticism transforms religion into a "purely personal and inward experience" (Troeltsch 1931). Mystics, there- fore, uphold the religious authority of the individual and the acceptance of differing views because individual mystics differ over what constitutes true reli- ,~ousexperience.

To the mystic, religion is nota cognitive but an experiential matter; it is an inward and ineffable sense of unity with the All. Consequently, mystics disdain reason as not only irrelevant but contmry to true religion. As transcendentalists condemned "rational" Christianity, UU spirituality proponents denounced the rational bias of secular humanism. The persistence of mysticism in this reason- exalting movement suggests, however, that the two are in practice compatible with one another.

That both vest the individual with authority in matters of belief has been noted. In addition, since mystical belief rests on the exper/eru:e of oneness, mys- ticism shares modern rationality's preference for empirically-verifiable knowl- edge. For the mystic, "God, in a final and irrefutable way, is before the appre- hending mind" (Ahlstrom and Carey 1985:7).

DemographicChange

The following remarks by three UU ministers credited with fostering signifi- cant growth of their congregations appeared in an article titled "How To Make Our Congregatiom Grow" (Workt January/February 1992:12-17).

Unlessweonceagaintakeholdofatheologicalmeaningsystemthat isrelevanttoour age and to the current generation, I fearthat we riskbecominga foomote in Americanchurch h~ory.

I sensea deep-seatedspiritualhungerin our society.... I think our churchesate beginningto respondto people'squestionsinwaysthat havemeaning,especiaUyto youngeradults....

Youn~er people, roughlythose boro aher World War II, have a whole different cukure, and our churches ate notnecessarilywillingtochangetofittheirneeds.If we continue the same

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

394      SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION

outwom motifs that still predominate in many of our churches, we are going to lose a whole generation that comes to us looking for something positive.

The message was clear: To grow, UU churches must tum from the secular hu- manism of its older members to the spirituality of disaffiliated baby boomers. 15

Two demographic changes encouraged UU's opening to new cult move- ments. The chief and most obvious of these is the mere existence of millions of unchurched baby boomers reaching child-rearing age in the 1980s; educated, individualistic, and religiously privatized, they appeared to representa potential membership bonanza for the "quintessential boomer church" (Newsweek,17 December 1990).16

Also important was the cultural impact on UUof the rapid influx of women into ministry beginning in the late 1970s. With the aid of a workshop series on goddess spirituality and feminist witchcraft - - "Cakes for the Queen of Heaven," produced by the UUA in 1986 w female clergy served as the principle conduit into UU of neopaganism. Feminist ministers, female and male, fired the first salvos in the assault on humanista, denouncing its "patriarchal" rationality. As more and more females occupied pulpits vacated by retiring males, the humanist grip on UU weakened while new cuk movements gained increasing legitimacy.

For nearly two centuries UU has influenced American culture in a manner greatly disproportionate to the number of its adherents. It has done so by adopt- ing and nurturing a series of fledgling religious and social movements that, lack- ing its institutional haven, may have flown a shorter distance or never taken wing at all.

Its recent assimilation of mystical cult movements can be located, descrip- tively, in this larger historical context. The objective of my analysis has been to show that this seemingly improbable development may be understood, sociologi- caUy, as due to the combination of three factors: UU's central affirmation of the exceptional value of the individual, its cultlike character with respect to belief and belonging, and contemporary demographic change.

REFERENCES

Ahlstrom, S., and J. Carey. 1985 An American re[ormation: A documentary histor'yof Unitarian Christian~. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Albanese, C. 1992. Ame.rica:Religl~msandreli~m, 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Arisiarh IC 1991. The humanist spiritual imperative for a new age. Annual FRH lecture, UUA

General Assembly, HoUywood, FL. Bartlett, J., and L. Bartlett. 1968. Moments of truth: Our next [our hundred years: An analysis of

l.h~ar/an Un/versa//sm. Berkeley: UUA.

15 With hall of its members over 55 years old, a high death tate, a low birth tate, and ah extraordinary inabilityto retain its r       LIU mmt recruit large numbers just to maintain membership at current levels.

16T}mu8hmembershipinereased~ 33,000between1982and1993,availableUUAstatisticsgiveno indication of the number of tuw.htaehed bah/boomers who joined during these years.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

STRAINED BEDFELLOWS 395

Beckford, J. 1984. Holisitic imagery and ethics in new religious and healing movements. Socia/ Compass 31:259-72.

Burrill, G. 1994. Hopedale's echoes: Spiritualism, Unitarian Universalism, and the 19th-centm3, movement for reform. Wor/d 8:16-19␣9

Campbell, C. 1977.Clarifyingthe cult. BriashJoumal ofSociology28:375-88. Cassara, E., ed. 1971. Universalismin America: A documentary history. Boston: Beacon. Cauthen, K. 1962. The ~       of American religumsliberalism.New York: Harper and Row. Church, F. 1987. Born Again Unitarian Universalism. Tulsa, OK: Cone-Lewis.

.1991. A new humanista. Reli~ous Humanista 25:3-13. Durkheim,E. 1951[18971.Su/c/de.NewYork:FreePress. . 1 9 8 4  [1893]. The divisionoflabor in society. New York: Free Press. Hoge, D., and D. Roozen, eds. 1979. Understanding church growth and decline, 1950-1978. New

York: Pilgrim Press. Huntington, E., and L. Whimey. 1927. Religion and Who's Who. American Mercury (August):438-

43. Kosmin, B., and S. Lachman. 1993. One nation under God: Religion in contemporary American

soc/ery. New York: Harmony. Lee,R. 1995.Ura        Universalism:Thecultoftheindividual.Unpublished manuscript. Lehman, H., and P. Witty. 1931. Scientific eminence and church membership. Sc/ent/ficMonth/:y

(December):544-49. McGuire, M. 1992. Reli~on: The socialcontext, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Marske, C. 1987. Durkheim's 'cult of the individual' and the moral reconstitution of society.

Sodo/og/ca/Theory 5: 1-14. Marty, M. 1961␣9The infu~l: Freethoughtand American reli~gn. Cleveland, OH: Meridian Books. Parsons, T. 1977. Socia/s'ystemsand the evolution ofaction theo,~. New York: Free Press. Richardson, J. 1979. From cult to sect: Creative eclecticism in new religious movements. Pac/f/c

Sociolo~cal Revietu 22:139-66. Robbins,T. 1988.Cu/ts,converts,andchaTisma.London:Sage. Robbins,T.,andD.Anthony. 1990.Ingodswetrust:Newpattemsofreli~ouspluralisminAmerica,

2nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Tramaction. Robinson, D. 1985. The Unitariansand the Universalists.Westport, CT: Greenwood. Selth, P. 1987.National prominence and religious preference. Journa/... the Sc/ent/ficStudyof

Relis    26:547-50. Swatos,W.1981.Church,sectandcult:Bringingmysticismbackin.Soc/dog/~And:ys• 42:17-26. Tapp, R. 1973. Reli~on among the Unitarian Universalists: Converts in the stepfather's house. New

York:Seminar Press. Tipton, S. 1982.Getting savedfrom thesixties. Berkeley:University of Califomia Press. Troeltsch, E. 1931. The socialteachingof the Christian churches. New York: Macmillan. UUA. 1963.Thefreechurchinachangingworld.Boston:UUA.

␣91967.Relxrrtofthecommitteeongoa/s. Boston: UUA. ␣91979. Mediafeasibilivystudy. Boston: UUA. ␣91989␣9The qualit'yof re.li~ouslifein Unitarian Universalistcongregat/ons. Boston: UUA. ␣91993. Grounh stat/st/cs. Bostorr UUA.

UUCA. 1988. Repon on congregationalidenaeySurvey. Atlanta, GA: UUCA. Wallis, R. 1974. Ideology, authority, and the development of cult movements. Soca     Research

41:299-327. Westley, F. 1978. The cult of man: Durkheim's predictions and new religious movements.

Soc/dog/ca/Ana/:ys/s 39:135-145␣9 ␣91983␣9Thecomplexformsofthenewvreligu~us li... ADur~imianviewofne~reli~msm~-

menta. Chico, CA: Scholars Presa

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010

3 9 6    SOClOLOGYOF RELIGION

Wimton, D. 1991.All-encompassingUnitarians beginningto drawthe crowds.TheBa/,/mor   Sun, 12 M.ay,Al, AIO.

Wuthn~w, IL 1976. Recr        pattems of secularimtion: A problem of generations?A         ~          Sor 10tica]~     41:850-67.

Downloaded from http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org by on July 1, 2010