The Missing Unitarian Principle Freedom. Reason. Tolerance. These words are the words that are most frequently trumpeted as the hallmark of Unitarianism and the commonly accepted foundation of the Unitarian movement. These words, as heard earlier, spring from Dr. Wilburs book 'A history of Unitarianism' published in 1945. Unitarianism has a history going back at least four hundred years, and it was only after 1945 that the use of 'Freedom, Reason and Tolerance' came in to use. That isn't very long is it? Perhaps, though, I am being a bit harsh as Dr. Wilbur did base his thoughts on a study of previous Unitarian thinkers. Our second reading concerned a small section of the Rev. Dr. Ray Walder's 2002 address, given in this church, in which he clearly suggests the increasing miss-use of the 'catchwords' Freedom, Reason and Tolerance which ignore the original context: Freedom - "... complete mental freedom in religion rather than bondage to creeds and confessions." Reason - "... the unrestricted use of reason in religion, rather than reliance upon external authority or past tradition." Tolerance - "... generous tolerance of differing, religious views and usages rather than insistence upon uniformity in doctrine, worship, polity." Quite rightly, in his 2002 address, Ray pointed out that although he personally viewed 'reason' as the pre-eminent quality of this modern Unitarian advertising 'trinity' his main concern was rightly with the idea that the movement was miss-using these words out of the original context which was strictly a narrow religious theological one. Of course you can argue that if these key Unitarian concepts are not narrow and if they become a part of who you are as 'belief' then these would spill out of the church into the world at large. Does this contention hold water? Let us briefly look at these again. "complete mental freedom in religion", "unrestricted use of reason in religion" "generous tolerance of differing religious views and usages". These are not beliefs! They are perhaps at best only guidelines for the approach to the development of an individual religious belief. From what Dr. Wilbur says it can be seen only that the guidelines are a negative view, i.e. that Unitarians shall not be bound to creeds, confessions, follow what an external (priestly) authority or past tradition, and not accept any uniformity in anything. No it doesn't hold water. It is only helpful as a starting point, and not too helpful at that' other than to point out that you have to work it out for yourself. It offers a starting point in the development of a personal belief system. So what is missing? What else would be useful in the journey towards a personal understanding of reality and the 'All that is'. Personal belief is that useful? No it isn't because the word 'belief' assumes that there is something to believe i.e. In a sense you have already worked it out, and most people haven't have they? Is the word faith any better? I believe not, as sometimes it us used to replace the word belief though 'faith' is more concerned with the acceptance of what another says is true. And that wouldn't be a credible Unitarian position would it? We have to work it out ourselves don't we? That is what Dr. Wilbur was saying in his book, wasn't it? He said complete mental freedom, unrestricted reason and a generous tolerance on this your own individual journey. O.K. we have to do it ourselves do we! So why, in general, does it not seem to happen. Why do we not really work it out for ourselves? Because 'working it out intellectually' is not enough. When you take this path all you end up with is a lot of good ideas but no certainty. Perhaps there is something missing in the Unitarian guidelines or perhaps we are not doing something that is within the guidelines? I think that there is and that Ray spoke of it in his sermon. Science offers a structured path, usually called the scientific method, that could apply here. It offers a form of structured thinking. In brief, the scientific method can be summed up as follows. One, getting a good idea. Two, testing in a controlled way to see whether this 'good' idea is the way things really are. Three, getting other people to take your good idea on board and to test it for themselves in the same way that you have. Finally four, accepting that what has been tested is reasonable if it seems to hold true for others. That is, at least until an even better idea comes along. Can we really do this? It is, I believe, possible but it isn't easy. At some level this is what Unitarian addresses are about. An address is fulfilling the first two steps in the 'scientific method', the good idea and hopefully how it has been 'tested', i.e. why this is a good thing to be doing. The congregation listening to the address are then supposed to take it on board and to test whether the 'good idea' is true for them. If this is then shared in some way then the 'good idea' could become an accepted idea until a better one comes along. Is this what happens? It is in part only. Where Unitarians fall down is that they, in my experience, rarely try out (test) the ideas offered and then feed their conclusions back to the person who did the sermon and so the idea drifts into forgetfulness and is lost. Why is this? Because, in general there, is no church or congregational mechanism to allow it to take place. So where does that leave us? It leaves us with looking for an alternative way forward. One that doesn't, at the moment, seem to form a part of either the Unitarian 'Freedom, Reason or Tolerance', at least not to any great degree. I would suggest that a fourth word should be added, i.e. 'Experience', as in recognising and promoting the direct experience of God in our lives. Do Unitarians accept that God is important? Of course they do. It is only the trinity that they have difficulty with. Do Unitarians recognise the validity of the direct 'God experience' when it arrives as a 'Spiritual Experience'? Of course they do. Do Unitarians recognise that healing by hand or prayer is a functional part of the 'God reality'? An increasingly large proportion do. If this is already an important factor in Unitarianism as it seems to be in this church then it is time that we add Experience to Dr. Wilbur's list to give us. In an abbreviated and slightly altered form:- Personal mental freedom in our religion. Personal unrestricted use of reason in our religion. Personal generous tolerance of differing religious and spiritual usages. Personal direct experience of God in our lives. The added bonus of accepting 'experience' is that it would, and does, give us a measure of what reason gives us. Experience gives us a 'knowing'. A good idea, is a good idea, is a good idea until it is faced with direct experience. If the good idea fits into the experience the good idea is accepted until an idea with a better 'fit' comes along. The bottom line in all this is the direct experience of God in our reality. But if no good ideas come along there is still the direct experience in our world to support us into a 'knowing' of God. Be open to it, listen.... "I speak to you. Be still. I am God". Joe Potter   February 11th 2007