Here's a quote (page 97):
"Acceptance without proof is the fundamental characteristic of western religion. Rejection without proof is the fundamental characteristic of western science. In other words, religion has become a matter of the heart and science has become a matter of the mind. This regrettable state of affairs does not reflect the fact that, physiologically, one cannot exist without the other. Everybody needs both. Mind and hear are only different aspects of us."
I was raised Lutheran, and not very devoutly so. My parents forced me to go to Sunday school and such things throughout my childhood. I hated it. My family moved from Virginia to Wisconsin right in the middle of my confirmation classes. So I was left with the prospect of, if I wanted to be confirmed (which amounts to becoming an adult member of the church), I would have to complete the classes on my own, just me and the pastor at our new church. Strangely enough, I took this on readily. I still don't know why. In retrospect, perhaps it was as a challenge -- one that I knew I would "win."
So I walked myself to confirmation class for some time. A one-on-one with the pastor. At the end of it (I don't remember how many weeks I did this), I remember asking the pastor some basic questions and being dissatisfied with the answers. I don't remember the questions, nor the answers. I only remember being dissatisfied. Also not surprised.
So I was confirmed. Shortly thereafter (like, the next week), I remember having a conversation with my parents during which I very confidently told them that I wouldn't be going to church any more. My dad was somewhat surprised, but I countered with his very words: "once you're old enough, you can make your own decisions." Confirmation was clearly "old enough", and my dastardly plan seemed to be right on track. He pressed me a little, and I challenged him with asking him whether he even knew what an "Apostolic Church" was. When he said that he didn't, and that it didn't matter, I pointed out that it was part of the Nicene creed, during which he professed what he believed in every week in church. It was just an example of the hypocrisy that I could no longer swallow.
Where was I going with this?....
Oh yeah. So anyway, back at this tender age of about 16, I remember coming to the realization, and telling my pastor about it, that religion claimed to BE the Truth, and science claimed to SEEK the Truth. So ultimately, shouldn't they eventually arrive at the same place? This got into a discussion about how religion is somewhat flexible, and science sometimes has an agenda, and that this obfuscates the process. Still, my point remained well made, whatever it was.
Now, in this passage in "The Dancing Wu Li Masters", I find myself vindicated.
...
One more thing about religion. I'm a Unitarian Universalist. My wife has been reading a book called "Under the Banner of Heaven", which is about Mormon Fundamentalism. Our conversations about the two vastly different books we're reading, and how they overlap to an amazing degree, got me thinking about what Unitarian Universalist fundamentalism would look like. Funny, in fact, was the realization that a "Fundamentalist Unitarian Universalist" would be called an FUU for short, and that this pretty much answered my question.
Then I realized that sometimes when I'm feeling prickly and I comment to people that I, personally, "don't so much worship god as study it", I'm actually BEING an FUU. Heh.
No comments:
Post a Comment