At last—a religion nonbelievers can believe in
Published 3/28/06
When we think of religion, we probably think of our ancestors forging belief systems out of the question “Why?” at the dawn of ancient civilization. But have you heard about the new religion that was founded by a medical student in Birmingham, Ala., in the Year of our Lord, 2003?
Not that the intern and his followers would say “Year of our Lord.”
That’s because adherents of Universism—pronounced Universe-ism—don’t believe in a diety. Likewise, they place their faith in doubt. The Web site of the Universist movement says it welcomes “people who apply reason to religious questions, who trust science, who believe in evolution, who reject miracles and shared revelation, who reject blind faith, yet believe in, for the lack of a better term, ‘God.’ ”
But for Universists, “God” is merely a supernatural first cause. He started us up and then left for a long cosmic lunch. He won’t be back to answer our prayers. And because of the dangers of belief, say the Universists, you have to hold loosely to your Heavenly Father as Higher Power because aligning yourself with an omniscient deity is a divisive issue. Besides, dogma—rather anti-dogma—is dynamic. The process of theology may yield a different answer tomorrow.
The movement, which calls itself “the world’s first rational religion,” claims 10,000 members, including first member Ford Vox, the twentysomething founder of Universism.
A medical student at the University of Alabama in Birmingham, Vox was shaken by the 9/11 attacks and the role that religion played in the tragedy. One day in 2003 he outlined his religious philosophy in an essay and posted it on the Web: “For all recorded time, true believers have fought for faiths that define their societies. Their horrors have stalked us through the millennia, and in the 21st century we have reached a precipice. Competing forces of faith struggle for dominance on a geopolitical stage, wielding weapons of mass destruction. Faiths impose profound limitations on human potential and propagate thought processes that remain among the greatest inspirations for individual acts of violence. Now they threaten all of humanity. We must declare independence from faith, or fall from the precipice.”
Ford went on to note that the principles of Universism “offer a clear and present alternative to the religions that threaten to destroy our world. There is a connection between faith-driven mass murder and faith-driven public policy in the United States. They differ in degree only.”
Vox knew he had struck a chord with other “nonbelievers” when replies to his Web page rolled in and the faithless Universists began meeting in small groups throughout the U.S. In cafés, living rooms and sometimes online, they gathered to read and discuss ideas found in various books, essays, songs, poetry or audio and visual media. According to their Web site, “This practice emphasizes how there is no one reference, no one authoritative source from which we draw inspiration and meaning as Universists.”
The Universist movement is definitely a seeker religion. Universist.org explains that it “elevates the search for meaning and purpose rather than valuing belief for its own sake…we all share an understanding that the search never ends, that it is a wellspring of wonder and motivation in our daily lives.”
The phenomenon has received its share of media coverage in the last few months, including reports by the New York Times, U.S. News & World Report, the Los Angeles Times, Fox News and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It’s also had its critics.
Last month on Anderson Cooper’s 360 °, CNN correspondent Tom Foreman called it “the Seinfeld of religion—no ministers, no real rules, nothing except endless evening talks on politics, life, death, love, all questions, no answers.” Maybe that wasn’t a criticism.
If Vox thinks that those of us who embrace a “revealed religion”—as he calls it—don’t deal with doubts, then he’s forgotten his Presbyterian roots.
But he does make some profound points. He told the Birmingham Weekly, “A shift needs to occur in the religious world from the whole paradigm of ‘Do you believe in God? to ‘How do you behave, based on what you believe?’ ”
I believe he’s right there.
When we think of religion, we probably think of our ancestors forging belief systems out of the question “Why?” at the dawn of ancient civilization. But have you heard about the new religion that was founded by a medical student in Birmingham, Ala., in the Year of our Lord, 2003?
Not that the intern and his followers would say “Year of our Lord.”
That’s because adherents of Universism—pronounced Universe-ism—don’t believe in a diety. Likewise, they place their faith in doubt. The Web site of the Universist movement says it welcomes “people who apply reason to religious questions, who trust science, who believe in evolution, who reject miracles and shared revelation, who reject blind faith, yet believe in, for the lack of a better term, ‘God.’ ”
But for Universists, “God” is merely a supernatural first cause. He started us up and then left for a long cosmic lunch. He won’t be back to answer our prayers. And because of the dangers of belief, say the Universists, you have to hold loosely to your Heavenly Father as Higher Power because aligning yourself with an omniscient deity is a divisive issue. Besides, dogma—rather anti-dogma—is dynamic. The process of theology may yield a different answer tomorrow.
The movement, which calls itself “the world’s first rational religion,” claims 10,000 members, including first member Ford Vox, the twentysomething founder of Universism.
A medical student at the University of Alabama in Birmingham, Vox was shaken by the 9/11 attacks and the role that religion played in the tragedy. One day in 2003 he outlined his religious philosophy in an essay and posted it on the Web: “For all recorded time, true believers have fought for faiths that define their societies. Their horrors have stalked us through the millennia, and in the 21st century we have reached a precipice. Competing forces of faith struggle for dominance on a geopolitical stage, wielding weapons of mass destruction. Faiths impose profound limitations on human potential and propagate thought processes that remain among the greatest inspirations for individual acts of violence. Now they threaten all of humanity. We must declare independence from faith, or fall from the precipice.”
Ford went on to note that the principles of Universism “offer a clear and present alternative to the religions that threaten to destroy our world. There is a connection between faith-driven mass murder and faith-driven public policy in the United States. They differ in degree only.”
Vox knew he had struck a chord with other “nonbelievers” when replies to his Web page rolled in and the faithless Universists began meeting in small groups throughout the U.S. In cafés, living rooms and sometimes online, they gathered to read and discuss ideas found in various books, essays, songs, poetry or audio and visual media. According to their Web site, “This practice emphasizes how there is no one reference, no one authoritative source from which we draw inspiration and meaning as Universists.”
The Universist movement is definitely a seeker religion. Universist.org explains that it “elevates the search for meaning and purpose rather than valuing belief for its own sake…we all share an understanding that the search never ends, that it is a wellspring of wonder and motivation in our daily lives.”
The phenomenon has received its share of media coverage in the last few months, including reports by the New York Times, U.S. News & World Report, the Los Angeles Times, Fox News and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It’s also had its critics.
Last month on Anderson Cooper’s 360 °, CNN correspondent Tom Foreman called it “the Seinfeld of religion—no ministers, no real rules, nothing except endless evening talks on politics, life, death, love, all questions, no answers.” Maybe that wasn’t a criticism.
If Vox thinks that those of us who embrace a “revealed religion”—as he calls it—don’t deal with doubts, then he’s forgotten his Presbyterian roots.
But he does make some profound points. He told the Birmingham Weekly, “A shift needs to occur in the religious world from the whole paradigm of ‘Do you believe in God? to ‘How do you behave, based on what you believe?’ ”
I believe he’s right there.
posted by Jack W. Williams | 6:09 PM
|
0 comments
