The Clergy Letter--from Unitarian Universalist Clergy--An Open Letter Concerning Religion and Science As Unitarian Universalists, we draw from many sources, including "Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life," and "Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit." While most Unitarian Universalists believe that many scared scriptures convey timeless truths about humans and their relationship with the sacred, we stand in solidarity with our Christian and Jewish brothers and sisters who do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook. We believe that religious truth is of a different order than scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information, but to transform hearts. Fundamentalists of various traditions, who perceive the teaching of evolution to be in conflict with their personal religious beliefs, are seeking to seeking to influence public school boards to authorize the teaching of creationism. We see this as a breach in the separation of church and state. Those who believe in a literal interpretation of the of the Biblical account of creation are free to teach their perspective in their homes, religious institutions, and parochial schools. To teach it in the public schools would be to assert a particular religious perspective in an environment that is supposed to be free from such indoctrination. We the undersigned, Unitarian Universalist clergy, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and other scriptures may comfortably coexist with the discoveries of modern science. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as "one theory among others" is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science, and religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary forms of truth.
The letter mentions "timeless truths of the Bible and other scriptures", but when it comes to criticizing a literal interpretation of the scriptures, it is only the Bible that is mentioned. There is also the matter of the Unitarian Universalist clergy objecting to fundamentalists trying to influence school boards, claiming it is a breech in the separation of church and state. But hundreds of Unitarian Universalist clergy signed this letter which is clearly an attempt on the part of these clergy to influence school boards. Isn't that also a breech in the separation of church and state? If the public schools should be free of religious influence, should that not apply just as much to influence by Unitarian Universalists as it does to influence by fundamentalists?
I recall a joke about Unitarians as people who believe in at most one God. But even that is no longer true, since Unitarians now openly embrace the option of polytheism. Unitarians seem to believe that fundamentalists are ridiculous for their literal belief in the Bible. But many people believe that Unitarians are ridiculous for claiming to be a religion, when they apparently do not actually believe in anything. There is no freedom of religion if we are not allowed to believe that we are right and other people are wrong. This applies to fundamentalists and to Unitarians. But there are situations where the religious beliefs of other people need to be treated with respect, even if we happen to consider them to be ridiculous. Once again, this applies to both fundamentalists and Unitarians--and the public schools are one place where the principle of respectful treatment applies.
Separation of church and state is not something that is found in the US Constitution. What is found in the Constitution are first Amendment restrictions that apply only to acts of Congress, and fourteenth Amendment requirements that the states provide equal protection and due process. Since the fourteenth Amendment is the true Constitutional basis for any Federal court rulings in this area, I believe discussions should be formulated in terms of equal protection and due process.
When modern Christians talk about idolatry they usually mean it in a rhetorical sense. "We shouldn't make becoming a success into an idol" would be an example. From this perspective, it sounds as if the Unitarian Universalists are saying we should not make literal interpretation of the Bible into an idol. But there is more to it than that. The reference to idolatries of the mind and spirit is part of a quotation in which the Unitarian Universalists appear to be quoting themselves. According to Joseph Priestly, perhaps the most influential of all Unitarians, a belief in a divine Christ was a corruption of Christianity. He saw Unitarians as waging a religious battle against a belief in the divinity of Christ. Priestly wanted to use science and reason to argue his case. Unitarians basically believe that Christians who accept the trinity are polytheistic pagan idolators, and those clergy who signed the Unitarian Universalist letter want to enlist the support of school boards in their effort to combat what they see as idolatry. Far from wanting a separation of church and state, the Unitarian Universalist clergy who signed the letter actually want to get school boards to take their side in a religious war.
I find it interesting that Joseph Priestly wanted a kind of separation of church and state in which it was the state which was expected to stay out of religion and education. I rather like that particular view of the separation of church and state. If we are to have public education, I think our goal should be religious neutrality. We should not have politically appointed members of a Supreme Court deciding which religious views should be given protected status and which religious views should be banned from the schools. Chaplains in the military offer a reasonable example of what can be done when the goal is neutrality rather than separation. It is a shame that we are unwilling to show a similar respect for different religious views in our public schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment