Unitarian Universalism compared to New Thought

I've finally had some time to explore the Unitarian church. I was curious about the difference between Unitarian and New Thought churches such as Unity and Religious Science. Since about March of this year, I have been exploring these three denominations to see if I can find a church I can tolerate for more than a few visits. New Thought and Unitarian Universalist brands definitely have a chance. I believe I know enough now to characterize the differences from my perspective.

I'll try to be succinct, as there is plenty of information elsewhere that compares these two approaches. Here are some ways they are the similar:

1. Both accept all religions as valid paths to the truth
2. Both believe in the quest for individual spiritual truth
3. Both support free thought
4. Both are tolerant of all races and sexual orientations
5. Both are metaphysically robust
6. Both share some overlap of thinkers in the 19th century (e.g. Emerson)

Here are some ways they are different:

1. Unitarians encourage no particular form of theistic belief - New Thought has a somewhat specific theistic concept
2. Unitarians draw from all theological, philosophical and other sources equally - New Thought emphasizes Christianity and the New Thought tradition while accepting and drawing from other sources as well
3. In particular, Religious Science draws from the Gospels, Eastern Religion, Ernest Holmes and Emerson somewhat equally while Unity tends to give a metaphysical interpretation of Christianity more emphasis
4. Unitarians have a more traditional form of worship service, drawing from many traditional hymns and using lots of classical music during worship services - New Thought is more contemporary with music
5. New Thought emphasizes meditation and affirmative prayer more than Unitarians
6. Unitarians are more intellectual, where Unity is more emotional
7. Unitarians appear to be somewhat equally represented by both genders - Unity/Religious Science appears to skew toward females
8. Unitarians are more intellectually broad in their sources - New Thought writing seems to have a more specific conceptual mentality

That's just a few. I wanted to get these down while I was thinking about them. My experiences recently in some of the discussion groups at the First Unitarian Church of Dallas have been extremely intellectually stimulating and thought-provoking.

Church Comparisons

Over the last year or so, off and on, I have been considering getting involved in a church again. I spent many years being more and less active in a Methodist church while my children were growing up. During that time my theological and philosophical beliefs and understanding underwent massive changes.

At the start of that period that began in my late twenties and ended in my late forties, I had not done much introspective or external research into what I actually believed. My beliefs were a muddled mix of what I had "learned" growing up in a rural Baptist church and other random secular tidbits of ideas from social science classes in college.

By the end of that time, I had read widely in areas that included philosophy, psychology, theology, science as well as pursued a couple of graduate degrees in Computer Science and Philosophy. I had also undergone 20+ years of life experience that included a first marriage, a long career in software development and raising two daughters. Given that, if my spiritual maturity and philosophical concepts had not changed, something would not have been working in my mind.

After settling into a comfortable agnosticism for many years, a couple of years ago I became newly interested in a spiritual conception based on metaphysics. This led me to the study and light participation in Religious Science. The catalyst for spending serious introspective time going down this path was the book, I and Thou, by Martin Buber. Following this I became aware of Science of Mind magazine and began reading books about Religious Science, New Thought and the writing of Ernest Holmes.

While all this may be well and good, finding a church that supports this line of thought that also supports a non-corny church experience has been challenging. More on that in a minute.

Today I tried going back to a Methodist church because I missed some aspects of a more traditional church experience such as singing traditional hymns, a good choir etc. Unfortunately, after being separated from a traditional protestant church for a few years, the separatist and dualistic theology that is woven into the languaging is more off-putting than before. It will be almost impossible for me to return to a church that has deep traditional and historical roots, even though I do enjoy singing the traditional hymns and I found the people very nice as usual.

So, it should be easy to go back to one of the New Thought churches (or spiritual centers as some like to be called), right? The first problem is that the one I like the best, a Religious Science variant, is about 12 miles north of where I live. The music is great, the theology is rich and the sermons are good. The people are awesome as well and there are a plethora of classes and outreach programs in which to participate.

The other two are Unity churches, a somewhat minor variant from Religious Science, perhaps a bit more directly rooted in Christianity. One is a medium sized church where the music is good, sermons are thought provoking and also includes many classes and opportunities. Another is a very small church, very close to my home with more limited class offerings, but is a good place to be if I want to participate in helping to build the church.

The downside of the first is, again, location, probably 9 miles or so from where I live. The second is almost too friendly, where hugs seem to be the order of the day :(. Both suffer from a lack of tradition in that the songs sung by the congregation are very singy-songy and seem shallow compared to the depth of tradition hymns. At least they do not suffer from the dated theological language contained in some of the old hymns.

Decision will be forthcoming. I have eliminated Methodist or any other traditional Protestant church, so that is progress at least.

Unity and Religious Science

The two religious movements seem to have come out of a similar motivation and time. Both movements have roots in the 19th century and accept all spiritual paths, Christianity and otherwise. Both movements have a connection to Eastern religious principles, but to differing degrees. Both movements appear to be motivated toward a metaphysical interpretation of the Bible, the New Testament Gospels in particular. Both movements emphasize the oneness of the Universe and our ability to get in touch with the One Presence.

I was surprised when I visited a Unity Church bookstore recently that I found no books about Religious Science. From my limited exposure to both approaches, I thought they share fundamental concepts. The differences seem to be in style and emphasis.

Religious Science appears to be a bit more theologically broad and to emphasize philosophy, metaphysics and concepts from Emerson, Science and Eastern religions a bit more. Bible acceptance is focused on the Gospels, although Ernest Holmes Science of Mind writings reference Bible scripture across the board. Unity appears to be a bit more rooted in traditional Christianity, with much more use of Christian scripture during services.

Both movements are a very refreshing approach to spiritual progress. Accepting all paths and pulling concepts from Science, Philosophy, Eastern Theology as well as New Testament Christianity is a recipe for enlightenment and practical application to modern life.