Getting doctrine out of the way

On Sunday a gunman opened fire in the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church during a children's program, killing two people an hospitalizing 7 (forgive me if I have that wrong). He left behind a screed denouncing gays and liberals and many believe he chose this particular church at this time because it recently publicly stated its welcome to gays. Several gay blogs have written several postings of the incident.

Here's a posting by Sara Robinson discussing why it seems the gunman went after a UU church and the traditional UU response to these kinds of tragedies and to American life in general. It is noteworthy for several reasons, even though I am not a Unitarian.

From the opening paragraph:

"Conventional wisdom says that we're soft in all the places our society values toughness. Our refusal to adhere to any dogma must mean that we're soft in our convictions. Our reflexive open-mindedness is often derided as evidence that we're soft in the head. Our persistent and gentle insistence on liberal values is evidence of hearts too soft to set boundaries. And all of this together leads to a public image of a mushy gathering of feckless intellectuals that somehow lacks cohesion, backbone, focus, or purpose."

I've encountered such accusations thrown my way as well -- Christians saying we "must stand for something" and using that as an excuse to wield doctrine like a club. I've been roundly (verbally) clobbered because I've dared to say that many times our insistence on doctrine is getting in the way of our ability to share the love of Christ.

After describing several Unitarians in our nation's history who have done heroic things (in spite of no doctrine as impetus) Robinson says:

"These are not fearful people. Nor do any of them seem to be bedeviled by a lack of conviction. 'Mushy' or 'feckless' are about the last words I'd use to describe any of them. ('Stupid' isn't anywhere on the list, either.) When you sign up to become a UU, this is the legacy you take on, and from then on attempt to live up to. It's not God's job to make the world a better place. It's yours. This has never been work for the faint of heart, mind, or spirit -- and in this era of conservatism gone crazy, it still isn't."

Now I would personally say that I would tackle making the world a better place by aligning myself with God's desire for the same. But this shows that morality can be rich and deep outside of Christianity -- and it seems many Unitarians have come up with a better, (dare I say it?) more Christian morality, than many Christians.

Then Robinson takes on secular progressives, saying religion does have a place in morality:

"Secular progressives don't seem to understand that while politics is all about how we're going to make the world better, progressive religion tells us why it's necessary to work for change, and what 'better' will look like when we get there. Liberal faith traditions offer the essential metaphors and worldview that everything else derives from -- the frames that give our dreams shape and meaning. It has an invaluable role to play in helping our movement set its values and priorities, understand where we are in the larger scheme, and gauge whether we're succeeding or not."

So, if doing away with doctrine gets us people looking out for others and striving for a world that is a better place for all people, let's have more of it! Like the author I am not saying we should do away with faith. It is my faith that drives what I do and my personal doctrine and morals derive from that faith. But my faith does not derive from doctrine and doctrine is secondary to faith. For many on the Right it seems they've got it backwards.

The whole posting is worthwhile.