A question of reason

By Christine Whelan

As someone who has come relatively late to Unitarianism, I’ve struggled to explain to people who ask, just what it is that our church is all about.  It’s been difficult to come up with an explanation that focuses on what we are, rather than what we’re not.  So when our visiting minister, Roger Fritts, gave a sermon entitled ‘What is a Unitarian today?’ I hoped that I’d find an explanation that made sense to me and that I could use when others asked me about the church.  Roger’s sermon identified ‘reason’ as the special strength of the Unitarian church – in particular the application of reason to religion.  By this he meant, and I quote: ‘we think, understand and form judgements about religious issues logically. The use of reason to analyse religious questions is our major contribution to the world.’  Roger’s talk, which expanded on this theme, made perfect sense to me and I was delighted to have some words that I could use when I was next put on the spot.

It didn’t take very long.  I was talking to a colleague about the fact that I was coming to the church one evening to attend a discussion group on ‘intelligent design’, when she looked at me in all seriousness and said, “well of course you believe in that, don’t you?”  I was at a loss for words – but at least my inability to explain Unitarianism was confirmed!  I knew that this colleague, who had been brought up a Catholic, but no longer attended the Catholic church, was looking for a church to attend so that her children could be part of some form of religious community, so, after some thought, I forwarded her the link to Roger’s sermon on our website and suggested that if she did want to know more about Unitarianism she might like to read it.  We were talking later on that day when she said to me, “I could never be a Unitarian.” Well, that was fine with me, but I was curious as to why, so I asked what had led her to that conclusion.  She told me that as soon as she read the sentence about reason being our special strength, she knew Unitarianism wasn’t for her.  Since this particular colleague prides herself on her logic and her rational approach to problems I found this an interesting response.  I asked her why this in particular had caused such a strong negative reaction and she said that from her experience people who relied on reason saw things as black and white and closed their minds to anything that couldn’t be scientifically proved.  From her point of view this meant that there is no room in Unitarianism for questioning or for mystery.

I have to say that this response threw me somewhat.  In my relatively short time in this church, the things that have impressed me most are the huge divergence of views in this congregation and the openness to the views of others.  My idea of the meaning of reason was clearly very different from that of my colleague.  I decided to have a look and see whether definitions of the word might help me at all.  Being somewhat pressed for time I took the easy way and started with the internet.  I found a number of definitions, some of which I’d like to share with you:

• the capacity for rational thought or inference or discrimination; 
• rationality: the state of having good sense and sound judgment;

and, to reason -

• to think logically;

It seemed to me that none of these things implied the sort of closed mindedness that my colleague had referred to – on the contrary, I’d suggest that there would have to be an openness to new information in order to make rational or reasoned judgements.

The fourth principle of Unitarian Universalism, which is to affirm and promote a free and responsible search for truth and meaning, supports this view – that we are open to new ideas and that we value the questioning that is part of the search.  There is no question that reason is a key element of the Unitarian approach to religion – this has been the basis of Unitarianism from the time of the Council of Nicaea through to the present day.  We are not asked to take anything on blind faith.

But, does our reasoned approach to the question of religion preclude either passion or mystery?  I think this is really what made my colleague decide that Unitarianism wasn’t for her – the feeling that somehow religion had become the subject of purely scientific analysis, leaving no room for the spiritual or the emotional.  Somehow, reason has become equated with emotional sterility – we can all recognize the societal stereotype of the clinical, cold-hearted scientist.  However, stereotypes are just that and scientists are simply people who look for answers in a logical and reasoned way. 

I was very interested, in my meanderings through the internet while researching this talk, to find a website giving instructions to American Southern Baptists on Understanding and evangelising members of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Churches.  Point three of the instructions reads:

3) Be prepared to use reason. Unitarian-Universalists are generally well-educated or at least well-read. They value reason. They will not be easily moved from their positions merely on the basis of your appeal to an unsubstantiated faith. Emphasize the reasonable aspects of Christian truths. Demonstrate that Christianity is a reasonable faith, in fact, the most reasonable faith. Emphasize the host of rational and empirical evidences that support the claims of Christianity.

It would appear that our strength in the use of reason is not only known to ourselves!

But is it really all about reason, or is that just a part of who we are? The third UU principle talks about acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations, so clearly the spiritual is important to us.  This is evident in our services – in our meditations, our songs and our readings. It’s also evident in the sources we reference for our living tradition, which include both religious and humanist teachings as well as “Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces that create and uphold life”.

But are the scientific approach and the spiritual or emotional mutually exclusive?  Can we demand evidence and still see mystery? 

In a 1998 article, Martsolf and Mickley defined the spiritual as relating to:

• Meaning – significance of life; making sense of situations; deriving purpose
• Values – beliefs, standards and ethics that one cherishes.
• Transcendence – experience, awareness, and appreciation of a "transcendent dimension" to life beyond self.
• Connecting – increased awareness of a connection with self, others, God/Spirit/Divinity, and nature.
• Becoming – an unfolding of life that calls for reflection and experience; including a sense of who one "is" and how one knows.

For the most part this definition is entirely consistent with the Unitarian and the scientific approach.  We can and should question and our questioning can lead us to spiritual growth.

It’s also clear that science does not preclude mystery.

Paul Davies, Professor of Natural Philosophy at the University of Adelaide, interviewed in 2002 for the BBC4 radio programme Devout Sceptics, talks about the inspiration that he and his scientific colleagues gain from what he describes as ‘the wonder, the beauty, the ingenuity of nature and the underlying, law-like mathematical order.’

Professor Davies also says: “It could be that there are some things that are simply going to be forever beyond scientific enquiry – not because we’re lacking the money or the expertise or something of that sort, but because there are inherent limits to how far rational enquiry can take us.  We know from the foundations of logic and mathematics that there are ultimate limits on things, on what can be proved and what can be known.  It could be that the scientific project is limited and that there will inevitably be mystery.  I think, in fact, that that is the case, that there will inevitably be some element of mystery in following the scientific path.” 

Chet Raymo, in an excerpt from his book, Skeptics and True Believers, says, “At its best, scientific skepticism is a manifestation of curiosity, intelligence, and imagination – in a word, the best of the human spirit.  It slowly, patiently builds the domain of knowledge, pushes back the encroaching darkness, the demons of the deep, but never exhausts the infinitude of mystery.  Asked if he was religious, Einstein replied: “Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernable concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable.  Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion.”

So, is Unitarianism a cold, passionless, rational religion?  I don’t believe for a moment that this is the case?  Unitarians are passionate about many different things – music, social justice, the environment, art and yes, religion and science – as well as being people who think logically.

I’d like to think that while reason is a cornerstone of our religion, it is, as Roger Fritts put it, only our tool.  A tool we can use to help us to understand at least some of the mysteries as well as to realise our spiritual goals.