Three Prophets of Religious Liberalism

This book presents three very famous sermons/essays in the history of religious liberalism or liberal Christianity if you prefer; a very good, detailed introduction sets the stage. I found the book to be very inspiring.

The introduction by Conrad Wright is over 40 pages long, but well worth reading before diving into the sermons/essays that follow. Mr. Wright provides much useful context and some explanation of the sermons/essays themselves here. I may be no expert, but I am not a neophyte in the area either, and I found the introduction very beneficial. Please don't skip past it.

The first essay/sermon was written and presented by William Ellery Channing for an ordination ceremony for a new minister in Baltimore in 1819. Dr. Channing was a major figure in the Unitarian movement around this time. This sermon/essay is sometimes named "Unitarian Christianity" and sometimes called simply the "Baltimore Sermon". In it, Dr. Channing describes many of the doctrinal areas where Unitarians and "Orthodox" (here meaning most Protestants of the day) Christians differ, while presenting his view on why the Unitarian viewpoint makes the most sense. The One God versus the Triune God being one of those areas (from which the Unitarians get there name originally), but by no means the only one. He was VERY convincing.

The writing style is a bit "old fashioned" in a few spots making it a challenge, but overall it is pretty clear. I must say that Dr. Channing was very good at laying out a logical argument to make his point which I really appreciate, and something I have not seen often enough in religious writing; most seem to appeal to/focus on emotion or feeling, and there is nothing wrong with that, but I prefer a logical, step by step approach.

Following Dr. Channing is the (Harvard) Divinity School Address of 1838 by Ralph Waldo Emerson. To be honest, I have never been a fan of Emerson's writing, and this did not change my mind. HOWEVER, I did find many points made here to be enlightening to me personally, so I am glad that I read it. My problem is his writing style. It is just hard to get through. Sorry, but that is how I feel. It is sometimes poetic, but often too cryptic, at least for me.

The last in "the Transient and the Permanent in Christianity" by Theodore Parker written and delivered in 1841 for another ordination. My reaction to it is simply, WOW!! This is a great piece of writing. I wish it would be published widely today for all people to consider and ponder. It is meant for a Christian audience or at least one from a Christian based culture, but it might have appeal to others as well. The writing style is very easy to follow and very logically laid out, but there is still plenty here for people who prefer an approach that appeals to the emotions as well. It is nearly 40 pages long, but I was able to sail right through it.

This sermon/essay by Parker got him into a lot of trouble when he gave it and then published it. This is explained in the introduction, and if one considers what he said and when he said it, this should not be a big surprise.

Parker's thesis is that in every age, Christians have doctrines and forms of worship that are unique to them and change over time to things very different. BUT, the core beliefs stay the same. And, he thinks this is not a bad thing necessarily, at least if there is proper focus on the core beliefs. Along the way in elaborating on this, he makes many points, including saying NO to the doctrine of Biblical infallibility (a big "no-no" at the time) and giving reasons for this; yet still, he showed respect for its basic teachings (which was not good enough for many in his time).

I must say that when I read Parker here, I felt that I saw the REAL message and approach of Jesus in it. I don't think that I can explain this. Take a look and I hope you can see it too.

I respect the religious tradition I was brought up in, but I do wish I had found out about these old Unitarians earlier in life. They had much to say that has helped me a lot. I hope that others find this for themselves too - here or elsewhere.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!

The World Jones Made

This is an early novel by PKD.

I have heard many negative things about this book, but I think they were unfair for the most part. It is not perfect, but still pretty good and well worth reading.

The story basically goes like this. There is a world war and much destruction. A new government takes over based on Relativism - you can believe what you like, but you can't try to foist it on others. Sort of the polar opposite of the Absolutism that is blamed for the war by some of the characters in the story. But in practice, the two may not seem all that different.

A member of the secret police happens upon this guy Jones who can see one year into the future. One thing leads to another, and after the secret police fail to assassinate Jones, he soon becomes supreme leader. His rise to power has something to do with amoeba like creatures from outer space called the drifters. It might spoil the book for people who have not read it if I explained much more on how that goes and turns out, but later, there is a sort of super Tholian web involved which will mean something to fans of the original Star Trek series. In any case, things under Jones don't seem to go so well.

Also in the story are some human like creatures adapted for life on Venus. Well, not the actual Venus as it is, but as I guess it was imagined by the author when this book was written in the 1950's and apparently before any probes went there. Well, it made for good storytelling nonetheless. These characters as presented in the story should also give readers some things to think about - I'll keep my conclusions here to myself.

The book is quite thought provoking in many other aspects as well. Things go from one extreme to another, and one can ask what really changed. The implications of being able to see the future were also explored and done quite well I think. There is much more besides this.

The book has a decent ending even if things are not tied up completely - but this lends a hopeful aspect.

I think it would have been a better book if it had been a little longer to allow for a deeper presentation of the many things it considered. In any case, it is very good as is, and I recommend it.