By Whose Authority?

In the 21st century, the Unitarian commitment to reason and conscience as arbiters of our religious and spiritual thinking is fairly much taken for granted. However, it was not ever thus. When Unitarianism started to take off in Britain in the 18^th century, its leading lights were Joseph Priestley, Theophilus Lindsey and Thomas Belsham.  And they believed that religious belief should be consonant with reason, and that reason should also be used when interpreting scripture. But they did not go so far as to tackle the question of what you should choose to believe if reason is found to contradict scripture.

James Martineau

It was not until the 19^th century that scholars really began to question the infallibility of the Bible. But as both scientific and biblical scholarship began to progress, many parts of the Bible came into question. Biblical scholars were able to demonstrate fairly convincingly that the Bible was a collection of books written over many centuries by many human beings, with many internal contradictions. So scripture could no longer be relied on as a source of authority.

Most Christians, and members of other religions, choose to believe that spiritual authority may be found in one or more of three places: in holy words (scripture, a creed, or a confession of faith); in a holy institution (for example, the Church or religious leaders such as priests or rabbis or ayatollahs); or in a special leader or person with authority (e.g. Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, the Buddha). This authority may be seen as divine.

It was James Martineau, the celebrated 19^th century Unitarian scholar and theologian, who finally addressed the problem of possible conflicts between reason and scripture, in his book The Seat of Authority in Religion, which was published in 1890. He looked at the traditional sources of authority - scripture, Church tradition, and leaders such as Jesus. And he came to the radical conclusion that actually, none of these should have ultimate authority over what someone should believe. And that the only valid sources of authority were the individual's own reason and conscience.

Martineau’s book marked a watershed in Unitarian thinking. It opened the door to a wider view of what religious authority means, which has evolved into our present questioning faith. Unitarians today believe that although we may develop spiritually within a particular faith tradition, we will never close the door on new revelation or stop questioning our beliefs. This is the antithesis of the traditional view of authority, which requires unthinking submission to a particular creed or set of beliefs.  It means that Unitarians can be open to inspiration from whatever source it comes – in the natural world, in the sciences and arts, in our work and friendships, in our sorrows as well as in our joys. In our services, we are free to draw inspiration from many sources.

Our view of authority has modified over the centuries, from a dual belief in reason and scripture, to our current position that, as Cliff Reed says, “each person is his or her own final authority in matters of faith.” The authority of individual reason and conscience is held to be supreme, but it is important to be a member of a religious community to which you can bring your questions and your doubts, in the sure knowledge that they will be met with a broad questioning tolerance. The interplay of individuals’ beliefs is one of the great strengths of a Unitarian congregation – the bouncing of ideas off each other means that we can never be complacent about what we believe. It is stimulating to belong to such a congregation, but can be very hard work. Nothing is set in stone, and each individual is responsible for keeping his or her mind open to new ideas, so that our faith can grow.