I think perhaps the most frequently used criticism of Unitarian Universalism is “you can believe anything.” The implication usually being that our religion requires little spiritual commitment. In one (more literal) sense this criticism is obviously false. There are some things our hearts and minds will not allow us to accept. I, for example, really wish I could believe in karma, or at least divine retribution, but I cannot.

However, there is another sense to the common criticism which is almost true; that one can have any belief and still choose to label themselves Unitarian Universalist. I say this is almost true because in some more fundamentalist belief systems, which would regard Unitarian Universalism as downright blasphemous, it would be a theological contradiction.

In the minds of others our syncretic, creedless religion might not be evil, but may seem flimsy or “wishy-washy.” Keith Troughton of the Dublin Unitarian Church described this in a December sermon as the “a la carte” (or “buffet” in American usage) criticism. “Sometimes ‘a la carte’ is accompanied by a comment like, ‘Well, that’s not really a religion at all, is it?’ which isn’t really a question so much as a statement.” Many have and continue to subscribe to this train of thought, including Texas comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, who in May 2004 challenged the tax-exempt status of Red River Unitarian Universalist Church on the grounds that it, “does not have one system of belief.” This assessment is misleading because it equates a system of belief with a creed.

It is my thought that the distinction between the two is very important. There is a vast diversity among UUs on an equally vast number of theological and philosophical issues. This is a natural result of UUism’s creedlessness. However, there is a certain mindset which pervades the spirit of our religion: open-mindedness, freethought, questioning and inquiry. The free and responsible search. The humility to admit to ourselves and others that we may never have all the answers, but the courage to never quit looking.

Troughton asserts, and I heartily agree, that Unitarianism requires great commitment: “Worst of all for me is the suggestion that being a Unitarian, being open to the spirit of life and the eternal no matter where or how it comes, lacks any kind of conviction or commitment. Certainly for this Unitarian the opposite is true.”

The lack of a creed is a challenge for us, sometimes even a hardship. That is not to say that members of creedal religions do not have their spiritual crises, but that for them more certainty exists. In my opinion, the courage to confront life and all of its religious implications despite uncertainty is the Unitarian Universalist commitment.