Foundationist Church?

Dave the Web

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
I have been looking around the site (at what you actually have up) and noticed a piece in your general articles section, which refers to a Foundationist Church. I have not yet read all of the article, but it does cause some concern. I joined this site believing that I would be among open-minded people, without fear for questioning any accepted norm or practice. I would be disppointed if the aim of this site was simply to create a sect, a cult, or other schismatic group centered around a central figure.

What say you, Brian?
May I state immediately that in no way whatsoever is this site intended, in whole or in part, to promote any form of organised belief system, doctrine, or similar - all of which are anathema to basic Foundationist principles. This is intended only as an information site, where open-minded people may indeed discuss. I would actually be quite horrified at the idea of an organisaed body coming into existence - that is the gateway to political manipulation and self-serving personal goals.
Btw - I was actually tempted to e-mail Sean and ask him if he would consider editing the article to remove all reference to "church" or other form of organisation. I figured that would be unnecessary, though, and believe the piont of the article is not a call for organised belief, but instead of freedom of belief.
You say that there is no orgnaised body involved with this site, yet what is this I see before my name? Neophyte? I fear you have established a system of titles that may confuse this issue.
one of the definitions of a church is: "The clerical profession; clergy; congregation". it is in this sense that i intended the word to be used. it is not a strictly Christian reference. While the Foundationist Church may be orgnized-- an organization, it in no way promotes an organized religion. what it does promote is an openminded and honest exploration of all beliefs to reconcile differences and focus on commonalities.
I am not against a Foundationist organisation as such. After all, I am sure that there are atheist and theist organisations of all types who have no doctrine. Or perhaps some do. Nevertheless, the use of the term Church did seem a little provocative. Since it is declared that this site promotes no doctrine or organised belief system then I rest more easily. I shall feel moer comfortable now.
the difference between a Foundationist and a Unitarian Universalist is that the former seeks to know, while the latter accepts the not knowing. one is questing while the other is resting.
Ah, now that is a good distinction. :)

Personally, I'd like to broaden the use to be inclusive of them, though. ;)

Note sure how the UU stand on doctrine - they have a reputation for being very open-minded, but they are still essentially a Christian sect.
I am not sure if the Unitarians even know what they believe in anymore. :-