Steven Waldman, editor-in-chief of Beliefnet, made a stir in UU circles by mentioning our name in public. (Are your ears burning?) Our collective chests are just a little bit bigger since he called the Founding Fathers "militant Unitarians."

Here's the quote:

But if I had to pick a religion, I’d say they were sort of militant Unitarians. In other words, they had rejected or become uncomfortable with key parts of Christian doctrine and institutional behavior but they did believe in an active God, who intervened in their lives and the lives of the nation.

Which got me to thinking: I understand the Unitarian part pretty easily. Many of our Founding Fathers, products of the Enlightenment, had issues with things that didn't seem to be rational, like the trinity. Like the idea that a human being can be GOD. So no trinity. A unity, instead. Perhaps God, the Father.

But what did Mr. Waldman mean by "militant"? The first thing that comes to mind is soldiers, fighting, war military aggression. The second thought is still a kind of aggression - strident, unyielding, in-your-face - a lot of political activists come to mind.

Our Founding Fathers were certainly militant about some things, like the revolution, and equality (for all land-owning white men). But the context in which Mr. Waldman said it makes it sound like they were militant about their Unitarianism.

Militant about the use of reason in religion?

Militant about freedom of conscience?

Militant about the inherent worth of humanity?

Militant about a God who intervenes on the side of justice?

Or maybe Walden meant something like the Unitarian Jihad.