Half a Hundred Rev. Rod Richards Unitarian Universalist Church of Southeastern Arizona 06/12/11

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Half a Hundred Rev. Rod Richards Unitarian Universalist Church of Southeastern Arizona 06/12/11"

Herbert Lewis
6 years ago
Views:

1 Rev. Rod Richards Unitarian Universalist Church of Southeastern Arizona 06/12/11 Reading From Our Chosen Faith: An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism (1989) by John A. Buehrens and F. Forrester Church: Both denominations that joined to create Unitarian Universalism are named after doctrines. Many denominations are known according to their form of organization. For instance, Episcopalians grant supreme authority to their bishops (the Greek word for bishop is episcopos ), Presbyterians to their presbyters or elders, and Congregationalists to each congregation Other denominations refer to themselves according to some specific practice (Baptists and Seventh Day Adventists); theological approach (Methodists and Christian Scientists); founder (Lutherans); or fidelity to God (Disciples of Christ and Jehovah s Witnesses). Our merged tradition, however, is named after two doctrines. Unitarianism refers to a belief in the unity of God, distinguishing early Unitarians from Trinitarians; and Universalism affirms salvation for all people. The two come together to form the most doctrinally free of all denominations which, ironically, has two doctrines in its name. Sermon Unitarian Universalism celebrates its 50 th birthday this year at the upcoming General Assembly and throughout the many congregations that make up the Unitarian Universalist Association. So this proud tradition we have inherited is only 50 years old? Well, no not quite. We are, collectively, quite a bit older than 50. Unitarian Universalism came about as a result of the merger of the two U s : Unitarianism and Universalism, each of which have roots in the Reformation of the 1500 s and, indeed, all the way back to the very beginnings of Christianity, if not before. (Some trace Unitarianism back to the Egyptian Pharaoh, Akhenaton, in the 1300s BCE.) We are a creedless religious tradition you will hear this many times in many ways in Unitarian Universalist congregations. Each Sunday, I point out in the welcome that we do not share a single set of beliefs; we do not come together around a common creed; a statement of belief. Isn t it interesting, then, that as the Reading pointed out--our name derives historically from just precisely that: BELIEFS! Especially considering that all of those traditions that do have very definite creeds do not have names that derive from beliefs, but rather refer to organization or practice or approach. I ve read that passage from Our Chosen Faith many times before, but it only struck me recently how this fact complicates the already-arduous task of describing Unitarian Universalism. We tell people that we welcome diversity and we do not define ourselves by a common set of beliefs but when they ask where our name comes from, we have no choice but to talk about specific beliefs. No wonder people walk away rolling their eyes and scratching their heads. Further, we have this whole merger piece that we are celebrating the 50 th anniversary of this year. How old is Unitarian Universalism? When were we founded? Well, as I said, Unitarianism has roots that

2 Richards / 2 of 5 reach into the distant past; Universalism has roots that reach into the ancient world; Unitarian Universalism? Well, we re 50 years old! We were born in the 60 s. Unitarian Universalism is a year younger than your minister. And the whole idea of a merger between two denomination with their own unique histories and characteristics brings up its own challenges. No analogy is perfect, but I have heard Unitarian Universalism described as a blended family. And while I think that the merger has been successful in many important respects, let us just say that peace has not always reigned in this house. As I said, Unitarianism and Universalism had unique histories and characteristics. A progress report on the merger in 1975 reads, We started in different ways and under different circumstances [Universalists] gathered their congregations largely from the unchurched, and from dissident elements in the orthodox churches. Membership was recruited from small tradesmen, farmers and wage earners. Their preachers were, with few exceptions, of scant formal education. On the other hand, from the movement s beginning in New England, the Unitarians had strong churches, long established. When the American Unitarian Association was formed in 1825, some 150 liberal Christian churches became Unitarian. Among them were many of New England s strongest and most historic congregations. The clergy were highly educated and the membership, on the whole, affluent and cultured. So this family was formed from members on both sides of the proverbial tracks. Further, there were theological differences. Thomas Starr King, a Universalist minister who became minister of the First Unitarian Church of San Francisco in 1860, famously described the two perspectives this way: [Universalists] think God is too good to damn them forever; [Unitarians] think they are too good to be damned forever. Both were religious optimists, in other words. One placed the weight of their optimism on God s love; the other on human potential. None of these generalizations are entirely true, of course, but these characterizations persist to this day and individual Unitarian Universalists are tempted to align, as sometimes happens in families, with one side or the other. Now some of you were in a congregation before the merger, either Unitarian or Universalist. You brought with you a history in one or the other of these traditions. But even those who have found their way to our congregations well after the merger, learning about our two-pronged history, they will tend to identify more strongly with one or the other of the U s. Unitarianism may appeal to those who place a high value on reason and intellectual exploration; Universalism may speak to those who feel that emotion and spiritual intuition also play a vital role in their religious understanding. To use an even simpler description, some have pictured Unitarianism as our head and Universalism as our heart. If these descriptions were accurate, one could imagine the cartoon bubble over Unitarians saying, Use your head! and a companion bubble over Univeresalists saying Have a heart! Taken together, these are not bad words to live by, really

3 Richards / 3 of 5 But the truth is, of course, more wonderfully complex than that. There are plenty of examples of generous and expansive hearts in Unitarianism and brilliant intellectual achievements in Universalism. If the merger has blended each tradition s strongest qualities, all the better. But I would also like to suggest that 50 years is long enough for us to think of ourselves as blended traditions. I don t mean that we should neglect our history, but we no longer need to fixate on those unique qualities in the present expression of Unitarian Universalism. There is a point when a blended family just becomes a family. There is a realization that all families are blended; mixtures of individual characteristics, of nature and nurture, of circumstance and choice. We come from Unitarians and Universalists, but we are Unitarian Universalists, a new thing under the sun, a family, a movement, a religion, a living tradition unto ourselves, a tradition that we live as Unitarian Universalists. But we still have that cumbersome name. If we are a new thing under the sun, should we keep the name? After all, we are a creedless tradition; we do not come together around a single set of beliefs; we do not share a common body of doctrines; and yet our name as the Reading pointed out is about doctrines, particular beliefs that described us at a particular point in time. We are still caught in this paradox. F. Forrester Church, in the book Our Chosen Faith, writes, Part of the reason for this paradox is that others named us. In the early nineteenth century we were accused by orthodox Christians of the heresies of Universalism and Unitarianism. In other words, the reason our tradition our twin traditions which we claim focus on how we live rather than what we believe, are yet named after particular beliefs is because we or our ancestors in these traditions--didn t choose the names. We were named by others who were concerned with particular beliefs. More specifically, we were named according to how we differed from their beliefs. We were labeled heretics. We accepted the names that were given to us; we sought to explain how and why we differed in belief and to make room for diversity of belief; we even accepted the role of heretics. And my question is, in the down-home phraseology of the esteemed Dr. Phil: How s that workin for ya? How is that working for us? Author, political thinker, and professor of linguistics, George Lakoff has brilliantly pointed out the importance of framing an issue. Our arguments and insights may be brilliant but, finally, ineffective if we allow someone else to establish the frame in which our words are heard, if we allow someone else to establish the metaphor or the language or the focus or the priority that drives the conversation. If we embrace the way someone else has identified us as heretics, for example we can reinterpret it in a variety of provocative ways, we can talk about freedom of conscience and the ability to choose, but we are still placing ourselves in a picture where someone or something else is at the center and we we heretics--are on the margins hurling critiques, fomenting dissent. Heresy only makes sense in opposition to an orthodox position, which means our self-definition could only be derived in

4 Richards / 4 of 5 relationship to a position from which we depart. For too long we ve seen ourselves only as dissenters rather than as the center; we have been better at criticizing than creating; we have reacted to someone else s definition of religion rather than offering up our own. If we accept a name that seems to make a particular belief the most important thing about us, we find ourselves first having to explain the belief and then having to explain that we don t have a creed and don t build our community upon a common belief system. It s not like those particular beliefs for which we were named hold sway among us today, even among those of us Unitarian Universalists who identify as Christian. So what do we do? Change our name? Or or is there a way in which those unwieldy but b-uu-tiful ten syllables can describe who we are today? Is there a way in which Unitarian Universalism can describe, not beliefs, but how we do religious community? As you may have guessed by this point, I believe the answer is: YES! Unitarian: One. The individual. Our congregations honor the integrity and spiritual freedom of each individual, with the understanding that the only beliefs that count are the ones that arise from each person s experience and reflection. Universalism: The Many. The All. Our congregations honor the importance of relationship. We call individuals into a caring, trusting fellowship, searching for understanding across a variety of beliefs. We strive toward, not agreement, but acceptance. We need not think alike to love alike. Further, we acknowledge that we are, in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., caught in an inescapable network of mutuality; we are inextricably ensnared in the interdependent web of all life, and we seek to honor that reality. The fruits of a free and responsible search for truth and meaning by each individual must be expressed in relationships within the congregation, in the greater world community, and with all of life. Unitarian Universalism. The one and the many. Religion, faith, values, beliefs must be explored and discovered within individuals and actualized in community, in relationship with all of life. And this is, of course, circular. Our experience in relationship; the challenges of community; the joys and struggles of working together leads us to fuller, deeper, wider reflection which reshapes our beliefs and understanding which we then strive to actualize in relationship. Unitarian Universalism. Me. Us. The one. And the all. That provides its own kind of balance, doesn t it? Not unlike the head and the heart I spoke of earlier. Unitarian Universalism. The head and the heart. My understanding of my relationship to all that is and my expression of that understanding in how I live my life.

5 Richards / 5 of 5 Let s go back to that for a minute the head and the heart. Actually, let s make a short detour to the land of Oz, because I think of the Wizard of Oz every time I say that: the head and the heart. The brain and the heart. I think of the Scarecrow in search of a brain and the Tin Man in search of a heart. Okay, so if we are saying that Unitarian Universalism speaks to the head and the heart, then we have the Scarecrow and the Tin Man covered. And I guess what I m asking of us today is that we not forget about the Lion. Now is the time to show our courage. Now is the time to quit hiding behind the complications of our history; now is the time to give up being dissenters and admit that we are at the center of something new. I believe that we offer something unique in a religious community. I believe that we are a religion for our time. I believe that people are looking for us but they will only find us if we have the courage to speak; if we have the courage to live out all that we can be. I call that church free which brings individuals into a caring, trusting fellowship, That protects and nourishes their integrity and spiritual freedom It is open to insight and conscience from every source; it bursts through rigid tradition, giving rise to new and living language, to new and broader fellowship. Unitarian Universalism. Head. Heart. Courage. Me. Us. All. So may it be.

INTRO TO WHO WE ARE AND WHAT UUS BELIEVE! a.k.a. UU 101 Thoughts for Seekers

Rev Bob Klein First UU Church Stockton September 24, 2017 INTRO TO WHO WE ARE AND WHAT UUS BELIEVE! a.k.a. UU 101 Thoughts for Seekers Even if you are completely new to Unitarian Universalism today, you