The first reading for the sermon is our seventh Unitarian Universalist Principle. This is "We Unitarian Universalists... covenant to affirm and promote ...respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part."
Our second reading is from the 2005 Commission on Appraisal Report on Engaging Our Theological Diversity. A contributor to the report, Professor David Bumbaugh offers this vision of Unitarian Universalism in the future: "The heart of a faith for the twenty-first century, I am convinced, is suggested by the seventh Principle.... Hidden in this apparently uncomplicated, uncontroversial, innocuous statement is a radical theological position. The seventh Principle calls us to reverence before the world, not some future world, but this miraculous world of our everyday experience. It challenges us to understand the world as reflexive and relational rather than hierarchical. It bespeaks a world in which neither god nor humanity is at the center; in which the center is the void, the ever fecund matrix out of which being emerges.... It calls us to trust the process, the creative, evolving, renewing, redeeming process which brings us into being, which sustains us in being, and which transform our being. It offers a vision of the world in which the holy, the sacred is incarnated in every moment, in every aspect of being, a world in which God is always fully present, and in which God is always fully as risk."i
If outsiders know Unitarian Universalists at all, we are known for several things. Some of these we're proud of, like being called "heretics" - which literally means those who choose. For people whose religions require them to accept a set creed, like the Apostle's Creed, this is unimaginable and perhaps envied freedom. Choosing what to believe? How strange... and to the orthodox how sinful. Needless to say, some of us take some glee in this, even as we may respond, "No. We can't believe anything we want. But we believe what our own consciences tell us we must." We UUs can be contrary folks (especially come-outers from other religions) and we're proud of our freedom to choose. We like to follow our own individual paths to religious or spiritual growth.
As Melvin Mackey, a UU member from Vashon, Washington wrote for the UU World, "Unitarian Universalism embodies religious freedom. We do not provide the answers to life's great questions. Instead, we provide a beloved community in which individuals, working together and alone, are encouraged to find answers that are meaningful in the context of their own lives. We draw upon all sources of knowledge-including experience, authority, intuition, reason, and faith-in the search for answers. ... Ours is a living, dynamic religion." He concludes, "We are always free to develop and change our beliefs as we
acquire new knowledge and insight concerning truth, reality, and the meaning of life."And because we as Unitarian Universalists are open-minded, we share a sincere desire to be open and welcoming to people of all sorts in our UU communities. This congregation has stated this openness so clearly in its mission statement. We may be less conscious of the heritage of heresies which goes back not only to 1637, but two thousand years to the beginning of Christianity. We are not a fly-back night, but an historically grounded religion.
On the other hand, there is a negative side to religious freedom. UUs are also unable to articulate what forms the core of their faith. Because the UUA is an intentionally noncreedal religious body, and individualism is so central to UU values; we cannot make universal statements of faith that apply to all of us individually. "What is it that UUs believe?" many people ask. We are challenged to say exactly what does that binds us together. So we're often the butt Garrison Keller's jokes on the Prairie Home Companion because of our vagueness. Beyond our brief "elevator speeches" or introductory statement of personal belief, what do we say next? Is there any belief we need exclude as being beyond the bounds? We instinctively say "yes." I think we know in our gut, but we have a problem saying this.
What do we hold in common? To identify this is a particular challenge for Unitarian Universalists. And to say this is an important challenge for two big reasons. First it's important not only for ourselves, but for our children and youth.
The lack of clarity in knowing where we are now and where we are going (and Heaven's knows where we are going!) has caused many born-UUs to leave our churches. We tend to lose young people as they graduate out of Sunday school or go off to college. This is not a criticism of Barry and Dinny and the fine work they're doing as Youth Group advisors. It is a challenge for all of us in this congregation, in many other UU congregations and in the denomination as a whole. We need to develop a stronger sense of being together on the journey. On April 30 you will have a guest minister, the Rev. Christana Wille-McKnight, who will preach more directly on the subject of retaining our youth.
Second of all, it is important because the lack of a clear theology makes it hard to attract and keep new members. You know the joke about what do you get when you cross a Mormon and a Unitarian Universalist? Someone who knocks on your door for no apparent reason. We may laugh at ourselves, but do we want to be known as those who knock "for no apparent reason?" We need a clearer message in order to evangelize our liberal religion... to spread its good word. It is not enough to just welcome diversity. Although that's important, it's not sufficient. We must have a positive message... a hopeful message, one of radical hospitality and acceptance of the stranger; one of the interdependence and mutuality of all human beings and of the natural world.
Having difficulty defining what unites us is not a new issue for us. As one minister, Ken Oliff wrote, "the strength of the contemporary liberal church lies in its openness, its respect for difference, and in the value that the church places on the sanctity of individual conscience." But he wrote that "where the church falls short is in its lack of clarity regarding an explicit theological vision, and an ensuing ambiguity regarding mission, purpose and commitment." ii
Let me take a moment to define "theology" since it's used so often when speaking about religions in general. Theology. according to the dictionary, is "The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions." It's also "a system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions." I should add that these religious questions extend to the nature of humankind and the universe and how it all relates to the divine. Unitarian Universalism we know has no such clear-cut system or school of opinions. In fact, it may be impossible to have one coherent theological statement which would be acceptable to all of us. And even with a loop-hole for non-believers, a so-called "liberty clause," I think too many of us might look at such a statement as a creed.
However, because many of UUs are concerned about this lack of clarity, the issue of what unites us was studied by the UUA's Commission on Appraisal. As a bit of a background, the Commission on Appraisal was begun in 1961 by our Association's bylaws. The Commission is a nine-member body charged with reviewing, studying and reporting on any function or activity of the Association that could benefit from an independent review. It is to report the results at least once every four years to the General Assembly.
The Commission conducted a study from 2001 to 2005 on this issue of defining what unites us theologically. The Commission traveled around the country interviewing groups of Unitarian Universalists in each district. I attended the one they held at Old Ship Church in Hingham. An impressive group of about 40 people, lay people and ministers, attended. The Commission also sent surveys to every UU church asking them to describe their worship practices. A large number responded. What came out of this four year study was a report called "Engaging Our Theological Diversity". The report's conclusions are both encouraging and challenging.
First our theological diversity. This can be both positive and negative, depending on how you look at it. What did the survey reveal about our religious identity? How did the UUs ... the 170 ministers and 271 lay people who answered the questionnaires identify themselves? Only 20 percent called themselves simply Unitarian Universalists. Others identified themselves as Buddhist UUs or Jewish UUs or Christian UUs or atheists or agnostics. Still others called themselves mystical humanists or natural theists. Many said they drew religious inspiration primarily from earth-centered traditions. Many ministers named process theology as their orientation. No single source predominated; it's clear that we are a diverse bunch. We are no longer mainly Christian, even in the most liberal sense, although those are our roots. Many UUs may called themselves Christian a half a century ago, but it is no longer so.
The encouraging part of the study is that there are many things that we as Unitarian Universalists do hold in common, many values and views that make us unique in the world. The challenging part is that our denomination is in a time of transition and we need to go deeper in developing and articulating our common ground.
This report is too long to go over it in any detail in this sermon. I urge any of you who are interested to borrow this and read it. But I will describe to you some of the encouraging discoveries.
One discovery is that, in place of a creed or set of doctrines, the UU Purposes and Principles has been adopted by many of us as a common expression of a common faith. They are often recited in worship or printed in orders of worship. Some congregations have adopted them in place of church covenants. They are also placed prominently at the beginning of our UU hymnal, where many Christian churches place the Apostle's Creed. We have also reformulated the Principles into simpler "Unitarian Universalists believe..." statements for children in our religious education classes.
The only problem with the Purposes and Principles is that they are not particularly religious in nature. As UUA President Rev. Bill Sinkford noted, they are not a theological statement and do not contact a "language of reverence." They are a set of beliefs and values which sound fairly secular. Many people could accept them without being UUs. Just think for a moment for religiously neutral they sound. Is "God" or "the divine" mentioned anywhere in the Seven Principles?
You have to turn to the second part, the sources of our living tradition, to find phrases that sound spiritual. Here you will find "that transcending mystery and wonder affirmed in all cultures." Here you will find "Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves." These statements are not in what we as congregations explicitly covenant to affirm and promote, but they at least are in there and refer to our roots. Without a firm grasp on our historical roots, we cannot understand the origin of our beliefs and values and we cannot have wings with which to move confidently into the future.
It is interesting that most UU churches use our hymnal, the Singing the Living Tradition hymnal, as their main hymnal. And many recite the affirmations printed in it for their worship, including "Love is the doctrine of this church"... the affirmation we used this morning. They also frequently use the "Love is the spirit of this church" affirmation ... one we've recited in other services. Also common among churches is the doxology we sang this morning. Thus these taken together can be considered core to our UU values and beliefs.
At the end, the Commission spelled out fourteen general statements of beliefs which are widely accepted among us, as well as noting special areas of disagreement. The Commission members believed that these statements approximated more of a systematic theology than our current Purposes and Principles. They caution, however, that this list is not definitive or final, but is merely a beginning of a deeper discussion among ourselves.
I offer these statements to you for consideration. It's interesting, I think, that the list starts with human beings, which is where UUs tend to start before we talk of the divine... if we dare to at all.
Human nature: We agree that all human beings have worth and dignity and must be respected. We are optimistic about the human capacity for goodness, but recognize that every person is capable of evil.
Knowledge and Revelation: We agree that revelation and knowledge come from many sources and that truth is always incomplete and evolving.
Reason: We agree that reason is a necessary part of religious inquiry and that the abilities of the human mind to think and choose must be brought to bear on religious questions in a disciplined and rigorous way.
We disagree about whether reason is a sufficient route to understanding by itself or whether other processes that go beyond the boundaries of reason are necessary... such as intuition or dialogue with others of differing views.
Freedom of the individual: We agree that no one owns the truth, and that each person must be free to search for the truth in a responsible and disciplined way and to choose what to believe based on individual experience and conscience.
We disagree as to whether freedom itself is a sufficient basis for religious faith or for holding together a religious community.
Human responsibility: We agree that human beings are responsible for creating a just, sustainable, and peaceful world through human capacities for forgiveness, nonviolent conflict managements, cooperation, and community building.
We disagree as to what is necessary to create such a world, and the extent to which we are responsible for maintaining the status quo.
Value of Community: We agree that being a part of an inclusive and covenantal religious community is important to the formation of a healthy religious self.
We disagree as to whether the building of a beloved community or supporting the quest of the solitary individual is the true goal of our congregations.
Democratic Process: We agree that decision-making in our communities should follow a democratic model. We disagree as to how to settle conflicts and how to preserve the rights of both the majority and the minority on any issue.
Nature of the Divine: We agree that the universe is an interdependent web, held together by a force (or forces) that can be understood in a variety of ways. We disagree on how that force (or forces) should be named, and whether or not it possesses consciousness.
Interdependent Web: We agree that the natural world is a continuously evolving web of interdependence and mutuality and that human beings must respect the impact of our actions on the whole. This may be the strongest belief commonly held among us.
Source of Evil: We agree that evil is most commonly the result of human choices and actions. We disagree as to whether evil is solely of human creation.
Spirituality: We agree that awe, wonder, and love are necessary and healthy. We disagree concerning the value of spirituality and spiritual practices for enhancing or engendering a sense of awe, wonder, and love.
Worship: We agree that it is important for a religious community to come together regularly for celebration, commemoration, mutual encouragement, and support. We disagree as to whether that coming together should be called worship, and the extent to which it should involve ritual, song, texts, and other aspects of worship common to the world's traditional religions.
Institutions: We agree that religious institutions have value. We disagree concerning the level of responsibility the individual has for the institution and whether institutionalization is important at more than a local level.
Sources of Authority: We agree that the conscience of the individual is the ultimate locus of religious authority. We disagree concerning the degree to which the individual conscience should be informed, inspired, or critiqued by tradition and community.
As the report concludes, we are somewhere in the middle of a process, a journey to a new and unknown place. We are in a difficult time, even a scary time where the road may be muddy and rough.
Let us stay together on the journey and support each other and our religious community. Let us trust in the process of creativity. Let us trust the place where the human and divine come together in the center, the ever fecund matrix out of which being emerges. This is an exciting time when we may be filled with hope for our living, dynamic faith. Let us be inspired to offer radical hospitality to all and a place of sanctuary and transformation in a hurting world.
Amen and may it be so.