SERMON: Our Unitarian Universalist Theology Pt. 1

Rev. Tom Capo

January 9, 2005

Sermon

As we begin this discussion of Unitarian Universalist theology, some of us may be a little uncomfortable trying to pin down the ineffable, the indescribable, the unknowable. Some of us might even say that theology is like describing the chemistry of a banana or the physics of riding a bike. It has some value, but what is essential is eating the banana and riding the bike. In other words, spirituality is an experience, a relationship. But I feel there is value in trying to use words, some my own and some of other Unitarians and Universalists, to describe what is essentially a very personal, perhaps autobiographical experience.

Since the beginning of our religion in America, Unitarians and Universalists have experienced much divisiveness regarding their beliefs. The Unitarians kicked most of the Transcendentalists out of the church because the Transcendentalists held that the Bible was not the only path to God. The Universalists fought over whether everyone was immediately allowed into heaven or whether some people had to go to Hell temporarily to prepare themselves for admittance into heaven. Our faith has had to cope with an evolving theology. Unitarians and Universalists have held an aversion to creeds and an openness for each person to individually explore with mind and heart what they believe—resulting in a pluralistic religion.

Almost since its inception, most Unitarian and Universalists have struggled trying to describe a comprehensive UU theology. Recently the Commission of Appraisal, an arm of the Unitarian Universalist Association’s Board of Trustees, has tried to find the beliefs that hold us together as a denomination. The Commission sent out a questionnaire to UU laypersons and ministers to try to find commonly held beliefs. Some of the questions were: where does your religious authority come from—personal experience, UU faith traditions, UU principles and purposes, wisdom shared in community, evolving insights, biblical/scriptural texts, other. What does the word God mean to you: nature, inner voice, cosmos, divinity, creative energy, humanity. While I could understand these questions, there were some that concerned me: How did you find out about your deity: newspaper, Bible, Torah, book of Mormon, Koran, my mother told me, near death experience, near life experience, national public radio, burning shrubbery. And did your God come to you undamaged, with all parts in good working order and with no obvious breakage or missing attributes: if no, please indicate the problems you encountered: not eternal, finite in space, does not occupy or inhabit the entire universe, not omniscient, not omnipotent, not all things to all people, makes mistakes—sort of like Geraldo Rivera, when beseeched doesn’t stay beseeched, requires burnt offerings or virginal sacrifices.

Certainly from these questions, we can see that theology is complicated, especially within a religion as diverse as Unitarian Universalism. But UU’s are not the only ones that have struggled with trying to answer life’s ultimate concerns; all humans have since the beginning of time. Religious Scholar Karen Armstrong believes that “human beings are spiritual animals…Men and Women started to worship gods as soon as they became recognizably humans; they created religion at the same time as they created works of art. This was not simply because they wanted to propitiate power forces; these early faiths expressed wonder and mystery that seem always to have been an essential component of the human experience of this beautiful yet terrifying world. Like art, religion has been an attempt to find meaning and value in life, despite the suffering that the flesh is heir to.”

So Theology is concerned with religion's answers to humanity’s ultimate concerns. Let’s break theology down a bit, to make it a little more digestible. In order to come up with some systematic and comprehensive UU theology, we will need to consider these concerns: what is the relationship between humans and God/divinity/spirit/holy (theological anthropology); what is our relationship/commitment to the church (ecclesiology); and what is salvation—in other words what protects and what saves us (soteriology). We will also need to consider the study of the end of the world or where are we headed (eschatoloy); the study of the holy spirit or what sustains and transforms us (pneuomatology); and the study of the mission of our church and our relationship to other religions on our world (missiology). This Sunday, we will look at God, church, and salvation; next week, the end of the world, the holy spirit, and the mission of the church. I felt we might be here way beyond one hour if I were to try to consider all of humanity’s religious questions in one sermon—not to mention that some of you might have some reaction to these questions that you might want to discuss with me later.

So let’s start with Unitarian Universalists’ views on humanity’s relationship with a divinity, or UU’s belief in one god, more or less.

Let’s consider the history of UU’s view of divinity. Unitarians broke with other Christians over the issue of the Trinity. This break, in addition to a rational approach to theology and an aversion to creeds, resulted in a Unitarian Christian view of divinity that was expressed in 1888 by Rev. James Freeman Clarke, one of the founders of the American Unitarian Association. He wrote: “Unitarians believe God is one--one being and one person. They believe that he is infinitely wise, holy and good; that he is omnipotent and omnipresent; that his highest attribute is love, and that his best name is “Father.” Unitarians reject the church doctrine of the Trinity, because it is unintelligible; because the doctrine of the Trinity is nowhere plainly taught in the New Testament; because there are many texts in the New Testament plainly opposed to the Church doctrine of the Trinity; because we know when and where the doctrine of the Trinity began, and how it gradually took form—it was not until the year 380, after much controversy and party strife, that the doctrine of the Trinity was established by the Church.” Already we can see the seeds of our present UU faith: a concept of spirit or divine that is ultimately good; an understanding that love is the spirit’s highest attribute, and a rational approach to religious tradition and history.

Also in the nineteenth century, Universalist minister Hosea Ballou considered the concept of divinity but from a different perspective. Ballou described God through nature. In his poem, God is Love, nature is used to describe God’s love: "When lovely Spring, with flowery wreathes, comes on young Zephyr’s wing, and every bird soft music breathes, ‘Tis love that makes them sing. Love blossoms on the forest trees, and paints each garden flower, gives honey to the laboring bees, in every sylvan bower. Love breathes in every wind that blows, and fragrance fills the air; meanders in each stream that flows, inviting pleasures there. Love brings the golden harvest in, and fills her stores with food; It moves ten thousand tongues to sing, of universal good.” This naturalistic view of the divine, which many of the Transcendentalist Club—Ralph Waldo Emerson, Theodore Parker, and others--also explored, continues to influence Unitarian Universalism today.

In 1979, Rev. Dana Greeley went a slightly different direction in his consideration of God: “If there is order or purpose in the cosmos, then there must be an orderer, a reason for being. I myself do not separate God from the purpose. For me God is the purpose.” He went on to say in 1983, “I cannot think of God as a person. But I can think of God as energy and light and love, both in me and around me, and five thousand billion miles away.” “There is one God and Father, or Mother, of us all, who is above all, and through all and in us all. In him or her, we live and move and have our being.”

What is your concept of the divine, the spirit, the holy? Consider now, is there any belief about divinity or the holy that we, as UUs, hold in common?

I believe that we do have some common UU understanding of the divine. A year or so ago, I heard Rebecca Parker, professor at Star King School of Theology, talk about aspects of the divine relationship that are commonly held by UUs. I think she is pretty much on target. She believes that UU’s believe God/Goddess/humanity/spirit is basically good and loving. And that to know whatever our concept of divinity is, we must first know ourselves; this gives us clues to the divine. We talk frequently about that divine spark or that inner voice that directs us toward the good; listening to that voice, isn’t that how we know ourselves better, and isn’t that how we wake up each morning feeling that we are doing the work of God/humanity/our soul?

Also, Parker believes that UUs study the world to understand God—science, nature, people, even government—these are elements of how we come to understand what we may consider divine. Thus the purpose of religion is to help us unfold our souls, to learn about ourselves and all creation, that we may come to understand in our hearts and minds that all creation, including ourselves, are manifestations of the divine.

Let us move ahead to ecclesiology; what is a Unitarian Universalist’s relationship/commitment to his/her church? A story might start us on the exploration of this concept: Once upon a time, a small town experienced a series of tragedies. First, the Catholic Church burned down. The priest was seen running out of the fiery edifice carrying a large crucifix. Soon after that, the Jewish temple burned down, and the Rabbi dashed out just in time with the scroll of the Torah in his arms. Then the UU church burned down, and the minister saved the coffee pot. The moral of this story is: church for many UUs is the conversation enjoyed, promises made, and enlightenment gained in community with one another, usually around a coffee pot.

Joachim Wach in The Comparative Study of Religion wrote: “There is no religion which has not evoked a type of religious fellowship.” But how one becomes part of that religious fellowship and what that fellowship means to them varies considerably. There are different methods of becoming a member and participating in religious communities: birth, lineage, birthplace, personal preference, special qualifications, indoctrination. Historically, for many people born in early America, the city they lived in determined the church they were members of. And municipal governments were responsible for gathering taxes to support the churches.

Let’s consider a definition for church before we go much further. Church can refer to a type of religious organization that is well established, inclusive in membership, concerned with the well-being of the community, and that understands itself as the only legitimate custodian of truth. Keep in mind that we are not entirely an exception to this definition.

So what do UU’s have to say about church? Rev. James Freeman Clarke wrote: "Unitarians believe that the Church is a union of those who come together to help each other to live a Christian life. The essential character of a church is stated by Jesus when he says, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them.” To meet “in the name of Christ” is to meet in his spirit, to do his work. Unitarians believe that the work of the church is to reform the vicious, to educate the ignorant, to strengthen the weak, and to cooperate in all attempts to elevate and improve society. Unitarians generally accept the two ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, not as essential to the spiritual life, but as helps to it. They regard both, not as ends, but as means. They consider them as natural symbols and outward images of inward feeling and purpose.” Again we see in the late nineteenth century the seeds of today’s Unitarian Universalist’s concept of church: when we gather we recognize that the holy is with us, church is a place of work/action: improving society, helping those less fortunate, and rituals/traditions are natural symbols and outward images of inward feelings.

Universalist missionary Rev. Starr King—whose namesake is the Starr King School of Theology at Berkley, one of our UU seminaries—put what many UUs feel about church very clearly: a church must be more than “a steeple pointing toward the sky…[church] means very little unless the life within and among the persons active in the church is also pointing toward something higher. The church must be a live institution drawing all of us to something better and higher than we now know or realize.”

And a more comprehensive understanding of a UU’s relationship with their church was written by James Luther Adams, 1930’s: "I call this church free which enters into covenant with the ultimate source of existence…It binds together families and generations, protecting against the idolatry of any human claim to absolute truth or authority. I call that church free which brings individuals into a caring, trusting fellowship…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…the goal is the prophethood and priesthood of all believers, the one for the liberty of prophesying, the other for the ministry of healing. It aims to find unity in diversity under the promptings of the spirit “that bloweth where it listeneth… and maketh all things new.”

Let me bring all these thoughts about a UU’s relationship with their church together. We covenant with one another—to work together toward our higher values—equality, justice, peace, love, and caring for all creation; We covenant with one another—to make ourselves and our world a better place, to support one another in our spiritual searches, to commit to keep this congregation a beacon of liberal religion in Beaumont, and to express our love for one another. We have no creed, no pope, no bishops; we share power—supporting the democratic process in our community and in the society at large. We share the priesthood and prophethood of all believers—everyone’s spiritual beliefs are valued by the community and we minister to each other; we have a relational pulpit—-with the free pulpit and the free pew—-we will preach what we feel and believe, and we have the choice to listen and respond.

Finally we will consider the issue of salvation—-what protects and what saves us? Rev. Starr King reflected on the different views of salvation expressed by Unitarians and Universalists: The difference between Universalists and Unitarians is that Universalists believe that God is too good to damn them, and the Unitarians believe that they are too good to be damned. I know what you are thinking as we talk about salvation, what about all those people who come up to us and ask: “Are you saved?” And at least in your mind you say: “No” with integrity. Well if we can break down this question, it means three things—are you a Christian? Are you one of us—their type of Christian? Have you resolved how to live with the full knowledge and acceptance of death as the end of life? For most UUs, it’s the last question that is most meaningful, and the one we will give most of our attention.

Rev. Hosea Ballou in A Treatise On Atonement wrote that nothing caused more harm to the understanding of Jesus than the idea of atonement, that Jesus died for our sins. This Christian salvation has resulted in people feeling polarized into the saved vs. the damned. In addition, this Christian concept of salvation has been exploited by some churches--there have been priests and ministers who manipulated their followers to stay in their church for fear of eternal punishment if they leave. Some people even suffer emotional torment never knowing for sure whether they have done enough to enter heaven.

In addition, Ballou rejected the notion that people will only do good works if threatened with eternal damnation for doing evil actions. He felt that if we believe that only in death will evil be dealt with, then we also must believe in the theology of a punishing God. This legitimizes violence in the here and now. This theology espouses that we are to be ultimately saved by God’s violence toward those that sin.

Ballou goes on to say that atonement has to do with how we repair the harm done to one another in the here and now, how we make it right. He says salvation has nothing to do with being saved from eternal damnation when we die; he believes that we carry guilt from the hells, the harm, we have caused in the here and now, and the only atonement, or salvation, is how we make amends with those we have harmed in the here and now.

Many UUs today believe as Hosea Ballou did so many years ago. And the same problems exist with the concept of salvation today that existed when Ballou was preaching in the nineteenth century.

So what does this mean for UUs and salvation; what saves us and what protects us: creativity saves and protects us—as we find new ways to end pain and suffering on our planet, the healing power of relationships saves and protects us and the brokenness in our world. Believing, as Ballou did, that God is a loving creator, not a punisher, saves and protects us. And ultimately we believe that love saves and protects us all.

So we have begun our theological journey, through God, church and salvation. I hope as you leave today that you reflect on these concepts; you consider what they mean to you; you consider what they mean to the community of Unitarian Universalists.

Do you remember that moment in the first Indiana Jones movie when Indiana is trapped in an impossible situation, and someone asks him, “What do we do now?” Harrison Ford snaps back, “How do I know? I’m making it up as I go along!” Unitarian Universalism is in process, perhaps it has always been. We’re making it up as we go along, and we won’t get it right every step of the way. But we’ll get it mostly right, if we hold onto each other with one hand, and hold onto our larger vision of creation with the other. May it be so.