Unitarian Universalism, A Journey
By Amber Beland – Preached in
I can remember from the time I could
form an argument always being asked this question - What is it that UU’s
believe? How many times have I thought
about the answer maybe pulling out the card in my wallet, like this red card and
reading from it, having long confusing discussions about hell and damnation, about
heaven and how I was just not going to be going there. I remember coming home and being confused, or
hurt but mostly just angry. Why would
these friends of mine not respect my ideas or answer my questions after all I
was just curious. That curiosity
sometimes led me to places and experiences that I did not expect. In the end, the place that those questions
led me is right here to this moment talking about the journey.
I have spent the last few years
working hard at becoming a UU minister and in some ways becoming a UU. Taking all I have learned and coalescing it
into some sort of reality, some sort of answer to the question what is a UU and
what is it that we believe. The research
I did for my senior paper during my Master’s program points to the history of
both the Unitarians and the Universalists for the answer. But the answer however interesting that we
find in the past is nothing without the living present of our religion that we
find on all days but especially on Sundays like this right here in worship
together. How do we explain our
connections, the freedom and responsibility that we have in community, the way
we minister to each other and the way that we are fed by this experience.
To start answering the question who are we as UU’s lets look back for a
moment. The Universalists were a group
working against the established religion in this country. They were an independent group of people who
might be called religious rebels. These
Universalists were tent revivalists, natural evangelicals, they were passing a
message of salvation – this was a rebellious move – they preached that universal
salvation was true and that the “elect” included all of humankind. They offered a religion without the eternal
damnation that was being preached in most other churches at the time. They attracted large numbers of free thinkers
– they offered a message of hope and transcendence. They were the itinerant preachers who spoke
in church or barring that under a tree– they were Bible based and spirit
filled. This free belief system fit well
with the experience of revolution and they found themselves in complete
agreement with the right of the colony to govern itself. Benjamin Rush, a parishioner in the
Universalist church, wrote a letter in which he expresses this connection he
wrote, “A belief in God’s universal love to all his creatures, and that he will
finally restore all those of them that are miserable to happiness, is a polar
truth. It leads to truths upon all
subjects, more especially on the subject of government. It establishes the equality of mankind----it
abolishes the punishment of death for any crime----and converts jails into
houses of repentance and reformation.”[1] By 1790 the Universalists were ready to
redefine their faith – they had a centralized convention in
Article I.
We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament contain
a revelation of the character of God, and of the duty, interest and final
destination of mankind.
Article II.
We believe that there is one God, whose nature is Love, revealed in one
Lord Jesus Christ, by one Holy Spirit of Grace, who will finally restore the
whole family of mankind to holiness and happiness.
Article III.
We believe that holiness and true happiness are inseparably connected,
and that believers ought to be careful to maintain order and practice good
works; for these things are good and profitable unto men.[3]
This Profession
was not accepted by all in the Universalist faith. The sheer independence and rebel feeling
meant that the Free Church polity and the independence of mind were at conflict
with the creedal feeling of the Profession.
This was to be reexamined as the years went on.
By the beginning of the 1900’s the
Universalist faith was to experience a movement called the Social Gospel. The message of this movement was not to go
alone into the world to change things but to use the church as a base from
which to renew and center oneself in the fight for change. This idea has carried well into our own
churches – with petitions in the coffee hour, multiple church outreach programs
and each of us finding ourselves in the midst of a community that fights and
hopes and changes the world around us.
The Universalists with their wonder
about the world, their bright outlook and promise of the love for all, the
energy of their members, and the freedom of their pulpit or should I say their
tent bring us a history that we continue to draw on.
The Unitarians are perhaps a group
that we hear more about – learn more about and are without a doubt much more
covered in our history – as a matter or fact they come first in our name. The Unitarians were the establishment – hard
as that is for us to believe in our day they were the “state church”. The very opposite of the early Universalists
– they were in the big cities – the big churches with the trained ministers –
those coming from Harvard and places like that – these were no grassroots
organizers – oh no – these were the voices of academic thought. There was no love lost between our two halves
in the beginning.
The Unitarians inherited the
Protestant church of the Puritans – the state church that had run in the
An early Unitarian, Octavius Brooks Frothingham defined
the religion in the 1840’s as, “a faith rather than a creed, a sentiment more
than a dogma, not sharp in outline, but full of emotion and charged with
conviction, slightly illogical perhaps, but firm – a religion of the heart.”[4] These
words echo in my heart – how could it be that this man more than 100 years ago
defined our religion in a way so close to the current conversation about
it.
History has a
way of shocking me – letting me know that this struggle to define our liberal
faith is one that generations before us have dealt with – the questions about
who we are have been asked a thousand times before and the answer, not an easy
one or a complete one has been spoken.
By 1886 the answer was in a statement called the “Theology of the
Future” created by James Freeman Clark in response to the Five Points of Calvinism
which were, Absolute Decrees, Atonement of Christ for the Elect only, Original
Sin, Effectual Calling and the Perseverance of the Saints. He created a statement that some of you may have heard or read about before
– it reads
1.
The Fatherhood of God
2.
The Brotherhood of Man
3.
The Leadership of Jesus
4.
Salvation by Character
5.
The Continuity of Human Development in all worlds, or the
Progress of Mankind onward and upward
forever.[5]
Now we might change the wording a bit and even the
theological content but we have to acknowledge the great change that these
religious liberals made – a brave change.
The fourth point is a place that we can hear an echo of today –
salvation by character – no longer the Calvinist idea of original sin but the
free idea that we can make our own way – we control our own destiny. This was the shocking breakthrough that the
Unitarians made in the late 1880’s; this is part of the legacy that we carry
today. As a young UU I understood this
principle. I was ready and willing to
make my own way and the church was a haven for that growth and development, a
place where each of us can decide our own salvation, however we might define it,
based on our own choices.
With the new century came the
influence of humanism – the challenge of understanding the natural world around
them. The Unitarians moved further and
further away from their Christian roots, finally in the 1930’s in an attempt to
understand and answer the question of who the denomination was they formed something
that we still do today to study and make action in our churches, you guessed it
they formed a committee. By 1936, this
committee called the Commission of Appraisal offered the following statement of
agreements and disagreements among Unitarians as it saw them at the time:
1.
----in
affirming the primacy of the free exercise of intelligence in religion,
believing that in the long run the safest guide to truth is human intelligence.
2.
----in
affirming the paramount importance for the individual of his own moral
convictions and purposes.
3.
----in
affirming that the social implications of religion are indispensable to its
vitality and validity, as expressed in terms of concern for social conditions
and the struggle to create a just social order.
4.
----in
affirming the importance of the church as the organized expression of religion.
5.
----in
affirming the necessity for worship as a deliberate effort to strengthen the
individual's grasp of the highest spiritual values of which he is aware.
6.
----in
affirming the rational nature of the universe.
1.
----as
to the expediency of using the traditional vocabulary of religion, within a
fellowship which includes many who have rejected the ideas commonly associated
with such words as "God", "prayer", "communion",
"salvation", "immortality".
2.
----as
to the wisdom of maintaining the definitely Christian tradition, and the
traditional forms of Christian worship.
3.
----as
to the religious values of a purely naturalistic philosophy.
4.
----as
to the adequacy and competency of man to solve his own problems, both
individual and social.
5.
---as
to the advisability of direct action by churches in the field of social and
political problems.[6]
What a group
we were even then – notice that we could not leave behind the disagreements –
and indeed these disagreements may be more interesting for us today than the
agreements. Are these not many of the
same questions, puzzles and problems that we still have today? The questions about vocabulary, the question
of our beliefs and where they lay – and how and when it is appropriate and
necessary to take direct action as a church.
Then the agreements – we all like these, right! How many times have I heard the disbelief
that a group of somewhat likeminded individuals in a building without a dogma,
a creed or a holy book is not a religion, a church or a faith? Well, I think that the statement of affirming
the importance of the church as the organized expression of religion is an
answer to this. The things mentioned in
this statement of 1936 show us the struggle of a faith changing and growing but
defining their center not as the belief system, dogma, creed or faith, not by
Jesus, God or any other deity but by their community. By their worship, their Sunday service, their
social hour, their sacred moments, their very agreement to enter into a search
together for answers, their love and fighting for the world around them. This is what held the church together and
this is what continues to feed us today.
We are a covenant not a creed, a community searching and seeking, asking
and answering, meditating, praying, and watching the light shift together. We are of different theologies; we have
different names for God if we believe in that possibility at all. We are a different kind of religion and this
may be what makes the question of What do UU’s believe so hard to answer. We have to define a new vocabulary, a new way
of thinking for our questioner before we can even begin to answer them.
By the time,
the two religions came to merger more than 40 years ago the Universalists and
the Unitarians who started out so different from each other found a belonging –
a connection. The youth groups had
united long before – the hymn we sang before the sermon was created and sung
first with the youth group of both denominations – the hymnal written in the
1930’s was of shared authorship and usage before merger. The two religions were ready to join but the
final moments of this connection came in 1961.
As the 1970’s came along there was a push from the women in the
congregation to change the wording of a document in the bylaws – a statement of
belief that was left over from the previous religions experiences. It was this group of women who started what
was to become both controversial and fulfilling for our newly founded UU
religion. By the 1980’s the controversy
was raging about these new statements around the place of Jesus and God in our
religion – Who were we as Unitarian Universalists and how were we different
from what had come before? Rev. Carl
Scovel of King’s Chapel was one of the people to speak out that the resolution
that had been drawn up in this women’s conference was too radical. He suggested a defeat of the amendment and a
committee appointed by the Board of Trustees of the UUA to study the issues[7]. More than 150 ministers eventually signed
this letter. Most people agreed and at
the 1981 General Assembly it was proposed to create a 7-person committee
appointed by the Board of Trustees. This
group would “devise and implement a process to involve the congregations and
Association organizations in this reexamination and report to the 1982 General
Assembly.[8]” This was the first time in the history of
either of the religions that the people in the churches were to have a direct say
in the creation of the statements. As
the committee worked through 1983 and into 1984 they distributed a
questionnaire to the congregations asking for their input in the process and
gathering information about the congregation and its congregants. There was a careful search for consensus and
by the 1983 General Assembly; the committee had compiled a listing of seven
principles[9]. These were carefully introduced with a cover
letter that stated, “What the model expresses is not so much religious belief
as ethical principle.[10]”
In the next year the committee decided to separate the principles into two
sections those that were truly principles and those that were sources. They also decided to change the order of the
principles stating that, “this was done to change the focus from the place of
the individual to the expanding context of community, earth and universe[11].”
These changes were kept and at the next General Assembly in 1985 the long
process of change that had taken eight years was completed when the bylaws were
amended. The current Principles and
Purposes that have gone through a few revisions since their initial acceptance
in 1985 read as follows,
We the member congregations of the
Unitarian Universalist Association covenant to affirm and promote
·
The inherent
worth and dignity of every person;
·
Justice, equity
and compassion in human relations;
·
Acceptance
of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
·
A
free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
·
The
right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our
congregations and in society at large;
·
The
goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
·
Respect
for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
The living tradition which we share
draws from many sources:
·
Direct
experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures,
which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which
create and uphold life;
·
Words
and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and
structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of
love;
·
Wisdom
from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
·
Jewish
and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our
neighbors as ourselves;
·
Humanist
teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of
science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit.
·
Spiritual
teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of
life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.
Grateful for the religious pluralism
which enriches and ennobles our faith, we are inspired to deepen our
understanding and expand our vision. As free congregations we enter into this
covenant, promising to one another our mutual trust and support.[12]
As the years
went by after the creation of the principles and purposes many people explored
and discussed what these meant to us as a religion. In 1987 Lucile Schuck Longview one of the
original feminists who began the process of revising the principles wrote, “we
are at a new beginning, a new field, a new paradigm, a new reality construct
…lift up and celebrate the fact that a phenomenal change in practice and
ideology has been embraced by the UUA.[13]” I find myself wondering if this statement is
true now that we have lived with these principles for almost 20 years. Has there been a phenomenal change and were
these principles really as far as they seemed from their historical roots?
From this quick overview of history we
can see that the questions, problems, challenges, blessings and hopes of the
great journey that our religion has taken continue to puzzle and intrigue each
of us. Our freedom to believe, our
challenge to the world around us and our movement to understand and recognize
our place in this world also continues.
Each of us does the hard work of creation every day – we as a community
of believers – and I think I can say of dreamers hopes for a better community
in the future – our past shows us that we are not alone – our present shows us
that we are keepers of the dream and our future lies before us.
The study of our history has taught me that the answers to the hard
questions are not easily found. Look
around this community – we are fighters, dreamers, wishers, and hopers,
doubters, and questioners. But we are
not alone – we are Unitarian Universalists – Universalist Unitarians. We will continue to struggle to define
ourselves, indeed we enjoy the struggle.
The next time that you are asked what
is it that UU’s believe you might still take out that red card or the card with
the principles and purposes in it but now you can tell of our journey, one full
of questioning and finding answers. We
are not alone in our liberal struggles rather we are a new generation blazing a
path. It is as our hymn says, “roots
hold me close, wings set me free” ours is a religion of hope, of freedom and of
responsibility, a challenge but one that we as Unitarian Universalists take up
gladly.
Blessed Be
[1] Robinson, 55.
[2] The New
England Convention was created when the
[3] Robinson, 56.
[4]
Robinson, 39. Octavius Brooks
Frothingham was a Boston Unitarian who was a radical leader, minister and a
graduate of
[5] Robinson, 105.
[6] Robinson, 163.
[7] Frost, 14.
[8] Frost, 17.
[9] Ross, 96.
[10] Frost, 19.
[11] Frost, 20.
[12] This can be found in many places but this latest statement was taken from the UUA website, www.uua.org.
[13] Frost, 22.