In honor of TVUUC
The
Living Tradition: Humanist Elements in Unitarian Universalism
First
delivered at UUCB on August 13, 2006
When I sat down to write this sermon it quickly became, without exception, the hardest sermon I ever set out to write. Not because the topic did not interest me, it does. Not because I wasn’t mentally, emotionally or spiritually prepared to immerse myself in humanism. Quite the contrary. When I attended the General Assembly of Unitarian Universalists this past June I intentionally scheduled two humanist seminars in my itinerary. I became the last person of the trade show to join the HUUmanists. Within a month of returning home I had applied to the graduate certification program for humanist leadership at the Humanist Institute.
I
had two difficulties contributing to my writer’s block. First was a conflict I
created myself. Well okay, I created both conflicts. When the Barefoot Bay
Humanist Club scheduled me to speak on a Saturday it happened to be the same
weekend I am scheduled to give the sermon at UUCB on Sunday. What better way to
prepare for the weekend than to kill two birds with one stone. Or bore two
groups of people with one speech.
BUT…one is a group of humanists who may know little about Unitarian Universalism and the other a group of UUs who may know little about humanism. How exactly is an essay to be structured that will engage both groups without insulting the intelligence of either?
Considering
the other source of my block provided the answer. The conflict was with the
title of this presentation itself, “Humanist Elements in Unitarian
Universalism.” The title makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Unitarian
Universalism is humanism with theological elements. Or not.
Given the history of both humanism and Unitarian Universalism in the 20th century it seems odd to be speaking on elements of one within the other. The preamble to the by-laws of the Unitarian Universalist Association includes a section usually referred to as the Living Tradition. This passage begins, “The living tradition which we share draws from many sources….” And goes on to list six elements of Unitarian Universalism. “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” is included in this list.
It is important to note the use of the words living and tradition together. Tradition is reassuring. It provides a sense of origin, identity and continuity by relating us to the past. Living traditions carry the past into the future by means of contemporary prophetic voices.
At General Assembly this year, one of the underlying themes was “What do Unitarian Universalists stand for? They don’t stand, they move!” That is exactly the association I make with the concept of a living tradition. It doesn’t stand on the shoulders of our predecessors but adapts and evolves as our needs and our environments change. If we’re to be honest about contemporary Unitarian Universalism we cannot assume the likes of John Adams, Ralph Waldo Emerson or even the twentieth century humanist John Dietrich would be rushing to join a UU church today. If I may be so bold, I would amend the statement to read:
“Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit, and alert us to the dangers of stagnation.”
Unitarians had a heavy dose of this challenge against stagnation when American
religious humanism began in the Unitarian pulpit. Rev. John Dietrich, a parish
minister, and Rev. Curtis Reese, a district administrator, generated quite a
controversy, indeed a crisis, in the early decades of the twentieth century.
Unitarians were forced to consider their commitment to freedom of belief and
lack of creedal requirement for ministry. They really had no problem with
freedom of belief in the pews, but in the pulpit? That was an entirely different
matter.
The debates that ensued, both in the Unitarian periodicals and on stage at Unitarian district and national meetings, were heated. In some instances, they were downright rancorous and personally insulting. Some theist ministers advocated a belief in God as being a minimum requirement for fellowship status as a Unitarian. These discussions would flare up, die down for a few years and resurface once again. Ultimately, the humanist position gained acceptance. First in the pews, the success of John Dietrich in Minneapolis would be the envy of any UU minister today, and then at the administrative level.
I firmly believe that without the humanist movement, Unitarian Universalism would not exist in its present state. Perhaps there would not even be a denomination available to Americans who seek to celebrate their humanism in a religious setting. According to William Schultz in Making the Manifesto: The Birth of Religious Humanism, “Unitarian Universalism, the faith community in which the vast majority of religious humanists are found today, has, in particular, been deeply affected by the religious humanist strain, diverse as the theological perspectives may be within the Unitarian Universalist family. Foremost, religious humanism made it possible for those with radically nontraditional views to find in Unitarian Universalism a comfortable religious home. Religious humanism was unapologetically religious”. (Schultz, xiii)
The contemporary paradigm for religion in our society is an ethical monotheist tradition based on orthodoxy, correct belief. The idea that religion can be valid without a coherent and binding creed is completely alien to most. Ironically, most contemporary religions and all ancient religions are not based on belief, but on practice and internal struggle. Seen from a broader perspective, orthodoxy is the exception and not the rule.
Again quoting Schulz, “religion
did not need to involve a relationship with the supernatural, the transcendent,
or God. It is, at base, a quest for the good life. It always involves a
three-fold complex of the ideal (of the good life), a program (for reaching it),
and a cosmic setting or world view within which the first two are understood.
The ideal may relate to a concept of God, as may the program, and
the cosmic setting may be theological in nature. But they do not have
to be.” (Schultz, 42) To
me, religion is not only engaging the philosophical questions:
-
“What is the good life?”
-
“Which program works best for me and my society for reaching it?” and
-
“How do I position myself in the context of reality as we know it?”
Religion is pursuing these questions and then acting upon them in a communal and relational setting.
In my opinion there are three key elements of Humanism that help define
and structure Unitarian Universalism.
-
Intellectual integrity within religious expression.
In humanism, it is the eschewing of the supernatural and an assertion the scientific method is the best means of exploring our world view. In Unitarian Universalism we find it in our principle affirming and promoting a free and responsible search for truth and meaning, emphasis on the word responsible.
-
“Theism is philosophically possible, but not religiously necessary.” - Rev. Curtis Reese
This statement is precisely why neither ordering off a menu or cafeteria-style spirituality phase me in the slightest. It is also the key to Unitarian Universalist tolerance within our congregations. Why should I care what any one of you chooses to accept as your theological source for spirituality when we can all engage in a religion with the humanist goals of personality development and social health.
-
“We must insist that whatever God does, he does through men and not for them.” - Rev. John Dietrich
Here is our social action platform at its core. Unitarian Universalists do not necessarily assume God, the Goddess, or Ultimate Reality directs events throughout history. This is also our seventh principle. We respect the interdependent web of which we are a part. We are not the culminating act of creation and not in a position of dominion over nature. We are nature.
The first Humanist Manifesto was composed in 1933 followed by Humanist Manifesto
II in 1973 and Humanist Manifesto III in 2003. The Unitarian Universalist
statement of Principles was compiled in 1985. Interestingly, our very first
principle appears verbatim in Manifesto III which also affirms the inherent
worth and dignity of every person.
So the primary difference I notice between Humanism and Unitarian Universalism
is that the idea of the supernatural is not addressed at all in our principles
and explicitly dismissed in the Manifestos. But that is just in writing. In
practice, there are theist Humanists and atheist Unitarian Universalists. I’m
curious what you would think of these phrases as a description for a UU
congregation.
The joining of individuality with interdependence enriches our lives, encourages us to enrich the lives of others and inspires hose of attaining peace, justice and opportunity for all. This congregation is concerned for the well-being of all and is committed to diversity and respect for those of differing yet humane views. We work to uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature’s integrity, diversity and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.
These words are adapted, without much manipulation, from the Humanist Manifesto III. May they resonate with us as we embrace our human responsibility and work together as Unitarian Universalists to help humanity progress towards its highest ideals.
Copyright © 2006
Ann Fuller, August 2006
Olds, Mason. American Religious Humanism, Rev. Ed. HUUmanists Association NFP. Hamden, CT, 2006. (uncited reference)
Schulz, William F. Making the Manifesto: The Birth of Religious Humanism. Skinner House Books. Boston, 2002.