A Wall Street Journal cartoon shows a minister in the pulpit preaching, "In compliance with federal full-disclosure laws, I'm required to tell you that I'm really not sure about any of this stuff." That may seem a strange text for this Bring a Friend Sunday, when we invite guests who may be interested in our church. But we do believe in full disclosure - honesty and truthfulness in religion, no matter what.
In the last two weeks I have had two very different experiences that demonstrate both the joy and the difficulty of being a Unitarian Universalist. On January 16th I hosted about 20 members of Rochester's Interfaith Forum, a representative gathering of the major faith groups in our community. I have twice been its Chair. Our program was, "Why Am I What I Am?" We invited each person to share a personal faith perspective - why are you what you are religiously? We broke into small groups, not only to give more "air time," but also to enable each of us to hone our statements before presenting them to whole group.
While it was far too ambitious an undertaking, it was a rich experience for those assembled in our Susan B. Anthony Lounge. There, in the ambiance of our world religion banners and under the thoughtful gaze of Susan B. Anthony, Muslim and Jew, Catholic and Protestant, Quaker and Buddhist, charismatic Christian and Unitarian Universalist, shared their deepest convictions. The atmosphere was so prayerful that as we finished I could only utter a single word, "Amen." It was a moment suspended in time when the theological planets of our religious solar system were in alignment - each with its own beauty, yet part of the whole.
On January 22, the 24th anniversary of the Supreme Court Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision, I had a quite different experience. Even as anti-abortion demonstrators were rallying in Washington, pro-choice activists, many from this congregation and including both your ministers, marched at Genesee Hospital in gratitude for those beleaguered and courageous members of the medical community who provide abortion services.
Challenging us was a small contingent of anti-abortion protesters with the inevitable blown-up picture of a botched late-term abortion. As I marched by one young woman, she assured me, in what I thought was a rather condescending tone, that she was praying so that I would go to heaven - presuming I suppose that I wasn't otherwise going to make it. No doubt she was sincere, but I took umbrage.
I was tempted toward some theological dialogue - I'm not so interested in getting people into heaven as getting heaven into people, her heaven being other-worldly, mine very this-worldly. However, I have learned that such street dialogues can be dangerous, especially in the wake of the recent abortion clinic bombings. She probably believes I'm going straight to Hell. I respectfully disagree with her anti-choice position and lack her confidence in my eternal destination.
Two very different experiences - one the epitome of genuine respect; the other of real antipathy; one leading to deeper relationships; the other alienating people from one another; one seeking new perspectives on truth; the other entrenched in a dogmatism about who has a monopoly on the truth.
There is one intrafaith experience that brings the issue still closer to home. In a Building Your Own Theology class one evening we were sharing our ethical ten commandments. Discussion was going too smoothly; I decided to be deliberately provocative and so I brought up the intolerance of the religious left. Many of us came here because we could no longer tolerate intolerance. We eschew dogma; we reject creed; we affirm the possibility of creating our own credo.
However, there are times when enthusiasm for our own faith gets the better of us and we are guilty of liberal dogmatism. My favorite illustration is the apocryphal tale of the Unitarian Universalist who said he would believe anything so long as it was not in the Bible.
One of the classic formulations of our faith is a liberal religious trinity - freedom, reason and tolerance: Freedom from religious authority; the use of reason in religion; and tolerance for the views of others. However, at times this freedom leads us to arrogance, our reason makes us exclusive, and we become intolerant of those who have not seen the light of the flaming chalice as we have.
This hint at the danger of liberal religious intolerance created a mini firestorm in our group, and we spent the rest of our session discussing it. It seems we had found the Achilles Heel of our proud liberal faith - our tendency to think that in the words of one sage, having become Unitarian Universalists there was nothing left to do, that we had found IT - whatever IT may be. We do seem sometimes to forget that we are a self-critical and self-correcting faith.
And so we shared examples of our own failures to fully respect the faith of others who did not share our views. I am as guilty of that as any and have been properly chastised for some unkind comment about the Christian Coalition and the religious right. There have been times when I have spoken not too kindly about the authority of the Pope. Sometimes in drawing distinctions between our approach and others, I have not been respectful.
It was a good - and even therapeutic - discussion. We concluded that we have many miles to go before we can fully live out our values. Freedom, reason and tolerance - that old Unitarian Universalist trinity - needs some updating. Freedom implies responsibility; reason needs sensitivity; and tolerance requires respect.
I find a substantial difference between tolerance and respect. Tolerance implies that I will allow you to practice your faith even though I am quite confident it is wrong. It places me on a step above the one tolerated. It suggests that I have found the truth, and that perhaps you will someday too. I will not in any way interfere with your right to your beliefs, but only because that would not be tolerant. Perhaps that is too harsh a picture of tolerance, but I believe it is the modus operandi of many "tolerant" folks.
Respect, on the other hand, is not condescending. Respect implies a genuine regard for others and their faith perspective. It does not suggest that I am right and you are wrong; rather that we have two defensible ways of looking at religious reality. It makes real dialogue possible. That was what happened at the Interfaith Forum meeting to which I have alluded.
It also happened one night at the Rochester Friends Meeting House as I and four other pro-choice activists engaged in the Claremont Dialogue with an equal number of people from Christians for Life. We sat in a circle and had a structured dialogue, alternating participants as each shared a personal perspective. We had to make "I" statements "owning" what we said; we were not allowed to comment on our counterparts. While nothing came of the evening politically, I came to a new respect for those who are my adversaries on abortion rights. That was not my experience at Genesee Hospital in the heat of political battle as my sinful soul was being prayed for.
There is a brace of poems that suggest something of the liberal religious struggle with tolerance and respect. Phylis McGinley, in her "Lament for a Wavering Viewpoint" indicates how hard it is to be a liberal - liberal in its basic sense of generosity of spirit:
I want to be a Tory and with the Tories stand,McGinley spells out, by extrapolation, how hard it is to be a Unitarian Universalist. Absent creed and dogma, dependent on one's own religious bearings, it is difficult to come to the fixity of beliefs that is so much a part of orthodox religion. But we wouldn't be here unless we had some problem with dogma - that it did not serve to make us religiously whole.
Elect and bound for glory with a proud, congenial band.
Or in the Leftish hallways I gladly would abide,
But from my youth I always could see the Other Side.
How comfortable to rest with the safe and armored folk
Congenitally blessed with opinions stout as oak.
Assured that every question one single answer hath,
They keep a good digestion and whistle in their bath.
But all my views are plastic, with neither form nor pride.They stretched like new elastic around the Other Side;
And I grow lean and haggard with searching out the taint
Of hero in the Blackguard of Villain in the saint.
Ah, snug lie those that slumber beneath Conviction's roof.
Their floors are sturdy lumber, their windows weatherproof.But I sleep cold forever and cold sleep all my kind,
Born nakedly to shiver in the draft of an open mind.
I think of the story about a "medieval Irish monk who died and was buried, as was the custom, in the monastery wall. One day the monks heard noises from within the wall and removed the stones to find their brother alive and well. He began to tell them what he had learned on his journey beyond - and everything he said was contrary to the teachings of the church. So the brothers put him back in the wall and sealed the crypt forever."
While many accuse Unitarian Universalists of intellectual pride, we say that the most pretentious pride of all is that of thinking oneself capable of recognizing infallibility - we must claim to be infallible to do so. We insist on letting the facts of our experience determine our feelings about faith rather than letting our feelings determine the facts.
Liberal religion insists we trust our own experience. While we can - and should - learn from all traditions in all times, ultimately we must formulate our faith out of the raw material of our own experience. Furthermore, we insist on doing this work in a religious community of souls who are seekers with us. Together we are so much more than we are alone.
We would affirm the wisdom of the Chinese ideograph for belief, which is two people talking.
However, there are inherent dangers in this openness. As has been said, "The trouble with being open-minded is that your brains may fall out."
Ogden Nash catches up that danger in his inimitable verse, "Yes and No":
Oh, would I were a politician,The fundamental problem for Unitarian Universalists, then, is this: how do we cultivate a basic religious humility before the ultimate questions of life, and at the same time maintain a strong enough faith to get us through the day - to get us through a life? While more conservative religious folk may be certain of too much, are we certain of too little?
Or else a person with a mission.
Heavens, how happy I could be
If only I were sure of me.
How would I strut, could I believe, that,
Out of all the sons of Eve,
God had granted this former youth
A binding option on His truth.
One side of the moon we've seen alone;
The other she has never shown.
What dreamless sleep, with sound digestion,
Were it the same with every question!
Sometimes with secret pride I sigh
To think how tolerant am I;
Then wonder what is really mine;
Tolerance or a rubber spine.
I go back to my experience with the Interfaith Forum. Each of us was able to confess our faith with conviction and yet with respect for the equally strong convictions of others. Of course, I disagreed with much of what was said, but I respect both the integrity of those who spoke and even beliefs with which I must disagree.
I find that I can confess my faith without the fanatic's compulsion to convert everyone to it. I am bound to humbly proclaim what I believe to be true and hope that my life will demonstrate the validity of those convictions.
Perhaps you will be persuaded to join me - perhaps not. In any case, let us respect one another.
I believe that Heaven - mythically speaking - is not populated by true believers. I doubt any God really wants the arrogant ones of absolute certainty among the citizenry. I think of two pictures - one is of Hell where the incumbents are gorging themselves on a magnificent feast. In Heaven God and one solitary human figure are dining together, eating a tuna sandwich. The caption under the second picture: "It's not worth cooking for two."
And so I have tried to make a case for religious humility. We Unitarian Universalists are theists and atheists, Christians and pagans, pantheists and agnostics. Uniformity of belief has never marked us. What has characterized us at out best is a sense of humility before the cosmos and its meaning for us. No one is privy to ultimate knowledge, least of all those who claim it. None of us can know the inner lives of others and how they have come to believe as they do. And so we continue the journey, respectful of our companions, even as we proclaim to them the truth we have found.
Like the Wall Street Journal cartoon preacher, there are a good many things I'm not sure about, but about my own convictions, the need to respect those of others, and the imperative to be humble before the universe, of this I am sure enough to bet my life. And I do so gladly, day after day.
return to main page