The Unitarian Fellowship of Peterborough

Music by David Berger

Our Unitarian Universalist Principles offer solid guidance regarding that which we want to affirm in life and society. But what is left unspoken in the words of our principles?

Religious Exploration: An Our Bodies and Selves day, on birth. Spirit Play story: TBA. Sheena Howard and Vanita Lokanathan will bring a special guest, their newborn son Balan, to the Seekers class.

ANNUAL BUDGET MEETING to follow service (Rescheduled to this date) A quorum is required, please plan to attend.

Opening Words

from"Gestalt at Sixty"   - May Sarton

Unitarian Universalist May Sarton describes our beloved community in her poem "Gestalt at Sixty":[1]

Lovers and friends
I come to you starved
For all you have to give,
Nourished by the food of solitude,
A good instrument for all you have to tell me,
For all I have to tell you.
We talk of first and last things,
Listen to music together,
Climb the long hill to the cemetery
In autumn,
Take another road in spring
Toward newborn lambs, ...

No one comes to this house
Who is not changed.
I meet no one here who does not change me.

Welcome, one and all, into this Unitarian Universalist religious community.  

In the presence of one another we are continually challenged and changed, that we may walk the ways of truthfulness, service, and love.

STORY FOR ALL

Zero is the Leaves on the Tree   - Betsy Franco

Have you ever tried to explain something for which there doesn’t really seem to be an explanation?  This book is called Zero is the Leaves on the Tree, (and if it had been written in Canada, perhaps it would be called Zed is the Leaves on the Tree) and it’s about trying to explain what zero is, or to count things that aren’t there...

READING

from Experience of “Transcending Mystery”
                                                                       - Rev. Dr. Steven Epperson

This reading is an excerpt from the Confluence Lecture given by the Rev. Dr. Steven Epperson at the 2009 Annual Conference and Meeting of the Canadian Unitarian Council.  In it, he refers to our UU principles.  Epperson writes:    

“Through myriad expressions, we have created religions to provide an all-encompassing interpretation or vision of life: what it is and ought to be, what hinders us from realizing that vision; and then how religions work to identify and make available the enduring means and ways to make life deeply meaningful and worth living. In spite of deeply flawed histories, we still strive through our many religions to make three basic assertions: a) that there is an essential problem that thwarts genuine human flourishing; b) that a religious vision of life contains an ideal that humanity ought to seek in order to overcome the basic roadblocks to our deepest needs and aspirations; and c) that there are effective means available by which persons can be transformed in order to attain our ideal, our essential goals.

“Our Seven Principles roughly sketch out a Unitarian world-view, an encompassing vision of life. As all religions strive to do, these Principles identify an essential problem; claim an ideal state of things which, if achieved, will overcome that roadblock to profound human flourishing; and they suggest the means at hand for achieving our ideal.

“Think of the first and seventh principle: behind them lurks what Unitarians assert is the essential problem: in #1, we’re acknowledging that the worth and dignity of persons is neither recognized nor achieved; and in #7, we see that there is a fatal lack of mindfulness with regard to the interdependence of all existence. As a result, human dignity and the extensive well-being of what we call “the web” are imperilled. Now step out from behind these two principles, and what do we see? What stands forth is the explicit assertion of our essential, transformative ideal, that about which we dream—in the words of the First Principle: affirming and realizing the inherent worth and dignity of every person (#1), and in the Seventh: human beings finally wised-up, and in possession of sufficient information, humility and commitment to respect and promote the interdependence of all things.

“Achieving those ideals….it would almost be heaven.  But how? What are the means to bring about such a transformation? That is where Principles 2-6 come in: these are the practices and disciplines we pick up and put to use in order to overcome and transform that which most fundamentally besets us and the world. They are the material we use to build. Put them to work, and piece by piece we raise walls and a roof over our heads—a home capacious, compassionate, just, democratic, truthful and spiritual enough, caring enough, for abiding and thriving in this world and amidst its myriad ways of being.”

MESSAGE

What Our Principles Don’t Say

Have you ever seen one of those kitschy rocks, on which someone has painted or etched the words, “Please turn over”?  You might see one lying by a fireplace, or used as a door stop.  You simply can’t help yourself...and reach down and turn it over.  On the other side, it says, “Thanks, that feels great!”  Makes you wonder if leaving no stone unturned is simply an act of compassion.   Similarly, I used to love, as a kid and in the days of shag carpet, to move furniture just slightly so that I could rub the smashed down spots and bring the shag back to life. 

I am also reminded of Kevin Kling, an actor/writer/performer in Minneapolis, who does a one-man holiday show at the Guthrie Theatre which he calls “Stories from the Charred Underbelly of the Yule Log.”   It’s his way of saying that what you see on the surface, in this case idyllic Midwestern holiday moments, don’t tell the whole story. 

Today we’re going to talk about our principles...not so much about what they say, but what they don’t say.  What’s beneath them, or on the other side?  But first, we’d better be sure you know what they are and what they DO say.  Can anyone recite them?  No?

Well, pull out those hymnals, and let’s read them.  Go to hymn #1, and then turn back a page, and on the left hand side, you’ll find the words that begin, “We the member congregations...”

Now these hymnals were published by the Unitarian Universalist Association in the States, and so we have to make a small change in our reading.  Rather than “We the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association,” we should read, “We the member congregations of the Canadian Unitarian Council.” 

So let’s read this antiphonally...The left side can begin with the words of introduction, the right side can read the first principle, the left side the second, and so on.  I’ll read with all of you.  Everybody ready?  And so we begin...

We, the member congregations of the Canadian Unitarian Council, 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.

Okay, so now you know what they do say, right?  But what is it they don’t say?  What do they say when we turn them over and look at them in a different way?

Let’s start at the very beginning...which is always a very good place to start...the introduction says “We, the member congregations...”  There is a very important part of our identity and our history in those words, a part that might not be obvious to the casual observer.  These seven principles were adopted by, and were affirmed by a ‘we’ that is a group of congregations, not a group of individuals.    So when you read this, you are reading it from a distance, in the second or even third person.   The words speak for a congregation, but not necessarily for you, as an individual.

What do you think of that?  When someone becomes a member of this congregation, they are asked to affirm that they are in general agreement with these principles, but they are not asked to raise their right hand, or swear on a bible, or memorize them.  So these opening words essentially say that we are a creedless faith.  We do not require members to ascribe to a specific statement of belief. 

In 1803 the Universalists adopted the Winchester profession, which was essentially a statement of belief, but which also contained a liberty clause that allowed for individual variation in belief.  However, toward the middle of that century, there was a fear that the beliefs of some were straying a bit too far into....heaven forbid!...Unitarian and Transcendentalist territory.  So in 1865, the liberty clause was removed, which meant that all Universalist ministers had to swear to a belief in miracles and in the Bible.  That led to a minister named Herman Bisbee being expelled from fellowship in the Minnesota conference because he refused to stand by the Winchester Profession.  And that started a huge long controversy which ended with the liberty clause being reinstated.  All that to say...we are committed to freedom of religion and to being a creedless faith. 

Back to the principles... “we the member congregations” ...Oh, now, there’s another thing.  The member congregations??  Members of what?  This too says something about who we are.  It says that we operate under congregational polity...a system by which each congregation is self-governing., and chooses to associate with other congregations in order to strengthen national presence and to share resources, in order to support the growth of vital religious communities in Canada.  We do not have a hierarchical ecclesial structure...that is to say, there is no one or no office to which this congregation and its leadership reports.  Rather, we are accountable to our membership in and covenant with the Canadian Unitarian Council, which is an association of congregations.  Behind this is a long history, which gelled in the Cambridge Platform in 1648...but that’s too long a story for today.  So...

I think now we’re down to “we...covenant to affirm and promote...”  Important words these.  Covenant...affirm...promote.  Another word for covenant might be promise, but a covenant is a relational kind of promise...like making a pact, taking a pinky-pledge...with people who matter to us.  We talk a lot about covenant here, because it is the glue that binds us together as a non-creedal community.  Perhaps it is best captured in the words of Frances David, who way back in the 16^th century said that we need not think alike to love alike.  Our covenant is our commitment to walk together in love, even through our differences.

And affirm and promote?  Well in my dictionary, the verb to affirm has over 60 synonyms, but not one of them is “to believe.”  My interpretation, given the synonyms listed, is that ‘affirm’ is a more active and a less certain verb than ‘to believe’.  To affirm means to state positively, to proclaim, to give voice to, to bear witness, to claim... essentially, to promote.  There’s a lot of ‘punch’ in the words ‘affirm and promote.’  They require something active of a congregation. 

But, these current principles are not the end all and be all.  They are part of an ever evolving document that saw its last changes in 1995.  Since that time, there’s been quite a bit of discussion about them.  The Canadian Unitarian Council, about five years ago, went through a national process to see if the principles should be changed or amended in any way, and the upshot was a decision for no change at this time.  Just a year ago, the Commission on Appraisal of the Unitarian Universalist Association in the States put forward a motion at the General Assembly to make some major changes in the principles and sources, and that motion was not passed...although the vote was pretty close.   One of those recommendations was to suggest that the words “affirm and promote” be replaced with “honour and uphold”...words the Commission felt are more reverential and more reflective of a focus on spiritual growth, as well as a better expression of our personal obligations.

What’s not being said here?  Clearly there is some unspoken tension between the principles being a covenant made by and between congregations, and their efficacy for us as individuals.  I see the principles and sources as a document of identity, which can guide us and express who we are as a tradition; but they might also imply that each person is simply along for the ride.  You’ll see as we go along today that an emphasis on the individual is quite prevalent in our principles, and yet the principles are not necessarily affirmed and promoted by individuals. 

Another thing, to which I’ve already alluded, and is obvious when you look at today’s version, is that our principles and sources are an evolving document that have been regularly adapted to fit the changing nature of our communities and theologies.  While both the Unitarians and Universalists have historically had some kind of affirmation or profession, there has been an ongoing string of changes.  For example, well into the 20^th century our Unitarian predecessors claimed, and taught their children, five principles: the belief in the fatherhood of god, the brotherhood of man, the leadership of Jesus, salvation through character and the progress of mankind onward and upward forever.   It’s fascinating to look at our history through the lens of these changing documents... one of my favourites was written in 1887 as “The Things Most Commonly Believed Among Us”...don’t you just love that title?...and begins with: "To love the good and to live the good is the supreme thing in religion…" words that aren’t too different than the stated purpose of this congregation in our incorporation documents. 

So, let’ move on to the seven principles...

Hear again the words of Rev. Dr. Steven Epperson:

“Our Seven Principles roughly sketch out a Unitarian world-view, an encompassing vision of life. As all religions strive to do, these Principles identify an essential problem; claim an ideal state of things which, if achieved, will overcome that roadblock to profound human flourishing; and they suggest the means at hand for achieving our ideal.”[2]

The seed for today’s sermon was planted in me when listening to this lecture in 2009.  I’m not sure that Rev. Epperson’s premise is apparent to us when we read our principles....at least, it wasn’t to me.  That is, to affirm and promote something, on the one side, speaks to our highest ideals, that about which we dream, and when we turn it over, we see that there are things and realities which we don’t affirm and promote. 

The first principle...to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person...implies that, in reality, “the worth and dignity of individuals is neither recognized nor achieved.”  So, as a religious tradition, we are naming this reality, as well as our desire to contribute to changing that reality.   What is perhaps missing from this first principle, and what was strongly suggested in feedback to the Commission on Appraisal, is that this wording should be changed to a more inclusive, “to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every being”, not just humans.   And going further, this implies that we are still a pretty human-centric faith, that we are implicitly individualistic, and that hopefully we are slowly moving toward a more inclusive perspective.

I’ll jump now to the seventh principle, just as Rev. Epperson did.  And I do so because they...the 1^st and 7^th principles...are often referred to as the pillars of the principles, the central ideals of our faith.  When a draft of our current principles came to a General Assembly floor in 1984, the seventh Principle read rather blandly: “respect for Earth and the interdependence of its living systems.” A minister named Paul L’Herrou gets credit with amending this to “respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part,”[3] which much more accurately expresses our place in the larger system.  Still, to claim a ‘respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part’ is to simultaneously acknowledge that “we see...a fatal lack of mindfulness with regard to the interdependence of all existence”.   In another Confluence Lecture, this time delivered by the Revs. Brian Kiely and Meg Roberts, titled, “Can Eco-SpiritUality Grow Eco-JUUstice?”, they suggested that a more inclusive and greener version of our principles would put the 7^th principle first, so that we begin with the paradigm of being one part of a larger interdependent web rather than starting with respect for the human individual.  In any case, the 7^th principle requires us to do more work toward expanding our definition of “everyone” in a way that has a better chance of creating a sustainable planet. 

Now, as Rev. Epperson tells us, principles 2-6 are more of the ‘how to’...they describe how it is that we might move toward a world in which we live in gratitude and respect for the interdependent web in a way that supports the worth and dignity of all beings.  Now perhaps it would be a stronger set of principles if we spelled out that responsibility...that in order to achieve our ideals, more than affirmation and promotion is required. 

We need to live with:

-           justice, equity and compassion in human relations...

We need to live in the spirit of complete:

-          acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;

We must each engage in:

-          a free and responsible search for truth and meaning;

We should actively support:

-          the right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;

And, we choose to live with:

-          the goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all – at the forefront of our awareness and vision.

Of course, there have been many suggestions for changes in these principles as well...

For example, should “human relations” (in #2) be changed to “all relations”?

Should not the encouragement of spiritual growth (in #3) include spiritual growth everywhere, not just in our congregations? 

In #4, should we place more emphasis on responsibility than we place on freedom in our search for truth and meaning?

Is there just one democratic process?  Should the word “the” be dropped from the 5^th principle, to acknowledge the reality of a greater diversity in decision-making processes?

And is there anything missing in the principles?

Isn’t it curious that love is not mentioned?
Would it be useful to more clearly articulate freedom, and particularly to acknowledge (as is implied in the Sources document) that no one person, tradition, perspective has the whole truth, including us?

Should there be any reference to service, or to something beyond ourselves? 

Frankly, and perhaps shamefully, I haven’t given much thought to the revision of our Principles.  I guess I don’t see them as so limiting that I can’t live and preach outside of their box.  Yet, I know that language is powerful, and that repeating words that don’t guide or inspire us will perpetuate a system we want to change or grow beyond. 

But one thing that is unsaid in our principles, and must be mentioned, is that our faith is one that is willing to question and to deeply look again at what we hold most dear.  We are almost obsessive about turning over rocks, with or without invitation.  The freedom to question, to change and grow, is a UU hallmark.  John Gibbs Millspaugh, in a sermon called “An Unprincipled New Year “[4] opined that “Apart from Quakers and their time honoured preference for consensus, it’s unlikely that in the entire history of religion on this earth, there has ever been any comparable example of such intentional and committed use of inclusive, non-hierarchical processes to produce a guiding statement for a faith... The genius of our faith,” he said, “is in our ongoing commitment to reflection, renewal and regeneration.  Over the centuries, with all the changes they have brought, one thing that has not changed is our commitment to an evolutionary faith and a living tradition.” 

If I could make one change in our principles it would be that they were so central to the life of religious community that we could not help but question them, challenge them, turn them over, this way and that, and re-write them so that they are profoundly relevant for us, even as we release them to the possibility of further change.  May we remember and be attentive to this, so that, in the words of Charles Howe, we remember that:

New light is ever waiting to break through to enlighten our ways, new truth is ever waiting to illumine our minds, new love is ever waiting to warm our hearts.

So be it.

Amen. 

CLOSING WORDS

Wayne B. Arnason and Jim Wickman[5]

Our time together ends.
We came together seeking a reality beyond our narrow selves, a reality that would bind us in compassion, love, and understanding.

In the days before we come together again,
May our actions match our words,
May our thoughts be filled with love,
May we remember the Wholeness of which we are a part.  

And may we truly make a difference in our world.

Amen.