I have spoken of [Unitarianism] as of a single movement in religious history. For although its developments in the countries with which it has been chiefly associated - Poland, Transylvania, England, America - have been so loosely connected or so little dependent upon each other that they might indeed easily be treated as distinct movements, yet they are in fact all joined together by very clear, even if sometimes slender, threads of historical sequence; and it will be shown that throughout their course they exhibit in common certain distinctive marks and principles which fundamentally characterize the movement as a whole...first, complete mental freedom in religion rather than bondage to creeds or confessions; second, the unrestricted use of reason in religion, rather than reliance upon external authority or past tradition; third, generous tolerance of differing religious views and usages rather than insistence upon uniformity in doctrine, worship or polity.
from Introduction, A History of Unitarianism by Earl Morse Wilbur
Sermon
As with many phrases that find their way into common usage, the roots of the expression "freedom, reason, and tolerance" to describe the uniqueness of our Unitarian Universalist faith is lost to most of us and until this week your minister. In a conversation with Rev. Bartlett this week I was reminded by him of the source which I shuddered to think had slipped my mind.
Every minister preparing for Fellowship with the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations must read a two volume work by Earl Morse Wilbur chronicling the history of Unitarianism. Even though parts have been shown to be inaccurate, it is the closest we have to the official history of Unitarianism. It is one of the legacies of Connie Burgess' presence in our congregation that we have a copy in our library - especially precious as it is now out of print.
Wilber's thesis as he explores the origins of our faith in Eastern Europe during the Reformation is the thread that unites the different sects and beliefs which connects to our present day faith is the thread of freedom, reason and tolerance.
The thread of freedom he recognized came from the principle struggle during the Reformation to be free to read the Bible and debate the orthodox interpretation of the words found there. The Reformation transferred religious authority from the Church to the Biblical text. That struggle continues today in earnest as Christian Fundamentalists hold up their Bibles and proclaim it as the literal word of God and road map for our lives and our society. The first Unitarians, many inspired by Renaissance Italian Humanism, read their Bibles and found no support for the Trinitarian conception of God. Most notably in our history, Michael Servetus was burned at the stake by John Calvin because he advocated a Unitarian rather than Trinitarian view of the divine.
The reason people got so worked up over what today we might dismiss as minor theological points, was because they thought if one's belief was in error one would be condemned to go to hell. Thus if I preached a theology which was incorrect, I would not only endanger myself but also my entire congregation. Thus having the correct view, be it Protestant or Catholic, was extremely important and stultifying to free debate of theological points.
It was terribly important to our Unitarian forbears that we have the freedom to dissent from the orthodox theology. They followed the path known as the Radical Reformation which cleansed itself of much of the Catholic tradition and attempted to reformulate their belief and practice strictly on the Bible. The reasons for their beliefs and practices were supported by lists of Biblical quotes rather than tradition or ecclesiastic authority. The early Unitarians understood the fallibility of human Biblical interpretation and embraced vigorous argument to resolve theological questions. They realized the only way to really understand the Bible and live its teachings is to allow everyone the freedom to read the text and generate their own conclusions.
Freedom, beautiful as it is, has its difficulties. Early on in the Unitarian communities which first evolved in Eastern Europe in the late 1500's and early 1600's, discovered freedom of interpretation must be tempered. They were still quite concerned about wrong views and their dangers. One could read the Bible for oneself and come up with clearly wrong-headed conclusions.
How to resolve disagreement?
The Christian orthodox had their answer from St. Paul - sound doctrine. The Bible must be read and understood in the orthodox theological framework. If you study the Bible with the correct assumptions of faith, one will arrive at the correct answers or can debate those answers within that framework. The Trinity, for example, is not questioned by the orthodox as they debated the meaning of a particular section of text.
The Unitarian answer came from the influence of Humanism The Unitarians believed reason should be our guide when debating Biblical interpretation. At first the use of reason was restricted to resolving conflicts within the Bible. Over the years it gradually broadened to conflicts between the Bible and historical Biblical criticism, between the Bible and science, and between the Bible and reason itself. The nineteenth century was spent debating the reasonability of miracles and their basis for Unitarian faith. In theses debates and controversies, Unitarians chose again and again to follow the guidance of reason.
Tolerance didn't evolve quite as quickly. The early Unitarians were sure they were right and their opponents were wrong. They were willing to give them the freedom to debate theological points but when shown to be wrong, they should change their views. In general, the concept of tolerance requires an ability to conceive of the same God in different ways. A great deal of blood has been shed by Christians killing other Christians because they used different language and conceptions while worshipping the exact same God. Tolerance was really only made possible by the evolution of secular government[1].
The burning of Michael Servetus at the stake send shock waves through the early Unitarian communities. They argued strenuously that death was not the appropriate response to theological disagreement. Inquisitions were not the way to defend the faith, rather, words must be met with words not swords. "..there should be no persecution for religion; that conscience should be free since faith was given by God rather than to be imposed by man...[2]" Sebastian Castellio, contemporary of Servetus and Calvin included in his 1551 translation of the Bible into more accessible language much as Luther had done, a dedication which has been called the first manifesto in favor of toleration. In this he urges that true religion makes slow progress because we engage in endless disputes, which issue only in bloodshed...it is absurd to use earthly weapons in spiritual warfare, in which the enemies of Christians, which are vices, are to be overcome by virtues. If we tolerate Turks, Jews, and sinners in general, how much more should we suffer those that confess the name of Christ, but would rather die than violate their consciences[3].
In the evolution of Liberal Religion here in America, we have seen the faith in freedom, reason and tolerance guide us as our movement has faced different crises. Each time we decide on a creed, we later reject it in favor of wider diversity of belief. The Universalists would come up with a self definition then add a clause that allowed its rejection if it went against deeply held individual beliefs. The guidance of reason has seen us gradually whittle away our belief in the authority of the Bible and the special incarnation of Jesus. We are much more likely to embrace the Bible today as inspired literature and seek personal meaning from its stories and morals. Most U.U.'s do not see Jesus as the son of God but rather as a human being who fully realized the divine nature which resides in all life forms. He was special because of his understanding but he was no different from us either. We seek not his miracle working magic but his life transforming teaching.
Finally Unitarians and Universalists fully embrace the premise on which the United States was founded, the premise of religious toleration. Not only are we free to practice our faith as we believe it, we must allow others to believe differently. Within our churches and fellowships, this toleration of sincere differences in views has led us to a strong support for diversity in our congregation. We have taken what other faiths see as a liability, and discovered that for us it is an asset. In our effort to welcome differences of belief, we welcome not only different religious beliefs, we welcome different sexual orientations, we welcome people of differing races, we welcome people of differing political orientation. The lines we choose to draw to define ourselves are around values we hold dearly, such as the inherent worth and dignity of all people. Such as Justice, equity and compassion in human relations. Such as the respect for the interdependent web of existence.
Much as freedom, reason and tolerance are anchors which historically describe our faith, our understanding of them continues to evolve as it has throughout our history.
Freedom of belief does not mean one can believe anything you want and be a Unitarian Universalist. Far from it. We do not accept within us beliefs which violate our purposes and principles. White Supremacists may not be a member of this Fellowship unless they can accept the principle of the inherent worth and dignity of all people. Fascists may not be member of our congregation unless they embrace the right of conscience and the use of the democratic process. Atheists may not be a Unitarian Universalist unless they acknowledge a willingness to accept one another who believe differently. Christian Fundamentalists will not be welcome unless they will follow a free and responsible search for truth and meaning. We have and continue to define who we are and are not.
Our understanding of reason is changing as well. The greater inclusion of feminist thought into our movement has helped move us away from a reason limited to the products of the cerebral cortex. Today we find a deep and profound logic operating in the emotions which as tremendous value for our religious life. Sometimes our ethics are most powerfully argued not from a cost benefit analysis but rather from the affection of the heart. Most of us seek both intellectual and emotional satisfaction in our religious life. We will not be satisfied to do the right thing if our emotions scream at us that it is the wrong thing. Infanticide can be quite reasonably argued as a population control measure unless you are the mother or father of the new born babe to be slaughtered. Unlike the accusations of hysteria used to ignore women's concerns, today we see a deep and profound order in the workings of the feelings which is being tapped by science to bring greater well-being to the human race. Our understanding of the connections between our minds and our bodies continues to redefine our belief systems.
The word tolerance has fallen out of favor over the past few years. We tolerate what we do not believe or accept not because we think the other is correct, but rather in sympathy for their delusions. Just because a person is mad doesn't mean we need banish them or put them to death. Tolerance has the connotation today of uncomfortable compromising coexistence - hardly something one would want to celebrate as a foundation of one's faith.
As the world becomes a global community, as the teachings and practices of the different world religions show up in bookstores, as religious gurus jet set around the world, we are finding much that each religion shares with another. Many of my generation have read books, attended lectures, and participated in rituals from around the world. Our inclination, rather than choosing one and tolerating the rest, is to take from each what we find of value building an individualistic faith grounded in these various traditions. I, myself have responded deeply to the teachings and practices of the Buddha, the teachings and practices of Sufi mystics, the teachings and practices of various modern Hindu Gurus, the teachings and practices of modern mystical Christians.
I see toleration evolving into the concept of acceptance. Rather than figure out what one believes and reject all that does not conform to our vision, we evolve our faith out of our contact with different religious traditions seeking that to which our heart and mind responds in all of them. The fundamental Protestant error is that belief can be sufficiently captured in words entombed within one sacred text, the Bible. The Fundamentalist Humanist error is to reject in total the Bible or any other revealed scripture because we find flaws in it. Like it or not, Christianity and Judaism are the ground on which Unitarian Universalism AND Humanism is built. Neither could exist today without it.
Religious diversity today is helping us see there are many many compatible ways to approach and grapple with the ultimate mysteries of existence. No final answer shall ever be possible. Acceptance of the differences while seeking deeper levels of connection is where I see liberal religion moving today. The development of world community as well as harmony within our congregations requires a recognition that everyone has a piece of the truth but no one has all the answers. It's better for us to share our truths so all of us grow in wisdom and understanding rather than fighting over each other's errors.
Wilber dedicated his book:
"In Memory of A dearly beloved Son, Thomas Lamb Eliot Wilbur, 1912-1932, in whose life, too soon cut short were finely exemplified the principles of Freedom in thought, Reason in conduct and Tolerance in judgment crowned by uprightness of character".
These are still noble aspirations for us today as we evolve in our understanding of them. These are beliefs of the highest value to enshrine in our religious tradition and pass on to future generations. These are manifestos for a global community and an individual congregation such as this one - to live in peace.