Gloucester
to A.U.W. Meeting, worship service
I want to add my greetings and to welcome you to this important gathering of Universalists. I’m quite sure that judging from the high quality of the program and the fine spirit that has been in evidence that this is an occasion of significance for every one of us.
The task of a leader in worship is to single out some phase of life’s experience and to attempt to so stimulate your minds and touch your emotions that a wholesome tension will be created.
I have enormous respect for the power that is represented by the women of the world. In our country, surveys have revealed that the purse strings are almost completely controlled by the women. Some sociologists as they reckon with this phenomenon, as they see women directing the activities of the parent-teacher groups, as they see the power of such women’s organizations as the League of Women Voters, and as they are presented with the unmistakable evidence of the growing interest of women’s groups in almost every cultural influence, predict that America will soon be, if not actually now is, a matriarchy with the men occupying a decidedly inferior position in terms of actual power and actually leadership. Now that may or may not be over-gilding the lily. But one cannot be long associated with the church work and not recognize that without the active support of the women of the church he will soon be floundering in very choppy waters.
For that reason I venture to set before you three qualities of leadership which will guarantee not only that your leadership will be fruitful in terms of the strengthening of Universalism in all ways, but also will guarantee that morally you will be on your way to being a real person.
First of all, there is no higher tribute to your leadership than your ability to find a successor who will do the job better. Enthusiasm for a worthy goal, long and tedious hours in acquiring certain “know-how” to lead a certain committee to continuing success pays big dividends for the church and for the achievement of desirable progress.
Yet even in our desire to serve we may consciously or unconsciously tend to rebuff those who would like to work with us, who would like to know more so that they might serve better. Many hundreds of miles from here I know of a woman who was most skillful in promoting an annual dinner which had acquired some amount of local fame. But when she became too old to continue her active leadership, she jealously guarded her knowledge of recipes, quantities needed and other important data. Those who followed her in the job were unable to share her experience because she was afraid that someone else would be recognized as her superior or even her equal. Such an attitude prevents progress. Progress in a church or in a nation is constructed on the basis of constant refining of past methods. If every generation had to start from scratch we would still be in the Stone Age.
Jimmie Durango (sometimes we can learn as much from a clown as from a Hamlet or a Lear) not so long ago made a recording, singing a duet with opera star Helen Traubel. After Miss Traubel observed that “It was truly a pleasure to record with an artist whose voice sounds just the same with a bad needle as a good one,” Jimmie rejoined width, “the reason why my voice is as bad today as it was 25 years ago, is that I take care of it.” (from Sunday Supplement THIS WEEK).
There are ways of taking care of things so that they will be as bad today as they were 25 years ago. Failure to look for and encourage new leadership is one. Ego has its place in all of our lives – we do need to have it fed. Those who have read biographies of early President John Adams will recall that he had a healthy ego and was no shrinking violet. Yet some think his talent which did the most for the country was his ability to pick good leaders for important jobs. Through the Second Continental Congress he was instrumental in the choice of a Commander-in-Chief of the Revolutionary Army, George Washington. When Adams was President he appointed John Marshall Chief Justice.
In terms of the ongoing procession of achievement, if you would make your leadership of lasting importance, find the best person you can and without undue fanfare share with him your joys and sorrows, your successes and failures as a leader. If you win him to your job, it’s the highest tribute to your ability.
Secondly, “There is no limit to the good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.” that’s a quotation but I cannot remember the source. Adoration of one’s own name in print is an occupational hazard common to most endeavors involving leadership. Did not the late George M. Cohan say, “I don’t care what you say about me, but spell my name correctly?” The matter is more profound than simply a superficial desire to acquire personal publicity. ( this is not to say if there that there may not be good reasons for publicity.) Basically the issue involves one’s moral approach to life. I rather think that is something of what Jesus had in mind when he spoke about “he who loses his life will find it.”
In that interesting letter in the New Testament called the Third Letter of John, we find the same question of personal standing vexing one of the early Christian Colonies. John of Ephesus (if he was the author) writing to his friend Gaius says that he has tried to get some problems straightened out by mail. But Diotrephes, who likes to be the leader, will not accept the suggestions of John of Ephesus. If the letters account is correct, Diotrephes wanted to be the #1 person regardless of the merit of the questions in controversy.
It’s possible the cause for an overemphasis to self-centeredness may be found in the reason for our being willing to serve. Is our motive the need that exists in this situation, whether that situation be one of assistance to our Japanese or Nigerian children, information for those that need enlightenment or pledges for the church budget? Or is our motivation for serving based on our need for recognition or love? When it is the latter, when the supremely important factor in our personal need for compliment, affection or applause, we are apt to fade away when confronted with a tough or ugly situation. “There’s no limit to the good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.”
One more thing, there’s no limit to the good you can do if you don’t mind being different. We’re living in an age where the pressure on us to conform to things as they are is greater than for a long time. There are those numbered among the Universalists who feel that it is of no importance if we fail to protect against the superficial refurbishing and renovation of all the old supernatural, inhumane, pessimistic theological doctrines. There are those good people in the ranks of the Universalists who respond with resentment when a Universalist keeps to the main line of Universalism - heresy, criticism, and a confidence that is constantly renewed that man is worthy of redemption and has the potential capacity to be the agent for that redemption. Prime Minister Ben Gurion of Israel, one of the more eminent statesman on the world scene today recently reminded the world that “the test of democracy is the freedom of criticism.”
The early Universalists who founded this church, whose names you may see on the Charter of Compact in the Ladies Parlor were not afraid to be different. For them the penalty was stoning, seizure of their goods and jail sentences. Yet because they and other early Universalists were different – were heretics – is why we are gathered here today – glad that we are Universalists.
We’re questing for the Universals in religion. We’re seeking the truths that all men can come to through exalted and sacrificial experience and every-day living. We will continue to be a minority. That is not particularly vital. What is vital is, will we be a CREATIVE minority? There are Universalists all over the world yearning for fellowship with those were different enough to recognize man’s common humanity and man’s deep need for the moral values discoverable in all ethically noble religions. Carlton Fisher stirred us deeply this morning when he told us the dramatic stories of Universalism in Japan and Nigeria. I think I can surprise him with a letter addressed to this church which was received the day before yesterday.
Let me read:
Universalist Church,
Gloucester, Massachusetts
United States America
Gentlemen:
“ Not only a long time now that I heard this Universalist church founded by honorable Reverend John Murray in your 1770, at Gloucester Massachusetts, and I am very happy when I know this church.
“In another way, I request a general information pertaining your Universalism, your Supreme Minister, address of your headquartered denomination, and etc. for I have something for it later- on.
“I’m proud to recommend that I myself is a former minister of the Universal Church of Christ in the town of San Carlos, and Canla-on province of Negros Occidental and Oriental, and I want to introduce this Universal Church of Christ to your Universalist Church happily.
“As soon as you can receive my letter, I hope that you will take good care my inquiry.
Respectfully yours,
Reverend Toribio S. Quimada,
Nataban, San Carlos,
Negroes Occidental,
Philippines.”
Because John Murray was interested in searching for more truth and didn’t mind being different, more than 182 years later a Universalist and the other side of the world seeks to know more about the possibilities of fellowship. There is no limit to the good you can do if you don’t mind being different.
No comments:
Post a Comment