Who Are The Unitarian Universalists?

September 9, 1984
Lakeland

We are a diverse lot in our 1000 or so churches and Fellowships. Wilbur, the historian, in the conclusion of his history, named freedom, reason, tolerance as the bonds which bind us together. I would add – fellowship.

We tend to indulge in a bit of ancestor worship. We remind people that 5 Presidents of the U.S. were from our numerically small ranks. We point with pride to Susan B. Anthony, pioneer for women’s rights; to Clara Barton, founder of the American Red Cross; to Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, William Ellery Channing; to Longfellow, Lowell, Hawthorne, Melville, Dr. Benjamin Rush, the Alcotts, Julia Ward Howe, Joseph Priestly, Frank Lloyd Wright, and many others.

We have great traditions – limitless inquiry, courage, reason, and sacrifice for individual freedom of belief. In concentrating on who we are now, you need not conclude that our history is not important or that our splendid Unitarian Universalist heritage and history are not worth talking about. One of the honored theologians in our movement, James Luther Adams, was reminded of a comment of Dr. Richard Cabot, who defined an idiot as a person who has no sense of the past, but lives only in the present. But, he went on, one who has nothing BUT a sense of the past is the victim of an inverted idiocy.

So, in reflecting [on] who we are now, I’m not dismissive [of] our past. I value it, I assume you do, and that you have a handle on the historical forces out of which Unitarian Universalism emerged and was sustained.

Who are we now? We are a tiny fraction of the total population of North America – perhaps one-tenth of 1%. There are some signs of growth, but too little and too soon to confidently predict that growth in numbers will be substantial. We confront a problem, not a unique one in religious institutions – as many drop out as drop in. Why? Any reason. In July, the “Peanuts” cartoon strip, Linus and Charlie Brown are talking. [CJW note: describe.] [Editor’s note: To view the cartoon online, click here: http://comics.com/peanuts/1984-07-24/]

There’s no easy or single answer to increasing the number of drop-ins and reducing the number of drop-outs. There can be continuing sensitivity to why a person leaves as well as enthusiasm when he/she arrives.

Who are we now? We are still a theologically diverse religion. We are sometimes knocked as free-wheeling agnostics who can’t kick a Sunday morning habit. To my way of thinking, because no creed is imposed, theological diversity is one of our strong assets from which, because of a lack of emphasis, we don’t draw enough interest.

For example, some people are surprised to learn that many Unitarian Universalists identify themselves as “Christian” and that there is a Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship organized continent-wide (a brochure for it is on the back table). Unitarian Universalist Christians are not orthodox Christians. I doubt many would be accepted by or comfortable in most Christian denominations. They choose to use interpretations of Christian symbols and language which express a stance toward life, death, and the human condition.

While I do not choose to be so identified, I would be false to my values if I in any way indicate or hinted that Unitarian Universalist Christians did not belong. I remember years ago, a panel which included a distinguished Unitarian Universalist minister who made this analogy. We emerged from the Christian tradition; we are a branch of the many-boughed Christian tree. Then he changed his figure of speech, saying “I speak the English language. But I am not a citizen of the United Kingdom.” He explained, the American Revolution secured our independence and separation from England, but English is still our mother tongue. Our institutions have been influenced by the Magna Carta, Parliaments, Shakespeare, the King James Bible, etc. But just because we secured our independence, we did not invent a new language. We kept what was best and went from there, or so he affirmed. Well, there’s some soundness to such arguments or analogies.

I, for one, was not convinced then, nor am I today. But without qualification, there’s a welcome place and always has been in our Unitarian Universalist circle for those who do trace such arcs of belief.

There was a time when rancor and bad-feeling characterized the debate between Christian Unitarian Universalists and those who did not want to be so identified. Fortunately there is little, if any, bitterness in the exchanges today.

I’m reminded of a story told by Harry Overstreet (THE MIND GOES FORTH). “Two duelists standing back to back, poised for the signal that will make them pace off the fatal distance from which they must shoot to kill. All is in order for one of the traditional, formalized dramas of conflict. All is in order except that one duelist has turned his head enough to say to the other over his shoulder, ‘I don’t feel very insulted this morning, do you?’”

Our theological diversity is no longer a duel or a tag-team wrestling match. We don’t feel insulted at another’s interpretation of religious experience of religious tradition. When we are at our best, our theological diversity motivates straighter thinking and kinder hearts.

Who are the Unitarian Universalists? Some might conclude that we are the “liberal-left,” not only on matters of religious interpretations, inquiring about the reasons and truths that most religious bodies take for granted, but also liberal on issues of the social order.

Our 1984 General Assembly meeting in Columbus, Ohio, in June, took positions on a number of issues in the social order. The few newspapers that I saw reporting on the event emphasized the resolution on gay and lesbian services of unions. That statement urged support of ministers who conduct services of union of gay and lesbian couples, even though legal marriages are denied by state governments. One might assume [by the reporting] that [this was the] only item deserving mention.

There were positions on other issues (as reported in July 15th UU World):

Support of nondiscriminatory, low-cost housing.

Urging governments to recognize the urban crisis by developing jobs for all, decent shelter, adequate healthcare and safe neighborhoods.

Resolved to urge Unitarian Universalists to educate themselves about toxic waste and become involved in efforts to see that environmental laws are enforced and to promote additional legislation where needed.

The delegates also recognized that the number of children abused and neglected is growing. Therefore there was advocacy for programs, economic and otherwise, that will help sustain and improve the dignity and rights to which all, including children, are entitled.

A resolution was passed urging the President of the U.S. to renounce the first use of nuclear weapons and conclude treaties with all nations renouncing first use.

Another resolution urged the renouncing of the proposed “Star Wars” scenario to put nuclear weapons in space.

The delegates also re-affirmed the 1983 resolution opposing overt and covert attempts to overthrow the government of Nicaragua and extend the position to all of Central America.

An accompanying resolution urged a reversal of the U.S. policy which denies asylum to refugees from El Salvador and Guatemala. Support for those churches that offer sanctuary was affirmed.

These positions were voted by 1258 delegates from 475 churches and Fellowships. Obviously with less than half of Unitarian Universalist Societies represented, there can be no claim that such resolutions represent the political and economic positions of all Unitarian Universalists. The positions taken are guides to the Unitarian Universalist Director of Social Action and the Unitarian Universalist Washington Office for Social Justice. Furthermore, the resolutions are invitations to local societies to study, discuss, and perhaps act on these matters.

There would be no more unanimity on all these resolutions dealing with the social order than there is with our religious identities.

I know of no recent studies, but a few years back, about 34% of Unitarian Universalists generally supported the Republican Party; 18% voted for Barry Goldwater in 1964. 28% disapproved of civil disobedience under any circumstances. 14% disapproved of our denomination’s work in the field of world peace.

Speaking as a political liberal (and I do not shrink from the term), Unitarian Universalists would be vastly poorer if there were no conservative voices among us. We do stand for unity in diversity. To begrudge a conservative point of view is contradictory to the value of “intellectual stimulation” which so many Unitarian Universalists place high on their reason for members of our churches and Fellowships.

Who are we? We are persons who consciously join or remain members of Unitarian Universalist churches or Fellowships because these are religious communities founded on freedom, tolerance, fellowship, and human dignity. I have mentioned before that “community” is increasingly used to describe our gatherings. Community is becoming nearly as basic as freedom in Unitarian Universalist identity. You recall the oft-quoted lines from T. S. Eliot’s poem, “The Rock”:

“When the stranger says:
‘What is the meaning of this city?
Do you huddle close together
Because you love each other?’
What do you answer?
‘We all dwell together
To make money from each other’?
Or, ‘this is a community’?”

There are numerous varieties of community: religious, business, professional, political, social, etc.

We gather in religious community, which builds into the foundation that I will not coerce you, nor you, me. We have always proposed tolerance as basic to our valuing system. But we are not tolerant of coercion! Debate, argue, present proofs, demonstrate, illustrate, illuminate in an effort to persuade. But don’t lean on me; I won’t lean on you.

In our Unitarian Universalist religion, we have believed that individuality and unity find form in the method of decision-making and working together we call congregational polity. Our individual beliefs are shared, but as these may differ among us, the action voted by the majority prevails. But the minority never loses its right to persuade, hoping to re-direct policies and actions.

But I (or you) should never be beguiled into believing that knowledge and reason reside solely in me, or you, or in any body, Unitarian Universalist or not. A proper modesty is both realistic and wise.

Years ago I clipped an item from a Unitarian Universalist newsletter. That church had a column called “Uncle Uni” which attempted to answer questions.

Dear Uncle Uni,

I have attended your church several times and have become very interested in Unitarianism. I was considering joining but was told that Unitarians are a bunch of intellectuals. As I am only of average intelligence, I don’t want to feel out of place. What do you advise?

- Worried in Hershey

Dear Worried,

Your problem is a common one but fortunately we have a solution. The next time we have a Congregational Meeting, attend even though you are not a member. Listen carefully to the discussion, and your worries will disappear, and you will come away with the knowledge that you can join our church without fear of embarrassment or concern.

- Uncle Uni

Who are the Unitarian Universalists? Neither the doorkeepers to a re-discovered Garden of Eden nor the guides to a Golden Age.

If our principles are more than mottos without substance, then the ever-present requirement is to be honest with ourselves and others.

We cannot be believers in anything just because we want to believe, but holding to what we must believe as knowledge, reason, justice, and tolerance compel us to believe.

[We believe in an] openness to and cultivation of ideas along with judgment to distinguish real differences.

And last, [we should] recognize the immense need, our human hunger to enhance and deepen the quality of human experience. That we do best together, not alone.