|
Sermon
 t’s
important for ministers to keep on studying and learning, because as
ministers expand their experiences, in turn congregations grow. This
past January, I took a week-long course on Religious Humanism at
Meadville Lombard, the Unitarian Universalist seminary in Chicago.
I jumped at the chance to enroll in this seminar. I admit it, before
this class I had never really understood Religious Humanism. Formal
studies were unconvincing --- shall I say, boring and unengaging. Of
course, in congregational life, I have interacted with many who call
themselves ‘humanist’ but I still remained unclear about what that meant
as a theological system. By taking this course, I know I expanded
considerably my capacity to minister to others by learning more about
religious humanism, and realizing the parts of myself that are humanist.
The seminar was taught by Rev. William Murry, past president of
Meadville Lombard. Bill Murry is one of today’s leading interpreters of
humanism. The title of his new book, Reason and Reverence, suggests his
balanced attitude toward current humanism. Rev. Murry will be the theme
speaker at the Mountain Desert District meeting in Albuquerque, October
12 - 14. There is still time to register for this meeting: information
is on the door of my office. And if not this meeting, I challenge each
of us to attend at least one cluster or another district event this
year. (See Karen Cody-Hopkins for more on the Denver-Boulder cluster.)
Thus, in conjunction with this upcoming district meeting, I want to
offer my first theologically based service. Today let’s consider
Religious Humanism. In a few weeks, let’s turn to theism, and sometime
later, other theologies, including speculation about where theology is
going in the future.
In one sermon, I can’t tell all about Religious Humanism . . . . What I
aim is to give you a broad picture of the changing face of humanism over
the past century and to ask you to notice where you fit, either as a
humanist yourself, or as a member of a congregation with humanist
members and attitudes. Newcomers today, I hope you learn more about this
Living Tradition of Unitarian Universalism through this service on
humanism.
I also want to remind you about the discussion forum after the service:
a chance for you to ask questions and for me to learn more about you.
You don’t have to be a humanist to attend the forum.
I should also repeat the disclaimer: I am not advocating that you all
sign on as humanists after today’s service. You might call yourself a
humanist, you might not. What is do hope is that through this service,
everyone grows in theological perspective, and in respect for the
diversity of perspectives in this faith. Given the interfaith nature of
Unitarian Universalism, it is easy to skim the surface of many religious
practices but never gain depth in any. What I advocate is that each of
you follow SOME path, that might change tomorrow but that today can help
you clarify your life.
Before unpacking Religious Humanism, let’s tackle a few basic concepts
that ground our understanding of theology.
Definition of ‘religion’ and ‘being
religious’
First, let consider the word ‘religion.’ What is ‘religion?’ The root
means ‘re-connecting together:’ religion is the cultural institution
that recognizes the common questions about human intimacy and ultimacy.
Rev. Forrest Church explains religion as ‘our response to the dual
reality of being alive and having to die.’
Religion is a human construct: as far as I know, humans are the only
life that experiences religion. Religion ought to be for the betterment
of life, but certainly we can cite long lists of abuses around the world
in the name of religion.
I invite you to distinguish ‘religion’ from the quality of ‘being
religious:’ that is, the noun from the adjective. Being religious seems
inherent in the human being. Many researchers suggest that humans are
hard-wired to be religious, driven by a need to find in daily life some
signs of universal significance.
Some qualities of being religious include 1) having a sense mystery,
such as the awe we may feel when looking up at the night sky and seeing
all those planets; 2) felling oneness of all things, such as holiness
when we’re in the mountains around us; 3) understanding meaning in and
feeling gratitude for life; 4) commitment to building community; and 5)
living by values that shape moral living. Note that this list did not
include acceptance of a supernatural being.
In a state of being religious, we show reverence for these qualities we
value through experiences such as worship. Worship is a time for
reverence, for honoring the awe in that which we regard as of the
highest meaning and value. This quality of reverence is what makes
worship different from other times when we are together in our religious
communities. The goal of worship is not community building: that we do
in other activities when we are together. The goal of worship is
reverence. We show reverence in many ways. Most of us probably also have
sources of reverence outside of church buildings on a Sunday: reverence
in nature, reverence for sports teams, reverence for special people,
reverence for vehicles we drive, and more. I imagine the roster of
reverence among us is long.
In contrast to the quality of ‘being religious,’ ‘religion’ has more to
do with institutions such as churches that promote particular belief
systems and practices. One writer has explained church as the laboratory
for learning a sense of community that we may take into the world: that
is, coming to church should help us be better people and thus enhance
that quality of being religious. To that end, , we hope that religious
institutions are committed to teaching, social action, and caring for
one another, among other goals.
I also encourage you to remember that ‘religion’ does not mean
‘conservative religion.’ ‘Liberal religion’ is not an oxymoron. And
‘religion’ is not synonymous with ‘theism’: Notice that the quality of
humanism I am talking about today is ‘religious humanism.’ Humanism is
one path of many that we may follow in response to the drive to be
religious.
Definition of Religious Humanism
Now let’s turn to Humanism. I’m interested in surveying you. If you are
willing to respond, who of you consider your main theology to be
humanist? ... who are something else? .... who isn’t sure .... Of the
humanists, who has a good grasp on what humanism means?
I’m willing to be proved wrong, but I wonder how many Unitarian
Universalists take on the mantle ‘humanism’ as a counter to ‘traditional
theism,’ that is, as a counter to experiences from religion they have
rejected. Instead of focussing on negatives, let’s consider some of the
positive markers of Humanism to explain it.
Humanism involves a focus on human beings. You may recall your art
history classes: from the Renaissance, humanism honored the human figure
as well as humans’ capacity for scientific knowledge. This
human-centeredness applies to religion as well. Religious humanism
focuses on humans rather than on a deity to explain ultimate or cosmic
questions. Religious humanism denies the supernatural: reality is here,
in the natural world. Religious humanism is grounded on science, not on
faith, but increasingly the distinction between science and faith seems
to be blurring. There are many varieties of religious humanism, that I
can’t get into here: black humanism, women’s humanism, pagan, Jewish,
Buddhist, and more.
Changing Humanism
Religious humanism has been around a long time. One could argue that the
incarnational theology of the early Christian movement was humanist: God
realized through a human being on earth.
Humanistic views of more recent times have usually been considered
heresy, or at last threatening traditional religion .... In the
twentieth century, religious humanism grew in popularity. It was
centered on the American mid-west, especially Chicago. No surprise,
several Unitarian ministers such as Curtis Reese and John Dietrich were
early proponents of ‘religion without God.’
Those earliest Humanists in the 1920s were individuals without a
movement. Finally in 1933 the first Humanist Manifesto was signed by
thirty-four men, including several Unitarians and one Universalist. This
document had the effect of solidifying Humanists as a recognized
movement. This first manifesto affirmed the scientific method to inform
religious practice; it promoted social well-being; and it supported
corporate worship to express religious values. It also had weaknesses.
It was individualistic and overly optimistic, seemingly ignoring
suffering loss, and grief: when John Dietrich was asked why he didn’t
call on the sick more in his ministry, he replied that they would have
to cope with their problems themselves.
Forty years later, in 1973, to accommodate changes in the humanist
movement, the second Humanist Manifesto was signed by scientists,
philosophers, and ministers. This manifesto corrected problems in
Manifesto I through attention to feminism and the environment, but it
still did not acknowledge the spiritual dimension of humanism and the
place of emotions in the religious experience, nor did it explain human
evil.
Finally, in 2003 Manifesto III was signed by eighty-nine men and women,
including a dozen Unitarian Universalist ministers. This document was
much more social and informed by experience. It promoted environmental
responsibility, but still was short on acknowledging spirituality and
human evil.
Such on-going changes in Religious Humanism indicate on-going need for
alternatives to traditional religion. Especially since atrocities of
World War II, the Holocaust, and nuclear warfare, mainstream religion
has fallen short in serving modern life. Today the rapidly escalating
environmental crisis is affirming all the more the urgency for yet more
new ways of approaching humanism and religion more generally.
Religious Humanism in Unitarian
Universalism
You know or can predict that many Unitarian Universalists are attracted
to humanism. At the time of merger in 1961, humanism was unquestionably
the dominant theology --- as high as 80% --- and happily so.
Unfortunately for the Humanist movement, through the 1970s and ‘80s,
humanism became entrenched, it became what William Murry calls ‘ossified
orthodoxy.’ It led to their Father’s Humanism, addressed in the reading.
Many of the old guard defined humanism narrowly---shaped by positivism
and empiricism, it was passionless and rigid. Those not humanistic were
shunned or discredited, often for not using their minds fully enough,
and mention of the word ‘God’ could get you kicked out of a Unitarian
Universalist church. Conflicts arose between theists and humanists, and
the gap widened in many congregations, and in some circles humanists
came to be identified as ‘cranky’ and ‘crusty.’ Quite ironic, isn’t it,
in this religion based on respect for diversity?
This rigidity seems to have come about in part because many took on the
mantel of ‘humanist’ with incomplete understanding of its principles. A
grounding in negativity does not provide a useful foundation for a
positive movement, or, as Murry says, ‘The heart of humanism should not
be what we reject but what we affirm.’
Still, up until a few years ago, UU Humanists remained largely
unresponsive to changing culture, especially influences from
feminism---that challenged ideas of power---from postmodernism---that
challenged ideas of knowledge--- and from the environmental
movement---that challenged humans as the superior force on the planet.
Many Humanists also rejected church as a place to grow spiritually.
Recent estimates are that the percentage of UU Humanists has dropped to
about 50%, still a sizable number, but Humanists began to feel
marginalized, the ‘marginalized majority,’ as one person called them.
Even a staunch devotee such as William Murry admits that ‘traditional
humanism lost much of its appeal.’
The dilemma of the entrenched Humanists was illustrated in the seminar I
took last year. A member of the class --- let’s call him Sam --- could
be described as the quintessential Humanist --- very bright,
fact-oriented, logical, a lawyer before entering ministry. During class
he described facing the problematic birth of his new grandchild. This
arch-humanist wept as he told us how when he saw his grandchild clinging
to life in the neo-natal unit of the hospital, all he could do was to
start praying. He said he had never prayed before in his life ....
Clearly, the traditional Humanism of our Fathers has changed to
accommodate the humanistic Sams of this movement.
UU Humanists have heard the call to get with the times and prove that
the obituary on Humanism has been premature. Humanists have recognize
the imperative to seek common ground rather than engendering
divisiveness in congregations. Many such as Murry have realized that
crust and spirit don’t mix very well. What has been labeled ‘the New
Humanism’ has been evolving these past few years.
The New Religious Humanism looks something like this. It is a closely
allied with naturalistic theism, which these days is how a majority of
Unitarian Universalists identify their theological orientation. Let me
explain. More and more people are seeking some sense of ultimate reality
outside themselves, and they locate that reality in nature, that is, in
the place that humans in habit, within the world, not separate from the
world: that is, immanent, not transcendent. That immanent spirit of life
within us, is not that far away from an attitude of humanistic
naturalism. Thus, humanism becomes a subset of religious naturalism. The
New Humanism exults in being alive, and takes satisfaction in
contributing to human betterment. The New Humanism is reasonable,
compassionate, and committed to social and environmental responsibility.
Seeing humanism as part of religious naturalism has many advantages. It
opens up possibilities for spirituality and emotion within humanism, and
it honors the body as much as the mind. Grounded in humanity, it
provides a basis for morality and social justice missing from strict
naturalistic theology.
The Great Turning: Call for One Community
I have not been a fan of the old crusty-style Religious Humanism, but I
have great hope for the New Humanism. It is not an end point, but this
sermon has reached one, lest we intrude on other activities. I think the
New Humanism honoring as it does both reason and reverence, is a
stepping stone toward a free religious future that will draw equally on
science and religion---as illustrated in a recent book title Thank God
for Evolution. I have faith that the New Religious Humanism will help
unite this free religious movement all the more. Our future can be
grounded in partnership and respect for ourselves and respect for the
other: our human neighbor next door and our human neighbors around the
world we will never meet.
Church is the place where we learn how to do the community that we take
into the world. What a wonderful gift we persons of free religion can
offer this fractured world of ours, if we can find ways to promote a
message of one world, one humanity, one system of life. Finding our own
strength, our own power, our own community, think what we can do for the
world.
SO BE IT.
Please do not copy or quote without permission of the
author.
|
