Sunday, February 24, 2008

"Aspiring to Affirm the

 Inherent Worth and Dignity of Every Person"

A Talk by Barbara Fleming

Namaqua UU Congregation

     At the General Assembly in 1985, the Unitarian Universalist Association adopted seven principles and a list of sources of religious wisdom and insight as a guideline for Unitarian Universalism, a creedless religion. Since the merger of the two faith traditions in 1961, no statement had been issued articulating our beliefs, in part because there had been little discussion about the religious aspects of the merger. Given the individualistic nature of people attracted to our religion, it perhaps seemed unnecessary to those who planned and accepted the merger. They preferred to leave each church, and each member, to craft his or her own belief structure.

     However, by the mid 1980s, after strong protests by both black and female UUs had raised concerns about just who and what we are, headquarters decided that some sort of framework was needed. A task force was designated, of which Rev. Roy Jones was a member, and in 1985 they brought their finished product to the delegates at the assembly.

     After – as you can well imagine – considerable discussion and debate, six principles and six sources were adopted. A seventh was proposed from the floor and added to the six brought forth by the commission.

     Now the UUA is, for the first time since their adoption, examining these principles and sources and asking members across the country to do the same.  In January the North Plains Cluster met and, after lively discussion, offered some ideas and suggestions for updating and revising which were passed on to the Commission on Appraisal. To follow up on this, the Worship Committee will bring to you over the next several months one person’s perspective on each principle, with two collections of writings from the UUA as resources. Please take into account that each talk is only one individual’s ideas and may not reflect your own views, which is why we invite your thoughtful reaction and discussion as we work our way through these principles. We invite you to read each talk and use it as a springboard for your own thoughts and ideas.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

First principle of Unitarian Universalism: We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, do covenant to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person.

     To affirm means to support and believe in. To promote means to put forth as a cause or idea.

Worth means value, and dignity means to have a sense of self-respect. Every person excludes no one. The significance of the statement hinges on a single word – inherent.

     He’s homeless, unkempt, unshaven, dirty. He sleeps in the shelter of a downtown building’s entryway, settling there after all the employees have left for the night. During the day, he parks himself and his belongings, one ragged, tied bundle, on a conspicuous corner with a cup that holds a few coins nearby. He seems to subsist on whatever people drop into the cup as they pass by. When you walk past him, noting the scent of alcohol wafting on the air, you feel conflicted, uncomfortable. If you give him money, he’s likely to spend it on liquor. If you try to help him, you might find yourself in way over your head, and getting nowhere. You are sorry he is this way – but what can you, one individual, do?

      Your child – that sweet, smart, funny, talented, loving little girl of yours – comes home one day crying, and a little disheveled. She tells you that some kids in school are making fun of her, calling her names (out of the hearing of adults, of course). This little girl you love so much got a combination of genes that will always keep her from being small and svelte. The kids, she says, are calling her “fatty” and other unflattering names. They won’t let her join in their games. Your first reaction is fury. How can anyone do this to your precious child? When you cool down, part of you acknowledges that they are just children, parroting what they see, hear, learn. Part of you knows that one day your beautiful child will come into her own. But the rest of you, the largest part, is consumed with powerful, stomach-clenching anger. What do you tell this tender soul who looks to you for comfort and advice? That the young bullies who are making her life miserable have inherent worth and dignity?

     They are a persistent couple. They have stood outside the grocery store, just far enough away to be legal, for days now, pressing a copy of a religious tract into the hands of everyone who comes within reaching distance. You told them the first time you walked by that you aren’t interested, but they seemed not to have heard you. They continue trying to hand you a copy of their publication. Your veneer of politeness is growing a little thin.

     She is different. You can’t quite put your finger on it, but something about her makes you uncomfortable. Her odd get-ups, perhaps, or her habit of smacking her gum right in your face. Maybe it’s her manner, so off-putting. She seems to have no interest in anyone but herself. When you find yourself in the same room with her, you behave politely toward her, as you’ve been taught, but you really wish she would go away.

     That group keeps sending you e-mails that make your blood boil. To you, their views are narrow-minded, delusional and distorted, possibly even dangerous. You disagree with everything they stand for. It’s very hard to maintain your cool when you see yet another message from them. Respectful disagreement with such people seems an unattainable goal, especially since they look to be trying very hard to impose their strictures on society at large.

     It is human, and very natural, to respond to any one of these individuals or groups with anger, frustration, or revulsion. It’s far easier to judge their actions and condemn them than it is to try to understand or relate to them. In all aspects of our lives there are people who infuriate, irritate or repel us. All of us carry wounds from our past and, probably, festering ones as well.

     Then there are those who defile the very idea of humanness, who are savage, willful, cruel.  Their names are legion. Today and over millennia, they have wreaked and are wreaking havoc and destruction upon humankind, especially on the most vulnerable of us. The deeds they have done, whether they were named Genghis Khan, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler or some other, whether they were littering the killing fields in Cambodia, transporting slaves under unspeakably inhumane conditions, committing genocide in Rwanda, or, right now, killing wantonly in other parts of Africa, are horrendous and unforgettable, unforgivable. How are we to reconcile these actions with dignity and worth? Where is the humanity?

     And yet…And yet…We UUs affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person, no exceptions. What does that mean in our daily lives, and how do we reconcile that principle with the actual individuals we encounter as we go about our lives, or the ones who have tramped through history destroying whatever impeded their progress? Can this principle in any way, to any extent, inform our behavior and our choices, or is it simply an unattainable ideal that we strive for and seldom achieve?

     Before we consider those weighty questions, let’s look at the background of this principle. Why is it one of our guiding principles – indeed, the very first one – and where did it come from?

     Among Unitarians, it began as a response to the Calvinist idea that human beings are innately depraved, born full of sin that only their brand of Christianity could cleanse. In the 19^th century, William Ellery Channing and others offered a vision of a perfectible human, asserting the idea that each of us carries within us a spark of the divine. In the Universalist tradition, as we learned during the Roots and Wings series, the concept of divine grace and forgiveness for all, no restrictions for getting into heaven regardless of the nature of one’s sins, translated in the 20^th century into most of the wording of our first principle, with the roots of both religions in its meaning.

     In our time, as Rev. Sarah Lammert observes, this principle has become a framework for living an ethical life. On the one hand, it means that we UUs respect differences, reject oppression, fight for justice. On the other hand, it sometimes means that we distrust authority, however benign, cling fiercely to our individuality and independence even at the expense of the greater good, and at times idolize the individual to the exclusion of the whole. It also means that sometimes we tolerate unacceptable behavior among our congregations, forgetting that while the person may have dignity and worth, the behavior overcomes whatever value we ascribe to the person.

     It has led to an eclecticism in our religious practices that can drive some people away at the same time as it attracts others.  Some want more God in services; some want less. Some want more spirituality; others want more intellectual stimulation. Some of us are not tolerant of anything Christian, while others want more Christian references in services. The result, for ministers and lay leaders, is what Lammert calls “a delicate dance, this foxtrot between individual belief and corporate worship.” All of us involved with worship are dancing all the time.

     But what does this principle mean to us as we live our lives, as we encounter the homeless man, the bullies, the aggressive proselytizers, the self-centered, thoughtless one, the people who see the world so much differently than we do and seek to impose their will on all of us, the doers of horrendous and unspeakable evil?

     Say Channing, Lammert and many others, this principle calls us to connect with something larger than ourselves, to recognize that each of us has a spark of the divine, name it what you will, and that when we connect with each other, we create a powerful presence “infused in all of life,” a power we recognize as love. This presence, Lammert says, “cries out that we each must use the gifts we are given in service of the whole.” It calls on us to sacrifice some of the individuality we so highly prize, to compromise and connect and seek to understand.

     This principle does not call us to love everyone in the whole world, or to love – even to like – everyone we encounter in our personal lives. Rather, it calls us to treat others with respect and acceptance, regardless of differing political or religious views, to honor the dignity of others, to follow, if you will, the golden rule.  We may agree to disagree but will strive to do so respectfully, with civility. We are all, says Lammert, people of worth, however we choose to spend our lives. Love is inherent in each of us. The spark was once there even in those who choose to extinguish it, to live destructively. We are all redeemable, says this principle, given favorable enough circumstances and the willingness of the individual to be redeemed.

     This spark links us together. It helps us to cope with a gravely troubled world, full of gravely troubled people, to forgive ourselves and others for mistakes we make, and to welcome into our church home all who wish to join us on our spiritual journey.

     Here, in this church, we can be what and who we are, because we recognize that each of us is part of the whole, each of us deserves to be treated with dignity, each of us can choose to treat others as we wish to be treated. While we continue to recognize that each of us is a unique individual, like no one else on earth, and precious, at the same time we give up a little bit of ourselves to become part of something stronger than any of us alone.

     Here, in this church community, we can come together to create a greater whole. Perhaps that whole can make a difference in the world, granting disadvantaged, disheartened others the gift of dignity and a sense of worth.

    And who knows? Maybe one day the alcoholic beggar will sober up, the misguided bullies see the error of their ways, the persistent couple discover a wider world view. I confess I don’t hold out much hope for the annoying e-mailers – but the rude gum-snapper may someday begin to notice, even to care about others. It is possibility that gives us hope, that shapes our faith. And when it comes to the first principle, the one which asks us to see beyond the outside --  an individual’s skin color, sexual orientation or other difference -- to the whole person inside, we can but do our best to live by it, challenging though it is to do so, knowing that we will often fall short. We can but do our best to bring about the world we would prefer to live in, a world where it is easier to live this principle in our daily lives, with everyone we encounter. We can but try to acknowledge worth and dignity by alleviating misery where possible, even if in small ways.

     Together, connecting with each other, we can make a difference, reminding ourselves of this principle, using it as a guideline for how we decide – and aspire -- to be.

Closing words, from the Rev. Henry Meserve: “If you were arrested for being a Unitarian Universalist, would there be enough evidence to convict you?” What might it mean to alter behavior according to these principles such that a case could be made to convince an impartial jury to convict you of Unitarian Universalism?

References:

Brandenburg, Ellen, ed. The Seven Principles in Word and Worship. Boston: Skinner House 

     Books, 2007.

Frost, Edward, ed. With Purpose and Principle. Boston: Unitarian Universalist

     Association, 1998.