Sermon on the Unitarian Universalist First Principle, To Affirm and Promote the
Inherent Worth and Dignity of Every Person, preached by the Rev. Lillie Mae Henley, 5 Nov 2006
The Seven Principles of the Unitarian Universalist Association are in the gray hymnal, one page before the first hymn. Because we are a member of the Unitarian Universalist Association, we are exploring these seven principles to discover what they might mean for us at Universalist National Memorial Church.
In the introductory sermon on these principles, I shared with you some of the history of these principles and how they reflect our Unitarian and Universalist heritage.
We are a free church with no church doctrine or religious creeds. Our Unitarian Universalist story in the United States has been one of opposition to the established, religious orthodoxy of the Puritans.
Many have misconceptions about Unitarians and Universalists. Because we are a free church, they believe we can believe “anything we want” to be UUs. That is far from the truth, but I heard a story…
There was a man, a Lutheran, who walked into his pastor’s office and said, my beloved dog has died and I want to give him a funeral. The minister said, I’m sorry, we don’t do funerals for animals, perhaps you can go down the street to the Unitarian Universalist minister, she will probably do one for you.
“Oh,” said the long-time Lutheran, “I hate to leave my own church and go there for a funeral for my Skippy, but I guess they’ll do one, I’ve decided to donate $2,000 to the church where I have his funeral.”
“Well,” said his pastor, “you didn’t say Skippy was Lutheran!”
Of all the religions in American today, it is the Universalists and the Unitarians who have truly lived a radical, religious revolution. I cannot say the most radical, for that would have to be all of the reformers and dissenters in the 1500s who broke away from the Roman Catholic Church. While there were thousands who died in Europe for their radical beliefs, we can be thankful that no one had to die here for their religious beliefs—even the most radical ones!
Of all the religions in American today, it is the Universalists and the Unitarians who have truly lived a radical, religious revolution. I cannot say the most radical, for that would have to be all of the reformers and dissenters in the 1500s who broke away from the Roman Catholic Church. While there were thousands who died in Europe for their radical beliefs, we can be thankful that no one had to die here for their religious beliefs—even the most radical ones!
Our story is rooted in the Congregational churches of the puritans who came to the Colonies specifically for religious freedom.
Our story is rooted in the German and American philosophy of transcendentalism, which taught that a person should use reason to discern her or his religious beliefs.
Our story is rooted in the principles of tolerance, established during the Reformation by forbearers who lived and died to spread the ideas of all three principles: freedom, reason, and tolerance.
Our Principles today are not what they will look like a decade or two from now. At least I hope not, because that is what our religion is all about. It is a religion that develops in relationship. I find it interesting that process theology, which has developed in the last few decades of the twentieth century, describes G-d as a process that changes and responds to humans, as we change and respond to G-d. Many recognize that religion has to change to meet the changing needs of humanity. As we Unitarian Universalists change, we expect that we will have to revisit and revise our Principles and Purposes.
Our first principle is we “… covenant to affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person.” How did this principle evolve?
Let us begin with the historical perspective on “the individual.”
We know that it wasn’t until the Renaissance that human beings began to think of themselves in terms of “I,” the individual. Before that, humans only saw themselves in relationship to their family, community, and tribe.
We do know, though, that some ancient cultures recognized that human beings had value and worth. For example, the Israelites were one of these early cultures. Psalms 139:13-14 states, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” But the Hebrews had value and worth only as a part of the tribe or cultic whole.
It was the Renaissance that produced the idea that human beings had intrinsic value and as creative individuals had worth as a singular person.
The wholehearted understanding of “I” that the Renaissance fostered became very clear religiously during the Reformation. It was then that Martin Luther, John Calvin, Unitarian reformers Socinius, Francis David, and other radical reformers insisted that human beings had to have access to the Bible and not just church doctrine and dictates. They argued that individuals could determine for themselves what the divinely-inspired Bible taught.
I don’t want to get too far away from our first principle; the story is so rich it is difficult to jump from the reformation to the United States. But that is what we have to do, because we are focusing on a religious understanding of the inherent worth and dignity of each person.
The Puritans established the Congregational churches here in America because they did not believe the Church of England would ever allow them the religious freedom and tolerance they needed as a religious people.
What is crucial for our understanding about the establishment of the Puritan churches is the inherent premise of the value of the individual. Each person has the responsibility to establish her or his relationship with God, and was expected to testify about their relationship with God. But above that, they also have the responsibility to demonstrate they are worthy of that relationship. This demonstration was important, because if they were good enough, they were probably one of the “elect,” or few, who was going to Heaven.
From the 1630s to the middle 1700s the Puritans practiced their New World religion, grounded in the value of individual belief and worthiness to be one of the elect.
Then in the middle to late 1770s, Universalist thought developed indigenously and was also brought to these shores by John Murray from England. The unorthodox belief of universal salvation developed in “protest” to the orthodox theology of only “the elect” having a place in Heaven.
At the same time, Unitarian thought was appearing, and by the 1800s, Transcendentalism had made a significant impact on both the Unitarians and Universalists. They were preaching that man had a responsibility to determine for himself or herself the truth in the Bible. Human kind was able to discern this truth, because we were capable of reason.
Our heritage came together in the 1800s—religious freedom, religious tolerance, and the use of reason in religion.
Our religious heritage developed as our constitutional, democracy developed. All men are created equal …
All people have inherent worth and dignity
We have brought the Renaissance “I,” the individual, to the forefront of human relations.
We know there is a lot said about “individualism” today, and this is not the sermon for that subject, suffice to say, that individualism, like all things human and divine, has a light and a shadow side—today we will focus on the positive—it has brought us, as a nation and as a religious people to where we are today.
How do we live out this covenant to affirm and promote each person’s worth and dignity?
This principle is the same as Jesus’ second great commandment, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
How do we live out this commandment?
There are so many people to love:
The homeless, but they smell, and refuse to work, and what can I do, anyway?
They are homeless, not only because some of them are alcoholics or drug addicts, but because some of them have serious mental challenges that our healthcare system does not address.
They are homeless because circumstances in their lives converged at one vulnerable time, while they were living their lives the best they could, and caused them to lose their jobs, and then their homes, and then their families.
They are homeless because of reasons we cannot even imagine.
We could be called to make a difference in the lives of the homeless. Will we have a ministry that changes the system that creates homelessness or changes the way we serve the homeless. We cannot look at the issue and believe that we alone can make a difference.
We have to look at the ministry we are called to do and say, what Dag Hammarskjold suggested, “Not I, but God in me!”
There are so many people to love.
There is our prison system and mandatory minimum sentencing.
First time offenders, young people, going to prison for 20 years because politicians can get elected easier if they are “tough on crime!”
There are our racist laws that discriminate against the powerless.
Research shows that building more and more prisons and mandatory sentencing is not the answer to making our world safer from criminal activity.
Something needs to be done about this.
If, we are called to a ministry to make a difference in the lives of people incarcerated, or if we are called to make a difference in the judicial system that unjustly incarcerates some, we cannot look at the issue and believe that we alone can make a difference.
We have to look at the ministry we are called to do and say, “Not I, but God in me!”
There are so many people to love.
Human rights abuses—look at Darfur.
Human rights abuses—look at how the Taliban still treat women in Afghanistan.
Human rights abuses—slavery, on the other side of the world and in our own neighborhoods.
Human rights abuses—gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people victims of hate crimes.
If, we are called to make a difference in human rights, here or around the world, we cannot look at the issue and believe that we alone can make a difference.
We have to look at the ministry we are called to do and say, “Not I, but God in me!”
There are so many people to love.
What about those who abuse? Murder? Commit unspeakable crimes?
God loves them, why can’t we love them?
Hosea Ballou, the greatest Universalist preacher who ever lived, said that when evil is done, goodness is the ultimate result. Ballou was influenced by the eighteenth century philosopher Petitpierre, who wrote, “… what seems evil is ultimately good: “…Whatever the sinner intends as evil, the Divine Ruler … means unto good.”
Ballou, would not have relied solely on the words of a philosopher; he found many sources for ultimate goodness in the Bible. No one ever faulted Ballou for his lack of exegetical skills.
There are so many people to love.
And we are called to love them all.
We may not be called to solve every problem, right every wrong, make every person’s life better, but
We are called to make a difference some way, somehow, somewhere.
God asks us to do what we can do.
When we are faced with that call to a ministry of which we might not know right,
Know we can love, love who we are asked to love, and minister to whoever needs that love, because it is “Not I, but God in me!”
Readings
Dag Hammarskjold (pronounced HAM-mar-shold) was born in 1905, the son of the Prime Minister of Sweden. He studied law and economics, and taught economics at the University of Stockholm. He was head of the Swedish delegation to the United Nations and then Secretary General of the United Nations. In 1960 the Belgian Congo (now Zaire) became independent, and civil war promptly broke out. Hammarskjold went in to negotiate a cease-fire, and was killed in a plane crash in Zambia on 18 September 1961.
For years, he had kept a private journal, writing down his thoughts on God and God’s meaning for his life. After his death, the journal was published under the title Markings. He wrote the following in 1951:
A young man, adamant in his committed life. The one who was nearest to him relates how, on the last evening, he arose from supper, laid aside his garments, and washed the feet of his friends and disciples—an adamant young man, alone as he confronted his final destiny…
He had assented to a possibility in his being, of which he had had his first inkling when he returned from the desert. If God required anything of him, he would not fail…
A young man, adamant in his commitment, who walks the road of possibility to the end without self-pity or demand for sympathy, fulfilling the destiny he has chosen — even sacrificing affection and fellowship when the others are unready to follow him— into a new fellowship…
Assenting to his possibility—why? Does he sacrifice himself for others, [or] … for his own sake—in … [conceit]? Or does he realize [that it is] for the sake of others? … A new commandment I give unto you: that ye love one another.
Second Reading is two scriptures, one from the Hebrew Scriptures and one from the New Testament
Isaiah 25:6-9
On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wines, of rich food filled with marrow, of well-aged wines strained clear. And he will destroy on this mountain the shroud that is cast over all peoples, the sheet that is spread over all nations; he will swallow up death forever. Then the Lord God will wife away from all faces, and the disgrace of his people he will take away form all the earth, for the Lord has spoken.
Luke 6:32-35
If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be child of the Most High; for God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.