Home
Contact Us
Find Us
Our Ministers
Sunday Sampler
Youth Programs
UU's in Action
UUCIF Committees
UUCIF Art Collection
Famous UU's
UU History
UUA
UUA Mountain Desert District
Principles and Purposes

A Sampling of Recent Sunday Services with Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin and Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones

Memorial Day Reflection

The Church Courageous

Masks

The Incredible Power of Forgiveness

A Reflection in the Mirror

Recent Sunday Services
with Member and Guest Speakers

Understanding the Bible - Understanding Our World
Presented by Rev. Lyn Stangland Cameron, Ruth Barnes, Tiffiny Tailor, and Tami Thatcher


A Prayer for Community
Written and Presented by Barry Leech


Prayer as a Means of Coping With Crisis
Presented by Rev. Dr. Rodney R. Romney


The Transformational History and Theology of Unitarian Universalism Introduction
Presented and written by Arthur Kull


THE GREAT STORY (also known as the Universe Story, Epic of Evolution, or Evolutionary Epic) is humanity’s common creation story. THE GREAT STORY is a way of telling the history of everyone and everything that honors and embraces all religious traditions and creation stories. It is the sacred narrative of an evolving Universe of emergent complexity and breathtaking creativity and cooperation — a story that offers each of us the opportunity to find meaning and purpose in our lives and our time in history. Worship service by acclaimed speakers Connie Barlow and Michael Dowd. Click here for the Great Story Website

Poetry Service Selections
Available selections.

“Poor devil” Poetry by Ric Masten.
Presented by Steven Watts

Click here for ric-masten.net

“In His Name”
Presented and written by Jeff Leuschen
Used by permission. All rights reserved.

“Sunna's Ride”
Presented and written by Jeff Leuschen
Used by permission. All rights reserved.


The Soul of Reality
A Worship Service with Guest Bill Mallory

Why do they hate us? Random thoughts about the post 9/11/01 world by a teacher uncertain about the future
A Worship Service with Jim Francis

Stories of the Fall
A Worship Service with guest speaker Whit Kaufmann

Mother Wove the Morning
A dramatic presentation by Oregon UU Nancy Harms

Night Dreaming and Day Waking

Letters from Camp
A Worship Service with a Baby Dedication

Zen and the Art of Real Life

A Life with a View

The Proposal of Marriage

Day of the Dead Celebration




A Sampling of Sunday Services with Rev. Lee Greiner

Heretical Choice

Planting Perennials in the Garden of the Spirit

Jefferson and the Vision of a Life That Yet May Be 


Wonder, Wisdom, and Serendipitous Knowledge


Listening for the Call, Wrangling with the Response


Languages of Life: Listening through Spiritual Disciplines

A Celebration of Life in Sight and Sound
 Featuring Photography by Arthur Kull


Is there a UU theology? If so, what is it?

 Forum Sunday with special guest Dr. Daniel O'Connell


A Sampling of Recent Sunday Services with Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin and Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones - Full transcription

Memorial Day Reflection
   by Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin, May 29, 2005

As a boy, on Memorial Day, my parents would sometimes bring flowers or wreaths to the graves of some of the men and women from our little town who had lost their lives in the wars of the last century. Later there would be a schmaltzy parade down the street in front of our house, some unintelligible speeches in the square downtown and, with all the boring stuff out of the way, we would all head off to the park for a town Bar-b-que with games and nifty prizes for us kids.

There are still picnics, of course, and and Bar-b-que’s around the country this weekend, but these days, this particular holiday is seen by most as simply an extra day off.

It’s a sad holiday. And, I think in order to avoid the profound sadness that permeates us all when we contemplate the debilitating costs of war, most of us would prefer to let the day pass in quiet gatherings of family or friends, or maybe alone, simply enjoying a day off.

I often walk around the Greenbelt of the Snake River. Every time I do, I pass the Veteran’s Memorial on Memorial Drive. The stone monument says “In honor of all veterans of all wars.” And another larger monument nearer the river says, “Lest we forget.” Just what is it that we might be prone to forget? Or to put it another way, what is it that we are being asked remember? Certainly, the men and women who have died in America’s wars. But I think it goes deeper than this.

What I think we need to remember is that, through all the untold human suffering, loss, death and grief of the myriad wars and battles fought by Americans, all of us, in the core of our souls, desperately want peace. This is our true heritage as human beings and, I hope, this is also our destiny, as well. I know that we, as a species, haven’t realized this aspiration for any significant length of time, but we humans do want peace; for ourselves and even more so for our children. And to really yearn for peace in this way means to work to overcome violence.

In 1789, the United States War Department was created to organize and maintain the U.S. army both in times of peace and war. In 1949 the War Department was reconstituted as the Dept. of the Army, which eventually became a division of the Department of Defense. But what about changing the name again? What if this gargantuan federal agency was to be called, for example, the Department of Peace? What might be the implications of that kind of a name change? What would the primary mission and tasks of this redefined organization then become? And what if the Department of Homeland Security was subsumed into this department, but now called the Department of Homeland Relations, not Security?

Would a change such as this immediately signal an end to war for this country? Sadly, no. But it would symbolize that it is our primary intention to work like crazy to ensure that war is the last resort in our panoply of foreign relations approaches. The very last resort, not simply a convenient, if untidy, tool of hegemonic imperialism. When I speak of a Department of Peace, I’m not talking here about the Orwellian doublespeak of political idioms such as Clear Skies and Healthy Forests Initiatives that mean more air pollution and more trees cut down. Or No Child Left Behind that means entire schools and their students left behind. No, I’m actually referring to, what is called in Greek, a metanoia – a complete change of mind and heart; an awareness that we have been going about this task of international relations in ways that are both self-serving and tragically flawed and, in fact, serve to undermine the very peace we seek to find. I’m speaking of a change that sounds, even as I say it, impossible, but I’m also reminded of the powerful and prophetic words of anthropologist Margaret Mead, quoted in our hymnal, who said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it’s the only thing that ever has.” It’s the only thing that ever has.

I think of our burgeoning little United Vision for Idaho group more and more each day as Elizabeth and I are serving this Fellowship. I remember the two small demonstrations we recently held downtown, in a city where demonstrations are a rare sight, indeed, aimed at protecting the Social Security program. The first gathering had maybe a dozen adults and one small child standing outside the City Council Chambers on the day of Sen. Larry Craig’s Town Hall meeting. And because it was held in concert with other small demonstrations around the state, it actually received national press coverage. Then the next one, some weeks later, more than tripled the number of marchers, with local television stations eager to cover the event. Some of you may have been there because this congregation was well represented. And that small child was again present with us. And he was able to articulate why he was there. That’s both symbolic and powerful. He is the face of the future of progressive values. These values have not died. They are once again being revived in public life.

Karl Rove started as one man, just one man and, through clever leveraging of some very powerful and wealthy people, and playing on the greed and fear of many, became the “architect” of a neo-conservative empire founded on a disdain for the oppressed and justice for the privileged. One man, one vision. What could we do if we actually leveraged compassion and justice into the cornerstones of a reinvigorated country that would finally live out the dreams, not the weaknesses, of our Founding Fathers and Mothers?

Violence is any behavior that dehumanizes anyone. When we deny the presence of love and truth in another human being we are committing violence. Violence is forgetting that there is an infinity behind every human face.

Woundedness - in ourselves, in others, and in our culture - is entangled within the very roots of violence, and in turn is inextricably enmeshed in the roots of war. We have all, unwittingly, by virtue in our membership in this culture, been enrolled in a class called “Violence 101.” Our teachers have been the media, our societal values of consumerism and exploitation, rugged individualism, and an illusion of superiority. Sometimes we receive extra tutoring from family or friends, bosses or even co-workers. Consciously or not we are being schooled in the logic and practice of emotional, verbal, physical and structural violence. We learn that the world is an untrustworthy place, we learn quickly who are enemies are and, most significantly, we learn that the only ways to deal with violence are to either accommodate it, avoid it, or utilize it ourselves. With every conflict we rehearse and reinforce these scripts by either going along with violence, running from it, or by throwing a verbal or physical punch. Ironically, violence rarely, if ever, ends through any of these means.

Nonviolence is a forceful, gentle and audacious power rooted in an unquenchable longing for the wholeness of the world and its wounded and sacred inhabitants. I personally struggle with the viability of this philosophy, but it keeps drawing me back again and again because active nonviolence, a living and breathing life of compassion, comes face to face with these wounds. Compassion touches a sacredness within each of us that lies even deeper than our wounds. This is the spiritual center where we finally come to our senses, recover our balance and reclaim our humanity. This is the place within us where the woundedness and sacredness of every person is revered and is seen to be capable of evoking the most profound healing.

By facing our woundedness and acknowledging this sacredness, active nonviolence prepares us to address the conflicts we face in our lives and in the life of the world. We can begin to trust ourselves to be fully present to others. We can creatively interrupt the cycle of retaliatory violence. We can acknowledge and safeguard the humanity of the opponent as well as the ally. We can identify and struggle for an agreement that respects all parties so we are then able to transform what divides we humans from ourselves, from one another, and from the Earth. The goal of nonviolence is not to win. It is to gain greater understanding of the truth, and then to encourage all sides act on that more encompassing truth. And to find mutually acceptable and sustainable solutions to conflicts.

Jesus, St. Francis, Gandhi, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King, Jr., and many others have declared with their lives an alternative to the treadmill of violence. They preached and practiced active nonviolence as a way to resolve conflict humanely and effectively, to become genuinely human.

Pace e bene, the brief quotation at the top of your Order of Service this morning, means “peace and all good to you” and was used by St. Francis and St. Clare in 12th century Assisi as a greeting and as a means of proclaiming the way of nonviolence in the midst of a violent world.

Strangely, it is not that anger, or even rage, disappears in learning nonviolence. Gandhi declared himself to be “the angriest man of the 20th century.” Rather, it’s making the choice again and again to not act on that first impulse for revenge, for retribution. This is not easy stuff. It is a lifelong and generation-spanning process. But there are tools to help us do this work. And people trained to help us learn. And to unlearn. Arun Gandhi, for example, is carrying on his grandfather’s legacy in teaching non-violence all around the world.

The most intractable conflicts we humans seem to face are those described as identity-based conflicts. These are the racially, ethnically, culturally or religiously-based conflicts we are most familiar with around the world – in Israel and Palestine, in Darfur in the Sudan, some years ago in Cambodia, and during the Nazi Holocaust.

If we want to make sure atrocities such as these don’t continue, we need to stop the downward spiral of conflict before it reaches anything like those dimensions.

In proposing nonviolent alternatives to war, the hypothetical question is almost always asked, “What would you have done about Hitler?” But the question is always asked too late. What happened in the 1930’s? Where was international diplomacy and pressure? Would it have stopped that juggernaut? Maybe.

People often used such hypothetical questions to try to derail Gandhi from his path of satyagraha or “soul force.” When pressed, time after time, even Gandhi developed 5 criteria for the use of what he called “injurious force,” which, firmly grounded in empathy for the Other, he distinguished from violence. These precepts were:

1. It is a last resort.
2. You engage it with deep regret.
3. You are doing it only to protect “life.”
4. You accept the consequences – physical, emotional and spiritual; and
5. You vow to never let this type of action happen again. Never again!

“Who is a hero?” the rabbis ask of the Talmud. Their answer: “One who changes an enemy into an ally.”

We humans can actually learn to develop a sense of compassion and open-heartedness for "the Other side" and even to tell the other side's story in a sympathetic manner. Jay Rothman, an international mediator, says in his book Resolving Identity-based Conflict, “Transforming conflict is about finding that even the bitterest of adversaries share common human needs. Such conflicts may be creatively transformed when adversaries come to learn, ironically perhaps, that they (can) fulfill their deepest needs and aspirations only with the cooperation of those who most vigorously oppose them. Even while cooperating, adversaries may still wish the other side would just go away; (but) peace prevails when they understand that this just will not happen. Through in-depth encounters, even the angriest of enemies may come to learn that just as their own needs for expression and fulfillment of identity, safety, dignity, and meaning are like a thirst that must be quenched, the other side’s identity needs are equally compelling.”

What would truly honor those men and women who have died in our nation’s wars? Wouldn’t the journey toward lives of non-violence and a just peace be a fitting memorial for a new Memorial Day?

It has been said that, “Everything good has to be done over and over again forever.” There is a community of people working tirelessly to bring into being the “Kingdom of God” that Jesus spoke of so often, because, ironically, the Kingdom is already among us, but as yet largely unrecognized. We are all called to be a part of this community, most of whom are still unknown to us, but who are following the call into a world that does not yet exist. Let’s join them.

May it be so.
Top

The Church Courageous
   by Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones, February 6, 2005

As she left the small, barely furnished room in the Massachusetts jail where she had been teaching about 20 female inmates, Dorothea Dix heard “an eerie kind of wailing, loud and sad.” The jailer told her with an amused smile that that was “one of the mad ones. No keeping them quiet.” That was the night Dorothea Dix discovered that the indigent insane were kept in the same jail as convicted criminals only the conditions for the mentally ill were much worse.

That bitter cold night, she found six figures huddled on straw smelling of feces, with no heat and only rags for clothes. It was in 1841 that Dorothea made this shocking discovery of how fellow human beings, mad, poor or both, but still humans, were kept. She immediately changed her focus from public school teaching to teaching the public and legislators about the atrocious condition she consistently found in jails and the inhumane way the poor and mentally ill, in particular, were being treated or rather mistreated. She was an exemplar extraordinaire of what one person, dedicated to change and justice, can accomplish. Stephen Kendrick in “A Faith People Make” tells the stories of Unitarian Universalists who, because of their UU beliefs, changed all of our lives. Dorothea Dix’s incredible story of dedication and caring is one of these. If you are ever in doubt about what one person can do, read about Dorothea Dix. Pope Pius IX called her a “modern day St. Theresa.”

Abraham Lincoln, recognizing her great talent and compassion, named her head of the U.S. Army nurses during the Civil War. Single handedly, she shocked and then educated America into taking care of its neediest citizens, the poor, the mentally ill and the imprisoned. Hers was a great personal victory but her work was an even greater victory for those she helped save from such misery. She is one of the greatest figures in our UU history because she won a courageous battle in the long struggle on behalf of mercy and deep human compassion.

Another of our Unitarian Universalist exemplars who served our denomination with uncommon courage was Thomas Starr King. He was a second-generation New England Universalist minister but made his name most prominently as the Unitarian Minister of the fledgling Unitarian Society of San Francisco. He was just over 5 feet tall but had the mind, wit, heart and voice of a giant. It was 1860 when he traveled to San Francisco from his home in Boston. Tragically, he was in California only 4 years before he died of pneumonia brought on by exhaustion.

But in those four years, he changed the life of the church and the politics of California. Not only did he raise enough money to build a beautiful new church for the San Francisco congregation but simultaneously, he became famous throughout California for his high ethics, his superior oratory prowess and his influence on Public policy. He traveled the state during those four years working to keep the state of California on the anti slavery Union side in the Civil War, a history altering accomplishment. One wonders what marvelous things he might have done for Unitarian Universalism and for this nation if he had lived past the age of 39. He was another one-person courageous force for compassion, justice and Unitarian Universalist values.

The Oxford dictionary defines courage as: 1. “The quality of character which shows itself when facing danger,” 2. “Acting despite fear or lack of confidence.” Courage is demonstrating integrity and character in face of danger. The word courage comes from the old French and Latin root meaning “heart.” Courage is doing what we know in our hearts is right, even when we feel afraid. That is why when we say to someone “ I really admire the courage it took to face that difficult situation,” they often say, “I didn’t actually feel brave at all.” Courage has little or nothing to do with bravery. It has to do with heart. It has to do with values. It has to do with deeply held values; the kind Socrates called “beautiful values.”

If we were each to make a list of our values, they might very well be similar lists but our ranking of their importance might be different. I might think Justice is the highest value where as you might consider security more valuable. Someone else might hold peace as the most important value while another would choose freedom. Justice, peace, security and freedom most likely would be on the list of important values for nearly everyone here but the one you would give up for another reveals your priority of values.

It is in defense of the value or values we hold highest that we are most likely to display courage. TSK literally gave his life for the values of justice, equality and the inherent worth and dignity of each person. Dorothea Dix displayed her courage in the cause of compassion, justice as well as the ideals of our first Unitarian Universalist principle.

Theodore Parker devoted much of his adult life to the abolition of slavery as well. He listened to his heart as his father had counseled him to do. It told him slavery was wrong. Courage is doing what we know in our hearts is the right thing to do according to our values.

Even though the examples I have given have to do with individual courage the foundation for group or communal courage is the same- hope, trust and a strong sense of values. Our values are how we discern what is right and what is wrong. The Religious Right does not have a monopoly on determining what is right and what is wrong. We have our own seven foundational Principles of right living as well, including those of compassion and justice. They call us to be respectful of each other and of the natural world.

In the passage by Yann Martel, which was read earlier, the effects of fear are described in graphic terms. The situation that caused such fear for the hero of this book, was a 450-pound Bengal tiger in the opposite end of his lifeboat, a situation dangerous enough to fill any of us with fear. The counsel given is that while we often foolishly throw away our reason in the face of such fear, we should never throw away Hope and Trust. If we can hang onto reason also, so much the better, but this does not often prove to be the case.

Rarely in our lives does fear actually come in the form of real 450-pound tigers, but fear is still present in all of our lives. Many of us have regular bouts of fear about our ultimate death. Some of us fear embarrassment or humiliation; some fear conflict or confrontation; some fear the loss of power, some the loss of money or other possessions. The potential or actual loss of a spouse or partner can result in fear as well as grief.

We fear for our children’s safety and for our own. If we have a loved one in Iraq, that generates fear and rightly so. Sometimes fear is real but it does not need to be real, rational, physical, or imminent for it to lessen our ability to function. Fear in some form may actually ride in many personal life boats as a daily companion. Fear lessens our ability to function effectively as individuals or as a group.

Therefore, for this Church to be courageous, its members need first to feel and be as safe as possible. That means adults and children are physically safe in this building and safe from emotional and verbal abuse as well. We all need a safe place in which to explore and follow our spiritual path, and to be able to respectfully express our beliefs and opinions and have them honestly heard and considered, whether they are commonly held or different from the majority. Safety also means that others will hang in there to solve a conflict and not walk out on the discussion. Trust means that we will not be abandoned even in times of chaos, illness, mistakes or fear.

On this day when the Super Bowl takes center stage, I will allow myself a sports metaphor. We all need to know that the whole team is behind us. That there is not just a star quarterback or a world class tight-end who gets all the acclaim, and like the World Champion New England Patriots, we are a team on which each player knows that the rest of the team is here to support, encourage, forgive, and to make a space through which we can run for our own touch down, what ever that may be for us, and cheer when we make a good play or even when we simply give it our best try. We each need to know that there will be teammates protecting our backs or throw a good block if we step out into dangerous territory.

At the same time it is good to remember that in the same sense that doctors and lawyers practice their professions, we are practicing Unitarian Universalists. That means two things: first, we are living our principles and values daily and, second, that we are not perfect in these skills. We are all still practicing.

It is not just imagined fears that get in the way of being courageous. Some of you were hurt or poorly treated in some ways in the past. Maybe here maybe somewhere else. You may feel that someone was rude to you or acted unfairly, judged or, even worse, misjudged you. There may be feelings that this Fellowship has not always been run openly and democratically. All these events, and more, can inflict wounds and until we help them heal, they may cause us to feel less supportive of this team, in our hearts, than we would like to be. This is a time of new beginnings.

It is the responsibility of each one of you to make this a radically safe church in all the ways about which I have just spoken. It is not the responsibility of a few highly dedicated folks to make this happen. If this Fellowship is to prosper, everyone must do his or her own part to ensure that this is a safe and courageous Church. This includes old-timers, newcomers, those older in years, and the younger ones, too.

And by the way, speaking of the younger generation, I believe that if there were a genuine role, not a made up job, but a real service that our teenagers could be responsible for in this congregation they would feel more like it is their church too, and want to come and participate fully on a regular basis.

Although the repeated use of his statement has made it sound trite, the wisdom in JFK’s admonishment to “Ask not what the country can do for you but what you can do for your country,” hits the mark and if altered to apply to this Fellowship and refocused on what we can do to sustain the health, nourishment, and bounty of this beloved community, it would indeed cause this Fellowship to be transformed. This would become a Courageous Church out of which would flow a myriad of personal and communal acts of justice and hope.

You might even become known in the broader community as that exciting, even “dangerous” congregation that Jeff spoke of two weeks ago. It would be a place where you could delight in bringing friends, relatives and neighbors, Mormon or evangelical, not yet churched or previously churched. It would be a place alive with energy, unbridled trust, radical hope and transforming courage.

Oh, May it be so.
Top

Masks
   by Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin, October 24, 2004

"A fiery horse with a speed of light, a cloud of dust, and a hearty ‘Hi-Yo, Silver!’. . .The Lone Ranger rides again!" On Saturday mornings, in the early 1950’s, I sat glued to a green round television screen to watch the Lone Ranger and Tonto bring desperados to justice. Set sometime in the 1880’s, the tale essentially went like this. A Texas Ranger unit on patrol is ambushed by the notorious Butch Cavendish gang. The lone survivor, John Reid, is nursed back to health by a passing Indian. To hide his identity while he pursues Cavendish, Reid dons a mask. Thus concealed, The Lone Ranger sets out to bring the gang to justice, and after them, a host of other outlaws who prey on honest, simple folk. In every episode there was someone who mistrusted him because of his mask but the Lone Ranger was always able to convince them by the end of the show that he was one of the “good guys.” After the villains of the story are caught, the selfless, anonymous Lone Ranger leaves behind a single silver bullet, a reminder of his steadfast vigilance against evil.”

Many years later I have come to see this simple story as the archetypal journey of the seeker of wisdom and truth. The villains represent ignorance, both within us and all around us. The silver bullet is the reminder of the way of truth. It is not the truth itself, but a reminder to stay on one’s chosen path.

As a young boy, after the show was over, I would often don my own Lone Ranger mask and head outside, eagerly searching for playmates to recreate what I had just seen on TV. Sometimes, the fantasy worked. I would find someone to play Tonto and other boys to be the bad guys. Other times, I would be ridiculed, usually by the bigger boys. You see, as a child, I was one of the fat kids, one of the kids who endured the taunts of “Lone Ranger, Hah!” Often followed by a simple, but cutting, chant of “Fatty fatty two-by- four, couldn’t get through the bathroom door, so he did it on the floor, fatty fatty two-by- four.” I would always put up a tough front, not wanting them to know how much they were hurting me, but what I desperately wanted was to just lay down a silver bullet, both to end the taunting and also to let these kids to know that I was really one of the good guys, too.

As I grew older, I abandoned my Lone Ranger mask, but my mask as a fat kid never left. Even after years of therapy, exercise, and dieting into someone who I think appears to be quite fit, that fat kid mask still survives. This was, of course, only one of the almost limitless ways a child can be the object of derision or scorn by both adults and peers. We all have our masks – the ones that aspire to hide from us the pain of times past, and attempt to cover over the feeling that we are, somehow, deep within, just not good enough. But to the extent that we mistake the mask for the being within, to that extent do we subvert the realization of our deepest longings for personal fulfillment and human intimacy.

The founder of Gestalt Therapy, Fritz Perls, described the human psyche as metaphorically consisting of layers, the first two being the everyday layers, the ways in which we, as children, learn how to get along in society, win approval and placate others. The third layer covers up a feeling of being empty and lost, that feeling we try to counteract by building up our character defenses, by donning our masks. Under this layer is the fourth and most baffling layer, the layer of our basic human anxieties. Perls calls it the “terror we carry around in our secret heart.” While most of us stay stuck in the first two layers, it is only when we explode this fourth layer, Perls suggested, that we arrive at our authentic self. I agree with Dr. Perls that, as human beings, we do deeply yearn, although it also terrifies us, for the freedom that comes from self-revelation, from allowing ourselves to be revealed in all our warts and all our glory.

And so I wonder, how do we penetrate through these layers? How do we remove our masks? Or should we even try? Is what lies beneath simply too frightening? Is the attempt to heal really worth the risk of discovery? Or, is there somewhere a silver bullet that will somehow assist in this journey of self-revelation?

I have no definitive answers to these questions but, as sometimes occurs during a search, a few clues do appear. Sometimes our unmasking happens completely unwittingly, through crisis or trauma. We are catapulted into the depths of our being by a situation out of our control. Maybe it’s a mid-life crisis, a divorce, an accident or illness, menopause. I described one example in a Sunday service here a few weeks ago where, at 16, I experienced a spiritual emergency, one that changed me in some ways forever.

Elizabeth and I had one of these catapulting experiences this summer while traveling in Costa Rica. We had rented a double kayak to paddle around on a mirror smooth tropical river. We began to paddle upstream and came upon some small rapids. This seemed intriguing, so we continued on and soon came to a place where the rapids were too fast for us to paddle against. Suddenly our kayak became wedged between two rocks, began filling with water, and we capsized into the now swiftly moving river. This was a Costa Rican jungle, there were no life jackets to be found and we were fully clothed. I was a lifeguard as a teenager, but Elizabeth is not the best swimmer. When we both simultaneously surfaced and gulped for air, I despaired as I watched all our belongings being washed down the river and I began to swim after them. Then I turned and shouted to Elizabeth, “Can you swim?” She said, “No.” In that instant, everything changed. I held on to her and maneuvered us both to a nearby rock where I hauled us out of the water. At that moment, as we looked at each other, there were no masks left between us. No barriers. Just raw adrenalin-pumping relief. We had survived and we were alive. That experience still lives within both of us. We occasionally speak of it. But mostly, it just sits in a warm place of intimacy, deep gratitude, and a heightened appreciation for life.

Another very different experience. On a pilgrimage to some of the ancient sacred sites of Europe two years ago, Elizabeth and I both stared in wonder as we walked through the multi-chambered hunting age sanctuary of the caves at Font du Gaume in France, the last caves in the Aquitane Basin still open to the public. We had waited for an hour and a half for the tour to begin. As it turned out the only tour available was given in French, a language neither Elizabeth nor I could speak, other than the most basic survival phrases. At first I was disappointed that I wouldn’t hear the history and interpretations of these paintings, but upon entering the caves I became aware that the theories might actually be a distraction from the power of the art, itself. As with the simulated cave at Lascaux we had just toured, termed “the Sistine Chapel of the Paleolithic” – it struck me that we were viewing an experience of divinity from over 15,000 years ago. The paintings mostly consist of a variety of leaping bulls, herds of stags and trotting ponies. But one image has stayed indelibly imprinted in my mind. It was the only human figure to be found in the caves, a man wearing a bird mask, with birdlike hands, and an erect penis pointing like a finger toward an eviscerated bull. Next to this man is an apparent wand, also bearing the image of a bird on its tip. While I know which aspect of the painting may seem the most intriguing, I’ll save my speculations about that penis for some other time.

It is possible that this scene merely represented a hunting accident. But to me, and certainly no one knows for sure, this seemed to be a painting of an early hunting ritual, maybe one of the first ever recorded. And the bird costume and the transformative ritual it may have represented are, indeed, consistent with what is now known about shamanic rituals of indigenous peoples throughout much of the world, rituals often conducted wearing the masks of animals and composite creatures.

In the world of our ancestors, the function of the mask was to bestow on its wearer and his or her people the all-important power to enter into and maintain a kind of mystical union with fellow creatures. This was often accomplished through stylized and prolonged dances that released the mind and enabled the shaman to enter a world beyond this world, where the ego dissolved and there was nothing left but pure life, itself, everywhere present. The Zen masters of China and Japan later called this a state of “no-mind.” The classical Indian terms are moksa, release; bodhi, enlightenment; or nirvana, a transcendaence of the winds of passion. Pure and simple presence of being. And without using religious language at all, writer James Joyce later spoke of this kind of experience as a “luminous silent stasis of aesthetic pleasure.”

It appears that, even in Paleolithic cultures, there was a deep psychological cleavage between the tough-minded practical hunters and their often feared, yet indispensable tender-minded shamans. Yet at that time both were needed, one for physical sustenance and the other for spiritual sustenance. The timely and the timeless. Two types of mind, surprisingly quite complementary.

This brings to mind a more modern day fissure in worldview in our own Unitarian Universalist movement, that between humanists and mystics. I think back just a few weeks to our after service potluck. I chanced to speak with one of the members here, a man who I believe would describe himself as a rational humanist, maybe more accurately a skeptic. Since I might describe myself more as a “grounded mystic,” this man and I hold rather different theological worldviews. He tried to explain his to me. I was, in the confusion of this brand new gathering of people, completely unable to explain mine. Mysticism doesn’t lend itself to a nifty definition under even the best of circumstances. But we chanced to switch to the topic of nature, a love we both share. I heard the words “awe” and “wonder” tumble out of one of our mouths and, for me, in that instant, the masks of our worldviews dissolved. We met in a place beyond the mask of theology, that meeting ground that seems to transcend boundaries. We crossed a bridge of human commonality without sacrificing the integrity of our beliefs and experience, a challenge we are called to rise to daily as Unitarian Universalists.

Joseph Campbell suggests, in his book, The Masks of God, that the ends for which most humans strive may be broken into three sets. They are: first, love and pleasure; second, power and success; and third, lawful order and moral virtue. But there is also a fourth way chosen by some: the way of the seeker of wisdom. This path in search of human and spiritual awareness, of deep and profound meaning, is one increasingly being undertaken by people of faith around the world, including some of us here today. A journey of unmasking, if you will.

In our searching, the dimension of meaning often emerges as a primary modality. Gestalt psychology explains this “meaning” response as a confrontation with the challenge of becoming whole. In asking such questions as, “Who am I?” or “What is the meaning of my life?” the very questions themselves provoke our feelings of brokenness or fragmentation. And often, in our questioning, and in the lack of clear answers, we are left with simply our own beingness. Zen master, Bernie Glassman, speaks of the lack of energy derived from answers, but of the animating power of living a life of questioning, what he calls a life of “unknowing” and of simply bearing witness to our lives and the lives of those we touch.

We open each of our Seven Plus Two groups with Thich Nhat Hahn’s radical assertion that “The most precious gift we can offer (each other) is our presence.” In these small groups, that we hope each of you will participate in, we are encouraging you to begin to unmask the truth of the history and experiences of yourselves, as members and friends of this wonderful Fellowship.

There is a Zen koan in which the roshi asks of his student, “Show me your face before you were born.” To comply with this seemingly impossible request, the student must find a way to enter her “original mind.” It may be that the deepest meaning of the mask has to do with finding “our faces before we were born.” The search for identity, for meaning, and for a place in this universe are intimately bound up with healing. And healing is the path of our individual faith journeys as we walk them together. Maybe this is our silver bullet.

As we find the courage to reveal to each other, and to hear from one another, the truths of our lives, we begin to come into a heightened feeling of aliveness and a fullness of being and in concert with fellow seekers, begin to create a more engaged and committed community. In the words of religious educator Sophia Lyon Fahs, “The wonder of being together, so close yet so apart – each hidden in our own secret chamber. Each listening, each trying to speak…” And, as we engage this formidable task, may we then be able to say with great passion, borrowing words from Ralph Waldo Emerson, undaunted by the cold winter winds outside our doors, in these refulgent times, “it has been a luxury to draw the breath of life.”
Top

The Incredible Power of Forgiveness
   by Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones, October 17, 2004

Forgiveness is a human act, a human quality that raises many questions for me: moral and ethical questions, questions of limits. Forgiveness like non-violence is a personal goal, a standard for daily living for which I strive. So, I think a lot about forgiveness especially in this interim time.

There are often angers, frustrations and deep hurts in a congregation when a minister leaves. These hurts and angers are sometimes caused by something the departing minister did or didn’t do or in some cases what other congregants did or didn’t do. The departing minister may have unresolved hurts, angers and frustrations as well.

We know there are some hurt feelings surrounding Lee’s ministry and/or departure. Besides anything to do with Lee there are probably simmering hurts and angers in your personal lives and in the congregation regardless of comings and goings of ministers or other changes. Forgiveness is a human endeavor we need to talk about often.

Forgiveness, as I said, raises lots questions, not only in our personal lives but in the political world as well. For example are there limits to forgiveness? What about people who commit or order others to commit atrocities like Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Omar Hassan al-Bashir or those who were involved in the abuse at Abu Ghraib. How about those we think of as ordinary people who rape, abuse, torture or kill children or adults? Should they ever be forgiven, and what would that mean?

What would it be like to live in a society in which accountability and forgiveness instead of retribution and vengeance were the law of the land and the measure of our humanity? What would the world be like? Would there be anarchy and chaos? Would there be universal violence? More than now exists? Chaos, violence and anarchy were what many predicted when, one hundred years ago, the Universalists preached Universal Salvation- the belief that God would, does forgive every sin and all are saved, that there is no Hell. Chaos did not reign. So maybe it is time to add the belief in the practice of forgiveness to our personal as well as religious lives? Ah, but can we give up vengeance, retribution, anger, hate and even pettiness?

I believe that part of our problem with embracing forgiveness, comes from the Old Testament image of God where he is portrayed as the vengeful angry father punishing his sinning children. An eye for an eye has become the rule of life for many people, including our own US president, however what the practice of an eye for an eye leads to, results in, is not peace or comforted people but a world where everyone is blind.

In the world-view of retribution, the only honorable way to respond to an act of violence, a threat or a wrong done to you or a member of your family, is revenge. Hatred, anger, resentment and the desire and justification to pay back or exact revenge seems to be taken as part of human nature and has now become an accepted and honorable part of our culture. But there is also a parallel but almost forgotten tradition that calls us instead to forgiveness. This tradition that is strongly connected to the teachings of Jesus is also a part of other religious traditions, including Islam, and Buddhism. Jesus encouraged the practice of forgiveness. Compassion and forgiveness were the central message of his teaching, as in the quote printed in this morning’s order of service. ( not 7 but 70 times 7)

Even though our secular culture generally views the principles of forgiveness as laughable and impractical, are they? Are vengeance and retribution such a success? Have they brought us peace and prosperity, eased our grief and soothed our anger? Made the world a safer and saner place?

The attraction of revenge and violence are easy to see. We can vent our hatred. Hurt those who hurt us. Satisfy our anger and grief. We can show the world, we are not wimps. To respond with vengeance and over whelming power, instead of forgiveness or peacemaking, is the way to restore our honor and place in the world or community according to this tradition and practice. But our dedication to revenge and punishment takes a very high toll in material resources, suffering and human lives in the world today. It devastates individual lives and communities. Read the papers. Look around you. Look inside yourself. Would, could forgiving, heal your hurts and restore good relations in the world community or closer to home with someone who has hurt or abused you as well as or better than revenge or getting even in some way? Or holding a grudge?

In his book, Forgive and Forget, Lewis Smedes speaks to many of my questions and quandaries about forgiveness. He says, “Forgiving is love’s toughest work, and love’s biggest risk If you twist it into something it was never meant to be, it can make you a doormat or an insufferable manipulator. Forgiveness seems almost unnatural. Our sense of fairness tells us people should pay for the wrong they do but forgiving is love’s power to break natures rule.” He asks these good questions. “What do I do when I forgive someone who has done me wrong?” “Who is forgivable? Have some people gone beyond the forgiveness zone?” “How do I do it? Why should I even try? Is there a pay-off? Is it fair?” (p. xii)

The idea of forgiveness raises a week’s full of questions. Because forgiveness is a huge issue, we need to narrow the field. Today, we are not talking about forgiving corporations, systems, or acts of nature, or God for that matter, though these are all well worth pondering. This morning, we are talking about us forgiving other human being, ordinary people. It is my experience that the people who can hurt me most easily and deeply are those with whom I have some kind of relationship.

In Churches and Fellowships, sometimes it is the minister who hurts our feelings or causes us to be angry. It also could be a congregant or someone who is a friend, or we thought was a friend who wounds us verbally in some way. Of course strangers and casual acquaintances can hurt or anger us as well. People can disappoint us by their disloyalty or what seems like their insensitivity to our feelings. Breaking a promise can hurt deeply and feeling betrayed is a very deep wound. Can we bring ourselves to forgive the person who has hurt us in any way?

When someone wounds, offends or disappoints me in some way, even in a small insignificant way, like a sharp word, maybe spoken in anger, I feel hurt and sometimes angry. I carry the anger and hurt around with me for a while and then I realize it was not important, it is O.K., and I just forgive the person, silently and forget about it, then nothing more needs to be done. But if that hurt is not dealt with and is deep enough and I hold on to it then it can turn into hate, or permanent anger, which are much harder emotions to deal with.

Just a word about forgetting in the process of forgiving. Most small incidents are best forgotten at the same time they are forgiven but in the case of very large wounds or transgressions, the act needs to be remembered and forgiven. The transgressor needs to be held accountable and forgiven. Forgetting does not heal the wound only forgiving does that. Hurts, angers, grudges and hatreds undealt with can make us sick. The Time for All Ages story that Jeff told, What If Nobody Forgave?, illustrated this truth. In real life, people get sick, sometimes even bent over from the weight of their angers and hurts. Forgiving is our only sure cure.

Smedes says in his book, “Hate can be fatal, when we let it grow to enormous size inside of; us the best people can get their bellies full of it. And it is just as real whether it involves a nasty little scene between friends or a question of international immorality. Sometimes your hate, (or anger) only nibbles at the edges of the heart; it does not always burn out the lining of the soul…. …but whether your hate or anger is a carcinoma growing hell-bent for death inside your soul, or only a pesky heartburn, it will hurt you if you do not use the right remedy. Your healing may take heroic surgery of the soul. Then again, you may get by with a quick cauterization. But eventually, unchecked hate (anger) will do you in. Such hate can be healed.” (p.25-26)

As with any change that might be made in our lives, if we are going to learn to forgive, first we must want to forgive. That does not mean finding excuses for the person’s actions or waving it off if the hurt is still there. Forgiveness begins with the recognition that I need to forgive so that I can get on with my own life. To do that, gradually I must get a new insight about the person who has wounded or wounds me. This is not easy.

One of the reasons we bury the hurt instead of dealing with it, is because it is very painful to recognize the reality of the hurt. Forgiving does not mean that all of the terrible or petty but painful things in my past are going to be transformed like straw into gold as in the fairy-tale, they are going to remain as ugly as they ever were, but I am going to see them in a different way. I have to have a new insight. I have to see the person who hurt me with new eyes. I, not the other person, have to be transformed. I will have to see the object of my anger and hurt in a different way. To see that person as a human being like myself with needs and shortcomings. One who can make mistakes, get tired, frustrated and be fearful. Then I can begin to see this person as more than just the hurtful act.

This often takes a long time but I will know that whenever even a tiny part of me has the power to wish that person well, the forgiveness process has begun. This can and must happen even when, even though I may not tolerate, or see as acceptable in any way what that person did, accept the person, not the act. This is love’s toughest work, love’s biggest risk. Still the hate needs to be transformed.

Forgiveness is a severe test. It calls us, every day, to actually live out in daily life our Unitarian Universalist principles, that affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person, compassion in human relationships and acceptance of one another. Sometimes a covenant nudges us to a higher vision. For some of us, it may call for a tough personal transformation, some very hard work.

Remember that forgiving is not for the other person, the transgressor. Forgiving is for the victim, for the one who has been hurt, you and me, the one who hates or is angry. Sometimes the hardest part is not the forgiving but giving up the anger, the hating. It is so self-righteous and satisfying. Sadly, we can become addicted to the idea of being a victim. We can become hooked on the pain so that it is hard to give it up. But we all need to be forgiven. More important we need to forgive each other. Each one of us has at sometime or other hurt another person. Maybe even someone who loved and trusted us. Few of us could cast the first stone if to do so would mean we had never hurt anyone. We are both the victim and the victimizer, the abused and the abuser. Which in itself is an important reason to forgive.

But the most important point is that forgiving one another is vital to our health. It is essential to our sense of well-being and joy. It is necessary if we are going to be fully alive and whole and essential for the building of a healthy and flourishing religious community. But forgiving deep hurts is one of the most difficult things we have to do; some of us find it almost impossible to do no matter how often we try.

We seem not to be able to forgive but not forgiving and carrying the hate or hurt is like drinking rat poison and waiting for the rat to die. Hear these words of encouragement from Lewis Smedes, Who says, “If you are trying to forgive; even if you forgive today and hate tomorrow, and have to forgive again the day after, you are a forgiver. Most of us are amateurs at forgiving. So what? When it comes to forgiving, nobody is an expert. We are all beginners.”

This interim transition time, actually anytime, is the right time for forgiveness, a time for reaching for wholeness and health. It is a time for forgiving past hurts, forgiving mistakes or errors we made as well as forgiving others who fell short of our expectations or hurt us in some way. It is a good time to make another attempt at healing wounds by our forgiveness. In that way we can we ready to make a whole new start at living and re-energizing, renewing this Fellowship. When we do so, we will experience the incredible power of forgiveness.
Top

A Reflection in the Mirror
   by Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin and Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones, October 3, 2004

Part 1. A Reflection in the Mirror

   by Rev. Jeffrey P. Lambkin

It was not, as they say, “business as usual.” I was 16 years old in the early months of 1964, living with my parents in upstate New York, struggling for grades good enough to be accepted into a decent college, cherishing a few good friendships, and awkward about my emerging sexuality. The 1967 Summer of Love in San Francisco’s Haight Ashbury district, and all that it symbolized, was still a few years and a leap in consciousness away.

I was sitting on my bed reading a book on that clear spring afternoon. Suddenly I felt as if my heart was being pried open and my head was being tightly squeezed. I was panicky, but couldn’t move. I was overtaken by a wild array of emotions, but abject fear and spiraling confusion were paramount. It seemed that most of what I thought I knew had just exploded out of my head and lay scattered on the floor all around me. But as time wore on that afternoon, another feeling began to take over – a sense of being held in a loving embrace by some unseen power.

In the ensuing days and weeks, I tried to describe this experience to my parents and a few friends, but I soon concluded that whatever had happened to me I would have to deal with on my own. It was not “business as usual.”

Some years later, this type of experience would be referred to by psychologist, Stanislov Grof, as a “spiritual emergency.” He later reframed this description into something much clearer and actually more affirming – he called it “spiritual emergence.”

I began looking in libraries and bookstores for books that might help me to understand this strange experience, to help me assimilate the fact that my entire world had changed, and as it turned out, had changed forever. I came upon the works of Alan Watts, an early Western practitioner of Zen Buddhism. I devoured his books. He somehow captured my experience, or something very much like it, and contextualized it within a tradition of spiritual exploration. I discovered others – the writings of Hindu and Christian and Jewish mystics. I began thinking I might be a mystic, as well, for the world I now inhabited seemed to hold dimensions I had never before known, all contained in a grand and mysterious interwoven matrix, what we Unitarian Universalists call the interdependent web. Thus began my lifelong quest in search of that illusive Holy Grail.

In the meantime, since childhood, I had been an active member of the Reformed Church, a denomination that evolved out of Calvinism. But I was soon to resign from the church of my youth over the Viet Nam War controversy and was struggling with the place Jesus would hold in my life, if he had any place left at all.

Ironically, I had been accepted into Hope College in Holland, Michigan, a school devoted to the preparation of religious leaders in the Reformed Church tradition and, although I was struggling in religious confusion, I was, as I followed this path, also answering my first calling into the ministry.

I did not pursue my ministerial calling after college. Instead I chose a career in health care administration. It was not until a transitional time after my mother’s death in 1999 that I decided finally to answer the calling and complete my seminary education.

My questing has been as much a part of me as my blood and my bones. To that end, I have immersed myself in an array of religious and spiritual paths – Buddhist, Hindu, Sufi, Native American (my children and grandchildren are part Lakota Sioux), New Age, Old Age, and religious humanist, to name a few. Ironically, it was the humanist aspect of Unitarian Universalism, and a fellowship of engineers, that eventually drew me into this movement. But that’s a story for another time.

Today, in The Idaho Falls Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, it is also “not business as usual.” Your Fellowship’s first called minister, the Rev. Lee Greiner, with you for some 8 years, has departed. Lee’s indelible imprint is now a significant part of your history. Elizabeth and I already know Lee was loved and respected. We also know her time here was not without conflict and controversy. Of course. We’re Unitarian Universalists. And beyond that, we’re human. Building community, authentic community, inherently engenders conflict. We promise, as your Interim Ministers, we will also do our part to create conflict. Not for conflict’s sake, certainly. But in the process of helping you discern more clearly who you are now and where you want to go, of demonstrating other ways of doing ministry, of making changes, and of experimenting, conflict will arise. During our time here we will help you to participate in healthy conflict engagement, and hopefully to experience the process as one of creative possibility, rather than fracturing division.

During the next few months, we will want to pay special attention to your past, mostly the last 8 years, but also going back to your inception, years that have served to powerfully form and guide this fellowship. To borrow the title of an old Clint Eastwood film, we want to know “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly!” We want to hear your many stories and we want you all to know the story of the Idaho Falls Fellowship. We want you to be able to speak, in safety, about the skeletons, secrets and sacred cows of the past and present in your fellowship. We want to learn more about your relationships with Lee. This is all part of the process of grieving and healing. It’s purpose is never to blame, but for you to move on, building capacity and health as a religious body during the next two years and, in the spring of 2006, to joyfully call your second settled minister. But before you can do that, you must look back on the past, not just with your intellects, but with your hearts, feeling all the emotions this process will trigger.

These are liminal times in your Fellowship. Victor Turner, in The Ritual Process, describes the attributes of liminality as being “necessarily ambiguous…betwixt and between the positions assigned and arrayed by law, custom, (or) convention…As such, their ambiguous… attributes are expressed by a rich variety of symbols...frequently likened to being in the womb, to darkness, to the wilderness.” And Michael Cunningham, in The Hours, writing about Virginia Woolf, says, “At this moment there are infinite possibilities, whole hours ahead. Her mind hums. This morning she may penetrate…the clogged pipes (and) reach the gold...” Can you feel the possibility here? Last Sunday, in your “Bridging” worship service, your worship committee spoke again and again of hope and anticipation.

These are also times of potential transformation, an experience that can enlarge you and expand your presence in the world. There is a lot of work to do – inner spiritual work, and community-building work. We know some of this will not be easy. It entails polishing your mirror so you can see yourselves clearly, maybe for the first time. But there is also a wonderful foundation you have already established here on which to build – a bedrock of love, compassion, service, and community. Elizabeth and I can feel these qualities, though we have only recently arrived. And we know you are up to the challenge and we believe you have the inner and outer resources you need.

As a community, you have endured to nurture each other’s spiritual and human journeys for over 50 years. You celebrated a glorious 50th anniversary not long ago. And for this we commend you. You have an important story to tell and you are a part of an even grander story. You belong to a remarkable faith tradition whose roots go back to the middle of the 16th Century, one that has spoken out prophetically for religious freedom time and time again.

We plan to explore with you some of the many possible shapes your emerging Fellowship might take, some of the myriad of paths you might follow. And hopefully, by the time we leave, through your hard work, a clearer vision will emerge; and a growing sense of purpose and commitment, not only to the well-being of this Fellowship, but to our larger movement of Unitarian Universalism and, even further, to re-creating our world in an image of justice, freedom and love.

May it be so.

Part 2. A Reflection in the Mirror
   by Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Selle Jones

Like many Unitarian Universalist ministers, this is a second career for me. In the first period of my life I raised four children and a husband. I volunteered in school and youth activities. I was dedicated to this career of wife, mother and community citizen. It filled my hours and felt rewarding and honorable. But like many of you, as my children grew up, and although I worried as much, they needed me less, an emptiness in me rose to the surface.

In my case this void took the guise of questions, “what will I do when I grow up?” And “what is the meaning of this life I have been given?” So I returned to the University looking for answers and got my BA in Anthropology. But school was only a preparation for me not the destination. However, it was through a connection at UCSB, actually the minister’s wife, that I found the Unitarian Society of Santa Barbara. And so began my slow but growing interest and connection with my spiritual self. I discovered Starr King School for the Ministry, the Unitarian Universalist seminary in Berkeley, and attended a summer session there. I was intrigued. But could not at that time envision myself becoming an actual minister. Later I did apply to be a student at Starr King.

However, life does not run smoothly, as you may have noticed, and within a few years we discovered that my husband had cancer and he died within the year.

My application to the Seminary was accepted and the question of what I was going to do with my one wild and wonderful life got a radical answer. I still had four loving and grown children but all else changed in my life. It was my own radical reformation.

If I had had the courage or taken the time to look in a mirror and do some serious and needed reflecting, I would have been terrified at what I saw there, and rightly so. I was in for some major deconstruction, before the rebuilding could begin. I was grieving over the loss of my husband, moving to a new place, and starting on a totally new life-path. Actually it was a time for me personally, similar to the one this Fellowship is in right now, in its process of change and growth. Stressful, exciting but not easy.

Seminary. My theology has always been a struggle. The concept of an over arching deity, outside of but also permeating the Universe, boggles my mind. On the other hand, the opposite idea of the universe creating itself and whatever is in it, by error and chance, including the fantastic life here on earth and maybe else where, is for me equally unbelievable. My search has been to find a God that I can believe in. I do not want to believe that all of creation, including me, exists just by happenstance or is some cosmic joke. I want there to be meaning and yes, of course, something after death besides annihilation. I have not yet found permanently that God but there are times now when I feel a divine embrace. I, and my theology, are most certainly still in transition and formation. When I have to, I describe myself as a Mystic Humanist and a seeker. I seek wisdom, inner and outer peace, meaning and balance, and of course lots of fun, travel and pleasure.

Marcus Borg, one of my favorite theologians, because I can understand him, says that one of the basic tools of a seeker is perception. That is, we really see not our projections or what we want to see, but what is really there, what is really going on. Mirrors sometimes help us do that. They show us that our hair is thinning or that we still look pretty good. When our self-images have told us otherwise. Mirrors reflect what is there. Sometimes we don’t like or we misuse the truth we see, as with the Stepmother/witch in Snow White who called on her mirror to tell her the truth. But she was angered by the truth she saw, that Snow White was more beautiful than she. The mirror told her where Snow White was and so she set about to kill her. Narcissus, on the other hand, saw his own reflection and fell in love with himself and that led to his self-destruction.

So what is all this about mirrors and perception. Well for the next two years, Jeff and I are going to act not as Moses coming down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments or even as regular settled ministers who tend more to flow with the Status Quo but as human mirrors reflecting back to you what we see. You may sometimes get angry with us for what we are showing you but we hope you will not want to kill us before the 2 years are over. On the other hand neither do we want you to blindly fall in love with what you see in us. S. Ansky says, “There is glass in the window and in the mirror, but in the mirror the glass is covered with a little silver; now lo and behold, no sooner is a little silver added than you cease to see others and see only yourself.”

In case it entered you mind, as it has ours, we are not just inanimate pieces of glass plated on one side with silver, impartially reflecting the images projected on it. We are human beings with ideas, minds, souls, prejudices, and pre-conceived notions just like all of you so every reflection comes with that caveat but we do hope to act like that bit of silver that helps you get a clear, or at least clearer, reflection of who you are.

So the first and most important phase of this two year interim process, is to begin to reflect back to you what we see, what we hear, paint a picture of who you are as a Fellowship right now and to deal with any grieving about the past including Lee’s departure.

In an interview in Parabola Magazine, Helen Luke is asked if the essence of reflection is attention. And she replies: Reflection or reflecting is attention that…

“… is not a rational thinking effort. It is living in the moment: past and future become one. The basic meaning of the word attend is to be present. It is not equivalent to the being present in nature—there is a specifically human content. Attention (and therefore reflection) involves seeing, listening, caring, and courtesy, which arise from the inclusion of the human act of intention and concentration beyond thought. Thus, the subject and the object are one. In those moments the mirror is clear.”

So we are here to be mirrors. We hope the reflection of who you are and who you want to be as a Fellowship, as a church, will gradually become more clear. We will do this together by paying close attention, by seeing, listening, caring, asking questions, all with courtesy and respect. In addition we hope we will all grow and have fun along the way.

So may it be.

Top



Recent Sunday Services
with Guest Speakers


Top

The Transformational History and Theology of Unitarian Universalism Introduction
   by Arthur Kull


Good Morning. Thank you for inviting me to talk about Unitarian Universalism. People of the Unitarian Universalist Faith are called UUs. As you may know, we are an eclectic bunch and stand sometimes for weird things. However, there is something we have in common with you, as illustrated in the following story:

“Once upon a time, a Disciples of Christ congregation bought an old building that had been owned by Unitarians. Some workers were making repairs when they discovered a coffeepot in a niche. “It’s true!” one shouted. “They do worship the coffeepot!”
I was born in Switzerland and spent my formative years in France. That’s why I don’t talk like a native. I am an Alpine Indian. There I grew up in the French Protestant Church, a minority of 1 million vs. the majority of 35 million Catholics. The French Protestant Church is essentially Lutheran. I did not know that until I visited a Lutheran Church in this country! So, I have some Lutheran blood flowing in my veins. And my wife Annelies grew up in the Swiss German Protestant Church, which is the church of Swiss Reformer Zwingli.

When I was a teenager, I had many questions about religion: “Who is God? Can you prove that God exists?” (at the time God was male, of course)? We would ask these questions mostly to annoy our parents. After reading some of the Spinoza’s writings, I would say: so, if “God created man in his own image”, then of course for men, God looks like a man, but isn’t the same valid for other things such as a triangle, a circle, a dog, a cat? Wouldn’t God look like a triangle, a circle, a dog or a cat for them? As far as driving my mother up the walls, I was really successful.

It was not that we did not have lots of serious questions, but no adult, including our pastor, could or did provide answers that satisfied our curiosity, or even wanted to get into a discussion about them. God is God and Jesus is the son of God, and that’s it! OK, but…..With no answers to and no discussions about these deep questions, these doubting Thomases just became a social group. We had great parties, though!

When I left home and embarked into the study of chemistry back in Switzerland, the questions about the nature of God and the role of religious beliefs faded, as science explained things based on what could be observed, and predicted things on the basis of proven theories. Obviously, we did not delve too deeply into Quantum Physics at the time, so the world was more or less predictable, or, if not, we were sure that over time, mankind would acquire enough knowledge to make it so! The realm of religion receded and became unimportant in the ambitious search for a successful place in the world. By that I mean my career.

Shift forward about twenty years. When, at the recommendation of friends, we attended a concert at a Unitarian Universalist Church in Connecticut, we were intrigued by what we heard and what we saw. Annelies, my wife, went first to a service on a Sunday morning. We later went as a family and soon became members of this church we called “The Barn.” It was called that way because the sanctuary was an old converted barn. It was a very cozy and comfortable place.

So, what is a Unitarian Universalist Church all about? What do we believe that is so different, so unique? A little story:
Once upon a time, there were two churches in a small rural village, one Universalist, the other Evangelical. A visitor asked why two churches were needed in so small a town. A resident replied: “That church says there ain’t no hell. The other says: the hell there ain’t.”
Unitarian Universalists are not unique in our desire to make life better for all. We are not the only religious organization to give generously to the needy in the world. We are not the only religious community to offer solace or inspiration or a sense that we are not alone in the world. What does make us unique is a set of values that includes respect for the inherent worth and dignity of every person as well as the free and responsible search for truth and meaning. Free and responsible means a religion without dogma. Although it has its roots in the Jewish and Christian traditions, Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion -- that is, a religion that keeps an open mind to the religious questions people have struggled with in all times and places, one that challenges us to keep an open mind and heart in many matters of human living.

We believe that personal experience, conscience and reason should be the final authorities in religion, and that in the end religious authority lies not in a book or person or institution, but in ourselves. We are a “non-creedal” religion, that is, we do not ask anyone to ascribe to a particular creed.

Each of our congregations, while joined together in our Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, is self-governing. Authority and responsibility are vested in the membership of the congregation. Each Unitarian Universalist congregation is involved in many kinds of programs. Worship is held regularly, service to the community is undertaken, and friendships are made. A visitor to a UU congregation will very likely find events and activities such as church school, day-care centers, lectures and forums, support groups, poetry festivals, family events, adult education classes and study groups.

Because there have always been men and women who question the religion handed them in childhood, a religion of the free mind, like today's Unitarian Universalism, was inevitable. If the specific events and personalities that shaped this religious movement had never existed, other religious liberals would have filled the vacuum. Though it would be known by a different name, this religion of the free mind would still exist today.

Nevertheless, there are some illustrious personalities who forged the way during difficult times. Struggling against ostracism, violence, and even murder as they moved through history down separate paths to Unitarianism and Universalism.

Principles and Purposes

For this Introduction to Unitarian Universalism, probably the best place to start our theological conversation is with the Principles and Purposes of our Association. This is our covenant.

We, the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association, covenant to affirm and promote:
  1. The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
  2. Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
  3. Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
  4. A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
  5. The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
  6. The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
  7. Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
The living tradition we share draws from many sources:
  • Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder of God, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces that create and uphold life;
  • Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
  • Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspire us in our ethical and spiritual life;
  • Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
  • Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn against idolatries of the mind and spirit.

Grateful for the religious pluralism which enriches and ennobles our faith, we are inspired to deepen our understanding and expand our vision.

As free congregations we enter into this covenant, promising to one another our mutual trust and support. (Singing the Living Tradition)

We draw from many sources in our religious pluralism. We constantly strive to adapt our understanding of the world based upon religious insights, scientific discoveries, philosophical considerations, revelations etc. These are some of what make us different from other religious organizations.

Brief History

The Unitarian and Universalist movements both germinated in specific religious issues. Both grew to encompass religious doubters of many views, and both eventually welcomed to their ranks all thoughtful men and women who would accept the right of others to have different views.

Unitarians and Universalists have always been heretics. We are heretics because we want to choose our faith, not because we desire to be rebellious. “Heresy” in Greek means “choice.”

We started out, at least as a faith, as early Christians trying to follow the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Those were little communities at first, each trying to understand this new faith and writing letters to each other to that effect. They wrote down the stories as they knew them.

The movement that eventually acquired the label “Unitarian” began shortly after Jesus’ death. Then, many who knew Jesus talked of his humanity and his teachings, while others who had only heard of him touted his divinity and began to construct a religion that was more about him than of him. During the first three centuries of the Christian church, believers could choose from a variety of tenets about Jesus and both Unitarian and Universalist ideas swirled among many others. Among these was a belief that Rabbi Jesus was sent by God on a divine mission.

By the fourth century there were many books going around the Mediterranean and different notions about the nature of God, no longer just the one God of their Jewish tradition but now a trinity of Gods: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. People got to arguing so much that in 325 CE, Constantine, the Emperor of Rome, convened a Council at Nicaea and, by means more political than religious, decided once and for all what books and teachings were true and which were not. Those that made it in compose the Bible as we know it today. Many of the other books were destroyed by order of the authorities, however, copies were found in the last century, which led to considerable new research about the history of Christianity.

More than a hundred years before the affirmation of the trinity, the seeds of Universalism were being planted by the articulate and prolific intellectual, Origen. Origen, who, like the Unitarians, stressed the humanity of Jesus, produced the basic idea on which this liberal religious movement would be built. He argued that no person would be condemned by God to eternal damnation and talked of a benevolent God who would offer salvation to all people. Those are the basic tenets of Universalism.

Christianity lost its element of choice in 325 CE when the Nicene Creed established the Trinity as dogma. The belief that Jesus was somewhat less than divine than God, championed by Arius, or that God provided universal salvation, as advanced by Origen, were positions forced underground by collaborating authorities of church and empire. For centuries thereafter, people who professed Unitarian or Universalist beliefs were persecuted.

The notion that Jesus was not divine, resurfaced again alongside the 16th century Protestant Reformation, when some people, in reading the Bible, began to conclude for themselves that there was no scriptural support for the dominant Trinitarian doctrine. These “anti-Trinitarians” gained toeholds in Poland briefly and in Transylvania, where they still exist today. Some also migrated to Western Europe, facing persecution at almost every turn.

The Protestant Reformation took hold in the remote mountains of Transylvania in Eastern Europe. Here the first edict of religious toleration in history was declared in 1568 during the reign of the first and only Unitarian king, John Sigismund. Sigismund’s court preacher, Frances David, had successively converted from Catholicism to Lutheranism to Calvinism and finally to Unitarianism because he could find no biblical basis for the doctrine of the Trinity. Arguing that people should be allowed to choose among these faiths, he said, “We need not think alike to love alike.” There is a little story that goes with Sigismund’s conversion:
King Sigismund declared that the people of his kingdom would adopt the religion of whichever combatant won a debate on the various flavors of faith. Unitarian bishop Frances David and Calvinist bishop Peter Melius prepared to address the question of the trinity, with the king in attendance. Naturally, each man had strong reasons to succeed. Melius was in little doubt that he would triumph. “If I win this debate,” he told David, “you will be executed.” David responded, “If I win this debate, you and everyone else in this country will be given complete religious freedom, and the tolerance due to every child of Man.” David won the debate.
It followed that in Transylvania, Unitarian congregations were established for the first time in history. And in case you wondered, we don’t have anything to do with Count Dracula! These churches continue to preach the Unitarian message in present-day Transylvania, which is now a province of Romania. Like their heretic forebears from ancient times, these liberals could not see how the deification of a human being or the simple recitation of creeds could help them live better lives. They determined to follow the teachings of Jesus, not to worship him.

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Unitarianism appeared briefly in other locations. A Unitarian community in Rakow, Poland, flourished for a time, and a book called “On the Errors of the Trinity” by a Spaniard, Michael Servetus, was circulated throughout Europe. But persecution frequently followed these believers. The Polish Unitarians were completely suppressed, and Michael Servetus was burned at the stake in 1553 for his radical views on the Trinity and his rejection of infant baptism. The one that sent him to die was none other than Calvin!

In 17th and 18th century England, though anti-Trinitarians were still outcasts, their numbers grew. Often they were men and women who found their way into the history books for reasons other than their religious activities. John Milton, Isaac Newton, John Locke, and Florence Nightingale were all people who fought for religious tolerance. By the first decade of the 19th century, 20 Unitarian churches had been established in England.

Despite its apparent European connections, Unitarianism as we know it in North America is not strictly a foreign import. In America, the movement toward a Unitarian position emerged gradually and organically, supported by the Puritan inclination to organize around covenant more than creed. In fact, the origins of our faith began with some of the most historic congregations in Puritan New England where each town was required to establish a congregationally independent church that followed Calvinist doctrines. Initially these congregational churches offered no religious choice for their parishioners, but over time the strict doctrines of original sin and predestination began to mellow.

By the mid-1700s a group of evangelicals were calling for the revival of Puritan orthodoxy. They asserted their belief in humanity’s eternal bondage to sin. People who opposed the revival, believing in free human will and the loving benevolence of God, eventually became Unitarian.

Coming from England, one of those who did carry the torch of Unitarianism to America was Joseph Priestley, a Unitarian minister better known as the discoverer of oxygen. After being harassed and nearly killed back in England by those of a less liberal bent, Priestley left and established the first openly Unitarian church in America in Philadelphia in 1796. Soon after, many well-established American churches acquired Unitarian ministers or Unitarian views. Already at that time, both in Unitarianism and in Universalism, virtually every aspect of religion was fair game for doubt and debate. During the first four decades of the nineteenth century, hundreds of original congregational churches fought over ideas about sin and salvation, and especially over the doctrine of the Trinity. Most of the churches split over these issues. In 1819, Unitarian minister William Ellery Channing delivered a sermon called “Unitarian Christianity” which established a strong Unitarian platform.

Later, the Trancendentalists, among them Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau, expanded the boundaries of liberal Christianity.

But now, let’s go back to the 17th and 18th centuries. During that period, the Universalist view also made great strides. In Germany many Universalist groups expanded and further defined the Universalist doctrine. In 1759 in England James Relly published “Union” which denied the Calvinistic doctrine of “salvation for the few” and claimed that all would be saved.

In America, Universalism developed in at least three distinct geographical locations: in the coastal towns of Massachusetts, the mid-Atlantic States, and the New England interior.

John Murray, a follower of Relly in England, helped deliver the Universalist movement to America. In 1779 Murray occupied the pulpit of the Independent Christian Church of Gloucester, Massachusetts, which was the first organized Universalist church in this country. John Murray later helped lead the battle to separate church and state. Twenty-six years later the movement's greatest exponent, Hosea Ballou, articulated Universalist doctrine in his book, “A Treatise on Atonement,” which sought to prove that the doctrine of the trinity was unscriptural, and argued against miracles and against the view of men and women as depraved creatures who would burn in hell.

Other preachers of the gospel of universal salvation appeared in what were later the Middle Atlantic and Southern states. By 1781, Elhanan Winchester had organized a Philadelphia congregation of Universal Baptists. Among its members was Benjamin Rush, the famous physician and signer of the Declaration of Independence.

At about the same time, in the rural, interior sections of New England, a small number of itinerant preachers, among them Caleb Rich, began to disbelieve the strict Calvinist doctrines of eternal punishment. They discovered from their biblical studies the “new” revelation of God’s loving redemption of all.

From its beginnings, Universalism challenged its members to reach out and embrace people whom society often marginalized. The Gloucester church included a freed slave among its charter members, and the Universalists became the first denomination to ordain women into the ministry, beginning in 1863 with Olympia Brown.

Universalism was a more evangelical faith than Unitarianism. After officially organizing in 1793, the Universalists spread their faith across the eastern United States and Canada. Hosea Ballou became the denomination’s greatest leader during the nineteenth century, and he and his followers, including Nathaniel Stacy, led the way in spreading their faith. Hosea Ballou was the one who, in 1829, helped found that UU church we first joined in Connecticut.

Other preachers followed the advice of Universalist publisher Horace Greeley and went West. One such person was Thomas Starr King, who is credited with defining the difference between Unitarians and Universalists: “Universalists believe that God is too good to damn people, and the Unitarians believe that people are too good to be damned by God.” As mentioned before, Universalists believed in a God who embraced everyone, and this eventually became central to their belief that lasting truth is found in all religions, and that dignity and worth is innate to all people regardless of sex, color, race, or class.

Growing out of this inclusive theology was a lasting impetus in both denominations to create a more just society. Both Unitarians and Universalists became active participants in many social justice movements in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, often led by women such as Julia Ward Howe, Susan B. Anthony, and notably Clara Barton who went from Civil War “angel of the battlefield” to become the founder of the American Red Cross. Through reformers such as these, the liberal religious movement became the champion of the abolition of slavery, women's rights, and penal reform. Unitarian preacher Theodore Parker was a prominent abolitionist, defending fugitive slaves and offering support to abolitionist John Brown.

As the two movements of Unitarianism and Universalism grew and acquired greater definition in the sermons of Hosea Ballou, Ralph Waldo Emerson, William Ellery Channing, Theodore Parker and others, the two paths of religious liberalism grew ever closer.

In the beginning of the twentieth century, humanists within both traditions advocated that people could be religious without believing in God. Now that was and still is heresy! But it was also a confirmation for that time that no one person, no one religion, can embrace all religious truths.

By the middle of the twentieth century it became clear that Unitarians and Universalists could have a stronger liberal religious voice if they merged their efforts, and they did so in 1961, forming the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.

Many UUs became active in the civil rights movement. James Reeb, a Unitarian Universalist minister, was murdered in Selma, Alabama, after he and twenty percent of the denomination’s ministers responded to Martin Luther King, Jr.'s call to march for justice.

Today we are determined to continue to work for greater racial and cultural diversity. In 1977, a resolution on “Women and Religion” was passed by the Association, and since then the denomination has worked at changing its sexist structures and language, especially with the publication of an inclusive hymnal.

The denomination has also affirmed the rights of bisexuals, gays, lesbians, and transgender persons. The denomination has ordained and settled gay and lesbian clergy in its congregations and, in 1996, affirmed same-sex marriage.

All these efforts reflect a modern understanding of universal salvation. Unitarian Universalism welcomes all to an expanding circle of understanding and choice in religious faith. Our history has carried us from liberal Christian views about Rabbi Jesus and human nature to a rich pluralism that includes theists and atheists, agnostics and humanists, pagans, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists.

Conclusion

We gather for very important reasons as Unitarian Universalists, not the least of which is an openness to change – a quality that has formed our faith over the centuries. Change can come from various sources: religious discovery, such as the Christian gospels found in Egypt, scientific discoveries, religious and philosophical insights, revelations etc. It is that very openness to change that will shape our faith in this new century. Our own history tells us that we cannot see everything clearly. Ours is a story of an evolving understanding of what it means to be human and to live in community on this beautiful planet. We gather to witness that evolving knowledge and to support each other as we strive to understand and appreciate our world and our universe.

Unitarian Universalism is a most noble experiment in human relations, mirroring in microcosm the rich experiment that is this very country. We believe that the most pressing question now before our churches, as before the American people, is this: how can we, a diverse group of people with rich and varying cultures, worldviews, and beliefs, learn to live together, with integrity and compassion, in a society that affirms and embodies the values of freedom, peace and justice? As our country’s history and our Unitarian Universalist faith continue to evolve and unfold, we invite and welcome all people of good will into this most vital ongoing conversation.

Challenges

We are not without challenges. I will talk about the three major ones: Money, Issues resulting from the Acceptance of Everybody and the Problem with our Message.

Challenge 1: Money.
I have seen many reports in the media on church giving over the years, and invariably, Unitarian Universalists end up having the highest average income…and the lowest contribution level. It is as though the more money people have, the less they are ready to part with it. A live illustration of that was given to me at our District Church Meeting in Grand Junction, Colorado this fall. In one of the workshops, we were talking about the support people give to social justice, when a young woman from Laramie, Wyoming, a waitress at a local diner, chimed in, saying that working people always give her very generous tips, whereas people with money rarely do.

In the past, we have been blessed by the generous contributions from some wealthy members, the result of which is that we do not have any debt on our building. But it is still a struggle from year to year to raise enough to meet our minister’s compensation and the ongoing building and program expenses.

But I won’t complain too loudly…I assume some others have the same issue.

Challenge 2: Acceptance of Everybody.
We are a welcoming and caring congregation, a church for all souls. Many needy souls find their way to our church.

Our big challenge is to create and to maintain a healthy congregational environment with the ability to grow both in numbers and spiritual depth, while at the same time providing a safe place for people with special needs and their families. We are now focusing on this most important issue. It is all about following the teachings of compassion by Rabbi Jesus to help these unfortunate people and keep the congregation strong and growing.

Challenge 3: What is our Message, Our Reason for Being?
The positive aspects of our faith, which I have outlined above in the sections on Belief and History, are also the ones creating difficulties for our group to spread its message and sometimes to stay together. How do you create a community with no common theology, whether explicit or assumed? How do you sell the idea about a community with no common theology? Remember, our members include people of humanistic bent as well as mystics! That is atheists, agnostics and deeply religious folks!

  • There is no creedal test for members,
  • There is no compelling story. We have no story to sell, like Heaven or Hell, or life after death.
  • We have no central figure such as Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, and Buddha around which religions are organized.
  • We cannot offer or promise salvation.
What we have and offer is a vision/mission/covenant, explicit or implicit, on how we will be with each other and with the community at large. The following is the new statement we just adopted last month:

  • We are a loving and caring religious community affirming the sacredness of all life.
  • We provide a spiritually nourishing and intellectually stimulating environment with respect for each individual.
  • We encourage exploration and growth in a spirit of fellowship and love for seekers of all ages.
  • With an attitude of cooperation, we will be a catalyst for religious freedom, social justice, peacemaking, and responsible stewardship of the Earth.
In different ways, we are all searching for a way to know and to be in relationship with God.

Let me close with words from a song that touched me very deeply. I heard it at the UU General Assembly this year in Fort Worth, Texas. It is a song by Pat Humphries titled “Swimming to the Other Side”:
I am alone and I am searching, hungering for answers in my time
I am balanced at the brink of wisdom; I’m impatient to receive a sign.
I move forward with my senses open. Imperfection it be my crime.
In humility, I will listen; we’re all swimming to the other side.

On this journey through thoughts and feelings; binding intuition, my head, my heart
I am gathering the tools together; I am preparing to do my part.
All of those who have come before me: band together and be my guide.
Loving lessons that I will follow, we’re all swimming to the other side.

When we get there, we’ll discover all the gifts we’ve been given to share
Have been with us since life’s beginning and we never noticed they were there.
We can balance at the brink of wisdom, never recognizing we have arrived.
Loving spirits will live together; we’re all swimming to the other side.
The Spirit of God is Within You!

Namasteh (the divine in me greets the divine in you.)

May it be so! Amen.

Bibliography

This presentation has borrowed “liberally” from various sources. These include excerpts from "We Are Unitarian Universalists", UUA pamphlet #3047, and the writings of Revs. Mark Harris, Ricky Hoyt, Susan Manker-Seale, and Jeffrey P. Lambkin.

Talk given by Arthur Kull.
Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Top

A Bible Study
   Written by Ruth Barnes

An intelligent understanding of the Bible is indispensable to anybody in the Western World who wishes to think wisely about religion. So opens the Introduction of the text we used for a study last Fall. The book, “Understanding the Bible, an Introduction for Skeptics, Seekers and Religious Liberals” is written by John A. Buehrens, a past President of the UUA.

The influence of the Bible remains pervasive in our culture. It not only functions as authoritative scripture for our largest religious communities, both Christian and Jewish, its language and stories also resonate throughout our literature and public rhetoric. Many contentious political debates in our public life over issues of sexuality, economics and even foreign policy disguise sharply divergent interpretations of the Bible.

Forrest Church, son of the Senator Frank Church from Idaho says that the Bible and God, like the Constitution and the American Flag, like Motherhood and Apple Pie remain powerful icons in our culture. If you leave the interpretation of our religious heritage to opponents, you cede power to them to define our heritage, our nation’s meaning, and our family values. John Spong, of the Episcopal Church (recently deceased) sees fundamentalism and literalism not as faith, but as disguised fear. If we allow that to happen, we allow spiritual oppression to usurp the Spirit of the Bible, and legitimize economic and environmental exploitation, racism, sexism, homophobia, and more.

We lose what the Bible is about, we lose beauty and goodness of creation, the story of frustration with violence and injustice throughout generations, we lose the experiences of exultation, expectation and inspiration that have sustained the human quest for wisdom, justice and peace. We must not speak as though the Bible says and means only what fundamentalists say that it means.

Yet if we reject or neglect the Bible and throw it out because others have turned it into an idol, it doesn’t mean that it goes away. It ends up in the hands and lips of reactionaries where it can be used against us.

Buehrens asks. “How did we happen to give away our right to question religious authority and to interpret the Bible for ourselves?” Maybe we should direct our skepticism toward ourselves, and not our forebears. Maybe we have turned away from eternally important questions because we are uncomfortable with the idea of the Eternal, who might actually require something from us?

Today television programs such as Discovery, make popular the findings in archeology, historical studies, anthropology, comparative religion, and feminist interpretations. All have the author’s or the sponsor’s point of view. There’s not much available to summarize these developments and help an up-to-date understanding of the Bible.

Buehrens has written his text to reach skeptics, seekers and liberals after he had taught many classes where he was repeatedly asked similar questions. He gives these reasons for writing his book.

  1. If you can’t or won’t understand the Bible, others will surely interpret it for you. In my first public school position I was legally required to read from the Bible to begin each day. So one reason to bother with the Bible has to do with questions of justice and power. Buehrens can attest to a ground swell, a yearning for understanding our Biblical heritage in a respectable, justice oriented and spiritually enriching way. This is a political reason for study.


  2. Another reason has to do with cultural literacy. Many of my friends in college took “Bible as Literature” classes. To study Literature, whether Modern or Renaissance and Reformation, You must learn Biblical and religious references that abound in poems and texts, even jokes.

    Dorothy Parker and another young actress arrived at a party simultaneously. There was jockeying for precedence, and the actress stepped back saying, “Age before beauty.” But Dorothy Parker quipped, “No my dear, pearls before swine.” Usaac Asimov reported that he gave up telling this joke because fewer and fewer people recognized the Biblical reference.

    Not only is it obvious that we cannot fully understand Renaissance art, Bach, Shakespeare, Milton, T.S.Elliot or Emily Dickenson without understanding biblical references, it is true that modern writers and artists use themes as a continuing source of inspitation.

  3. Finally, a personal reason for study. Despite oppressive uses of the Bible, there is a source of inspiration, liberation, creation and even exultation as we understand the Bible anew, at a deeper and less literal level.

A Zen Buddhist recommended to his student that in his brief life, his spiritual work was to understand his own heritage more deeply. He sent the student back to study the Bible.

The Bible is human literature about the divine, not divine literature about humans. It requires critical approach. We are the spiritual beneficiaries and descendents of radical reformers. We know the stories of those dedicated people, burned at the stake still insisting that scripture be available to everyone, so that everyone may claim personal powers of interpretation and understanding.

The local exhibit “Ink and Blood” touches directly on this inheritance.

Buehrens’ text asks skeptics to keep skepticism where it matters. His text addresses liberals, even radicals to help claim power to understand and interpret the Bible for themselves and the common good. And, the text is directed to seekers to find an ethical and spiritual wisdom for everyday living together.

Even if the Bible is only literature, poetry and true religion require imaginative compassion, says Thomas Hardy. The texts deserve critical thought, but so do our own prejudices.

If you are a skeptic, a seeker, or liberal - yet want the Bible to reveal its wisdom to you, it is required that you do the texts justice and look for how the texts themselves can serve justice; and, that you practice imaginative compassion, and walk humbly in the quest for a liberating wisdom.

Thus you may uncover the human experience of the Holy, and find enduring truth and wisdom that lays behind ancient texts.

UU Bible Class
   Written by Tiffinie Tailor

The recent UU Bible class was the first time I cracked open a Bible in a long time. The time away from it was probably good for me since I could come to it in a neutral frame of mind. A question raised in the class was whether it was relevant to each of us today. After reading many of its passages I also had to ask whether it could be the excellent moral compass so many believers claim it to be.

After all, the Bible was the word of God and it would not lead me astray. There was no need to question its truth because in doing so I would be questioning God’s truth. Indeed, the first 4 of the 10 commandments demonstrate God’s importance. (Exodus 20)

The Bible gives us some rules to live by and commands us to “Keep all my decrees and all my laws and follow them. I am the Lord”. (Leviticus Ch. 19) Among them are:

  • Thou salt not kill.
  • Do not steal.
  • Do not lie.
  • Do not deceive on another.
  • Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself.
  • Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed.
  • Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
  • If a man sleeps with a woman who is a slave girl promised to another man but who has not been ransomed or given her freedom, there must be due punishment. Yet they are not to be put to death, because she had not been freed.
  • Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.
  • Do not degrade your daughter by making her a prostitute.
It also teaches us the golden rule of “do unto others”. Even after being led out of slavery, the people are directed:

  • If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year he shall go free…If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free… (Leviticus 21: 2, 7-11)
It offers instructions about war and more about “doing unto others”:

  • When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. (Deuteronomy 20:10)
It teaches that cleanliness is next to Godliness…even after committing murder:

  • “Have you allowed all the women to live?” He asked them. They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the Lord in what happed at Peor, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. “Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. All of you who have killed anyone or touched anyone who was killed must stay outside the camp seven days. On the third and seventh days you must purify yourselves and your captives. Purity every garment as well as everything made of leather, goat hair or wood.” (Numbers 31:15-20)
So, how am I to use the Bible as a moral guide? Does the Bible contain lessons I would like my children to learn? Games and movies are given a rating system so parents can get an idea of content before they say OK to kids seeing them. I wonder; if the same system was applied to the Bible, how many parents would allow it in their homes?

What it does offer me is a point of view that stirs up the soul and prompts me to ask questions about the people in these stories, about morality and about the human condition. Perhaps in the context of the world they were in, their truths make sense. As far as the Bible’s relevance to me, it does lead me to question whether the things that I accept as truth are universal truths or only truths in context. It shows how fragile and how vicious we humans can be when we ascribe to a belief, a system or a “God.” It shows the best and the worst in people. Our stories tell us what we need to know about ourselves so our history need not be repeated. It is a reminder that beliefs are not absolute. That clinging to a belief out of tradition may not always make sense or be in our best interest. That unquestioning obedience has consequences. It is a reminder of how far we have come and how far we have yet to go.

Reflections on Bible Study Class
   Written by Tami Thatcher

I signed up the Bible Study Class because the text for the class looked refreshing: “Understanding the Bible — An Introduction for Skeptics, Seekers, and Religious Liberals” by John A. Buehrens, former president of the UUA and UU minister, and because my Bible background was very limited. Many of us taking the class often felt that it sounded a little bit funny to be saying “I’m going to Bible study class.” Only we Unitarian Universalists knew that this class was very different than other Bible study classes around town. One difference is that the acceptance of one another did not depend on having a common view of the Bible.

In Rev. Lyn’s class, we would start off each class by identifying examples of how beliefs about the Bible influence our society today. One example was a an Ellen Goodman opinion editorial about a congressman admitting that he did not believe in a supreme being and admitting that he was an nontheist. A spokesperson for the Concerned Women for America unabashedly bashed him, saying that “a Christian world-view is proper for a politician to have.”

In this same article, presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s reassurances to the religious right were stated: that he believes in the virgin birth, the crucifixion, and the resurrection — apparently, this is the assumed ecclesiastical checklist for president.

The idea that people can be trusted only if they believe the “right” things — is real, whether or not it is openly discussed.

Believing in the “right things” in this country often has ties to believing in God and the Bible. Trying to read and to interpret the Bible has always been unsettling for me. While other people deeply enjoy reading at least parts of the Bible, my tendency is to agonize a bit over the uncertainty of what was really meant by the words. In the class, as we read Bible verses from many versions of the bible, it was possible to see the variations in style, word selection, and interpretation from various editors of the same Bible verse. I can see how a person could spend a lifetime studying the Bible and I have only barely scratched the surface.

But even if we rarely think about them, the Bible concepts that we grew up surrounded by affect us, even if we do not accept these concepts. Concepts of god, perhaps as a supreme all-knowing being, and of an ultimate judge in the universe, of a Creator that alleviates human responsibility for taking action, concepts of an afterlife, of the meaning of life’s difficulties... They affect us. Taking a Bible class as an adult is an opportunity to revisit these concepts and to make conscious reconciliation or rejection of some of these concepts.

During the class, I found a book titled “Feminist Approaches to the Bible” at the Library book sale. Having spoken about the fight for women’s right to vote last fall, I was interested in what this book discussed about the Bible and women’s equality—for years the Bible had been used as a powerful and effective weapon against women’s rights. Many feminists believed that it was not the Bible that was the problem: it was the male misinterpretation of the Bible. However, as more women studied the Bible, many women found that actually, the Bible itself was the problem.

The class provided a rare chance for a UU to learn about the rapture. I also read a book describing the evolving vision of Heaven by various Christians through the last two thousand years. The concepts of heaven pervade our culture and language and thought. Though the concept of Heaven is more influenced by writings and thought outside of the Bible, it comes strongly connected to the Bible. People who are confident in their view of heaven tend to have an air of superiority. I found that reading the “inside information,” about the many views of heaven in the Christian realm and their evolution to be somehow liberating.

I also read more about the persecution of Jews by Christians. As we as UUs tend to praise our Christian roots, we, in particular, should be mindful of the sometimes cruel past of our Christian forbearers and the present tendancy of many Christians to discount people of other faiths or of no faith.

Well, wrapping up. I enjoyed the class and the people in it. The class was thought-provoking and I did gain a greater appreciation for the variety and complexity of writings in the Bible. And the continuing influence of the Bible in our world today.


Top

A Prayer for Community
   Written by Barry Leech

Let our blessed community be strong,
being united as one in the spirit of love and life.
Let forgiveness be our key to happiness,
forgiving ourselves as well as others
when there are judgements or anger between us.
Let our blessed community be strong,
So that fears and blocks melt away
and everyone feels free to share
what is in their hearts. Amen.


Top

Prayer as a Means of Coping With Crisis
   The Rev. Dr. Rodney R. Romney

Sermon given on January 29, 2006, at Unitarian Universalist Church in Idaho Falls.

We often think of prayer as an instinctive cry for help when we feel threatened by danger, crises, or calamity. This cry is native in every human being, regardless of religious conviction or lack thereof. It is an inborn instinct in everyone. But if we only pray when we are in trouble or when we need help, then we are missing the larger dimension of what prayer can be.

For most people, prayer is what we say. It is a human attempt to speak to God. But what I have lea