Last preached on March 13th, 2011
Reading Excerpt from “Unitarian Christianity” by Rev. William Ellery Channing
Also known as the Baltimore Sermon, this excerpt is from the ordination sermon of Rev. Jared Sparks in 1819, and is considered by many the official birth of American Unitarianism.
We indeed grant, that the use of reason in religion is accompanied with danger. But we ask any honest man to look back on the history of the church, and say, whether the renunciation of it be not still more dangerous. Besides, it is a plain fact, that men reason as erroneously on all subjects, as on religion. Who does not know the wild and groundless theories, which have been framed in physical and political science? But who ever supposed, that we must cease to exercise reason on nature and society, because men have erred for ages in explaining them? We grant, that the passions continually, and sometimes fatally, disturb the rational faculty in its inquiries into revelation. The ambitious contrive to find doctrines in the Bible, which favor their love of dominion. The timid and dejected discover there a gloomy system, and the mystical and fanatical, a visionary theology. The vicious can find examples or assertions on which to build the hope of a late repentance, or of acceptance on easy terms. The falsely refined contrive to light on doctrines which have not been soiled by vulgar handling. But the passions do not distract the reason in religious, any more than in other inquiries, which excite strong and general interest; and this faculty, of consequence, is not to be renounced in religion, unless we are prepared to discard it universally. The true inference from the almost endless errors, which have darkened theology, is, not that we are to neglect and disparage our powers, but to exert them more patiently, circumspectly, uprightly. The worst errors, after all, having sprung up in that church, which proscribes reason, and demands from its members implicit faith.
Message “Being a Reluctant Radical” by Rev. David Pyle
When we begin introducing those new
to Unitarian Universalism to our faith,
one of our most common tendencies
is to parade before them a list of
“Famous Historical Unitarian Universalists”.
We do this for many reasons,
not the least of which is our own ego.
To know that you are in the company of Olympia Brown,
Ralph Waldo Emerson, P.T. Barnum, Susan B. Anthony,
and Clara Barton is indeed a heady thing.
It gives you a sense of connection,
to know that those that came before you
accomplished so much, being so few.
It is an example to us as we live,
to never doubt that a few, intelligent, dedicated,
and well-intentioned people really can change the world.
In fact, it is the only thing that ever has.
When I returned to Unitarian Universalism some ten years ago,
I too was subjected to the parade of UU Saints,
and it did inspire the awe in me that it does in many.
I do remember though that there were some names in that list
that I had never heard of. I didn’t want to mention it,
for fear that I would betray my own ignorance.
But that there were some famous people that it was felt
I should know, and didn’t, seemed a bit humbling to me…
and even a bit condescending.
One of those names was William Ellery Channing.
Let us not kid ourselves…
outside of scholarly circles
and our own Unitarian Universalist community,
it is not a name well known.
Certainly not like some of his students,
such as Ralph Waldo Emerson.
In retrospect, it was not surprising that I had never heard of him.
And yet, he is considered by many to be
the “Father of American Unitarianism”.
Emerson called him our “Unitarian Bishop”.
My ignorance inspired me to a study of this Father of our Faith.
Looking back, I’m not sure if I had any real pre-conceptions,
and I think that was a blessing. It let me take him as I found him.
Let us start off by saying that,
by the standards of his day or by our modern standards,
no one could doubt that Channing was a Christian.
In fact, were he dropped into even
the more religiously Christian of UU congregations,
he would seem a bit out of place.
He believed in God, but that Jesus was a man,
even if a divine one.
He believed in Miracles,
and that his job in this world was to save souls.
He believed that the bible must be understood through reason,
but still believed it was the greatest guide in existence
on how to live life.
I could see the seeds of our modern faith
in the thought and ideas of Channing, but nothing direct.
In many ways Channing opened the doors
for transcendentalists such as Emerson
and Henry David Thoreau….
And our current theological ideas
trace more to them then to Channing.
While the ideas behind the “Unitarian Controversy”
of the early 1800’s were shocking to many at the time…
they would be quite tame by modern standards.
So, I could not see Channing as the “Father of our Faith”
when it came to Theology.
Better to leave that to Emerson,
and to the “Humiliati” on the Universalist side of our history.
Channing was also opposed
to their ever being any overall organization of Unitarians,
as he felt that would tend to limit
the minister’s freedom from the pulpit.
Later in his life, he came to believe that all institutions are corrupt,
and even began to doubt in the power of order and law.
The closest he came to such organization
was a kind of “Minister’s club” which was the original concept
behind the American Unitarian Association,
one of the forerunners to the modern
Unitarian Universalist Association, our denomination.
Many times, he found himself in conflict
with the Board of Trustees of his own Federal Street Church,
and often all but dictated to them.
So, I could not see in Channing the beginnings
of our national organization,
or even our system of congregational polity,
where by the members are the authority in the church,
not the minister or the denomination.
Sure, his thought was an early form of Humanism…
but still very tied to Christianity.
And many of the more conservative ministers in Boston
certainly thought Channing was a heretic,
and that would endear him to us.
But I began to wonder why,
other than that he called himself a Unitarian,
we claimed him at all…..
and even to wonder, if he were here today,
would he would claim us?
And yet, there are two aspects of our faith
in which the example of William Ellery Channing
shines like a Beacon…
One of them is in our dedication to the education of children.
I think we could safely say that Channing
was the father of UU Children’s Religious Education.
He created the first Sunday School in Boston,
and even developed a sort of Catechism
for the early Unitarian Faith.
He built a separate building for the education of children,
and invited all children to attend,
not just those whose parents were members
of the Federal Street Church.
I would even say that William Ellery Channing
was one of the tributaries that led into the stream
that forced the creation of
a Public Education System in New England
during the succeeding 60 years.
But, as admirable as this is,
I still didn’t think it would earn him
the pre-eminent place that he holds in our list of UU Saints.
It did not answer why, it is his pulpit
that is in the chapel at 25 Beacon Street,
our denominational headquarters in Boston.
There had to be something else,
something more attuned to the fabric
of what it means to be a Unitarian Universalist.
In his biography of Channing,
UU Minister Jack Mendelsohn refers to Channing as
“The Reluctant Radical”…
and from that title we begin to see
why he holds such a place in our faith.
For you see, he was a radical…
even if he often had to be dragged
kicking and screaming into such a position.
And though he was a Radical theologically….
He was an even greater radical in the
Equality, Justice, and Charity issues of his day.
We as UU’s often talk of “Transformative Experiences”….
An idea we have garnered
from the Transcendentalists of our past.
We each have many experiences in our lives,
but certain ones are deeply moving and life changing in nature.
I told you about one such experience
in Channing’s early life during our Story for All Ages.
Let me take a few minutes to mention
another such experience in his life.
After graduating from Harvard at 18 years old,
Channing took a job as a tutor
to two young aristocratic children in Richmond Virginia.
He had never been out of New England,
and wanted to travel… and in those days,
Virginia was just as exotic to him
as New Zealand would be to me.
He was struck to his core by the seeming incongruity
between the genteel, aristocratic society
of Virginia’s wealthier families,
and the brutal system of slavery that supported it.
He had an intellectual understanding of slavery
before he left for Virginia,
and even a view that it was a “necessary evil”….
But seeing it, experiencing it, and seeing that,
far from being less than a man, the slaves were just as much,
if not more truly human than the people that held them.
By the end of his time there,
he had retreated into his own personal studies,
having no social contact with the elite of Virginia.
He was wracked with guilt.
You see, Channing could never escape his own mind.
He saw the brutality and evil of Slavery,
and he saw how the system was not only supported
by the culture of the South, but also by the culture of the North.
He saw the hand of his friends in New England,
who after all purchased the products of the South…
products created by slave labor.
He felt utterly ashamed, and his health faltered…
never to fully recover.
So, to get away from these worldly concerns,
he threw himself into religious study and thought…
but the first-hand experience of slavery never left him,
and would later have a profound effect upon his life…
and upon our nation.
Channing was never one to seek controversy.
However, it often found him.
Often, it chased after him like a rabid dog,
and he could not escape it.
The first such Controversy was to be found
during the War of 1812.
After leaving Virginia, Channing accepted ordination
to the Federal Street Church in Boston in 1803.
It was to be the only pulpit he ever called his own…
and it was his until his death 40 years later.
Those first few years were a kind of love affair
between Channing and his congregation.
He was a great, inspiring preacher,
despite his slight frame and ill health.
He encouraged the well to do in Boston to charitable works,
not through dictates, but through sermons
that reminded them of the duties of Christian Charity.
His first real political foray came
with the advent of the War of 1812.
In the time leading up to the war,
Channing felt that it could be avoided,
and believed when war broke out
it was the fault of American politicians and diplomats
as much as the British. As the war continued,
Channing wrestled with his inherent pacifism and his patriotism.
A struggle I know that I can relate to in today’s world.
Channing was gaining respect in Boston as a minister,
and indeed both the pro-war and the more pacifist activists
campaigned for his support.
It was well known that he hated war….
But he did believe that at times war might be necessary.
What Channing did in this controversy
was a prelude for his style of taking a stand
on all such issues of social significance.
He took his time, developed and researched his position,
refused to be carried away in a tide of enthusiasm,
and then chose sides….
Often much later than many of his
hot-headed contemporaries would have wished.
When he had decided upon his position,
he let it be known in a rational, reasoned manner,
always keeping proper decorum,
and yet with a passion that no one could deny.
Channing would never have been found in a street protest!
More likely he would have organized
a series of lectures on the topic,
brought leaders together to meet and discuss it,
and used his contacts in government and society
to persuade others to his point of view.
All of these things, he did in opposition to the War of 1812…
and he did so with a level of esteem and respect
that allowed him to accomplish much more
than vindictive and enthusiastic protest would ever have allowed.
This same pattern was repeated in the theological debate
known as the “Unitarian Controversy” which was,
at its core, a disagreement between
Liberal and Conservative ministers in New England.
It had been known for many years
that Channing’s sympathies lay with the more liberal ministers…
but it wasn’t until he gave an ordination sermon in 1819,
many years into the controversy
that he publicly proclaimed his position
in what is considered to be the greatest treatise
on Unitarian Christianity ever written.
And he did so with all the authority, respect, and stature
that could have been asked for.
Even those who most disagreed with his views
showed great respect for him.
Because of that respect, he was able to bring the ideas
behind the controversy out of the private meetings of ministers
and to make them topics of public discussion
among the people of New England.
We see the same pattern in Channing’s reaction
to the status of the poor immigrants in the New England cities,
to how workers were treated by their wealthy employers,
to how the Native Americans were losing
their lands and livelihoods… and lives,
and to how the violence of the West was affecting American life.
In all of these issues he refused to be moved
by those who were passionate on either side,
calmly studied the issue,
arrived at what he felt was a rational, justifiable position,
and then used his experience, passion, authority, and reputation
to affect the issue in anyway he could.
And, it can be shown that, in every one of these issues, this one,
well meaning and dedicated man did indeed make a difference.
But the issue that was to show this system
of social action and social witness the most…
in which Channing would have the greatest affect,
and which would have the greatest affect upon him,
was the issue of Slavery.
The question of the Evil of Slavery
had burned in Channing since his time in Richmond…
and though it had died down a bit, it had never gone out.
In fact, much of his theological views of Evil and of Satan
had focused around the institution of slavery.
Though he disliked using his Pulpit for political purposes,
he had often discussed evil in terms of slavery…
and felt that America could never be a righteous, moral nation
so long as slavery was allowed to exist.
But, he had never taken his abolitionist tendencies
beyond his own congregation and friends.
This, I think, was due in part to the guilt that he felt
over the issue… because he viewed himself
as being partially responsible, as all Americans were.
It was also because he was focused on his ministry,
and on affecting things that were closer to home…
but those were just excuses.
The real reason for his reluctance had nothing to do with slavery,
but rather to do with those who opposed slavery…
You see, William Ellery Channing distrusted anyone
who was too emotionally enthusiastic about a cause.
He preferred a more rational, directed approach
to making a difference in the world,
and the rhetoric and vindictiveness found in many of those
who opposed slavery turned him off.
He did not want to be associated with the bitterness,
the name-calling, the dividing of people,
and the “soap box” attitude he perceived
in those passionate about ending slavery.
And yet, he began to see that all of his friends,
those he respected and loved, all of his students,
and even his own wife had left him behind on this issue.
In fact, they were all looking to him for leadership, guidance,
and strength in the struggle to free the slaves.
And so, he did what he always did.
He took time, rationally thought through the issue.
He looked at his own pre-conceptions,
the theological implications,
and the practical issues around slavery.
He looked at what effects ending slavery would have,
not just on Southern Society, but upon life in the north as well.
He looked at his concept and respect for the law,
and debated within himself whether
disobeying laws legalizing slavery was justified.
Through this theological study,
William Ellery Channing came to the conclusion that slavery
was the greatest evil ever known to humankind,
that it was destroying the fabric of the nation,
and that a law that justified so great an evil
was a law which had to be defied.
One day, near the end of this study by Channing,
a young man, a former student of his,
came by to see him one evening.
Like many before him, this student and now minister
had come for the specific purpose of convincing this man
he respected more than anyone else in the world
to take up the leadership of the cause to end slavery.
The young man, the Reverend Samuel May,
asked Channing rather bluntly
why he had not spoken out about Slavery.
At one point, as the conversation became a heated argument,
May lost his patience with his respected teacher
and yelled “Why, Sir, Have you not moved!
Why have you not spoken!”
Silence followed…. Channing in thought,
May in shock at the fact that he had just yelled
at the Unitarian Bishop! After a few minutes,
Channing’s mild voice could be heard,
saying with a little smile “Brother May,
I acknowledge the justice of your reproof….
I have been silent too long”.
How many of us have felt like Brother May at times,
in our view of the Social Action
of the Unitarian Universalist Association?
How many of us have at times wanted to yell
“Why Have we not moved! Why have we not spoken!”
True to his word, Channing’s silence ended,
and he began a fight to end slavery
that would only conclude for him with his death.
While avoiding the invective and the flashyness
of many other abolitionists,
Channing defied his own inherent avoidance of conflict,
and on several occasions even the direct wishes
of his Board of Trustees in his pursuit of the issue.
On the occasion of the Funeral of a fellow minister
and active abolitionist, Charles Fallon,
Channing defied the leaders of the Federal Street Church a
nd performed the Eulogy against their direct wishes,
for they wished to avoid the controversy
of performing such a service for a controversial abolitionist.
Channing’s relations with his church became strained.
And yet, he never joined any anti-slavery societies…
he always acted on his own.
He wrote pamphlets, gave sermons and lectures,
harangued politicians, and above all else persuaded people
as to the evils of slavery.
He probably converted more people to the cause of abolition
than any other single individual
in the history of the anti-slavery movement.
And he did so, because he never seemed angry or vindictive,
and he combined the passion of the cause
with the formidable powers of his intellect and most importantly,
the power of his faith.
Channing also realized that there are times
when one cause interferes with another.
Channing knew before many others
that it was going to take war to end slavery.
He had opposed the war of 1812,
but fell short of saying that all war was evil.
He knew even back then that,
sometimes war was necessary…
and he came to the conclusion that if war was the horrific price
of ending the evil of slavery,
then it was a price that had to be paid.
And, he knew it would be paid.
It is this system of reasoned social action and social witness
that is Channing’s greatest gift to our association.
I have often heard people, usually of the more passionate bent,
discuss how they wish the UUA
would quit discussing issues endlessly and do more…
get out there, protest, get in their faces!
And, admittedly, there is that within me that enjoys a good protest.
I have a bit of the soapbox preacher in me!
I know that I have certainly felt like Samuel May at times.
And yet, when the UUA moves on an issue,
the true goal is to move the issue.
Our faith and its members were instrumental
in advancing woman’s sufferage,
promoting racial equality and civil liberties, seeking equal rights
for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender persons….
And we are even now fighting for the equality of marriage….
And for peace.
We have more effect than denominations
much larger than we are, and have throughout our history.
As Shakespeare said, “We few, we happy few”.
We are a gentle angry people.
Why? Why does anyone listen to us?
Think about it… there are fewer Unitarian Universalists
in this nation than there are U.S. Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We are a denomination of less than 160,000 souls…
Why does anyone pay attention to what we have to say?
I propose it is because we do follow the example
set by William Ellery Channing,
and to ignore that example is to lose the authority and credibility
that have been the key to our success throughout our history.
While there are a couple of forms of social witness
that we engage in at the UUA General Assembly,
the most important is the creation of a “Statement of Conscience”.
Such are the way in which the UUA tries to move an issue itself.
Statements of Conscience have been issued on Racial Equality,
Freedom of Marriage, Civil Liberties, economic justice,
global warming and many, many more issues over the years.
A statement of Conscience takes over three years
of study, reflection, consultation, input from congregations,
and research to draft.
It all begins with the adoption of a “Study Action Issue”
at a General Assembly, and ends with the final approval
of a Statement of Conscience two to three years later.
When they are completed, it is an issue that we have studied,
that we are ready to move on,
and ready to make a real difference in the world with.
Last year, the UUA General Assembly approved,
after an exhaustive three year process,
one of the first comprehensive statements
on Peacemaking in our Association’s history.
I served on the team that did the initial research,
and helped draft the original statement.
It explored ways of thinking about peacemaking
beyond the traditional “Just War or Pacifism” dichotomy.
I had the honor of speaking on the floor
of the General Assembly in support
of this Statement of Conscience,
and was told by many that my statement
was when they chose to vote for its passage…
so you can say I have some ownership
in this particular statement of our association of congregations.
few copies of the statement are in the back,
for those who wish to see our current
Statement of Conscience on Peacemaking.
Our Association has currently moved into a study
to draft a Statement of Conscience on Immigration
and how undocumented immigrants and communities
are treated in our nation.
On this issue, Samuel May has just yelled at us
“Why have you not Spoken!”
Our study will lead to the General Assembly in 2012,
where all Unitarian Universalists are invited and challenged
to come together in Phoenix Arizona
to bear witness to that state, its government,
and the unjust way they are engaging
the issue of immigration and the undocumented.
I hope to see all of you there, on the border with us,
bearing witness.
As Channing taught us, we must act on these major issues
only after study… but once that study is done, we must act!
Not just to protest, anyone can do that…
but act to make a difference.
Act in ways that can affect change.
We must be the Reluctant Radicals of this time.
So may it be, blessed be, and Amen.