Unitarian Universalist Meeting of South Berkshire

 

 

July 27, 2003

 

 

“Is There a Humanist Language of Reverence?”

 

 

Rev. Kathy Duhon

 

           

At times, in these shared sacred Sunday meetings, we have come so close to the heart of Christianity, or of Judaism, that I have bidden us all to become “honorary” Christians or Jews, for a stretch.  Or, at other times, we have participated in Buddhist meditation or Earth-centered spirituality, and we have in those services entered into the practice, or the circle, of those religious traditions.  As this day, we receive into membership in our congregation these wonderful people, I reflect on our unique ability as Unitarian Universalists to grasp and be grasped by the living sources of many religious traditions, all feeding our own sense of wonder and meaning.

Today I invite us to experience Humanism, with its bedrock strength, soaring beauty, and glorious goodness.  Humanism is one of the strongest sources of our living tradition.  In some ways, we really all are humanists, all the time, not just “honorary humanists”.  We are humanists when we work for the good of humanity, stressing individual dignity and worth, and rejecting any otherworldly beliefs that denigrate, or that contradict a reasoned understanding of the world.  Humanism is strong in our history and currently an important influence among the members of our congregations.  As we seek unity in our diversity, we can do no better than what some of the leading humanists in our association have decided to do:  explore “a humanist vocabulary of reverence.”  And I am so sorry that I missed the workshop at General Assembly this year with the same title as this sermon, “Is There a Humanist Language of Reverence?”

But first, here’s a quick lesson on Humanism.  Sometimes Unitarians trace our roots back to several sources that are prior to the actual use of the term Unitarian, and one of these comes at the end of the Middle Ages when Catholic humanists, including Erasmus, began reforming the church.  These humanists taught before the Protestant Reformation and helped start the Renaissance; they were in love with learning and the classics, balance and moderation.  The bloody 16th and 17th centuries of religious rivalry almost completely wiped out the humanist movement and its radical younger sibling, Unitarianism. 

Now, fast forward 400 years and humanism is back, in a new form.  Humanism was first preached in America by Unitarians – the Rev. John Dietrich and the Rev. Curtis Reese – 90 years ago, and they advocated getting rid of the old language, like God and prayer, and moving from a center in the supernatural, to one in the natural, with the good of humanity as prime.  Humanism was mostly identified with non-theism, atheism and agnosticism.  Humanists were not only within the Unitarian religion, and the Unitarians were not only humanists, but Humanism was a growing force within our religion over the course of the 20th century.  Our religious humanists assumed that theism would soon be abandoned.  They believed that humanity was unique and valued, and that all should work hard for social reforms.  Despite some contentiousness, our religion went forward as one, able to contain both theists and humanists, and others.

The Humanist Manifesto was signed in 1933, mostly by Unitarian ministers, then it was revised in 1973, and again this past Spring – the Humanist Manifesto III, which we heard from earlier.  Current humanists are more likely to speak of the whole world, not just humanity, and sometimes even profess a form of theism, though they would be careful to say that God is not a being separate from us and the world.  Most reject theism.  This is too brief a history of humanism, I know, but I hope it gives you some of the flavor.

The attempt to find meaningful religious vocabulary – a language of reverence – that we can use together, and with the rest of the world, is a subject that is being raised by the leadership of the UUA, especially President Bill Sinkford, but it reflects a conversation we’ve already been having, and which has been with us for at least as long as humanism has.  A not entirely comfortable conversation.  We are independent thinkers and believers, and many a humanist among us has wondered if this isn’t just a way to promote theism over humanism.  Theists and pagans wonder if their understandings of spirituality will be respected in any new or renewed use of sacred language.  But what I heard at General Assembly was not only skepticism and concern – there was a real interest and hope expressed in the idea of a shared language of reverence.

Since Rev. Sinkford, as a theist, is promoting this conversation, you might believe that he came up with using the term “reverence”, but it was a humanist actually, the Rev. David Bumbaugh, who has called this language "a vocabulary of reverence."  Bumbaugh writes, "We have manned the ramparts of reason and are prepared to defend the citadel of the mind. But in the process . . . we have lost . . . the ability to speak of that which is sacred, holy, of ultimate importance to us, the language which would allow us to enter into critical dialogue with the religious community."

I am reading a wonderful book, entitled Reverence, and was surprised to realize that it is categorized under “Philosophy”, not “Religion”, and was written by a professor of the humanities, an expert in ancient Greek thought, Paul Woodruff.  UU humanists would undoubtedly like what Woodruff has to say about reverence; so would theists – I know I do.  He calls reverence a virtue, and explains that it needs no theology or creed, but that it is incredibly important to culture, politics, and ethics.  Modern society has lost much of the understanding of reverence, to its detriment, Woodruff maintains.

Woodruff explains it this way: “Reverence begins in a deep understanding of human limitations; from this grows the capacity to be in awe of whatever we believe lies outside our control – God, truth, justice, nature, even death.  The capacity for awe, as it grows, brings with it the capacity for respecting fellow human beings, flaws and all.  This in turn fosters the ability to be ashamed when we show moral flaws exceeding the normal human allotment.”  Both the ancient Greeks and the Confucians in ancient China believed that reverence helped keep society in good shape, according to Woodruff.  Reverence fosters community, and unlike beliefs, can be shared by those in different religions, and by those who follow no religion at all.

One of our most famous Unitarians, Albert Schweitzer, coined the phrase, “reverence for life” when he was doing humanitarian work in Africa, as Loren here has just finished.  Although he was a pastor, a renowned musician and musicologist, a medical doctor, brilliant theologian and break-through Biblical scholar, Schweitzer most clearly found meaning in the simple revelation he experienced of “reverence for life”.  The phrase came to him unbidden, on a barge journey in the jungle, and solved questions of meaning, ethics and religion.  He needed this language, as he exuded, “The iron door had yielded: the path in the thicket had become visible.  Now I had found my way to the ideas in which world-and-life-affirmations and ethics are contained side by side!”

We have already developed some of the language of reverence, including the word reverence, but also the term “Spirit of Life” and our understanding of “blessings”, “grace”, “transcendence”, and “the holy”, to name a few.  To me, the search for a meaningful language of reverence is never about compromise or limitation, but is about translation and explication, about saying what is really real, what is the deepest and most universal experiences we share, in ways that illuminate the understanding better to all of us.  In reverence for life, for the web of being, I invite all of us humanists, and ‘whatevers’, to explore this language of reverence.  Blessed be the journey.