August 21, 2016

The Second U: Universalism

by Karen Esterl

Some of you may have already read an abbreviated version of what I want to talk about today in the religion column in the newspaper last week. If you have, then you won’t be surprised to see I brought this book, Pretty Good Joke Book: A Prairie Home Companion. It’s a thank you gift from National Public Radio featuring humor from Garrison Keillor’s live radio variety show. I’d
like to begin by sharing a couple jokes with you:

Q: Why is it dangerous to upset a Unitarian?
A: He might burn a question mark in your front lawn.
Q: Why are Unitarians such bad singers?
A: Because they’re always reading ahead in the hymnal to see if they agree with it.

As you may already know, I have mixed feelings about these jokes. On the one hand, I’m superexcited when our denomination is mentioned. I feel as though the vast majority of folks don’t even know we exist, so it’s pretty thrilling when we’re mentioned on a nationally broadcast
radio program. And the essence of each of these jokes is pretty spot on. Nonetheless, my hackles rise when we’re called Unitarians because we’re not simply Unitarians . . . at least not since 1961, when the Universalist Church of America and the American Unitarian Association
consolidated. What are we now? Unitarian Universalists, or UUs for short.

I want to focus today on the Universalist strand of our faith. Christian Universalism claims roots that go back to biblical times. Its theological premise is essentially this: an all-loving God would never condemn anyone to eternal hell. Some Universalists have linked this idea to atonement theology, the idea that Jesus Christ died as a sacrifice by which sins would be forgiven. Whereas non-Universalist Christians who have adopted atonement theology would argue that there are specific conditions under which one is saved by this sacrifice—some say you have to accept Jesus Christ as your lord and savior; others, you must be predestined to be among the elect; others, you must be baptized; and so on—Universalist Christians who espouse atonement theology believe that everyone, regardless of what they do or believe, has been saved by Jesus’s death.

Now keep in mind that not all Universalists—indeed not all Christians—believe in atonement theology. My wife, the pastor of Congregational United Church of Christ, is a real-life example of a Christian who rejects the idea that Jesus died for the sins of humanity. If you enjoy talking
about theology, just ask her what she thinks about the blood of the lamb and get ready for an earful. (When I told her about what I planned to say today, she said that I should tell you she thinks atonement theology is “bullarkey” and “damaging archaic rhetoric.” For more details,
see Laura.) So, as I was saying, many Universalists do not ascribe to atonement theology. Listen to this quote from the Christian Universalist Association’s website: “The main purpose of Jesus Christ coming to this world was to proclaim and reveal a God who loves all people with a parental love, who will never give up on any soul, and who has a plan for the reconciliation of all things” (http://www.christianuniversalist.org/resources/articles/history-of-universalism, accessed 8/20/16). Those words focus more on Jesus’s example and teachings and, while they talk about universal salvation, don’t indicate that the cross was a necessary ingredient. Throughout its history, Christianity has had theologians and communities that have preached Universalist teachings. Universalism did not come, however, to be recognized as a formal denomination in the United States until the late eighteenth century. Called the “father of Universalism,” John Murray was minister of the Independent Church of Christ, established in 1779 as the first Universalist church in this country. Murray proclaimed (forgive the genderexclusive
language he uses—it was, after all, the 1700s), Go out into the highways and byways of America, your new country. Give the people,
blanketed with a decaying and crumbling Calvinism, something of your new vision. You may possess only a small light but uncover it, let it shine, use it in order to bring more light and understanding to the hearts and minds of men. Give them, not hell, but hope and courage. Do not push them deeper into their theological despair, but preach the kindness and everlasting love of God. (Charles A. Howe, The Larger Faith: A Short History of American Universalism, 9)

By 1790, there were at least seventeen Universalist ministers sharing this message of hope. And, although there were not that many formally organized Universalist societies, there were significant numbers of people who believed in the Universalist doctrine in a variety of denominations—Moravians, Quakers, Methodists, Baptists, and so on. Many of these folks gathered for two weeks in 1790 for what is now known as the Philadelphia Convention, where they agreed on Articles of Faith, which included the statement, “We believe in One God, infinite
in all his perfections; and that these perfections are modifications of infinite, adorable, incomprehensible, and unchangeable Love” (Howe 11).
It is this emphasis on love that I find so compelling, so necessary. Whether or not we believe in universal salvation, if we believe that what is most sacred is love, then our worldview is shaped by this belief, sculpting in turn how we live and move and have our being. In the case of the
early American Universalists, for example, at the same convention, they also passed a resolution for the abolition of slavery, saying, “We believe it to be inconsistent with the union of the human race. . .to hold any part of our fellow-creatures in bondage” (Howe 12). How
many other denominations at that time had the courage to speak out against slavery? How many even implicitly supported it? The Universalist movement in the U.S. continued to grow as people responded to the message of all-inclusive love, of not hell but hope. Helping to spread the message were periodicals, one of which was the Universalist Magazine, founded by influential Universalist preacher Hosea Ballou in 1819. (We’ll be reading words by Ballou as we extinguish the chalice later.) This magazine exists to this day though it has undergone mergers and name changes. You might be familiar with it now as UU World. Thanks to the work of this and other magazines, the evangelism of various Universalist preachers, and the appeal of Universalism’s message, by the 1840s there were 853 Universalist societies and 512 clergy.
With an increase in numbers came an increase in influence. Motivated to put love into action, the Universalists worked for the positive transformation of society: supporting the establishment of public schools and creating their own non-sectarian coeducational schools;
continuing to speak out for the abolition of slavery; advocating prison reform; and championing women’s suffrage.
The Universalists’ commitment to equality strengthened and was evident in its own operations. Olympia Brown, who wrote the words we read earlier in this service, was ordained in 1863 with full denominational authority—she was the first woman in this country to graduate from a
theological school and the first full-time ordained minister. By 1920, when the United States finally passed the 19th Amendment, giving women the right to vote, the Universalists had ordained eighty-eight female ministers. The Unitarians had a bit of catching up to do with only
forty-two. And we know that even now, over 150 years later, many denominations still do not recognize women as capable of having full ministerial authority.

As the Unitarian and Universalist denominations evolved, they found themselves becoming more and more alike. For instance, the Unitarians, were involved in many of the same struggles for social justice that the Universalists were engaged in. The two denominations started talking
about the possibility of joining forces as long ago as the Civil War era. After all, not all Universalists were Trinitarian, and many Unitarians believed in universal salvation. But there was a social and educational chasm between the two denominations. Unitarians were, as a
whole, wealthy and formally educated. Universalists were more likely to be self-educated farmers and tradespeople though, by this time, the denomination’s ranks did include college presidents, bankers, and other members of the more elite. Also, while some members of both
denominations held identical views, not all did. Thomas Starr King, who himself was a minister in both denominations (Starr King School for the Ministry in Berkeley is named after him), summarized the fundamental difference as this: “Universalists believe that God is too good to
damn people, and the Unitarians believe that people are too good to be damned by God” (http://www.uua.org/beliefs/history/our-historic-faith, accessed 8/20/16).

A few decades later, however, the early twentieth century saw increased cooperation between the two denominations as they became fellow members of the International Congress of Religious Liberals, the oldest international interfaith group in the world, known today as the
International Association for Religious Freedom (IARF). And in 1933 the Free Church Fellowship was established. This was a new ecumenical group to which Unitarian and Universalist churches could belong. Not an outright merger, it was an outright failure, lasting only four
years due to a lack of funds, members, clear mission, and interest. Universalism continued to grow and change, and by the mid-1900s, a new liberal wing appeared that espoused “emergent Universalism,” moving beyond Christianity to universal religion. The gap between Unitarians and Universalists had continued to narrow, and in 1961 the two denominations merged, becoming the Unitarian Universalist Association, or UUA. As we know, the consolidation has been largely successful. The UUA is still around more than fifty years later. But there have been challenges. For instance, soon after the merger, two Universalist seminaries were closed, causing great bitterness among many with Universalist backgrounds, who felt they were being “run over roughshod” by those from Unitarian backgrounds, “whom they charged with insensitivity, especially for referring to Unitarian Universalists simply as ‘Unitarians.’ At one time this practice became so common even at
meetings of the UUA Board of Trustees that fines were imposed on any trustee who succumbed to it” (Howe 131).

So I want to be sure that we don’t repeat the errors of those insensitive Unitarians of yesteryear. I want us to remember that we are Unitarian Universalists. Why is it so important to claim our full name? Well, for starters, Unitarians are one thing. Universalists are another. And Unitarian
Universalists are yet another thing altogether. When these two traditions merged, they became more than the sum of their parts, and the new denomination that they formed has not remain static since 1961. It is a dynamic, evolving organization that has incorporated not only
Unitarian and Universalist values but also wisdom from other world religions, secular philosophies, and the individual’s direct experience of transcending mystery and wonder. When I say I’m a UU, I don’t necessarily mean that I reject Jesus’s divinity as a Unitarian would
(although I might). I don’t necessarily mean that I believe that all human beings are loved by God as a Universalist would (although I might). When I say I’m a UU, I mean that I belong to an association of many faith communities who have declared that we need not think alike in order
to love alike. When I say I’m a UU,

  • I covenant to affirm and promote our principles like the free and responsible search for
    truth and meaning,
  • I draw on a variety of sources like the words and deeds of prophetic people which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love,
  • I identify as a person open to religious pluralism, committed to critical thought, and dedicated to radical inclusiveness.

Calling ourselves Unitarian Universalists fully embraces what we are instead of claiming a fraction of what we used to be if we try to abbreviate by using only our “first name.” From a logical perspective, I think it doesn’t make a lot of sense to give pride of place to the Unitarians because my guess is that there are probably more Universalists among us if we are using those terms to refer to the underlying tenets of those two traditions. The original primary focus of Unitarianism was the oneness of God (in contrast to the doctrine of the trinity). How
many UUs today are monotheistic? Among our numbers are non-theistic Buddhists, polytheistic pagans, atheists, agnostics, and many others in addition to the monotheists. And I’d wager among the UU monotheists there are some who are actually Trinitarians! By contrast,
I think that most (but, of course, not all!) UUs, even if they don’t believe in universal salvation, believe that people are not condemned to hell for all eternity. From my perspective, that makes them Universalists.

Perhaps most importantly, I believe that some of the most critical underpinnings of our faith come directly from our Universalist past. For quite some time now, the Northeast Iowa Unitarian Universalist Fellowship has often been explicitly naming which UU principle each service explores. And one of the principles we’ve seen most frequently, one that is clearly near and dear to our collective heart, is the inherent worth and dignity of every person, an idea that is predominantly Universalist in character. We’re soon going to sing a song whose words were written by a Congregationalist minister. (By the way, the Congregationalists also made overtures to the Universalists in the 1920s suggesting closer cooperation or even possible union between the two denominations.) Though the lyricist belonged to the Congregationalist denomination, he is clearly also a Universalist. As we sing, I hope you reflect on how the words reflect Universalist themes: the example of Jesus as a call to serve humanity; an emphasis on the commonalities that transcend boundaries be those divisions country, race, or socioeconomic status; a focus on all-inclusive love; and a yearning for social justice. If we hold fast to the lessons of Universalism, imagine the world we can help to create.