Our Humanist Heritage

There was a time when humanism ruled the Unitarian world, just as the giant dinosaurs ruled the ancient jungles and forests. Born of years of controversy over the importance and even the reality of God and Jesus, humanism thundered into the swamps of mushy theology and devoured all vestiges of theism, deism, and liberal Christianity. Once the first Humanist Manifesto was signed by some of the most significant Unitarian clergy of the 1930's, Unitarianism became a dry arid plain of rationalism and militant atheism. Thankfully, today we are witnessing a rebirth of spirituality here in UU land and soon that old dinosaur called Humanism will go the way of all the other dinosaurs. At least that's the way some of our people tell the story of our humanist heritage.

I'm glad to say that the report of the demise of humanism is grossly exaggerated. Humanism isn't dead in UU land or anywhere else in America, despite the best efforts of its critics and enemies. Humanism is alive and well, and is so deeply embedded in our worldview that we don't even know it's there. The truth is that every person in this room holds dear fundamental humanist values. Does this mean that we all dwell together in theological love and peace? Not exactly! In fact, over the past thirty years, our congregations have become more diverse and we've seen some very painful splits over issues of theology. In the past five years or so, we've had some new congregations that have been intentionally Christian or Wiccan. Some UU's like to clarify their personal theology and so we have "hyphenated" UU's and special associations for UU-Christians, UU-Buddhists, UU-Jews, UU-Pagans, and of course UU-Humanists

Despite these labels, you'll find that every one of these groups is founded on humanist values that are shared not only across different UU theologies, but also across mainstream Christian and Jewish congregations. So when I speak anout our humanist heritage, this heritage belongs not only to us as Unitarian Universalists, but really to all 21^st century western people.

Although humanism has come into its fullest expression in the last 100 years, we can trace the history of this philosophy from ancient Greece and Rome. Humanism disappeared from view during the period after the fall of the Roman Empire when scholarship and the values of the Greeks and Romans were lost in feudal Europe. It surfaced again in the Reformation and the Renaissance, and has been growing ever since.

In our own history, humanism truly gained a hold in the 1920's. Curtis Reese and John Dietrich were both Unitarian ministers who were trying for formulate a new approach to theology when they met in 1917 at a meeting of the Western Conference of Unitarian Churches in Des Moines, Iowa. Dietrich wanted to reconstruct religions so that it would be in harmony with science. Reese wanted to get rid of the hierarchical constructs of traditional Christianity, even unseating God from that metaphorical throne in the heaven. Initially he called his approach "Democratic" but eventually the label "Humanism" seemed to be a more accurate description of his views.

One of Reese's more controversial ideas was that the basic content of religious liberalism is spiritual freedom. I want to say that again: the content of liberal religion is spiritual freedom. In other words, freedom is not a stance, not a description, not an attitude of liberal religion, it is the very essence of liberal religion. Where other religions have creeds, doctrines, dogma, and sacraments, we have freedom. Reese also claimed that liberalism embraces the "essentially natural character of religions." For a liberal, the most authentic and truthful faith was a purely naturalistic faith which did not rely on supernatural beings or divine revelation for its faith and values.

Reese also claimed that the "true believer" of humanism would be committed and loyal to worthy causes and goals in order that a free and positive personality may be developed, intelligently associated, and cosmically related. I'm not certain what is meant by the words "cosmically related," but the idea that Resse presents is that by working for the good of humanity through direct engagement with the problems of society that our personalities will develop according to their potential. Reese was an activist and be believed that action was a vital part of religious life.

The full and free development of the personality is Reese's equivalent to what a Christian would call salvation. It is the highest goal, the end of liberal faith. Personality, not the soul, was the human aspect that he held in the highest regard, and each personality was to be valued. Thus our reason for being was to develop the personality to the fullest of our capacity, free of institutions which often had to be outgrown -- just as a butterfly outgrows the chrysalis.

Of course, Reese wasn't the only voice defining and expounding Unitarian ideas. There were still staunch theists among the clergy and layity, people who believed in a personal God. But their ideas were losing ground as the world struggled to make sense of the horrors of the First World War. The world was changing on all fronts and these changes had a profound effect on traditional Western religions.

Humanism's butterfly burst out of the chrysalis with the publication of the Humanist Manifesto in 1933. This Manifesto proclaimed fifteen theses as the core of Humanism. Here is a summary of these fifteen points. (I've adapted the language to make it gender inclusive.)

• Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
  
• Humanists accept the Darwinian theory of evolution and reject the traditional dualism of body and mind.
  
• Humanism recognizes that individuals are shaped by the culture they are born into.
  
• Humanism asserts that scientific understanding of the universe makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Humanism does not claim that our knowledge of the universe and humanity is complete, but it asserts that all new knowledge must meet the requirements of rational study. Such new discoveries have value as they speak to human needs.
  
• Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are significant to human life. Nothing human is alien to the religious. We deny any distinction between the sacred and the secular.
  
• Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now.
  
• The humanist finds his or her religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being. We deny that there are uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
  
• Humankind will learn to face the crises of life in terms of a knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reason will be fostered by education and supported by custom.
  
• Believing that religion must work for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
  
• Religious Humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life.
  
• The humanists are firmly convinced that a social system based on materialism and the profit motive is inadequate and that a radical change is needed. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
  
• We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few.

Let me remind you again that this is an edited version of the fifteen points of the first Humanist Manifesto. There was a sentence in the original about socialism that I deleted as well as a few statements of how humanism is different from traditional religion. But I hope that I've been faithful to the intent of the original.

This document isn't perfect. To modern ears it may overvalue the intellect as our best way of knowing and valuing. It also seems to set human beings at the top of the great chain of being; what's good for humanity is what is most valued. In light of our increasing concern for the ecosystem as a whole, this emphasis on human beings is bothersome to some. Despite these concerns, I would hazard to say that the majority of us sitting here would find most of these ideas acceptable. And in many ways, this statement mirrors the attitude of most Americans; that religion is concerned with human happiness and fulfillment of human potential.

Exactly forty years after the First Humanist Manifest was published, the Second Humanist Manifesto was released to the public. This creation of document was, in the words of one of the authors, "a Herculean task." Like every other school of thought, humanism had fragmented and there were many more opinions about the true expressions and concerns that were appropriate to Humanism.

The second manifesto spoke to a broad spectrum of human needs and concerns. Like the first manifesto, this new statement begins with a statement that humanism puts humanity, not God, first. There is a strongly worded rejection of traditional religions and an affirmation that reason and intelligence are the most effective instruments that humans possess.

A large section of the document speaks to the value and rights of the individual and a renunciation of discrimination due to ethnicity, race, class, gender, or sexual orientation. The authors uphold the separation of church and state and the right to democratic process. They speak of the need for a world community that works to meet the needs of all people while recognizing the value of different cultures and ethnic groups. The manifesto includes a warning that we must plan for diminishing natural resources, and that we must recognize that the planet is truly one connected eco-system.

Thousands of people have signed this document, including a number of UU clergy. But there were also a number of powerful opponents who used this document to attack the "liberal establishment." "Secular Humanism" became the T-Rex of the late twentieth century with its one-world government, its advocacy of sexual freedom, and the acceptance of homosexuality. And we have to wonder what impact this document has had on the world in general as we've seen the rise of fundamentalism across the globe and the increasing interest in what some call "para-normal" psychology and a variety of so called "New Age" spiritualities. It almost seems that a significant percentage of the world's population is moving away from the values and ideals of these two declarations for reason and human freedom.

There are complaints that Humanism is losing its rightful place within our own association too. In 1996, the UU publication World included an article called "The Marginalized Majority." The point of this article is that those who claim a humanist orientation (about half of all UU's) feel that they are being discounted by the people coming into our congregations and even by the leadership of the UUA. According to The Rev. Khoren Arisian, one of the leaders of the Humanist movement and a former Unitarian minister, the result of the shift away from humanism is that Unitarianism is losing its tradition of rigorous intellectual character in favor of a new, eclectic spirituality. We have become so broad and so accepting of all points of view, says Arisian, that we have lost our center.

Some of this sense of tension and marginalization seems to be the result of a softening and broadening of our understanding of humanism itself. I know UU ministers who identify themselves as "Christian Humanists" and "Biblical Humanists." This is baffling to those who claim that part of the core identity of Humanism is the rejection of a supreme or divine being. So in the eyes of some, the ministers I just mentioned and others like them, are not real humanists because they don't share all of the humanist ideology.

According to the Rev. John Weston, now the Director of Settlement for the UUA office of ministry, another reason for the decline of Humanism is in the postmodern era the idea of truth with a capital "T" has fallen out of favor. He says,

The message of modernism was "Truth is clean, pure, and simple;" the message of Postmodernism is that "Truth is messy, tainted and ambiguous, Even religious truth."

I'm aware of tension that exists within some of our congregations and within our ministerial association. My own feeling is that the conflicts have arisen in part from the constraints that some UU's have experienced in congregations that were formed in the heyday of Humanism. The long-time members of these congregations are most comfortable with a particular style of service and a vocabulary that has no place for traditional religious language. Words and rituals that bear the taint of traditional religion are unacceptable. This can affect all aspects of congregational life. I've been caught up in heated debates over church school curricula that are based on the Jewish and Christian Scriptures or that explored the ways that different religions and cultures depict God. Humanists in the congregation felt strongly that such materials had no place in a UU program

Our broad theological diversity is a challenge for any minister, and some of us claim that if we manage to trouble or offend every segment of the congregation at some point in the course of a year, then we've covered all our bases. I'd prefer to acknowledge that we are all indebted to our triple heritage of Judaism, Christianity, and Humanism. I know that my life has been enriched by all three ways of understanding my human nature and the world around me. I admit that I move freely between these three houses, never fully committed to any one, but reasonably comfortable in each. And I am deeply grateful that I find nourishment, rest, and good companions in each, despite the tensions and contradictions that lie between them. I suppose it would be easier simply to dwell in one house, but my nature doesn't allow me that luxury of certainty.

Despite the resistance and even resentment of those who have championed the Humanist cause for years, Humanism is being re-framed and re-formed as a result of the changes in our wider culture and a shift in what we value in human experience. Reason and the intellect are no longer automatically given primacy in our post-modern society. I'd argue that in our UU history, this on-going process of re-definition and re working our core values has been the power of our story. We began the long journey to Humanism by re-framing Christianity, much to the dismay of many within the movement. The emphasis on individualism, so dear to the Transcendentalists, was eventually overshadowed by the need to form institutions that would see the Unitarian movement into the next century. So too will Humanism go through a process of evolution that may alter its shape and focus. But I pray that we never lose the sense of gratitude to the courageous men and women who have been at the forefront of the movement, helping to create a world where human freedom and responsibility are still valued, and the goal of a shared life in a shared world is still a cherished dream.

May it be so.

UUC Home Page

Reverend BrownlieHome Page