The Sources of Our Faith: Humanism

A sermon delivered at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Blacksburg, VA), January 11, 2009, by the Reverend Christine Brownlie.

America is noted for being an exceptionally “religious” nation. Religion and conflict over religious values infuses our public life — consider the current controversy over the prayer before the Roanoke Council meetings, or the ongoing dispute over the Biblical account of creation vs. Darwin’s theory of evolution.

If you were to ask a Christian, Jew, or Muslim to describe their faith, he or she would probably begin with some statement describing the theology, which includes ideas and claims about the divine and what should be held as sacred. If you asked them to explain what their faith requires of them in their day to day life, they would expound on the laws or teachings that tell the believers how to live a good life. Most followers will claim that at least God gave some of these laws to humanity. These treasures of the faith are available to any seeker through sacred texts of the tradition.

Unitarian Universalism is radically different, in that it locates primary religious authority in the individual. We have no established set of doctrines or creeds that you must accept to be a Unitarian Universalist. We don’t hold one text as the only source of truth. Many of us would reference a document that we call Our Principles and Purposes, but if you read the first sentence carefully, you’ll find this document is a covenant among the member congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association. Our Principles and Purposes was not intended to be used as a personal creed, although many of us turn to this document for guidance. What’s more, this covenantal statement was not given to us by an all-knowing divine being. A committee of (fallible) human beings composed it, and the committee called the UUA Commission on Appraisal is revising it. Our faith doesn’t claim an infallible source for truth; our search for truth is ongoing, and it depends more on reason than revelation.

The genesis of sermon was a comment that someone made to me a couple of months ago. We were discussing how our way of doing religion is quite different from the Bible and the Jesus-focused tradition that this individual had grown up in and had then left. This new seeker had read our Principles and Purposes and was curious about one of the sources mentioned in the second section of the document:

“Humanist teachings, which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit.”

I’m not surprised that the reference to Humanism is puzzling to some folks. It could be that many of us are simply not familiar with Humanism as a bona-fide philosophy. Maybe we remember the big dust-up in the 70s and 80s over “secular humanism,” which some thought was a dire threat to the moral fiber our nation. Many people believe that Humanism came out of the era of rebellion against the traditional values and assumptions and is simply an attempt to codify that in-your-face attitude.

Not so!

The fundamental ideas of what we now call Humanism have been around since the ancient Greeks and Romans. Protagoras, who lived sometime during the 5^th century BCE, is famous for his statement, “Man is the measure of all things.” What he meant by these words is that human beings are capable of discerning the good and that our ideas of justice and the right way to live come not from the “gods” but from our own ability to reason. Other great minds, like Socrates and Plato, also held that human reason was a reliable tool for discerning the best way to live an ethical life.

Artistotle and Democritus believed that natural forces controlled the world. Storms, earthquakes, and other natural calamities were not the result of divine intervention or expressions of the wrath of some divine being.

These radical thinkers taught that the human capacities of observations and reason could lead to an understanding of these forces and even discover the laws that controlled them.

The threads that these ancient philosophers spun were taken up by some of the most highly regarded thinkers of the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment and woven into new ideas that would bring about profound changes in how people understood the world, including the power of the human mind to discover truth with a capital “T.” This growing respect for human reason in matters of ethics and science led to the claim that individuals had the right to make up their own minds about religious matters. As a result, the power of the Church to force the acceptance of doctrines and creeds began to crumble.

It also led to a more human-centered philosophy of the purpose and meaning of life. The common understanding of God as a sort of puppeteer or stage manager who was in charge of everything that happened to every individual no longer made sense in the light of new knowledge and the new ideas that were being developed. For some intellectuals, God was best thought of as a watchmaker who created the universe and put it in motion but who had no further involvement in the project. Human beings were on their own, with no divine savior or judge-like being who would send them to eternal torment. Deeds were becoming more important than creeds.

Our Unitarian heritage was influenced by many elements of Humanist thought. William Ellery Channing, the first self-described Unitarian minister in America, strongly defended the use of reason in religious matters. His idea of salvation called on every person to develop an ethical character, along with whatever talents and gifts he or she possessed. The goal was to live a good and moral life, and to use one’s abilities to better the lives of other people. Channing’s ideas were a powerful influence. Unitarians became involved in some of the great reform movements of the 1800s.

As the powers of reason and science led to new discoveries and to startling new paradigms, some came to the conclusion that God did not exist. Educated people in America, Europe, and other parts of the world found that the Humanist perspective simply made more sense and offered more hope than did the traditional orthodoxies. As the movement grew, there was a desire to name and claim the fundamentals of this philosophy/religion and present it to the world as an acceptable way of understanding and living life as a full and free human being. This desire led to the creation of a document called the Humanist Manifesto that was published in 1933. Two more iterations would follow: the second in 1978 the third in 2000. (This page in Wikipedia has links to all three versions.)

Manifesto I is a bold and ambitious statement of the principles and expected benefits of Humanism. Here, and very briefly, are some of the highlights of the document that speak to me. (You may be startled to see the words “Religious Humanists” or “”Religious Humanism” and I’ll have more to say about that a little later.)

The document beings with the statement that Religious Humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created. The authors go on to say

“The findings of modern science make any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values unacceptable.”

The purpose of human life is the complete realization of human personality as well as its “development and fulfillment in the here and now.” There is no place of eternal reward or punishment. In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer, the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being. It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural. Humanism is described as life affirming and finding hope in the possibilities of life, not just for a few favored people, but for all humankind.

Should anyone be confused by the words “religious humanism,” the authors provided this clarification.

“Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation — all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.”

Among the thirty-four signers of this first Manifesto were a number of Unitarian ministers. I can’t help but wonder if the presence of clergy influenced the vocabulary of the document.

Humanist Manifesto I was considered by many to be bold and shocking in the proclamation of human authority and its optimistic view of human potential. 40 years later, Humanist Manifesto II offered a less sanguine view of human nature. The authors noted the display of human brutality all over the world since the publication of Humanist Manifesto I. They also acknowledged that Humanism had lost whatever purity it had back in 1933. Freedom of thought had overcome the constraints of doctrines and fear of being tossed out of the church or family. By the 1970s, many people claimed a connection to Humanism — even as they held on to their traditional values. It remained for the movement to claim them, and the authors were willing to do so — but only if these fellow travelers held to some fundamental principles.

The second Manifesto is long. It affirms the supreme values of science, reason, and human life, and it calls for justice in many areas of human life. Here are some words from the introductory essay to the Manifesto.

“The next century can be and should be the humanistic century. Dramatic scientific, technological, and ever-accelerating social and political changes crowd our awareness. We have virtually conquered the planet, explored the moon, overcome the natural limits of travel and communication; we stand at the dawn of a new age, ready to move farther into space and perhaps inhabit other planets. Using technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, significantly modify our behavior, alter the course of human evolution and cultural development, unlock vast new powers, and provide humankind with unparalleled opportunity for achieving an abundant and meaningful life.”

These are remarkably optimistic words. But the tone quickly changes as the authors examine the realities of their time.

“The future is, however, filled with dangers. In learning to apply the scientific method to nature and human life, we have opened the door to ecological damage, over-population, dehumanizing institutions, totalitarian repression, and nuclear and bio- chemical disaster. Faced with apocalyptic prophesies and doomsday scenarios, many flee in despair from reason and embrace irrational cults and theologies of withdrawal and retreat”

The document calls for a wider use of the methods of science, but the value of compassion as well as reason. It declares once again that the ultimate goal of Humanism is the fulfillment of the human potential for good and creativity that is found in every human being.

Humanist Manifesto III also called “Humanism and Its Aspirations,” published in 2003 begins with this far more modest statement

“Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.”

The authors go on to elaborate on these six modest and not terribly controversial themes

• Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis.

• Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change.

• Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience.

• Life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals.

• Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships.

• Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness.

Many Unitarian Universalists would claim that they are Humanists by virtue of their concern for this life, their commitment to the findings of science, and their use of reason and experience in discerning what is good or ethical. Some would also acknowledge that a sense of the divine is a part of their personal faith and is experienced as a sense of awe, wonder, and love. Based on my recent conversations with friends and family, many people who attend traditional Christian and Jewish services are also influenced by the basic tenants of Humanism. Heresy seems to be the common denominator in all liberal religions in modern America.

As Unitarian Universalists, we create our faith as we journey through life and all that it offers us. We are not a church of doctrines, but of discoveries. We do not place our faith in creeds but in human compassion, courage and commitment. We know that we are fallible, but we also recognize the human capacity for generosity and kindness.

Your faith is what you make of it. Be mindful of how you grow it and how you live it day to day. I pray that whatever your beliefs may be, that they lead you to an authentic, joyful, and fulfilling life.

May it be so!