Jesus was a humanist.
I don’t think that word means what you think it means
Many of you in our congregations consider yourselves humanists.
You appreciate the humanist bent in some of the songs included in our 30 year-old hymnal, Singing the Living Tradition. You are proud of the Unitarian ministers who signed on to the Humanist Manifesto in 1933. You love that we draw wisdom from the prophetic words and deeds of people and not just from holy texts.
Yes, there are many humanists in our congregations. I am one of them.
I am a humanist.
I am a theist.
Yes. It is entirely possible to be a humanist and believe in God. Because humanism does not exclude belief in a higher power. In the early 20th century, John Dietrich, considered the father of religious humanism, spoke of a ‘cosmic theism’, which interprets God as the indwelling power in the universe rather than an individual, separate power. Dietrich suggests that there is no conflict between humanism and theism, because a concern for the human condition is not in opposition to believing in God (however you define that word). He suggested simply that we look not to supernatural events to save us but to put our energies into doing that which saves others.1
So I don’t know what it means when theists have to hide in the corner after coffee hour to talk about God, or congregants can accuse preachers of using “that word”, or worship committees brace themselves when services that talk about theism (and *gasp* Christianity) are on the calendar, or worship leaders try to find any way to talk about Easter without mentioning Jesus.
All of which I have been a direct party to.
THIS IS NOT WHAT WE DO.
We are a pluralist faith – a faith built on Christian ideas of universal salvation and the power of reason to understand God is one. A faith that understands that those theologies ultimately grow beyond Christianity to include the wisdom and celebration of religious traditions around the world, many of which are also have some form of indwelling power. A faith that even includes those who do not believe there is an indwelling power but who appreciate the wisdom and community of humanity.
We are a pluralist faith, a humanist faith – not an atheist faith.
I know I’m not saying anything your ministers haven’t said a hundred times from the pulpit/in emails/in newsletter columns. The reason I’m saying this now is because those of you who demand the rest of us not celebrate our holy days, not say the G word (or other words of reverence), or even talk about theism are acting COUNTER TO OUR FAITH.
We are not an atheist faith.
We are a humanist faith.
Meaning, we know our concern is not what happens after we die – our concern is here, on earth, now, amongst each other. And through the many sources of wisdom – including sacred texts – we find that wisdom and confidence to do all we are called to do as humans whose central value is Love and whose central ethic is putting those values into action.
And yes, I know some of you are come-in-ers, having been harmed by bad theology in other religious settings. Some of you knew words like “God” and “prayer” and “saved” and even “holy” as weapons for spiritual harm. I do not deny that for some of you, those words are still a struggle. But that is your work to do, to be able to hear them without being triggered. We have resources to help, of course, and one of them is worship.
When we talk about the Easter story from a Unitarian Universalist pulpit for example, we are longing to reframe the story and the texts in ways that connect both with their original intent and with our modern, humanist take on the events of that week 2000+ years ago. You won’t hear an altar call after, you won’t hear a demand that you believe, you won’t hear anyone suggesting if you don’t believe you’re going to hell. You might hear about Jesus’s powerful ministry and call to feed the hungry, care for the infirm, shelter the stranger, love your neighbor.
Many of you who are atheists in our congregations already know this. You’ve experienced it year after year after year.
So why is it still such a big deal?
Your ministers are spending so much time on this non-issue – from listening to the constant complaints to pastoral calls with those who wonder if their faith, which is at the very least agnostic, is even welcome. And every time you say you don’t hear enough humanist content, what you mean is you don’t hear enough atheist content - because really, everything you hear from a Unitarian Universalist pulpit is humanist, because we are a humanistic faith.
And we are a pluralist faith.
That means you’re not always going to hear things that are written just for you. But I can guaran-damn-tee you that it’s holding, comforting, and engaging someone else. THAT is what we are about.
I’m begging you: STOP FORCING ATHEISM ONTO UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISM.
Your minister will thank you. Your music director and religious educator will thank you. Your fellow congregants will thank you. And your faith will be richer.
I’m paraphrasing and synthesizing here - a bit of what I learned in classes with and books by Gary Dorrien, what I learned from William Murry’s book Reason and Reverence, and other reading that happens when you’re on a ministerial path. I’m not inclined to do a great deal of additional research for what is not an academic paper.
A funny thing happened on my way to reading this piece ... In conversation with the author, I learned that there are a number of grouchy people who write her lengthy, pissy emails trying to argue the points she makes in this space.
Why don't they leave comments here, you may ask? Well, because in order to comment in this space, one has to have a paid subscription, which means that Rev. Debus gets some compensation for her work. I am a subscriber. I didn't give a ton of money, but I gave what I could afford, because I support considered, forward-thinking commentary about the state and future of my denomination.
But there are some who don't like what Rev. Debus has to say here, but are unwilling to donate a couple bucks for the privilege to comment here, so they write long, angry diatribes about how she is wrong, and impudent, and uppity, and wrong-headed and should really know better and, frankly, know her place, which is inferred to mean that she ought to sit down, shut up, and let others (namely them) speak.
Only, here's the thing, fellas: She pays for this site. She pays for the bandwidth and licensing and all the other techno-paperworky-stuff that makes it exist. She publishes her own stuff and can say whatever she damn well pleases, and has no obligation to respond to, or even read, the unpaid, unsolicited shit that flies in over the transom. I am her friend, so I support her when hurtful things come into her desktop uninvited.
Y'all choose to read this stuff. You've got to opt in to see what's happening here. She doesn't write personal emails to you insulting your intelligence, education, or capacity to speak with authority on the topics at hand. She has a graduate degree in this stuff, folks. She's read the old stuff, the more recent stuff, and the emerging stuff. It's her job to be educated about our history as well as emerging scholarship and trends in the evolution of our pluralist faith.
and one more thing? If I have somehow inspired somebody to cough up a few bucks in order to be able to rant here like I have done, keep in mind that this is still Rev. Debus' space and she can permit or forbid whatever he heart desires, including me and the stuff I've just written.
Engage in respectful discourse if you like, but it would reflect better on your character if you stopped flinging dogshit over the fence into her yard, hm?
Just sent this to the facilitator of the Huumanist Affinity Group at the congregation I serve. He liked it. It may be a conversation starter for the group.