Henry David Thoreau and the Simple Life

Luther Elmore

August 14, 2011

Text of this sermon is not available. Click the play button to listen. Audio is also available for free download at iTunes. Keyword: austin uu

Henry David Thoreau is generally recognized as one of us, a UU. He most famously lived for two years at Walden Pond and wrote of his life and observances while there. His quest at Walden and at other times in his life reflect a search for meaning and simplicity that we can apply to our lives today.

Sometimes you just need a good exorcism

Marisol Caballero

August 7, 2011

Text of this sermon is not available. Click the play button to listen. Audio of this sermon is also available for free download on iTunes. Keyword: austin uu

 

Ministerial Candidate, Marisol Caballero, is a life-long UU and Native Texan. She recently returned to Texas after spending the past 2 years in California, doing one year of hospital chaplaincy at USCF Medical Center in San Francisco, and one year as a Ministerial Intern at Neighborhood and Throop UU Churches of Pasadena. In 2010, Mari, as many call her, was honored to “fly solo” as Neighborhood UU Church’s Summer Minister. Mari earned her B.A. from St. Edward’s University in 2003 and her Masters of Divinity (M.Div.) from Union Theological Seminary in New York City in 2007. She now lives in Cedar Park with her long-term partner, Chanel, and their cat, Peppercorn Cottonpaws, and works as substitute teacher in the Austin school district and as a chaplain at St. David’s Hospital. She was a member of this congregation for a time during college.

Worship Service: “Sometimes You Just Need a Good Exorcism,”

Marisol Caballero, UU Ministerial Candidate

During my time as a hospital chaplain in San Francisco, I encountered rituals that were quite different from my own spiritual practices. In what ways can such rituals inform our own theologies and what lessons do they hold for Unitarian Universalists about compassion and renewal?

 

So let it be written

Eric Hepburn

July 31, 2011

Prayer

Somewhere out there

On a dusty shelf

Or a spinning disk

On parchment aged

Or in pixels bright

There are words waiting for you

These words were written for you

And when you find them

They will touch your heart

And change your life.

Somewhere in there

Between the synapses

Of your frontal lobe

Or floating around

In the recesses of you consciousness

Are words destined for another

Words that will touch their heart

And change their life

It is your duty to record them

So that they may be found.

Somewhere out there

Is a better world

waiting to be described

We spend our days and our nights

Imagining this world

When we are wise,

We record these imaginings

For each other

To bring this dream one step

Closer to reality.

When we are unwise,

We think that

all of these imaginings

are just stories.

We pray this in the name of everything that is holy, and that is, precisely, everything.

Sermon: “So let it be written…”

“So let it be written, so let it be done.”

I have to start this morning with an amusing admission, I chose the title of today’s sermon off the cuff after being approached by Vicki and Dwayne who hoped that I would tie the sermon into the end of our Hogwarts Summer Camp and our Bookspring summer social action project.

I thought it was from the bible. I thought it was from Moses or one of the other Old Testament prophets… But, as I was doing research for the sermon I found out that the quote was actually from Cecil B. DeMille’s epic film The Ten Commandments. Furthermore, it was not one of God’s noble representatives, but the Pharaoh who utters this famous line. Here is the quote in context:

The Egyptian Master Builder Baka asks Pharaoh, “Will you lose a throne because Moses builds a city?” Pharaoh Rameses answers, “The city that he builds shall bear my name, the woman that he loves shall bear my child. So let it be written, so let it be done.”

Well, you can thank Vicki and Dwayne for saving you from the torturous sermon on self-righteousness that I was planning. And you can thank me for drawing the title of a sermon on the sacredness of all texts from a movie line that exemplifies the petty vengefulness of tyrants.

Being unfortunately trained in the contemporary American academic tradition, my first thought when I decided to write a sermon about the sacredness of all texts was to be critical of its weakest point, which, to my mind is more or less, the Harlequin Romance Novel. Can I make the case that even the schmaltz-iest novel is a sacred text? Now I want to clarify that I don’t believe that the success or failure of the proposition that all texts are sacred rests on whether or not I prove the holiness of the romance novel. However, I would like to challenge you to think about whatever genre or type of writing that you find most banal and least likely to be sacred. Must not the author of this dubious work, by necessity, confront the human condition? Does not this topic, this domain of inquiry speak to some pertinent aspect of our shared reality and thus derive its readership? What else is there? We are all at different points in our journey, and so it ought not be too surprising that we find a wide variety of different material insightful in different ways and at different times in our lives.

I think that the more important differentiation, in terms of sacredness, or to echo our prayer closing from Jack Harris-Bonham, holiness, is not what we read but how we read it. It is not which book we select, but why. It is not the level of enlightenment or spiritual power of the author, but how well the book resonates with our own spiritual journey that matters. Ultimately, the sacredness of any particular text to us is about whether or not, and to what extent, we allow the text to change us…

From this perspective, we can come to recognize the transformative potential of essentially all human writings. To be sure, some texts will have objectively greater transformative breadth and depth, but this describes a continuum of sacredness, not an either-or proposition. For the sexually repressed, salvation might just come in the form of a Harlequin.

In the spirit of this revelation, I would like to share with you some of the writings that have changed me.

I want to frame these writings using Ursula Le Guin’s introduction to her novel The Left Hand of Darkness. I started reading science fiction and fantasy when I was twelve, but it wasn’t until I read this introduction in my thirties that I understood why it had always had such a hold on me.

 “Science fiction is often described, and even defined, as extrapolative… This book is not extrapolative. If you like you can read it, and a lot of other science fiction, as a thought-experiment. Let’s say (says Mary Shelley) that a young doctor creates a human being in his laboratory; let’s say (says Philip K. Dick) that the Allies lost the second world war; let’s say this or that is such and so, and see what happens… In a story so conceived, the moral complexity proper to the modern novel need not be sacrificed, nor is there a built-in dead end; thought and intuition can move freely within bounds set only by the terms of the experiment, which may be very large indeed.” 

I remember concretely the moment when I first read this paragraph. I was lying in bed reading, excited to start a new book by an author I was just discovering. I remember feeling a bit breathless, I remember laying the book down on my stomach. I remember closing my eyes and flashing through twenty years of my favorite books. I remember realizing that my favorites were the ones where this counterfactual universe, this imagined world, produced in me a type or degree of moral complexity, sometimes even moral clarity, beyond what I had ever experienced in reading traditional literary fiction.

For example, in his series that begins with Ender’s Game, Orson Scott Card takes on the themes of xenophobia and just war theory in a fictional war with aliens. Ultimately, the reader finds a way to identify with and find compassion for the aliens, while becoming self-critical of the might-makes-right and win-at-all-costs mentality of humanity. I can think of no finer gift for a loved one preparing to enlist in the military than a box-set of Ender’s Game, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind. Not that these books would dissuade their service, Card’s work is steeped in the value of civil service and self-sacrifice. What these books would do is encourage them to struggle with questions that are particularly relevant to anyone preparing him or herself to enter a profession with regular access to weapons of mass destruction.

To continue from Le Guin;

“The purpose of a thought-experiment, as the term was used by Schrodinger and other physicists, is not to predict the future – indeed Schrodinger’s most famous thought-experiment goes to show that the “future,” on the quantum level, cannot be predicted – but to describe reality, the present world… Science fiction is not predictive; it is descriptive.”

J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings famously describes the struggle between those who wish to live in harmony with nature and those who seek to control it. Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials describes the struggle between free inquiry and powerfully institutionalized dogma. While Robert Heinlein’s Stranger in a Strange Land describes the perverse oddity of culture, any culture, when viewed critically by an outsider.

(Quoting again from Le Guin)

“Prediction is the business of prophets, clairvoyants, and futurologists. It is not the business of novelists. A novelist’s business is lying. …Certainly. Fiction writers, at least in their braver moments, do desire the truth: to know it, speak it, serve it. But they go about it in a peculiar and devious way, which consists in inventing persons, places, and events which never did and never will exist or occur, and telling about these fictions in detail and at length and with a great deal of emotion, and then when they are done writing this pack of lies, the say, There! That’s the Truth!

…In fact, while we read a novel, we are insane – bonkers. We believe in the existence of people who aren’t there, we hear their voices, we watch the battle of Borodino with them, we may even become Napoleon. Sanity returns (in most cases) when the book is closed. 

What has struck me about some of my favorite works of alternative histories and futures, many by Kim Stanley Robinson, such as his Mars and California trilogies and his compelling The Years of Rice and Salt, is that these thoughtfully constructed alternative worlds have often felt far more sane than the world we live in. Not a Pollyanna-ish sanity that denies our darker angels, but a cooler-heads-have-prevailed sanity where our social energy is focused on living good lives together and not at each other’s expense.

Returning to Le Guin’s words:

“…I do not say that artists cannot be seers, inspired: that the awen cannot come upon them. Who would be an artist if they did not believe that that happens? if they did not know it happens, because they have felt the god within them use their tongue, their hands? Maybe only once, once in their lives. But once is enough.

I talk about the gods, I am an atheist. But I am an artist too, and therefore a liar. Distrust everything I say. I am telling the truth.

The only truth I can understand or express is, logically defined, a lie. Psychologically defined, a symbol. Aesthetically defined, a metaphor.

In reading a novel, any novel, we have to know perfectly well that the whole thing is nonsense, and then, while reading, believe every word of it. Finally, when we’re done with it, we may find – if it’s a good novel – that we’re a bit different from what we were before we read it, that we have been changed a little… But it’s very hard to say just what we learned, how we were changed.

The artist deals with what cannot be said in words.

The artist whose medium is fiction does this in words. The novelist says in words what cannot be said in words.

Words can thus be used paradoxically because they have, along with a semiotic usage, a symbolic or metaphoric usage…” 

Ah, paradox; such fodder for reflection; such a treasure trove of possibility for the mystically inclined. My first serious introduction to the power of paradox probably came through the robot novels of Isaac Asimov, most famously I Robot. In these books Asimov deconstructs the power of both logic and rules by forcing his sentient robotic protagonists through sequence after sequence of moral crisis brought on by situational conflicts with and between the immutable laws of robotics. Asimov deals similarly with the paradoxes of time and prediction in his famous foundation series. If I can claim today to have the insight that logic, in and of itself, is inadequate to solve the problems of humanity or to answer our biggest questions, the seed of that insight was planted by Asimov in my thirteen year old brain many years ago.

And now, Ursula Le Guin’s finale,

“All fiction is metaphor. Science fiction is a metaphor. What sets it apart from older forms of fiction seems to be its use of new metaphors, drawn from certain great dominants of our contemporary life – science, …and technology, and the relativistic and the historical outlook, among them. Space travel is one of these metaphors; so is an alternative society, an alternative biology; the future is another. The future, in fiction, is a metaphor.

A metaphor for what?

If I could have said it non-metaphorically, I would not have written all these words, this novel; and Genly Ai would never have sat down at my desk and used up my ink and typewriter ribbon in informing me, and you, rather solemnly, that the truth is a matter of the imagination.” 

That is how the six page introduction to The Left Hand of Darkness ends. I have tried to pull out the most succulent language and ideas from those six pages… my wife insisted that reading all six pages aloud to you was a bad idea, one that would end in, at best, a half-glazed congregation. After reflecting, I couldn’t disagree. When I read this introduction the first time, which was followed immediately by rereading it a second time, and then a third time, I put the book on my nightstand, turned out the light, and spent the next few hours in quiet contemplation until sleep finally overtook me. On subsequent nights, I went on to finish the book, diving deeply into the world of Gethen, where the native intelligent species is much like mankind, except for its being without gender. I’m not exactly sure what a planet full of androgynous hermaphrodites is a metaphor for, but I can tell you that it is a great book. I can tell you that it challenges you to think, and to feel, beyond gender to what lies at the heart of our shared humanity.

I have stood in this pulpit many times. I have shared with this community my reflections on growing up as an evangelical Christian, I have laid out for you my obsession with barefoot running, I have pondered with you the concepts of karma and natural law, and I have read to you the words of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., and Tenzin Gyatso the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, and Mohandas K. Gandhi, these ones who seem to me the prophets of our modern age. But what I have not told you, not until today, is where my faith comes from. I have not told you… why. Why I stand up here, why I care so much about trying. I have not told you WHY I believe.

My faith comes from science fiction. I do not have to guess whether or not we can imagine a better world. I do not suffer from doubt on this count. We can, and we have, and we do… We actually know EXACTLY what kind of world we want, and we need, and we deserve. I see this knowledge reflected back to me from every single person I meet… in their desire for justice, for compassion, for community, for truth and for beauty, for goodness and for peace. But nowhere do I see these desires mirrored more faithfully and more clearly, than in the thousands of worlds and cultures and peoples that we, ourselves, have projected out there, onto the great metaphorical unknowns of space and time.

And so, we have already let it be written…

What remains, is to let it be done.

Love and Fear

Gary Bennett

July 24, 2011

I was originally thinking of some sort of cosmic smack-down between love and fear. In one corner, we have Machiavelli, Hobbes and a few others who thought fear essential to running a society. But the Beatles assured us that all we need is love, and they are not alone; how many pop songs, religious homilies and greeting cards say the same? Simple enough. But not really. I’m into love, but I’m also full of fears, from nuclear war to phone calls at 2 am to walking in tall Texas grass in summer, even botching a sermon. At best, I try to keep the fears to things I can do something about, or at least reasonable. I can’t help worrying about government default, but can pass on worrying about whether Casey Anthony’s verdict was an outrage.

Fear is pervasive among all living beings and keeps us alive, the great-granddaddy of all emotions. Once there was no freedom in the universe but quantum uncertainty; but as organic molecules proliferated, those that best avoided danger were likeliest to replicate. And that’s still what it’s all about for one-celled creatures. But life over time became more complex. Colonies of single-celled creatures; then multi-celled. Symbiosis. Sexual reproduction and protecting mom and the kids. All kinds of social species. Ecosystems, up to and perhaps including the Earth itself. Something has been driving this ever greater complexity; call it the ancestor of love. Love is what seeks to find completeness outside, a possible definition of agape . Romantic love probably fits in there somewhere, but that involves jealousy, which brings us back to fear. From amoeba on up the chain of life, somewhere you get to the emotions of love and fear as we know them, rather than just tropisms or instincts.

Human nature was primarily shaped in the hundreds of millennia of hunter/gatherer tribal life. Fears were directed outward, particularly in the earliest days, toward predators, natural disasters and starvation; I doubt much time was spent determining alpha males. The chief survival asset these tribes had was their internal unity, their willingness to work together for the common good; and because survival is what natural selection is about, traits that made us better tribespeople flourished. We developed language for conversation, stories and ritual, and to simplify teaching the next generation; we learned to flirt, and to make art and music together. We even developed a taste for questions which, surprisingly, only tribal lore could answer. Love was the principal tribal glue, but fear was also used to build unity: we were frightened of being ignored, censured, barred from mating or worst of all, exiled. A funny thing happened because we were so successful as tribes: external threats shrank in importance, and with it our sense of “tiger reality,” the urgent need to acknowledge the existence of that tiger within striking distance, diminished; it was far more important for our minds to focus on the group’s shared version of reality. If you are impressed by the Social Darwinist view of pre-social man struggling for survival against other humans, think about this: there would be a strong survival advantage for those who saw the world most clearly; but instead we are far better at rationalizing than reasoning, because our status within the group has been more important than out thinking others.

Very late in our existence came farming and herding, and the ability to hoard wealth came with it. Nomadic desert tribes in the Middle East were patriarchal; some men ended up owning large flocks, many wives, children and slaves and of course enough hired goons to keep it all. Then came cities, and mind-boggling extremes of wealth; states with priest-kings or god-kings and despotic rule followed. For a while there were other, more balanced societies around too, but the fear-based states came to dominate in all the world’s major civilizations.

Not unopposed. The prophets of Israel from the 7th century BC on denounced inequality and injustice. “Woe to those who are at ease in Zion,” said Amos; and “Hear this, you who trample the needy and bring ruin to the poor of the land.” Christianity began as a religion with a radical emphasis on love, as even a casual reading of the Gospels reveals. St. Paul’s letters to young churches focus on trying to bring back to earth starry-eyed hippies waiting for Jesus’ return; but he could get in the spirit from time to time: “Now abide these three things, faith, hope and love, but the greatest of these is love.” St. Augustine was even more succinct: “Love God and do whatever you want.”

But the rebellions in the end failed. Within a few centuries after Jesus, Catholicism was about rigid obedience to the Church; punishment was persecution in this life and eternal torture in the next. Later the Reformation Protestants threw out much, including the authority of the Pope and some beliefs about the sacraments; but kept fear, in the idea of heresy, in demanding obedience to authority and even more anxiety about Hell. Those few who did go further, such as the Quakers – or several centuries the Universalists – were persecuted by every other religious group.

So what’s with Machiavelli? He’s talking government, not religion, and any government as last resort uses force on individuals. But there are repressive regimes and free ones, and legitimate or not. The Prince is written for the ruler who comes to power illegitimately; that ruler, if he relies primarily on charisma and popularity, will be in trouble when these fade. Better to rely on terror from the beginning, given the changing tides of public approval. You might be able to relax the reins a bit later; at least that’s what they tell beginning classroom teachers.

Though he wrote the best primer ever for dictators, Machiavelli’s true loyalty was to democracy; after all, he was a high ranking diplomat for the Republic of Florence before dictator Lorenzo di Medici came along. His masterwork was Discourses on the Histories of Livy, looking for historical patterns to help preserve republics. One lesson was that republics should rely on citizen armies; hiring mercenaries always backfires. How much was I influenced by Machiavelli? A few years later I must have been one of the few people in the United States of my age, gender and draft status who consistently opposed ending the draft. Forty years after Nixon ended it I believe more strongly than ever that is dangerous and possibly fatal for our middle class to be so detached from America’s wars and government policy. “A republic,” said Benjamin Franklin, “if you can preserve it.”

European settlers brought their fears to America with them, and added a few new ones. Forget the myths: with few exceptions, the colonists were interested in religious freedom only for themselves. Most of them came to get rich quick and go home, or to stay one step ahead of the law. The natives very quickly became enemies, as Europeans kept encroaching on their lands. Plentiful land and scarce labor led them to human slavery, and the more slaves they brought in, the greater the fear. And the march west led also to dangerous encounters with the French and Spanish Empires. Texas was the center of a maelstrom of all fears, as colonists dealt with the Mexican Army, their imported slaves and the Comanches; and in their folly, Texans took on the United States a generation later. They were tough enough to win most of these struggles; I can’t imagine America as a continental power otherwise, for what that is worth. But in winning, the core fear-based personality and culture predominated then, and by cultural inertia, it continues today.

Elsewhere in America and Europe changes were happening. In the 1600s New Englanders bred a patriarchal, tyrannical, even theocratic culture second to none. Massachusetts Puritans persecuted differences ruthlessly, driving out dissenters to create many nearby colonies; they tortured and lynched supposed witches as late as 1690 and manned stomach-turning slave ships even into the 19th century. Their clashes with the natives led to one of the worst of all such conflicts, King Philip’s War, in the 1670s. But life gradually got a bit softer after that, less dangerous and with fewer non-tribesmen to fear, and so the rough edges began to smooth over. The Middle Colonies also began to diverge from the slave revolt-fearing Lower South. Enlightenment ideas began to drift in from Europe, and without class extremes or a powerful church, took root faster than in Europe itself. The Revolutionary generation created the Declaration of Independence, followed by 200 years or so of trying to live up to it. These changes have shifted the over-all American culture more to the love end of the love/fear axis.

Transmitting the cultural values of love and fear is partly a matter of upbringing, and partly a matter of what the external world hands you. One psychologist breaks parenting styles into four types. Two of the four are the permissive and the non-involved; though quite different, each merits near-universal disapproval in the larger culture, because they tend to produce unpleasant children and dysfunctional adults. The other two, which have huge bases of approval, are the authoritarian and the authoritative.

The first and probably commonest of these, the authoritarian, emphasizes obedience without understanding, otherwise known as “because I said so.” Authoritarians believe routine harsh physical punishment is the only way to beat good behavior and good manners into kids; they will look at you blankly if you try to distinguish between discipline and whippings. Children come to take pride in the punishment they have endured; as adults, they believe it is responsible for their own highly-developed character, so as good parents they must repeat the pattern. Papa, as the strongman in the house, is naturally the unquestioned head of household, and the obvious source of punishment. Morality becomes confused with power, and their cultural heroes tend to be physically powerful, arrogant and underhanded, from John Wayne or Sylvester Stallone action movies to wars waged by the United States against weaker nations. The Founding Fathers’ documents, in particular the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they believe to be perfect and infallible in the same way they believe the Bible is; and they are equally unlikely to read any of them. God is the ultimate strongman Papa, and His infinite power must be shown by rewarding those who obey him and exacting infinite punishment on His enemies, the sinners. The only escape from Hell is obeying the Church’s teachings without question, from the particular 16 out-of-context Bible verses that make up its theology or, all too often, whom to vote for in the coming elections. Authoritarian adults tend to be hard-working and successful. But they are subject to an inordinate number of fears, which can be exploited by those who know which buttons to push. They have exaggerated fears of the likelihood of being crime victims, of foreign attack or of having their children seduced away from them by enemies within.

Authoritative parenting emphasizes democratic virtues. Unlike permissives, parents set limits on behavior and expect obedience. But within the limits of a child’s understanding, reasons are given; as the child matures, she or he is allowed more say in family matters generally and in personal behavior especially. Discipline is enforced, but with as little harsh physical punishment as possible. Because the rules make sense and the child is listened to, the world comes to be seen as fair and moderately benevolent. Culture heroes are judged as much by their sense of fair play as for their power and skill. My cousins, for example, adored the bullying John Wayne and imitated his strut; I preferred a straight shooter like Roy Rogers, who never cheated, bullied or did more harm than necessary for self-defense.

From this kind of childhood a self-confident adult can develop, capable of being economically successful, but also able to look past self-interest. These adults can certainly be frightened, for fear is intrinsic to life; but endless fear-mongering by politicians and media tends to become less and less effective. They are also more persuadable through fairness and compassion; when Martin Luther King’s marchers did not trade violence for violence, this made a much greater impact on this group than on authoritarians. When I was growing up in the 1950s and Ô60s, these were not liberal or conservative but the commonly accepted values of good citizenship.

I like to think that Unitarian Universalism can be a good home for those for whom love and compassion, not fear and unquestioning obedience, represent ultimate values. But we are not alone in holding these values; given our size, that’s a good thing. Other religious faiths, both Christian and non-Christian, also espouse them. According to a recent Pew Foundation study, most Christians in this country, even among Evangelicals and conservative Catholics, have moved away from the traditional beliefs about salvation and Hell; in overwhelming numbers they either do not believe in Hell at all, or believe that it will be reserved only for the truly wicked. Universalism, far from having withered away, has in some ways permeated Christianity. In a country where the media have been pouring fear into people’s living rooms incessantly in recent decades and where preachers and politicians successfully run political campaigns on fear alone, that is very good news.

So here we are. We need fear; we cannot survive without fear. But fear is not easily governed by reason. If the crowd around seems to be calling me to fear, I might find it stirring without ever passing through the rational critic in my head. Fear begets fear, and none are more compelling than those ingrained in us as children. All of these characteristics have been ruthlessly exploited since the beginning of civilization for the benefit of power and wealth; they have also been spontaneously generated by news events and even by the stress of living with those we consider as being “not from our tribe.”

And we have another need as well, love. It was an integral part of what made us human in the first place, even if limited to our own tribe; so we need it to remain human in the face of fear. We also need it to align ourselves with a cosmic principle that has moved to ever greater levels of complexity, cooperation and integration for billions of years, perhaps not so much shaped by a pre-existing God as shaping toward becoming God. And we need it right now most urgently for the survival of the human race, with its ever bloodier wars fought with ever more terrible weapons. Let W.H. Auden have the last word: “We must love one another or die.”

Are First UU's Inside Traders?

Michael LeBurkien

July 17, 2011

Good Morning Beloved Community. MEOW!! You are FAT CATS. We are a very wealthy, self satisfied, insider trading, tax cheating FAT CAT congregation. We are the spiritually richest congregation in the USA.

We are gorged with honest religion, true and relevant religion…..but you refuse to Evangelize, to share the Good News with others. You are guilty of Spiritual Insider Trading in a most precious life sustaining and enhancing commodity; authentic religious stocks and bonds and spiritual gold. You are inside traders, taking advantage of non public information, keeping it non public…..keeping UU’ism and FUUCA a secret as if this knowledge were your birthright. This is religiously illegal and a violation of our mission statement. This illegal activity raises the cost of purchasing honest religion, an essential commodity for all. It decreases the spread of spirituality over the entire planet earth. Our attitude is I’ll scratch your back and you scratch mine. You give religious tips to insider members, but not the general public. We are self satisfied in our little hidden cul de sac at the end of poorly traveled No Outlet Rd. This is fraudulent and violates the duty of full disclosure. We all may end up in prison. We may be in spiritual prison and on the way to spiritual Hell this very moment.

Speaking of prison listen to the story of Coval Russell from the New York Times. The Butte Co jail cell where Coval spent his last happy days is no bigger than a wheel-chair-size stall at Austin International Airport and dominated by a toilet. He called this place where few would want to spend a single night his home. He spent 14 months there for wounding his landlord with a knife. He became a beloved counselor. He was given dibs on TV program selection. Pops was first in the food line and had a reserved place in Monopoly Game Marathons. He never had visitors, but he did not need any. Here among the transient population of men awaiting trial or sentencing, he had found community. His body was found Wednesday in the Feather River, where he had fallen from a bridge just a hop from the Motel 6 where he was staying since his release. No one doubted what had happened. Russell had petitioned the court to keep him in jail indefinitely and became depressed when the judge granted him probation. He said he would kill himself if he was sent “back out there” with no friends and family. He took a taxi to Table Mountain Ridge….said on a railroad track for 1/2 hour and then disappeared. He was unaware that a UU church in Butte would have taken him into their homeless aid program because it was not advertised to the general public or the Butte Co. prisoners aid programs.

We delude ourselves when we say that UU’ism is just about lofty principals. People seek us out because they simply want a place where they belong. Our world marginalizes, discounts and ignores many folks who are just looking for a place to live a life of spiritual integrity. Lofty principals yes, but it is also a one at a time religion. We all have our secret struggles. We all need community to give us strength to cope with our secret struggles. That is why we need to evangelize to inform the general public that we are here for them.

Evangelism is in our genes, our history. In 1834, George Rogers, a renowned, Universalist circuit rider rode one horseback out West, then Pennsylvania, to preach in Pottsville, Bethlehem, & Womelsdorf speaking English to a German Congregation. Local clergy opposed him with violence. Rocks were thrown, windows broken. He told religious persecutors….”You have mistaken your man. I am not to be stopped, I will preach the universal love of God at the martyr’s stake” Hundreds came to hear him. Think of that next time you complain about a 20 minute drive to church. The evangelistic style spread the good news of Universaism and its heartfelt saving message and make us visible. It emphasized personal evangelism, leading to change is heart and behavior throughout the horseback circuits.

Can we talk? UU’ism is not for everyone. If you plan to attend Gov. Perry’s Houston’s Reliant Stadium religious rally wherein fundamentalist preachers will talk about the Sex Goddess seducing the Emperor thus causing social demise, this is not the church for you. If you think Oprah is an unknowing well meaning handmaiden of the anti-Christ, this is not the church for you, if you think children of immigrants who are born here are raised as terrorist time bombs and should be sent back to countries of their parents origin, this is not the church for you. If you think Mr. Michelle Bachman’s clinic is right in promoting reparative prayers to change gays to straight people and takes government money for that purpose, then this is not the church for you.

On the other hand, on the other hand…. If you think you are responsible for your own mind, body, and spirit, If you know that you don’t know every answer to every question, if you’re not afraid of humanists, who aren’t afraid of pagans, who aren’t afraid of theists, who aren’t afraid of atheists, who aren’t afraid of Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Christians, or Buddhists, if you’re fairly sure that tattoos and body piercing do not signal the end of Western civilization, if you are tired of the phrases acceptable losses & collateral damage, if you’re ashamed of the amount of press coverage given to the debate about the place of God in the Pledge of Allegiance in a country where 1/6 of the children go to bed hungry and health care is considered non-essential, if you’re tired of union rights denied to social workers and teachers who work 2 jobs to make ends meet then this is your church, your community, your spiritual home. This church is good news for you.

In this country we number only 1/4 of a million. Our population was greater 2 decades ago. But in the recent census 600,000 listed themselves as Unitarian Universalists. We are out there, but unevangelized. Fundamentalists have said UU’s believe in nothing and everything. No requirements no beliefs no faith. They don’t know us because we inside trade our beliefs, we inside trade our thoughts on revelation, repentance, resurrection, salvation and the Messianic Age. We are shy about evangelizing and offering our Amazing Grace to spiritual prisoners. We practice illlegal and criminal religion if we don’t communicate our access to spiritual wealth to a religiously impoverished world.

Hey People, we are a vibrant faith of believers. We believe in the motive force of love, We believe in the necessity of the democratic process, We believe in the importance of a religious community, we believe in the freedom of religious expression, We believe in the appreciation of religious ideas, but not religious myths, We believe in the authority of reason and conscience, we believe in the never ending search for Truth and spiritual honesty,We believe in the unity of experience, and all life, We believe in the worth and dignity of each human being, We believe in ethical application of religion with the goal of social justice, We believe in the Amazing Inner Grace that finds completion in community involvement.

When I tell young people students at UT about our beliefs they tell me they did not know a religion like ours existed. Where is your church? What time are services?

Let me end with my own personal story. About 2 years ago I initiated proceedings to end my marriage of 4 decades. Many years were happy and fullfilling . But it became intolerable. I was ashamed and afraid. I masochistically blamed myself for the events leading to divorce. I was afraid of being cut off from my grown children and beautiful grandchildren. I feared being branded a loser not meeting social expectations of not having a spouse, a girlfriend, a partner, a significant other, or even a roommate. I had allowed myself to be cut off from old friends and had been denied the opportunities to make new friends. Like Coval Russell being let out of the Butte Co. jail, I had no community. I contemplated the ending of my life.

But I was drawn to the FUUCA. Embryonic friendships became solid. The ties to community strengthened. I stopped being afraid. I felt strong and worthwhile, I gained spiritual strength and self esteem. I learned to love myself and accept love from other UU’s. I learned from this community and the gym locker room that friendship love and church family love was just as valid as romantic love and having a spouse, girlfriend, significant other or roommate was no guarantee of erotic love anyhow. I gathered my forces and crossed the the stormy Channel to find the safe haven of personal happiness and community service I never looked back. I now have matured, and grown emotionally, intellectually and spiritually. I am light years ahead. I have taken university level courses in family systems, leadership development and non violent communication here. We believe in continuing education here. I don’t even recognize who I was 2 weeks ago, let alone 2 years ago. This church saved my life and it can save yours.

In the Torah it says, “If I am not for myself who will be? If I am for myself alone, what am I?” Let’s get out of our inside trader comfort zone people.” There are millions out there in the general public who like me, like you, need to find a spiritually integrity who need to connected to all creation. What are you, if you are for yourselves alone?

The Virtues of Leadership

Rev. Mark Skrabacz

July 10, 2011

First UU Church of Austin

4700 Grover Ave., Austin, TX 78756

www.austinuu.org

I wonder what you think good leadership is? What is your experience of leaders and as leaders?

A few months ago 10 of our Congregation’s leaders gathered to share a Leadership Training. This was a round table discussion during which we explored readings and topics to enhance our understanding of leadership, specifically for our church. As UU communities we are committed to democracy, which means that “we the people” are the principals of our church. Our Boards are our elected voluntary representatives and as such serve as leaders for a time. We members are also in a way only temporary, too. Nevertheless, members present and future will endure as the responsible authors and leaders of our churches.

Right here, right now, I invite you speak out single words or phrases in answer to these questions: Firstly, what are some of the qualities you most admire in good leadership? Secondly, what are those qualities you most fear or dislike?

Changes are happening around our planet. The whole world is changing, and what can we learn from this? We learn that good leadership is absolutely necessary to navigate through times of change. Changes are happening in our church community as we grow with the steady addition of new members, new interests, new concerns, talents and energies. We are expanding our embrace and becoming more broadly linked to the world. We are blessed to be growing in increments, so that we can integrate new energies with the old. For we have something special here that called us and will call others. We all have to take responsibility for our church community. Today’s message will address this in part.

Nowadays there are countless new examples of how leaders mobilize others to get extraordinary things done in just about every area of organized activity. Leadership knows no bounds and can be found in every racial, religious, ethnic and cultural circumstance. Yet the traits of leadership follow remarkably similar patterns as mentioned in our brief Q&A today. Let’s examine some common virtues of leaders that will hopefully steer us toward further achievements in our church community.

In olden times, society and churches accorded great authority to clergy. The priests were the authors of their church’s destinies and the center of church communities. That was my experience growing up. It led me to pursue leadership training in a Roman Catholic seminary in the navel-gazing 70s. This was a time when many priests were looking at their lives and the dwindling prospects of their dreams being actualized in a church that seemed bent on preserving the past, and an extremely patronizing and authoritarian one at that. They started leaving in droves. In the midst of my own aspirations, I began to witness the loss of the best and the retention of the “yes men”. The inner authority that clergy demonstrated began to falter as many persons who possessed the personal traits of honesty, transparency and trustability left the clergy.

The great opportunity of the demise of authoritarian leadership lies in developing a new capacity for leadership. A title and authority can be given but it’s behavior that wins respect. The first virtue of leadership is that leaders must model the way. People respect and follow first the person, then the plan…bringing to mind the cardinal principle of parenting: kids don’t go where you point; they go where you go.

Leading means you have to be a good example and walk your talk. Exemplary leadership attracts commitment and achieves high standards, because it models the behavior expected of others. One of the guiding principles of modeling is that it clarifies your values. Your values are at the core of leadership. You have to open up your mind and heart to let people really know what you think and believe. Yet it’s not just the leader’s values that are important, because leaders aren’t just representing themselves. They speak on behalf of the larger organization.

20 members of our church met last December to launch our Long Range Planning process with an appreciative inquiry facilitated by Eric Hepburn. He helped us ask questions and tell stories in order to think and listen for our own core values that we personally find in our lives and that are shared in our church. We came up with three: communication, interconnectedness and acceptance. Leaders must forge agreement around the common values and ideals of the group being led.

A friend of mine works as a leadership consultant and he tells of his initial meeting of with a company president The CEO briefly outlined their history, mission, current goals, personnel problems and the situation he wanted help with. My friend listened and then asked the president what he valued more than anything else. The president asked for clarification. My friend asked him again to declare the single thing that motivated his life. He got up and closed the door and asked if that meant for work or life in general. My friend said there was no difference; that there was only life.

He finally answered, I guess that would be love. The consultant asked how many were on his executive team and he said 8 and that most of them had been with him for 5 years. The consultant remarked that probably all of them knew that love was is most cherished value. He answered probably not. 6? No. 3? No. My friend said: “How many of these people with whom you’ve worked closely for 10 hours a day, 5 days a week for 5 years, would know that love is your most important value?” He answered, “Probably none.”

Makes you wonder if that leader was lying to himself about his personal values. How do your leader’s modeling of their personal values impact their ability to represent your congregation’s values?

A second virtue is that leaders must also inspire a shared vision. You all — this church — has done a lot of work on this these past few years with your core values and development of vision and mission. The idea here is that when we get as excited about our future as we do about our present, we will allow that vision to pull us forward into it. Our vision is the force that directs our future. Leaders gaze across the horizon of time and imagine the exciting and ennobling opportunities that are in store for their organization. Leaders have a desire to make things happen that no one else has ever done. Do you have any interest in your future as a church community? Do you have any images to share of how we might be making a difference? Then you are a visionary leader and I hope you will step up and act, so that we all can support these ideas.

A note of caution: Be careful about surrendering your own authority and initiative to a charismatic leader. Remember we are about creating a future that is bigger than any leader.

This is what the world wants and the basis of today’s revolutions–the chance for the people to author their own lives and destiny. Facilitating this is the work of leadership. How well is your church doing in raising up leadership? George Bancroft, a notable early 19th century historian wrote: “The exact measure of the progress of civilization is the degree in which the intelligence of the common mind has prevailed over wealth and brute force; in other words, the measure of the progress of civilization is the progress of the people.” Sounds like our recently-departed contemporary historian Howard Zinn.

That brings us to the third virtue of leadership the ability to challenge the process. Whatever the challenge: growth, change, mission, expansion, innovation, all cases involve a change from the status quo. This is challenging for us to hear. Yet the fact is not one leader who has ever achieved something of great importance did it by keeping things the same. All leaders challenge the process.

Leaders venture out. They invite others into challenging conversations. They are pioneers searching for opportunities to make things better, to integrate the best of the past with the burgeoning future. They listen within and without in order to check the timing, take risks and create the atmosphere for experimentation, the implementation of new ideas and the willingness to innovate. Risk and change are scary. Not everyone is comfortable with uncertainty. Yet small steps and small wins build confidence so that bigger challenges can be met. My view is that this happens best when it happens in increments. We must feel safe first, then we can begin to take the risks necessary to lead by challenging the process.

There’s a difference between managing and leading. Managers use their authority by making decisions, decisions that get things done; leaders exceed this kind of authority by causing others to ponder troubling questions; questions like how can we be more relevant or more transparent or inclusive or more compassionate? Managers calm people by resolving ambiguity; leaders often frustrate people by refusing to decide quickly what can only be solved slowly and digested by a greater number than one or a few. You see, the most important challenges are too big for individual decision-makers to address alone. That’s where leaders come in to bring the whole group’s gifts to bear. Anyone, from any seat in here, can lead.

Which situations call for management and which for leadership? One factor is the nature of the challenge to be faced. For example, if the central air malfunctions, it must be repaired. Our congregation has authorized our Building and Grounds Committee to pick a contractor and spend money pronto. On the other hand, hypothetically a once-successful program that no longer attracts participation may need a cross-section of good heads to take whatever time they need to cook up a fresh vision of this activity.

Leadership is not a personal trait, but the ability to take action: like getting a whole group of us to address our most important challenges. Leadership is measured not by whether leaders get their way, but by how well the resources of the congregation come to bear on crucial questions.

That’s a picture of the next virtue of good leadership: Leaders enable others to act. They build trust and foster collaboration. The single test most used to detect whether or not someone is on the road to becoming a leader is the use of the word “we.” They use it nearly 3X more than the word “I.” Leaders make it possible for others to do good work. They empower others. They delegate. Like the reading for the Tao Te Ching, they give the work back to the people.

Finally leaders encourage the heart with genuine acts of caring that uplift the spirit and draw people forward. Personal thank you notes, phone calls, visits to the home, then following up with an email. These are old-fashioned but timeless signs of encouragement. Recognizing contributions and celebrating shared values and victories are also helpful, as are empathy and sympathy when things are tough.

Before closing I’ll paraphrase Gordon McKeeman, former President of our UU Starr King School of Ministry and a parish minister of 22 years in Akron, Ohio.

There are extraordinary possibilities in ordinary people. Beckoning them forth is the task of leadership. As leaders we have the responsibility to lead our institution – in our case our church – in becoming a source of power of making a difference. We are called to do this in the midst of a group of people overwhelmingly devoted to individualism, and who are consequently suspicious of institutions.

Each individual is a locus of power, actual and potential. A purpose of having any institution is to link the separate powers of individuals into one larger, more committed, more powerful community. … The maturing self struggles to embrace more and more … to grow toward a larger self that is always learning to love one more person, forgiving one more person, understanding that his or her well-being is inextricably bound to that of others. … It then realizes that the glorification of the small, narrow I is the source of what we call evil.

The errand on which we are bent is this: the realization of exalted human possibilities through self-growth from narcissism to encompassing wholeness. Let’s become “we” speaking people.

Fortunately, anyone can lead. While it is far from the ideal solution, when official leaders fail, then leadership can still emerge from the periphery: from ad hoc planning teams, from voices crying in the wilderness, even from the mouths of babes. Maybe you feel like a voice in the wilderness or even a baby to your community. This message is to encourage you to consider serving in leadership on a working committee. Your Board would be interested in hearing from you about your concerns and interests regarding your church and if you are interested in serving on a committee. You know, serving this congregation on its board or a committee, your board and committees, is a very good learning opportunity.

After hearing this, I leave you with these questions about your own beloved Church’s leadership: Considering the virtues of leadership we have just explored, what do you feel you are doing well and where could you use some improvement?

With acknowledgment to the authors of Leadership Challenge: Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner for material reiterated in this sermon.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of What?

Brian Ferguson

July 3, 2011

Reading

Excerpt from A Treatise on Atonement by the 19th Century Universalist leader Hosea Ballou.

“Man’s major goal, in all he does, is happiness; and were it not for that, he never could have any other particular goal. What would induce men to form societies; to be at the expense of supporting government; to acquire knowledge; to learn the sciences, or till the earth, if they believed they could be as happy without as with?

The fact is, man would not be the thing that he now is, as there would not be any stimulus to action; Men are never without this grand goal, so they are never without their wants, which render such a goal desirable. But their minor goals vary, and their passions differ. Then, says the objector, there is no such thing as disinterested benevolence.

The objector will say, to admit that our happiness is the grand goal of all we do destroys the purity of religion, and reduces the whole to nothing but selfishness.

To which, I reply a man acting for his own happiness, if he seek it in the heavenly system of universal benevolence, knowing that his own happiness is connected with the happiness of his fellow-men, which induces him to do justly and to deal mercifully with all men, he is not more selfish than he ought to be. But a man acting for his own happiness, if he seek it in the narrow circle of partiality and covetousness, his selfishness is irreligious and wicked.”

Sermon

I find it interesting that on this July 4th Independence Weekend that you invited a worship leader who is British. I am reminded of the Romans, who would parade their captured enemies through the street then have the defeated leaders give speeches praising the Great Roman Empire. I wondered if this is why you invited me back? Those of you who remember my eventful Internship here two years ago probably realize that is not what I will be doing. What I do want to do is congratulate this religious community for the hard work you have done over the last two years and your selection of a fabulous Minister in the Rev. Meg Barnhouse. Congratulations, I am sure you must be very happy.

Now happiness is something I want to explore today. Happiness is a strange idea when you think about it. It is one of the most common wishes we make for others. This weekend we will be wishing each other a Happy 4th July, even to British people. Last Fall I even saw a sign saying Happy Veterans Day. I was taken aback and a little unsettled by this, Happy Veterans Day. Veterans Day has always been a day I recognized as a solemn day of remembrance for those who lost their lives in wars. Wishing someone a Happy Veterans Day seems to have missed the point of the day. Not everything in life is happy – in fact even our wishing of each other happiness on holidays implies that most of the time we are not happy.

Now being from Britain, happiness is not something that comes easily to me. I grew up Presbyterian which with its emphasis on human depravity seems much more grounded in reality than any foolish optimism about happiness. Human history seems to have plenty of examples where humanity has taken the low road in the treatment of each other. Reviewing human history with its seeming constant violence and injustice usually stirs in me emotions of sadness or anger and often both. History or our current news rarely stirs emotions of happiness in me.

Now perhaps I’m overly negative about this but to show that I’m not alone in this view, there was a proposal by a British psychologist to have happiness classified as a psychiatric disorder. I originally thought this was a joke from a satirical newspaper like the Onion but it was in the Journal of Medical Ethics1 which is not usually a barrel of laughs. Here is what the abstract to the proposal says:

“It is proposed that happiness be classified as a psychiatric disorder. In a review of the relevant literature it is shown that happiness is statistically abnormal, is associated with a range of cognitive abnormalities, and probably reflects the abnormal functioning of the central nervous system. One possible objection to this proposal remains — that happiness is not negatively valued. However, this objection is dismissed as scientifically irrelevant.” So there you have it to be happy is abnormal – at least in Britain. We British can be a miserable bunch. Perhaps that is why the American colonies wanted their independence from Britain -they wanted to be happy or at least the opportunity to pursue happiness. At the very founding of the United States in the Declaration of Independence there is talk about happiness. One of the most famous sentences from the Declaration says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

This is considered a powerful statement of individual human rights and has been called one of the best-known sentences in the English language.2 As a powerful statement of human rights it is great shame that it talked about all men rather than all people being created equal. If it had said all people then women might not have had to wait another 140 years for the vote. Alas like the reading from Hosea Ballou earlier, it’s sexist language was a product of its time.

Thomas Jefferson was the main author of the declaration and acknowledged that most of the ideas in it were not original. Scholars recognize multiple influences on the document. One of the major influences was somewhat ironically the British political philosopher, John Locke, who was one of the most influential thinkers of the 17th and 18th centuries. He wrote extensively about the just use of power by governments and about 100 years before the Declaration of Independence he said people had the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of property.” Lock believed that property rights were fundamental to human rights both of which should be protected by the government. It is interesting that Jefferson changed this aspect of Locke’s work to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The pursuit of property seems much more in line with our lives in the consumer culture of the U.S. today.

The modern American and British views of individual property rights are by no means a Universal view. Many of the indigenous Native American groups to New England struggled to understand the early American colonists’ ideas of ownership of land. A common view among the Native American groups was “The land does not belong to us, we belong to the land.” This in many ways is a radical interpretation of our 7th Unitarian Universalist principle of the respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are part. Many Native American saw humans as part of the environment, part of something larger than themselves, with no sense of ownership by them. That is a radically different world view and makes a clash of cultures inevitable as soon as the early colonists started claiming ownership of land. What did the Native Americans make of the first “No Trespassing” signs?

Many indigenous groups throughout the world struggle with the dominant western ideas of individual property rights. Even, in my home country of Scotland, the native non-English language Gaelic, did not have a word for individual ownership, it only had language for community ownership by family or clan. The language had no way of saying that I own this, a person could only talk about how we own this. This is a remarkably different approach to living than we have in most of our modern society. Yet think about how we talk about ownership within this religious community.

In our religious tradition ownership and responsibility does not lie with some centralized power or with the minister, blame may lie with the minister but not ownership and responsibility. The ownership and responsibility lies with the members of this religious community, with each of us. We talk about our church, our religious education program, our members, our minister, the land that we own, and in the modern world we live – our webpage and our facebook page. As individuals of this religious community we own none of it but together with each other we own all of it.

The idea of individual property rights is so fundamental to how British and American societies operate that we forget it is a choice we make as a society. I find it interesting that the individual pursuit of property was down-played by Jefferson in the declaration of independence and replaced with the pursuit of happiness. There are many benefits to individual ownership since as individuals we often take better care of what we own individually rather than what we own in common with others. The desire for ownership, be it a house, car, or other item, can be the primary motivator for many of our actions.

Now the exact relation of ownership to happiness is a complex one. The material wealth of most Americans has increased enormously since the 1950’s but the surveys of happiness suggest most Americans are slightly less happy than the 1950’s. The pursuit of property may be a major motivator of our actions but does not seem to make us happier. This makes sense to me since pursuing property to a certain level of comfort such as having a safe place to live and ample food to eat will reduce our fear and insecurity therefore increase our happiness. Beyond these basic comforts the continual pursuit of property and goods which is encouraged by our economic system I believe can result in more dissatisfaction. As our expectations are continually raised then the likelihood of happiness or even just contentment can diminish. Perhaps Jefferson was on to something when he replaced the Pursuit of Property with the Pursuit of Happiness.

Some historians believed that Jefferson de-emphasized protection of property by the government to allow taxation but most historians believed that Jefferson wanted a more virtuous ideal to go along with life and liberty. Happiness was a very important concept in the 18th century since many liberal philosophers like Jefferson and Locke were justifying the curbing of the powers by Kings and Tyrants – often the same thing. The justification defined the role of government to serve the people by seeking the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.3 Judging by this standard it would seem that our present government in America is failing badly since no-one seems happy with it.

At the time of the writing of the Declaration of Independence Happiness was considered the supreme determiner of a person’s actions. This idea was mentioned in the earlier reading by Hosea Ballou, considered the father of the Universalist side our tradition. He stated: “Man’s major goal, in all he does, is happiness; and were it not for that, he never could have any other particular goal.”4 Hosea Ballou was writing just 30 years after the Declaration of Independence and still reflects that period’s belief in the pursuit of happiness as the major motivation of a person’s actions. The Declaration has a strong religious context emphasizing rights endowed by one’s Creator meaning God. Ballou likewise believed we had a God-given right to be happy and we were created to be fulfilled and happy. Jefferson from a political point of view stated the pursuit of happiness is a right and Ballou from our own Universalist religious tradition stated that happiness is our main stimulus to noble action. It seems like happiness is a very important idea but is the pursuit of happiness an appropriate religious goal?

In the earlier reading Ballou warned that acting only for our own individual happiness is irreligious and wicked5. The focus on one’s own individual happiness can easily slip into narcissism and selfishness. Ballou believed true happiness would come when we acted justly on the behalf of others and dealt mercifully with them – a universal system of benevolence. Over the last 200 years we have increasingly become a more individualistic culture and many in our society do not think in terms of the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

As well as the overemphasis on individual happiness, the idea of happiness as a goal to be pursued seems problematic to me since it implies we can reach some stable state of happiness. I don’t think life is like that. Given the constant change in our world and the finite nature of human life then any expectation of a lasting state of happiness seems doomed to disappointment. Our lives are filled with challenges such as illness, loss of loved ones, disappointments in relationships, financial uncertainty, and injustice in its many forms. Now being happy through all the struggles of life may not be a psychiatric disorder as was claimed earlier but may not be a meaningful response to life’s challenges. Having expectations of lasting happiness can lead to a sense of disappointment and despair. I heard it said that expectations are just premeditated resentments therefore I treat life with high hopes and low expectations. So what are my expectations and hopes about happiness?

I think we have brief moments of happiness rather than lasting periods of happiness. These moments often come when reflecting on our past, often our immediate past. These reflections can be on some great time of connection with family or friends, or a great event we worked hard on that felt successful, or time we took for ourselves to reflect on our growth as people through skills acquired or changes of behavior. Happiness for me has a reflective quality where some past event gives us satisfaction and I think that happiness is more often the consequence of what we do not the motivation for what we do. Take some of the life’s struggles I just mentioned – with illness I seek care, for loss of loved ones I seek comfort, for disappointments with relationships I seek understanding, for financial struggles I seek support, and for injustice I seek to work for justice.

Mainly what I seek with life’s struggle is the compassion and understanding of others to help me cope. This is where I think religious communities can play an important role in our lives. Many people seek religious community to help them cope with life’s sorrows and celebrate life’s joys. The congregation I serve in San Marcos has a shared joys and concerns portion of our weekly worship service which is a ritualized form of that. But the sharing of joys and concerns amongst us does not just happen in worship, it happens in the fellowship hour after service, and through the friendships we have with fellow congregants. This is a vital part of the fabric of a healthy religious community.

Through this sharing and reflection on the struggles and joys of life we create the meaning in our lives. This sharing and reflection in community can allow us to feel cared for, comforted, supported, and understood which, in time, may leads us to moments of happiness as we reflect on how we are valued by other people. And the sharing of joys is important because if we can learn to truly find joy in another person’s joy then this can help increase the moments of happiness in our own lives.

In closing, I think Jefferson did get it right in pursuing happiness rather than property as one of our rights but happiness is not a goal to be achieved but moments of satisfaction to be savored in our lives. Aristotle said “happiness is the only thing that humans desire for its own sake, unlike riches, honor, health or friendship, which are sought not for their own sake but cause people to be happier.” I would add that people may desire happiness but life will place obstacles in the way of our happiness. How we choose between riches, honor, health, and friendship will determine the depth and frequency of those moments of our happiness. We do well to choose wisely.

 

Ballou, Hosea. A Treatise on Atonement Edited and introduced by Ernest Cassara (Boston, MA: Skinner House Books, 1986) p.33-34

i Bentall, Richard P. Journal of Medical Ethics Volume 18, Issue 2 (BMJ Group, 1992) p.94-98

ii Lucas, Stephen E. Justifying America: The Declaration of Independence as a Rhetorical Document in American Rhetoric: Context and Criticism Thomas W Benson ed. (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press,1989) p.85

iii Willis, Gary. Inventing America: Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence ( New York, NY: Doubleday, 1978) p.259

iv Ballou, Hosea. A Treatise on Atonement Edited and introduced by Ernest Cassara (Boston, MA: Skinner House Books, 1986) p.33-34v Ballou, Hosea. A Treatise on Atonement Edited and introduced by Ernest Cassara (Boston, MA: Skinner House Books, 1986) p.33-34

The importance of ritual

Stephanie Canada Gill

Sandra Ries

June 26, 2011

Stephanie Canada Gill

It’s always fun; when preparing a sermon, to look up the dictionary definition for your topic. So I went to www.dictionary.com; which gives me some choices from a variety of dictionaries, and the one which I found the most amusing, was this one from “The World English Dictionary”:

Ritual – (noun)

1. the prescribed or established form of a religious or other ceremony

2. stereotyped activity or behavior

3. [psychological] any repetitive behavior, such as hand-washing, performed by a person with a compulsive personality disorder

With that in mind, I am happy to be here with you this morning, so that we can enjoy our compulsive, repetitive behavior together.

It’s worth noting that some in this church don’t necessarily qualify what we do here together each Sunday as ritualistic or ceremonial. Yet each aspect of our worship service has a meaning, a context, and a reason why it is performed in the way that it is, and the manner and order in which we perform it are vitally important to us.

If you doubt that; I urge you to have a chat with any of the “old timers” here such as myself about our discussions; as a congregation, about any changes in our worship services. For those of you who have been here a while, please take a moment and cast your memories back to the time we added “Joys and Concerns” to the service… and when we removed it later. Or our discussions about how, when, and in what manner we would be including our children within the worship services.

Yes, I don’t believe that “Vitally Important” is too strong a phrase.

Ritual can be seen in terms of a structure, a template. There is something repetitive in the nature of ritual, but it is the way we each conceptualize ritual that is important. So let me share an experience I had about that, many years ago.

I had a period of time during my teens where I was still attending church, but no longer felt a deep connection to the faith of my childhood. And during that time, I had an experience worth sharing.

It happened on one of those many, nameless mornings, just as my mind was waking up in response to the communion plate being passed around. Ah, the sharpness of unsweetened grape juice, and its contrast to the tasteless little wafer squares. For me, it meant that the service was nearly over and my freedom was within sight.

But then I noticed something; one of my fellow congregants, who was sitting in the pew in front of me. I saw her face light up as she put the wafer in her mouth. I was captivated. I watched carefully, and I then I turned to look at others across the aisle, and in the pews behind me. It happened again and again, there, and then there! Somehow in that sad little square; people were tasting something I didn’t, and whatever it was, it was not something inherent in the wafer itself. It had touched their hearts.

I remember sitting back in the pew; almost light-headed, and thinking about what I had just seen. And then I realized that it wasn’t that the rituals of that church were meaningless, it was that they had become meaningless to me.

They felt something, something very profound.

It may seem obvious to you all now; but I tell you it shook me, and it made my heart clench. I was excluded from what I had witnessed, and I came to realize later that it was because they were experiencing the spiritual expression of their god, a god with whom I no longer felt contact.

Although it came to me much later, that day was the start of a personal quest. I began a search for rituals which did have meaning for me. I did not find meaningful expressions of ritual again until I came to THIS church. And it was here that I began to open up to Paganism. Until that time, I did not know that creating our own rituals was an option until I came to this church.

What was I missing? Well, let’s start by considering this concept:

Ritual is a way to make non-observable reality manifest.

I’ll say that again, a little slower:

Ritual is a way…to make non-observable reality…manifest.

Ritual touches something in our core, something significant and deep in us which has existed at least as far back as the painted caves, and likely before that. It touches our emotions, but it also appeals to our minds. Ritual speaks to the part of us which is so often beyond words.

In fact, we are going to perform something ritualistic together today after this sermon. Words give a clearness of direction; it is a way of expressly stating our sacred intent, if you will. But the non-verbal part is key. The non-verbal portions of ritual give us the opportunity to digest the words, and allow them to touch us on an emotional level. So here is an opportunity to transmute words into emotions. Later in the service, we are going to smudge this sanctuary.

So let’s look at smudging. This is a sacred act, which revolves around some similar concepts world-wide. It’s an ancient rite, we really have no idea how far it goes back in any of the cultures which use it.

Smudging has an element of purification, and of defining sacred space via scent. The two are intertwined, because in essence it sweeps away whatever is mundane, in order to make room for the sacred. Distracting thoughts, impurities from outside the circle of the holy space – smudging pushes those things out in order to create a void which the sacred can fill. It recognizes that in order for something new to be born, something old must give way. The smoke fills the room, and then fades. Now a new space is created.

Within that context; smudging has a symbolic connection to planting, to rededicating, to preparing the way for something new to begin. The way is made clear. What will we plant once the weeds have been plowed under? What are the furrows waiting for? These are decisions which are planted in our hearts, and later will bloom into words and actions

I believe we are accustomed to thinking of sacred space as someplace where the sacred somehow simply happens. But; in fact, the sacred consists of what we bring to the space, what we do while we are there, and how we take it and apply to our lives both within the ritual context and beyond. A ritual can be seen as a temporary construct, but in truth no ritual is successful if it does not in some way impact our lives on an ongoing basis.

The ancients understood this. They understood the core aspect of ritual construction – intention. Ritual takes the reality we envision; but cannot yet see except with the eyes of our heart, and ignites the process through which it will become our reality in time yet to come. So it’s important to know what our intentions are.

Ritual is a way to connect our emotions with our thoughts. This happens; in the case of smudging, through our sense of smell. The only way we have to begin the process of connecting with the unseen; or inexpressible, is by using one (or more) of our five senses.

The sense of smell is tied to memory. Scientific research has shown this. As such, it has the ability to create a strong memory, to create a path way in our brains; if you will, so that the repeated use of a given smell, over and over in a particular context will naturally take us more and more quickly in our minds back to that context. And that context was designed intentionally and so is supported by that smell. As such, it is absolutely ideal for religious ritual.

Nor is the sense of smell the only sense ritual can use to great effect. Our sense of hearing can be used both actively and passively. Passively, we had have music sung to us or played for us by a variety of amazingly talented people over the course of time. It lifts our spirits, it opens our hearts.

I sometimes refer to ritual as storytelling, as it is within ritual that we tell the story of who we are. Like a story, our ritual has a beginning, a middle, and an end. In our worship services, we begin the process of creating sacred space by the introductory music, which alerts us that we are entering the place where we create the sacred together. This space is infused with sacred sounds, unlike our day to day lives.

Just as a storyteller might set the stage by saying, “Once upon a time…”; our opening music says that we are stepping into a place where our ordinary reality takes a backseat to a magical sort of reality, where we are both the best of who we can be and; at the same time, the seekers who hope to learn more about the connections we long to feel, the connections to each other, and to the sacred within each of ourselves, In the most effective rituals, we meld heart and mind together to guide us on the next step of our journey.

We feel connected to the sacred, when we listen.

Our intention can be touched actively when we sing together. The hymns we sing together are an expression of our roots as a Christian denomination, in many ways. Singing is universal, but hymns are associated with Christianity. We join in aural communion via the sense of sound, when we stand together and sing a hymn from our hymnal. We’ve worked very hard to be more egalitarian, non-sexist, and so on with our hymnal, but that in no way changes these facts. Singing is a way to affirm our unity over our differences.

And our emotions are connected to our senses. We feel bonded as we sing. That bonding is intentional and deliberate.

Ask a Buddhist sometime about the importance of “breath”. He or she will tell you that the Universe was created via “the breath”. A Buddhist would say “Breath is the beginning of all things, and the crux of awakening”. Turn that over in your mind after the sermon. Oh, and breathe deeply when you do.

Now, I did mention that ritual context was designed and supported by our senses to bring our sacred intentions manifest. So what is our sacred intent? Our church mission statement reflects it as does our invocation of the chalice and the flame. This is not a church of sinners trembling before an angry god, this is a church of seekers!

This is our sanctuary, we designed and paid for it together, we collectively decided (or at least delegated) the decision of who will stand where I am standing each Sunday. Standing before a podium emphasizes something different about me and my purpose here than how I would be seen sitting at the edge of a circle. We have had active and; let’s say brisk and intense discussions about any ongoing changes about our rituals which take place here. Our emotions are very much involved, whether we like to admit to them or not.

It feels a little odd to say that Unitarian Universalists are emotional about ritual, doesn’t it?

But there’s no question that we are. And that is because ritual is the key to our intentions; as a congregation, and as a faith. There may words involved in the UU approach to ritual, actually with UU’s there are always words involved. Lots and lots of words. Let us never forget however that a vital part of our lives is happening between the words.

This weekly Worship service IS our ritual. We may draw from Christian traditions, we may draw from other faith traditions; for example today we will be drawing from traditions which use smudging darn near globally across the face of this planet. We have a multitude of influences throughout our hymnal, and I could go on and on, picking apart our ritual; piece by piece to show you the where and why each aspect of our “Order of Service” is done how it is done, why it is done, and the reason in this order, but I would prefer to get you started wondering; as I did so many years ago. Does it have meaning for you?

What about the smudging? I urge you to “push your envelope” a little and stay here for it, unless your allergies prevent it. Does it feel too “out there” for you? Or is there something some how satisfying about sitting through a brief few minutes in within our ritual which are strange, yet comforting in their own way. And in either case, why do you feel what you feel? What is your heart saying to you about this experience?

Let me return to the concept that smudging clears the way. Now we have a new minister coming. But have we thought about what we are willing to give up, in order to make space for what we hope to put in the place of what went before? What are the comfortable old ways we have done things in this church, which need to be set aside for the new? What are the outdated visions of how we see this congregation, which now need to be plowed into the furrows, so that they can fertilize and support new growth? I encourage you to consider those questions in depth over the coming weeks.

Change is uncomfortable. But change is the only truth which is inevitable in life. Resisting change is difficult, but embracing change will transform you.

Here is our opportunity to transform ourselves.

Ritual is a way to make non-observable reality manifest. Who we hope to become in our spiritual journey can’t be seen. The emotions which are summoned up in ritual, their power, our connections with the divine are invisible which which are summoned forth in ritual are not tangible. But these are the seeds of something which can compel us to express then beyond the confines of ritual. They grow day by day and if we nurture them, they bloom in the actions we take in the world to express ourselves as the best of who we can they be, and take those first steps in the process of making our world the best it can be. They change us, and they change our world, casting their seeds in turn to everyone who is touched by what we do. They become manifest.

Feel the new wind which is blowing through this congregation. Be ready to plant the seeds of your choice within your heart. Embrace the wind, and be transformed!

 

Sandra Ries

To continue the theme of change and transformation, I share with you some words from Unitarian and from Universalist leaders from our history.

For an expression of our hope, we look to Clara Barton:

“I have an almost complete disregard of precedent, and a faith in the possibility of something better. It irritates me to be told how things have always been done. I defy the tyranny of precedent. I go for anything new that might improve the past.”

For an expression of our determination in days to come, we look to Henry David Thoreau:

“All endeavor calls for the ability to tramp the last mile, shape the last plan, endure the last hours toil. The fight-to-the-finish spirit is the one characteristic we must posses if we are to face the future as finishers.”

For inspiration, we look to Ralph Waldo Emerson:

Be not the slave of your own past. Plunge into the sublime seas, dive deep and swim far, so you shall come back with self-respect, with new power, with an advanced experience that shall explain and overlook the old.

 

Responsive Reading

The Spirit of those leaders who have walked this path before us, calls to us

We recognize their work, and its legacy.

They have joined people together in common purpose

Or have written in solitude and contemplation.

They have labored to bring justice and compassion to the world

And we are their heirs.

Each of us is human, each of us has stumbled and fallen

And yet we have risen, and we are gathered today.

With hope in our hearts, with joy in our vision

I seek to be nourished, I seek to nourish others.

Ready for new beginnings

I wish to be transformed, I wish to transform others.

Ready to help create a better world

I want to do justice, I want to join with others to do justice.

And so we set out on this journey together,

to participate in building a community of souls,

bringing our diverse perspectives together

To manifest the light within us, and around us

In this congregation, and in our lives

So May It Be!

 

As Stephanie said during the sermon, in a ritual, intent is important. In the group ritual we are about to perform, our shared intent makes it even more powerful. As Stephanie performs the smudging, I invite you to envision what “sacred space” means to you as an individual as well as to our congregation as a whole. And I invite you to reaffirm our sanctuary as a sacred space.

Endings and Beginnings

Nell Newton

Chris Jimmerson

Eric Hepburn

Brendan Sterne

Susan Thomson

Rev. Ed Brock

June 19, 2011

First UU Church of Austin

4700 Grover Ave., Austin, TX 78756

www.austinuu.org

Tribute to Ed Brock

Nell Newton

As Mick and Keith have already told us, “You can’t always get what you want, but you’ll get what you need.”

That is exactly what we got when we called Ed Brock and asked if he would consider serving as our interim minister for this past year. We didn’t know this at the time, but let me back up.

The process by which churches obtain interim ministers is much more streamlined than the search for settled ministers. While a settled search takes nine people about 18 months, an interim search can be done by five people in three months with the UUA serving as matchmaker.

Last spring we were wrapping up a successful and soothing year of interim ministry with Rev. Janet Newman. We knew we still had some work to do before we’d be ready to call a settled minister, and we’d heard stories about other interim ministers who specialize in shaking up the status quo. These are the SWAT ministers who come in swinging their brooms, with a critical eye for bad habits, and who cut no slack for sentimental tradition if it stands in the way of progress. Perhaps that’s what we should look for – a no-nonsense interim who would make us stand up straight, straighten our tie, and do things their way. It would be good for us. We knew we had some bad habits, and we were ready to be humbled, if necessary.

As the president of the congregation, I was kept apprised of the progress and would be the one to make any formal offers. The search team was sent four names of possible interims – and two had the reputation of being stem-to-stern change up specialists. Oooh! Perfect!

But nothing went as planned. For assorted reasons, none of those four names answered when we called to inquire. Oh dear. Perhaps we weren’t challenging enough for them? Or worse — maybe we were we too far gone…

I called the office at the UUA and tried not to let them hear the rising worry in my voice. Uh… could we maybe, uh… well, you see… we need more names… Of course, we’ll send more names. Not to worry, this happens all the time. Trust the process. You’ll get the right minister.

Four more names arrived, and immediately the search team pushed one name ahead of the others: Rev. Ed Brock. A minister trained in family systems theory – Oh! We’ve heard about family systems theory! And he’s a trained counselor – Oh! We could use some counseling! I was a little nervous when we called him. Would you? Could you? Consider us? Yes? Wonderful. Thank you. Yes! Yes! Yes!

When Ed first arrived, he didn’t kick in the doors, he didn’t tell us we were doing things all wrong, and he was nice. He was the kind of guy who would pull you over to the side and quietly tell you if you had spinach stuck in your front teeth. And during his first visit with the board, he gave us the nicest gift. He told us that during this year, we would be busy at work searching for our next settled minister, but that one thing we should always remember is that we already have our settled ministry in the form of our lay leadership and our community. We are the enduring ministry of this church.

Oh, my heart just melted then and there! Instead of telling us we were a lost cause, he had held up a mirror and showed us how strong, and lively, and beautiful we are.

Instead of marching ahead, he walked alongside us during a year of heavy work. He pointed out dusty places, and held a flashlight steady as we went into some dark spaces. He kept us company and encouraged us to keep going as we cleaned the windows, overhauled the by-laws, and learned to trust ourselves to do good work.

Ed’s ministry showed us that, No, you don’t always get what you think you want, but if you do the work, trust the process, and say “yes, yes, yes!” you’ll get what you need.

 


 

Chris Jimmerson

In the past year, I have had the opportunity to work with Rev. Brock, Ed, in a variety of ways and on a nearly weekly basis. After spending all of this time with him, I can tell you one thing for certain – The Reverend Edward L. Brock is …not normative.

And that’s a good thing! When it comes to large systems, oftentimes, normative is great because what has become normal practice is the result of much experience, experimentation and research to determine what works best.

In an interim minister though, normative could mean average, when what we are hoping for is excellence. Excellence is what we got in Ed Brock!

So, let me count the ways that Ed has been “not normative”.

1. Despite his self-effacing and modest disposition, Ed has dared to tell us how his experience and training might inform the opportunities and challenges we have encountered – to help up us begin to implement the covenant, governance and mission groundwork we had laid in our first year of interim ministry – even when it meant challenging prior ways of doing things and ingrained ways of thinking.

And all without disagreement or controversy!

2. He has sent us some of the wisest and most detailed email messages I have ever seen. Many of them sounded just like one of his sermons; some of them were shorter.

3. His sermons have contained a terrific mix of humor, inspiration and topical wisdom that we needed to hear. Some of them were even better than his email messages.

4. Ed gave some great stewardship speeches that helped increase pledges at a time when the church really needed it. As they said in the small Texas town where I grew up, “he can talk a dog off a piece of meat.”

5. Ed did all of this while mentoring not one but two new Unitarian Universalist ministerial aspirants. I’m so grateful for the advice and opportunities he has given me, not to mention for all of the various recommendation forms and paperwork he has had to complete for me as I applied to seminary, scholarship funds, the Unitarian Universalist Association, etc. In fact, it got to be so much extra work for Ed at one point that I took to taking previous forms he had filled out, reformatting them to fit wherever I was applying this time and giving them to Ed to sign if he was OK with what I had done.

Oh, that reminds me – (to Ed) Ed could you … (back to congregation) excuse me … (take to Ed) Ed, could you just sign and date this here. Oh, and on the second page also.

(Back to congregation) Sorry.

Suddenly I’m realizing, I can’t possibly cover all of the extraordinary gifts Ed has brought to us in the last year, so let me just close by saying this: If helping a congregation to call an exceptional settled minister by guiding us through the work necessary to chart a future filled with magnificent promise with that new settled minister is what we hope is “normative” for a second year interim ministry in UU churches, then Ed has set the new gold standard with us.

Thank you Ed, for a wonderful year.

 


 

Brenden Sterne

Our new congregational President Chris Jimmerson asked me to say a few words about this past year and the work that the church has accomplished with the help of Ed Brock. I am tempted to say a few nice things about Ed, but afraid that all the nice things that can be said about Ed have already been said, by Ed.

In all seriousness…

Early on during my first year on the Board of Trustees, a dozen or so of us sat around the tables on a hot Saturday morning in one of the classrooms, and Nell Newton, our president at the time, asked us to check-in by taking turns sharing with the group, what is was that we were giving up to be at church that Saturday

I thought it was a great idea to recognize what we sacrificing that day to do the work of governance. And that it would help us get to know each other better. There were a variety of answers. If I remember correctly I felt most keenly that I was missing time with my family – my daughter’s soccer game that morning, and maybe swimming in the afternoon.

Whenever anyone in our community, devotes some of the their time, talents or treasure in serving the mission of our church, they are giving up something too. Just to be here this morning, each of you has given up something. Maybe it’s time you could spend on your house. Or time reading. Or maybe it’s just sleep. As the parent of toddler I know how precious, precious sleep is. So we’re all giving up a little something to be here.

Ed was joking around these past two weeks as he asked us if we members of the congregation wouldn’t mind recording a brief message of support, that he could bring back with him and share with his family.

And if you reflect on that request for a moment – the human side of Ed comes out. On father’s day I think it’s particularly appropriate that we recognize that behind the professional role of Minister that Ed lives so well, there is also the role of husband and father. As many of you know Ed has a wife and children 7 and 9, in Washington state, that he has been apart from this year.

And that’s why he asked us record those videos. Because as he wants his wife and children to know why is doing what he does, and that what he is doing is important.

This shows that Ed has had to make some big sacrifices to be here with us. And what it also shows is how much faith he must have in our religion, and this church, leaving his family for a big part of this year.

Now I can’t speak for the good Reverend Ed, but I’ve come to know him a little bit, and I think that I understand why he is doing what he does. Just like most volunteers at our church – he does it for the money.

You can’t do Interim Ministry without a deep belief that what we do here at church is important. I can’t recall where I first heard the words, but they’ve stuck with me, and that is: ‘We have a life-saving message’.

Let that one sink in here for a second. ‘We have a life-saving message’. The ‘we’ in that sentence can mean Unitarian Universalism. And it can mean the First UU Church of Austin. Whatever works for you.

I know Ed really believes that we have a life-saving message, and that we can make a real difference in our community and the world.

I want to thank Ed for all his wonderful contributions to our church this year. And I want to thank the congregation for all your hard work and trust that you have placed in the board.

When I’m at church I’m always delighted to see that there is a community of people who are willing to make sacrifices – small and large – towards a higher purpose. I hope that you are, and continue to be nourished, and that you find your life being transformed, as I find mine.

I look forward to my final year on the board as your board secretary. And I’m excited about the arrival of our new Minister Meg Barnhouse.

 


 

Susan Thomson

I have been reflecting a lot lately on the state of our church 2 years ago and now. I was not excited about the prospect of an interim minister, even though I had been in congregations, including this church, with interim ministers of whom I was very fond. And perhaps that was why I was not looking forward to more as I had quickly bonded with these interim ministers only to have them move on from my congregation in a short time. So I was eager to just get on with it and hurriedly organize a search for our next settled minister. And if I had been the Grand Poobah, or the Decider, to quote a former President from Texas, that is exactly what we would have done.

I came to believe, though, in the wisdom of not only having one interim minister for one year but a second interim for the following year. Our church has been so blessed by both our interim ministers, Janet Newman and Ed Brock, who each brought different gifts at just the right time for us.

I have been struck in looking back on the past two year about how much our church has grown by doing things the right way. To have a deliberate transition from one settled minister to the next, with time for re-examination about who we are as a congregation, resulting in a beautiful new mission, values and ends-that was the right way to do things. For time to identify what needed to change to make us a better, healthier congregation as we prepare for our next settled minister-that was the right way to do things.

Joe Sullivan, a consultant with Unity Consulting, observed at our board retreat last weekend that we not only commissioned the Bridge Builders report from Peter Steinke, contrary apparently to many churches, we actually read it and actually implemented the actions called for in the report. So we have done many things the right way these past 2 years.

But what I would like to speak to today is not only the part that Rev. Brock has played in helping us do things the right way, but the courage he has demonstrated in pointing us toward the right thing to do. And there is a difference. Doing the right thing is much riskier. It involves poking more sacred cows. It is often more challenging to determine the right thing to do than to look through a rulebook or a policy manual for answers on the right way to do things. It takes more courage.

Ed has worked tirelessly to help us determine the right thing to do. He has done so with our mission, our values and our ends as his compass. And as we wish Ed Godspeed with grateful hearts for his time with us and prepare to welcome Meg, we know that we now have the foundation upon which we as a congregation can work tirelessly to do the right thing at First UU, to allow our mission and our values and our ends to guide us to become the thriving congregation we want to become.

 

 

When we pray

Nell Newton

March 13, 2011

You can listen to the sermon by clicking the play button below.

“Laughter is also a form of prayer.” Kierkegaard

Sermon: When We Pray

I am here to report back to you all that prayer has been discovered to exist among Unitarian Universalists! Back at the end of November I was up here and mused a bit on what prayer might look like for us. After dispensing with the juvenile aspects of prayer (oh lord, won’t you buy me a mercedez benz?) I asked you all to consider the possible uses of prayer, and to tell me about your experiences with prayer. Many of you kindly responded with wonderful stories. And yes, despite your stern and sensible exteriors, many of you have private rituals and words that, if looked at out of the corner of the eye, would bear strong resemblance to prayer.

This might be unexpected to those who don’t know us well. We do not have a fixed liturgy of prayer in our denomination. The rituals and words we have here at this church are not necessarily shared in other UU churches. You cannot walk into any UU church on a given Sunday and hear the same words spoken in the same way at the same time in the service. Our congregational roots give us the freedom to construct our worship as we see fit. Sometimes we include prayer and sometimes we don’t. While we treasure this freedom, some have pointed out that we might actually have a hollow space, a place otherwise filled by a shared and powerful practice of prayer. We have no common words to carry us through the rough parts of the journey — no call and response that wraps everyone together. Honestly, it is my guess that we would not trust any attempt at a one-size-fits all common prayer. But, while Unitarian Universalists are expected to build our own theologies, we often are not given the tools or formal instruction in how to build any prayers. In some ways, this is an underdeveloped part of our denominational psyche. We’re all over social action and the more cerebral bits of spirituality, but too often we don’t do the basics of grief and loss very well. And when we hit these terrifying transitions in life, we have no vocabulary to help us see ourselves as part of something larger, and we feel uncomfortable with our human need to ask for assurance in the face of self doubt or crisis.

Some have identified this as a “shadow” issue for Unitarian Universalists. “Shadow” because prayer was often rejected when we migrated out of mainstream churches. It was left behind or pushed away as a superstitious vehicle of dogma. But so often, that which we reject is exactly that which we need to be whole. And just as we are slowly reclaiming god-talk and other aspects of spirituality, the necessary re-examination of prayer will provoke anxiety until we learn to put prayer into a UU framework.

The good news is that when we do pray, we are inclusive and expansive. And, as a lifelong UU I see this empty spot as open and beckoning, a blank book that each of us is expected to fill in. But how do we begin?

Many of us started with prayers from our source traditions and, like careful seamstresses, let out places that were too tight and added in ease with amended words. Several people shared fresh translations of the Christian Lord’s Prayer which they use to serve as a grounding point in their days. Try this version and see if it fits better:

Great Spirit of all the universe, father and mother to us all We stand here in gratitude for all that is given to us. Please guide us to an awareness of the profound peace, wholeness, growth, and bounty that is possible. Teach us to recognize grace and forgiveness and to practice this in our lives. Bring us what we need each day and guide us to the contributions we can make that give our lives meaning. Thank you! Amen. Blessed Be.

Others among us left our home traditions and struck out into wilder woods. We learned to pray or meditate from other teachers, foreign and domestic. And even though we eventually made our way into this sanctuary, we brought along some interesting souvenirs from our experiences. Handy bits of Buddhism or calming affirmations — struck and stuck with us, and are touchstones we reach for in moments of crisis or joy.

And there are also the homemade prayers – made from durable materials we find laying about, or custom cast. Here are some tips to guide you in this process:

  • Remember that “God” is not god’s name! How you address your prayer must only make sense to you.
  • Whether you choose to focus on the holy outside or to connect more closely with the divine residing inside your own skin is again, your choice.
  • Prayer need not have anything to do with the supernatural! It can be a humanistic, naturalistic, or an ecstatic grounding of the self in the moment.

Retired UU minister Annie Foerster has pointed out that the traditional prayers were once new. And that the Psalms in the Hebrew bible were created by poets and lovers. She instructs us to think like poets and lovers as we set out to create our own prayers.

When I sit in prayer here at church, I close myself in to more closely feel the warmth and pulse of my palms pressed together. I feel my own breath close by. I find my center, where my universe spins, and I breathe. I find my bones and my blood and I breathe. I find my skin and my nerves and I breathe. Then I still myself just enough to become aware of the Everpresent. And that is when the tears of astonishment begin.

In my earlier sermon I spoke of prayers of intercession as a more juvenile form – but I have since changed my mind. Mature prayers of petition are not self-serving wishing and whining. Truly mature prayers that ask for something beyond oneself can be powerful and healing. One man explained that he had never been taught to pray, but now that he is older, he finds himself praying frequently. After surviving cancer, heart attack, and stroke, I think he’s entitled to whatever keeps him strong. But, here’s what struck me about his prayer – its simplicity and selflessness. The prayer he utters during times of stress or suffering consists of this simple sentence: “Oh God, help this go well.” “Oh God, help this go well.” He admits that he doesn’t know what “going well” might mean, but he’s seen so many ways that things can go bad. And, note that he’s not asking for “the best”, just “well”. He’ll be grateful for that.

Now, let’s think of the children… How or even should we teach our children to pray? Must we ask that they give thanks for what they already know is their birthright? And I doubt that many of us have laid them down to sleep, their souls offered up for god to keep. But what prayers might we weave above their heads so that they might feel loved and protected throughout the night? I’ll admit, when our son was born we filled his nursery with a Korean grandma spirit face, a St. Anthony medal, a Sri Lankan tiger mask, a Turkish glass eye amulet, and a dream catcher his grandmother made to keep him safe from evil spirits. And, for the record, he’s always been a good sleeper!

After listening to my first sermon, a fellow shared one prayer memory. He remembered being a little kid out shopping with his Mom. They were at the shoe-store, and he saw one of those sit-in metal cars that usually had pedals. But this one was battery powered and was on display as the prize in a drawing. That car totally captivated him. He was filled with utter desire, became obsessed with it, and probably annoyed his parents over it. He prayed to win that car. Prayed hard. But, for some reason he gave god an out: “Let me win that car or let me forget about it.” It was twenty years before he thought of that car again. He’s still not sure why he gave god an option. And he’s still not sure why the event came back up to the surface decades later but he recognizes that it reflects Kierkegaard’s insight that “The function of prayer is not to influence God, but rather to change the nature of the one who prays.”

My 12 year old daughter recently reported with some bitterness that she’s done with prayer because she’s tried it and it doesn’t work. Thinking back to my own trip through the maelstrom that is the world of the 12 year old girl, I had to agree with her prayer is pretty useless here. But this is because, I suspect that if there is a god, like so many fathers, he prefers to jam his fingers in his ears and hum loudly when faced with his daughter’s demand that he referee adolescent disputes. And, I also suspect that if there is a goddess, like the wisest of mothers, she simply smiles with compassion at her daughter’s despair and says “there, there” but leaves her to learn on her own.

Nonetheless if we are to be our children’s spiritual guides, we’d better start modeling the behaviors we want them to consider normal and useful. We’d better show them how we give thanks and what prayer looks like when it’s more than just wishful thinking.

When our children were little our bedtime ritual included a soothing inversion of counting one’s blessings. Instead of praying to god to take care of folks, we would calm down by bestowing blessings. “Blessings on Grandma Gerry, blessings on Cousin Bella, blessings on the kitties, blessings on the baby chicks, blessings on our neighbor Helen…. Our lists were exhaustive – exhaustion was part of the goal here – but more importantly the ritual was one where we called for and implicitly co-created the blessings. I did not teach them that blessings were the sole labor of a god – blessings are our work as well. By spooling through our friends, family, and pets each night we closed down one day and laid out our work for the next.

And now, what about those of us for whom prayer has no use? There are many of us for whom prayer feels like a hollow chanting into emptiness. I will acknowledge that prayer is not essential to happiness. However, for those of us who do not feel a need to connect to an eternal presence, may I invite you to connect to the essential parts of the human experience that are best expressed in poetry? For, there are times in our lives when ordinary conversation will not suffice and we want the finest of words available to carry us through the moment. And this is where poetry serves and saves us. Go find a poem – long, short, old, or new. Dig it out of a dusty anthology on your bookshelf. Poets.org will send you a fresh poem every day if you like! But find a poem, and carry it around in your pocket or your head for a while. Read it in your spare moments. Find another one and hold that one for a while. Write your own. Gather a handful of poems that you can hold onto for those times when you are sick at heart, or when joy erupts and spills out as tears.

My father retains the last few lines of the poem April Inventory by his friend W.D. Snodgrass: Though trees turn bare and girls turn wives, We shall afford our costly seasons; There is a gentleness survives That will outspeak and has its reasons. There is a loveliness exists, Preserves us, not for specialists

The one line “there is a loveliness exists” is his favorite. It encompasses and affirms the grace he has found in life, and has carried those words around for some fifty years.

There are some of us who still pull up short and feel the scarred places — for whom prayer is still linked too tightly to a previous church experience that hurt or denied our whole selves. I think of this as spiritual “Sauce-Bearnaise” syndrome. That is the term used in psychology for conditioned taste aversion to explain the quirk of our brains and palates that associates the last thing you ate right before becoming nauseated, with the illness – regardless of its actual influence. What this means, is that if you had a meal with sauce Bearnaise and shortly thereafter become ill, you are likely to find sauce Bearnaise unappealing for sometime thereafter – even if the sauce had nothing to do with your illness. This is a useful adaptation for omnivores – a good way to learn to avoid bad foods. However, too many of us who will have nothing to do with prayer because of the indigestible theologies that it was mixed with, and that left us feeling clammy and unwell. For those of us who might still be made queasy when presented with prayer, try this soothing mint tea in the form of words from the English mystic Julian of Norwich: All shall be well, And all shall be well And all manner of things shall be well.”

Now, here’s a challenge for the really bold among us – going public with our prayer! What would it be like to offer a prayer as a greeting or farewell? What if you could sincerely and unselfconsciously offer “Bless your heart” and not have it taken the wrong way? Would you take a moment before you tear into the basket of chips and salsa you are sharing with friends and be brazen enough to look them all straight on and say, “I am so glad to be here with you all” and mean it as a blessing? Would you share a ritual of parting with a dear person? Remember my pragmatic Aunt Ruth? The one who didn’t want folks praying for her? I’ll tell you something she does every time a precious friend prepares to leaves her house – she simply says “Go well”, and those of us who know and love her answer “Stay well”. It is a blessing that flows both ways, and makes the moment of parting sacred. For our taciturn Midwestern clan, that is some pretty heartfelt stuff.

What would your days be like if you were to invoke the holy into ordinary moments? Not as a superstitious warding off of evil spirits, but to call awareness to the slippery rocks we are treading upon. So many things can go wrong in a moment — what would it be like if you could simply ask “may this go well”. For, truly, it is the pure heart and pure intention that turns simple words into prayer, and simple rituals into holy time.

Ours is an empty book to fill. We are creative people, with the courage to be changed. Keep me posted.

March 12, 2011 ©

Experience of the Holy

Chris Jimmerson

February 20, 2011

You may listen to the sermon by clicking the play button below.

Sermon

Ralph Waldo Emerson famously asked, “Why should not we enjoy an original relation with the universe?”

Last year, when we were in the process of discerning that wonderful mission statement, along with our values and ends, our facilitators had us participate in an exercise they called the “Experience of the Holy”. They put us in pairs and asked that each of us in the pair tell the other of a time when we had experienced the holy.

Here is how they described such experiences and encouraged us to recall them:

“I invite you to reflect on an experience of the Holy in your life — A time when you felt connected to something larger than yourself, a time when you felt your heart and mind expand.”

As a member of your Board of Trustees, I was fortunate not only to get to participate in this exercise myself but to be asked to observe as other pairs described to one another their experiences of the holy.

I remember that the irony in a bunch of non-theistic humanists sitting in a church talking about holy experiences was not lost on me.

On the other hand, I do not remember anyone saying, “I don’t know what you’re talking about and I have never had such an experience.”

But mostly, I remember how powerful and moving it was.

The individual stories of what prompted peoples’ experience of the holy varied widely. Some people spoke of it happening right here in the church, when the actions of our community evoked something transformative within them.

Some of the women spoke of giving birth. Other people spoke of quiet times surrounded by the beauty of nature. Some spoke of being moved into the experience through listening to music, viewing a wonderful piece of art, watching an exhilarating moment of live theatre. Still others told of experiencing the holy during the simple or the seemingly mundane – just catching the beauty of patterns of sunlight streaming through the kitchen blinds. One war veteran told of holding a dying buddy in their arms, of being the last person who would hold and comfort their friend.

The stories were beautiful and evoked a wide range of events from the solitary to occurrences of being a part of something terrific in a large group. The descriptions of the experience of the holy though, were remarkably alike, and people expressed that they were struggling to convey their experience because normal, everyday words and emotions were inadequate.

This is how some of your fellow church members struggled to describe their experience of the holy:

“I was enveloped by mystery, awe and wonder.”

Another person said, “I felt suddenly at peace with myself and with everything – connected to something larger.”

Another said, “It was hyper-realistic, being truly present and in the present, receptive to greater wisdom than can be known in words.”

Someone else put it as “timeless, transcendent, a sense of unity and compassion with and for, well, everything.”

We described these experiences as deeply meaningful, profoundly moving and powerfully motivating, sometimes life altering.

Reverend Dr. William F. Schulz, the most recent self-described humanist to serve as President of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations called this the “apprehension of the holy” and spoke of the holy being “embodied in the abundance of a scarred creation.” One of our church’s values, “Transcendence – To connect with the wonder and awe of the unity of life”, is another way of trying to describe this.

Humanistic psychology’s founder, Abraham Maslow, described essentially the same type of experiences as what he called “peak experiences”, and he believed that they were instances wherein people become maximally what he referred to as “self-actualized”. More recently, researchers have examined similar phenomenon, such as “quantum experiences”, a sort of peak experience that the person evaluates as profound in a life changing way, and “flow” experiences, a sense of timelessness and ultimate fit in the universe.

You probably remember that Maslow was the creator of the pyramid or hierarchy of human needs. In Maslow’s hierarchy, as our basic needs, such as food, water and shelter get met, we move up through successions of higher level needs. Finally, if each of the preceding levels of needs have all been met, human development results in our fulfilling our highest need, self-actualization. He described self-actualized people as, creative, fulfilled, fully alive, connected with something larger, dedicated to justice, compassionate, playful – well, basically what most Unitarian Universalists want to be when we grow up.

Maslow described these characteristics as “Being-values” and found that they were parts of the knowledge people reported carrying forward from within their peak experiences. He found descriptions of such experiences across all cultures and within all of the world’s major religions.

Maslow thought that peak experiences were random occurrences of self-actualization that arise when uncontrollable life events happen to push us into a moment of such self-actualization. In fact, he said, “In general, we are ‘Surprised by Joy’. Peaks come unexpectedly…. you can’t count on them. And hunting them is like hunting happiness. It’s best not done directly. It comes as a by-product, an epiphenomenon, for instance, of doing a fine job at a worthy task you can identify with”. Thus, he did not think we could induce our own experience of the holy; although, he did seem to think that self-actualized people might be more likely to have peak moments.

Recent research has found that Maslow was only partially right – that there may be a neurobiological mechanism behind peak experiences that can be activated not only by random life events of being “surprised by joy” but also though meditation and other forms of what I will call spiritual ritual and practice. Using a brain scanning technique called Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography or SPECT, researchers examined brain activity in a group of experienced meditators. What they found is that while meditating, particularly at the point of reaching a deep meditative state, wherein the meditators reported experiencing a sense of universal connectedness, a peak experience, there was decreased activity in the areas of the brain normally associated with a sense of ones own body image and with the sense of the time and space one inhabits.

Could this explain the experience of the holy? Could this elucidation of a potential biological mechanism behind our peak experiences mean that such experiences are really just delusions?

Further research examined long-term meditators and found that their brain patterns, even in a non-meditative state, were different from the patterns in people who do not meditate. The researchers also found that the brain patterns during meditation were different from those induced by dream states, as well as different from those associated with delusions, including delusions with religious themes. In fact, they reported that, unlike people who experience a delusion, people who have these peak experiences articulate them as hyperlucid and MORE real than their normal state.

This has led some to question a purely reductionist interpretation of the SPECT research as failing to explain the whole of the experience – to find yet more awe and mystery in the fact the we appear to be biologically equipped with the capacity to experience the holy.

The SPECT researchers themselves, taking perhaps a more postmodern viewpoint, stated “…spiritual or mystical states of reality recalled in the baseline state as more certainly representing an objective condition than what is represented in the sensorium of the baseline state must be considered real”. Whew! In other words, intellectual investigation alone cannot reveal the experience itself. Knowing the potential mechanism may not fully explain — or explain away — the phenomenon — or epiphenomenon, as Maslow put it.

Beyond this, there is also evidence that peak experiences can be beneficial. Studies have found that meditation and other spiritual rituals can reduce anxiety and stress, even blood pressure, not only in the moment, but also over the longer-term. Even more fascinating, research has shown that peak experiences can lead to what some psychologists have termed “quantum change” – a sudden shift in one’s values from things like achievement, fitting in, attractiveness, career, wealth and power to values such as peace, humility, spirituality, forgiveness, growth, creativity and generosity.

It appears Maslow’s theory about “Being Values” and self-actualization may have been correct. Perhaps, we should lock our political and economic leaders in a retreat center and tell them “we will not let you out until you have experienced the holy!”

More and more, I have come to believe that we do enjoy Emerson’s “original relation with the universe”. I have had too many of these experiences to answer otherwise and believe that they can have profound implications for how we live our lives – how we are ABLE to live our lives.

I’ve known the movement toward wholeness and self-actualization, the shift in values, that can occur in these experiences, but this knowing comes from within the experience of the holy itself and is a knowledge that like other people, I have trouble expressing in normal, everyday language. I’m struggling to express it now.

Maybe I can come closest though, by sharing one of these peak moments that, for me, led to a beneficial change in life direction, even though it occurred during a time that was contained a sense of sadness over an anticipated loss. Maybe, it is the sharing of these experiences, no matter how difficult it is to find an adequate vocabulary for describing them that allows us to bring forward those “Being-values” that Maslow talked about.

My parents divorced when my brother and sister and I were very young, so my maternal grandparents became more like a second set of parents to us. They helped raise us while my mother worked often long hours. They were our role models and always instilled in us a sense of worth, value and respect for ourselves and for others. I owe much of the adult I became to them.

Later, they welcomed my partner, Wayne, into our family with great love and genuine warmth. In fact, my grandmother always called us “her boys”, even long after a time where either of us could claim any resemblance to the term. However, we had never discussed the … exact nature … of our relationship with my grandparents. My Grandfather was a deacon in the First Baptist Church of Groves, Texas, after all. Still, to their great credit, they treated us both with genuine love, even if it was never openly discussed.

After my grandfather died, my grandmother only lived two more years. Wayne and I were visiting her in the hospital for what we all knew would likely be the last time – she had congestive heart failure and had decided against any more medical intervention after having been in and out of the hospital too many times, after deciding to let go with grace and dignity.

As we said our goodbyes and prepared to leave, she took us both by the hand and said, “Take care of each other.”

Then she locked her eyes with mine.

It was only a moment, maybe even less. Just an instant.

In that instant, we knew as much love as it is possible for human beings to comprehend — more love than the mere humans in the room could contain. The love rushed forth, sweeping us into a different state of experience, spreading us out into an ever expanding way of being, permeating us with all that is holy.

In that instant, we experienced existing in connection with, being one with, not just each other, but with all that has ever been and ever will be. In that instant, we experienced existing in all times and all places at once and yet outside of linear time and in no material space at all.

For an instant, we knew all that we would ever need to know.

I still carry something of that knowledge with me now, but in fragments, in smaller pieces of understanding, because the knowing that occurs during these experiences is a knowing that is outside our usual language of thinking and emotions. That is why it is so hard to express our experiences of the holy to others.

Perhaps, it is a level of understanding that occurs in a more fundamental, yet more encompassing language; a knowing that exists in a language we can only rarely fully access – a language that we have sometimes called, “God”.

Still, I believe those smaller pieces of understanding we are able to retain are important, because they are the burning embers that have the potential to spark further peak experiences and quantum change — what we call in our church’s values, “transformation — to pursue the growth that changes our lives and heals our world”.

I wonder, since research has shown that these peak experiences can lead to a shift in our values, if it is possible that the reverse is also true. I wonder if, combined with spiritual practice, living those values can help us experience the holy more and more, further reinforcing and deepening those same values? I wonder if living lives of transcendence, compassion and courage, if gathering in community to nourish souls, transform lives and do justice wouldn’t be the ultimate experience of the holy?

I say we find out! Let’s conduct our own experiment by bringing our best translation of that “language of mystery and awe”, our values and mission, into a growing, vital, thriving reality.

I invite us to actualize the Holy in our lives — to actively seek connection with something larger than ourselves, to continuously expand our hearts and minds.

I invite us to embrace our original relation with the universe.

Benediction

In “Our Humanist Legacy”, Rev. Dr. William F. Schulz wrote: “What is of supreme importance is that I live my life in a posture of gratitude-that I recognize my existence and, indeed, Being itself, as an unaccountable blessing, a gift of grace. Sometimes, it is helpful to call the source or fact of that grace God and sometimes not. But what is always helpful and absolutely necessary is to look kindly on the world, to be bold in pursuit of its repair, and to be comfortable in the embrace of its splendor. I know no better term for what I seek than an encounter with the Holy.”

May we each go forth and encounter the holy in our world, be open to its presence in our lives — however we may know it.

Amen.

Beyond Categorical Thinking

Rev. Keith Kron

UUA Director of  Ministerial Transition

January 23, 2011

You can listen to the sermon by clicking the play button at the bottom of the page.

Reading

“Eleven” by Sandra Cisneros

What they don’t understand about birthdays and what they never tell you is that when you’re eleven, you’re also ten, and nine, and eight, and seven, and six, and five, and four, and three, and two and one.

And when you wake up on your eleventh birthday you expect to feel eleven, but you don’t.

You open your eyes and everything’s just like yesterday, only it’s today.

And you don’t feel eleven at all. You feel like you’re still ten. And you are – underneath the year that makes you eleven.

Like some days you might say something stupid and that’s the part of you that’s still ten.

Or maybe some days you might need to sit on your mother’s lap because you’re scared, and that’s the part of you that’s five.

And maybe one day when you’re all grown up maybe you will need to cry like you’re three, and that’s okay.

That’s what I tell Mama when she’s sad and needs to cry. Maybe she’s feeling three. Because the way you grow old is kind of like an onion or like the rings inside a tree trunk or like my little wooden dolls that fit one inside the other, each year inside the next. That’s how being eleven years old is.

You don’t feel eleven. Not right away. It takes a few days, weeks even, sometimes even months before you say “Eleven” when they ask you.

And you don’t feel smart eleven, not until you’re almost twelve. That’s the way it is.

Reading

“The Possum” by Cynthia Rylant

from The Van Gogh Cafe

Kansas is not what one would call picturesque. It is flat. So flat it could make some people a little crazy, people who need a hill now and then to keep their balance. But in Kansas at least things get noticed. The flatness makes everything count and not one thing slips by. That is why, if a possum was going to choose to hang upside down somewhere, Kansas would be a good choice. People would notice. And if the possum chose to hang outside the window of the Van Gogh Cafe in Flowers… well then, everyone would start talking about magic. And that would be good for the possum, too.

The Van Gogh Cafe is owned by a young man named Marc and his daughter, Clara. Clara is one reason for all of the magic in the cafe. She is ten and believes anything might happen.

Marc and Clara open up the cafe at six every morning except Sundays, when they sleep until ten. Clara takes breakfast orders for MarcÑwho is the cookÑfor half an hour on school mornings, then she goes to their apartment across the street to get ready for school. Clara likes taking orders because everyone is sleepy and sweet and all they want in the world is a cup of coffee, please. Clara thinks morning is the kindest time of day.

Most of the people who come to the Van Gogh Cafe are Flowers people and know each other: “Hi Ray.” “Hello, Roy.” But sometimes someone is new, for Flowers sits near I-70, which people take when they are escaping from an old life in the East to a new life in the West or the other way around. Clara has met many people between six and six-thirty on their way to something new.

But she has not met a possum until today. Today is Saturday and she’s working a couple extra hours for her father, and it is eight o’clock in the morning when suddenly a possum is hanging upside down in the tree outside the cafe window. Right on Main Street. A minute ago it wasn’t there and now it is.

Clara sees it first: Look, there’s a possum. Coffee cups go down, heads turn, and outside a little gray possum enjoys being noticed. It scratches its nose and blinks its eyes and stares back at all the faces.

No one sitting down can say hello to a possum. So everyone in the cafe gets up and stands in front of the window. Now, this is the magic of the Van Gogh Cafe: not one person says, “Amazing! A possum upside down on Main Street!” No, everyone is not all that surprised. They, like Clara, have come to believe anything might happen, because they have been having breakfast at the Van Gogh Cafe all their lives.

What they do say is, “Hi.” Many of them wave. Ray asks Roy what possums eat. And, with their usual curiosity about every new person in Flowers, they all say, “Wonder where he’s from?”

Well, it’s hard to know a possum’s story before he does something magical, but after he does, there’s story and more to tell.

One of the first stories is that the possum starts coming back to the Van Gogh Cafe every day. Eight in the morning, he’s up in the tree.

But that’s a small story.

The possum begins to attract people, and this is the bigger story because he attracts people who haven’t been getting along. Best friends who had a fight the day before: today they’re standing on the sidewalk next to the possum. The possum is hanging upside down and blinking, and the two friends are talking, and suddenly they’ve got their arms around each other and are coming into the cafe for some pie.

A young husband and wife: the day before they’re yelling in the front yard, the next day they’re kissing beside the possum.

Two neighbors: the day before they’re arguing about loud music, the next day the possum is watching them shake hands.

The story becomes even bigger when people start bringing food out of the Van Gogh Cafe, food for the possum. Half an English muffin here, two pieces of oven-fried potatoes there, a cup of milk. They can’t help themselves; they want to give it some food. The possum isn’t hungry. But a stray dog from the other end of town is, and he starts stopping by for breakfast. So does a thin cat and two baby kittens. And a shy small mouse. Several sparrows. Even a deer.

And this goes on for a while until the biggest story happens. A story that will enter quietly into the walls of the cafe and become part of its magic.

For a man whose wife has died drives through Flowers, Kansas, one morning on his way to something new. He is sad. He really isn’t sure where he’s going.

But passing the Van Gogh Cafe, he sees the possum. He sees the possum and he sees all the hungry animals standing beneath it, eating the scraps of muffins and potatoes. And the man sees something else there, too, something no one has seen until now. And because of what he sees, he turns his car around and drives back where he belongs, back to his farm, which he turns into a home for stray animals, animals who come to him and take away his loneliness.

Since that day the possum at the Van Gogh Cafe has disappeared. One minute it was there, the next minute it wasn’t.

But the customers still bring food out of the cafe every morning, leaving scraps beneath the tree in case anyone hungry happens by. There is always a new stray dog, a new thin cat, sparrows.

Clara is not surprised the possum has gone away. Things are always changing at the Van Gogh Cafe, and something new is sure to happen soon. Perhaps when the silent movie star arrives…

Sermon

The Van Gogh Cafe

Not surprisingly I was unpacking children’s books at the time.

My principal, Jay Jordan, walked into my classroom and closed the door. He surveyed my room and shook his head, definitely a Keith Kron fourth grade classroom–a few books here (well, more than a few books), a few chairs there, two bulletin boards scattered all over the floor, my desk already swamped with papers. And school would not start for two days yet.

We looked at each other, and I knew I was at the OK Corral. I wasn’t sure what I was about to be shot for, but I knew something was up.

Perhaps you have seen the face and fidgeting of a nine-year-old child who lied to you twenty minutes before about having to go to the rest room and now really needed to go. My principal looked somewhat less composed than that.

He asked me if I had gotten his message from the day before about wanting to talk to him about something. I told him I had. Silence. More fidgeting. I began to have an inkling about what this conversation was going to be about.

“I am glad we’re on your turf,” Jay said. He looked at me for a minute. I nodded. Silence. Jay took a breath.

“You know Tristan Burke is no longer on your class list.” I nodded again.

“His mother made me take him out of your class.” Jay looked down and then back up. I nodded again. Tristan’s mother was president of the PTA that year. I only vaguely knew who Tristan was–and the only thing I knew about him was that he was the most effeminate boy I had encountered in five years of teaching.

“His mother made me take him out of your class because she says she knows you’re a homosexual. I don’t know how she knows it, but she knows it.” Jay looked at me. I looked at him and could see the wheels spinning in his head. I would wonder later if he could see the wheels spinning in mine.

Fortunately, and sadly, I had prepared for this moment. I had no doubts it would come at some point. Years of thinking about it had almost kept me from going into teaching, but the call to teach had won out.

I knew to say nothing. I knew to wait to be asked, then I would answer yes, and only then. I raised my eyebrows back at him. More silence. Part of me was hoping he would ask, that I would be given an opportunity to tell him, that I could finally tell my story.

He didn’t ask. He broke the silence. “This is ridiculous. You’re not the type to harm children.”

We looked at each other. I nodded quietly, realizing the support I was getting. It was a bittersweet moment for both of us. Jay finally mumbled, “I shouldn’t have pulled him out of your class.”

“She would have made your year horrible. Mine, too, for that matter.” I paused. “It’s okay.”

Jay nodded quietly back at me.

“We did reading groups today. Tristan will be in my class for reading. It’s an hour each day.” My voice trailed off.

Jay was firmer now. “You’ll get my backing. She’ll just have to deal with it. There’s another parent concerned too. I’ll deal with him too. We won’t talk about this again.” Jay surveyed my room.

“Now get this room cleaned up. I don’t know how you are going to be ready to teach in two days.” He spun on his heels and turned toward the door. He opened it and turned to me.

“I’m glad we did this on your turf,” he repeated.

He looked at me one last time, tried to smile, and left, closing the door behind him.

For the next four years, I never heard any of those complaints again. Tristan and I got along famously. I invited his mother into my reading class to help out when she could. She did, and we laughed a lot together. From me she learned the fine art of teasing children–and probably a few other things.

It occurs to me to tell you why I am here–why I do the work now as Director of the Office of Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, and Transgender Concerns for our Unitarian Universalist Association–and not teaching fourth grade anymore.

I left because I was afraid.

It is more than being found out and fired because I was a known homosexual, though that’s certainly part of it. The longer I stuck around the greater the odds were that my private life would become public knowledge.

My parents, who have not used the words “gay” or “homosexual” in the twenty plus years I have been out to them, are a part of this story too. My dad was a principal in the same school system as I, and my mother taught first grade in Lexington as well. I never had the opportunity to think of fighting this battle alone, and my folks had given a lifetime of modeling to know how to overprotect people. Any public battle I chose there would have included them.

I lived four lives in Lexington, Kentucky. I lived a work life where I loved the work of teaching elementary school. I lived a family life where I had dinner with my folks once a week, visited my grandmother a lot, and overspent on my young relatives at Christmas. I lived a gay life where I hung out with friends, led a support group, and played volleyball. I lived a religious life where I sat on every committee in my home UU congregation and moved on to district and denominational work beyond that.

I even managed to begin to see some overlapping. Certainly my work life and family life overlapped some. And as I came out in church, my gay life and my religious life began to merge. I worked very hard at making my church a welcoming place for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. I worked very hard at bringing gays, lesbians, and bisexuals into my church. And it happened.

It happened in part because I started telling stories in church. I was able to tell the story about having a crush on Mr. Gardner, my high school drama teacher, and then telling him about it. I was able to tell the story of being in very Southern Baptist church as a teenager and having my “Anita Bryant” type Sunday school teacher ask me if I agreed with her that homosexuals were sick people.

I was able to tell the story of coming out to my parents and having my father ask me if I was going to molest children while my mother cried. I was able to tell the story of meeting a Unitarian Universalist minister in a gay bar and that’s how I became a Unitarian Universalist.

I was becoming aware that not only could I be eleven and ten and nine and eight and seven and six and five and four and three and two and one, but I could talk about them as well. You see, my real fear was not that someone like my principal would ask me if I was gay, would ask me my story. My real fear is that I would never get to tell it.

This is what the radical right wants–to control our society so that only certain approved stories can be told.

I was afraid I would never get to have a life. I was afraid I would always have four of them.

My fear was not that my private life would become public knowledge. My fear was either that it never would, or it would happen only on someone else’s terms.

When I hear people say they want to make sure they have a private life and a public life, I wonder, “Do they really want two lives?” Categories for human beings are really a bad idea.

I think I learned that during my conversation with my principal.

As an aside, I do understand that people are talking about control and choice when they make the point about having a private life. I’m all for that. I just believe human beings do better when they only have one life to juggle. It’s more than enough to do.

So it was after this conversation with my principal when I began to know the need to make a change. I looked around me and became sadly aware of the number of people leading more than one life at a time.

My teaching colleague who had been married to a man with a sexual addiction for children.

My father who tried to pretend he never had a father and never talked, or talks, about him.

My friend Steve who quit playing the piano because he became a librarian.

My friend Saundra who told no one about her live-in boyfriend, Dick.

All of these people and so many more who never got to be eleven. It was hardest for me to see in the children I taught. Children who came to school and then went home and cooked and cleaned for younger brothers and sisters. Children who knew they could not fail. Children who went home to wars. And by the time they were nine years old they knew to keep these lives quiet.

Religious Educator Maria Harris talks about implicit education–what is taught without saying it. I knew I was implicitly teaching these children to have more than one life. There had to be a better way.

I looked at how I might make it a better way. I learned of cities that had nondiscrimination policies for teachers. I did not trust that those were real.

I looked at the amount of work I had to do. And I thought about the fact that I often spent more time documenting what I taught and how I taught it and who was there to hear it, than I did actually getting to teach.

So I decided to look elsewhere. The person I saw doing the most teaching was my minister and the other ministers I knew. And they didn’t have to fill out report cards either.

I remembered Jesus was a teacher in many ways. Rabbis consider themselves as teachers. I watched the UU ministers I knew and I watched the way they taught the people around them–by telling stories, often their stories.

At the same time I was leading homophobia workshops in UU congregations–not how to have more of it, mind you, but how to have less. I learned quickly three things about teaching adults.

1) They don’t necessarily have longer attention spans than children. They just do a better job of faking. Usually engaging people on an emotional level increases their attentiveness.

2) Adult learning is as much about unlearning as it is about learning.

3) The product isn’t nearly as important as the process.

So how do you teach people to be less homophobic? You are explicitly teaching them about homophobia. You are implicitly teaching them about vulnerability.

That’s where the possum shows up. That’s where the magic happens. As people let themselves become more vulnerable, they become stronger and less homophobic. I did this through telling stories–sometimes my stories. And I was blessed with the stories of others.

I saw the possibility for having one life.

A friend of mine from seminary and I were talking one day and she said you could learn a fair amount about a person by asking them these four questions:

1) When did you stop singing?

2) When did you stop dancing?

3) When did you stop playing?

4) When did you stop telling your story?

For the record, I stopped singing in third grade in music class when Mrs. Rice told me I couldn’t sing–though I still hum to myself when I think no one is looking.

I still go dancing.

I still play.

And as I told my friend, “It’s more a matter of when I started telling my story than when I stopped.”

I stopped telling my story at fourteen. It would be ten years later that I started telling some of my stories again. It’s only been in the last few years that I’ve not had to figure out what story I could tell where.

Like the story of the possum, one story leads to another. And when we hear our story in another’s story, well, that’s the magic. That’s when we encounter mystery.

What are your stories? Have you stopped telling them? Do you only tell them in certain places, in certain lives? How well do you know the stories of those around you? The stories in this room–your stories–are magical. I hope you are not afraid to tell them. They are your life and they let you be fully eleven or whatever age you are.

A final story from the Van Gogh Cafe’ and then I will close.

It is winter at the cafe’.

Marc is in the back cooking, though the restaurant is empty. Clara is putting napkins into the napkin holder when a man walks in. He is tall and slender and moves like water. He is strikingly handsome and a fabulous dresser. Black cloak, black cashmere scarf, black wool gloves, black cane.

His white hair sets it off perfectly. He must be 90. Clara takes his order.

“Tea, plain. Boiled egg, please. Thank you.”

Clara thinks there is something romantic about him.

After his food is served, Marc comes out looking for his watch. He looks around and sees the man. Marc stops what he is doing and stares. He is staring because he knows who this elegant man in the cafe’ is.

He is a star.

Clara doesn’t know, of course. She has watched the old movies with her father, but, except for Chaplin, doesn’t know their names. Only their movements.

And it is perhaps the way the elegant man has moved through the cafe’ that reminds her of something she has seen before. Reminds everyone. But none can quite place the memory.

The breakfast hours pass and people go their way, to work, to the mall at the edge of town, back home.

But the elegant man stays on. He has hardly touched his egg. His teacup is still half full. The door of the Van Gogh Cafe’ opens and closes, opens and closes, and he stays on looking out the window.

Marc cannot help himself. When there is no one left in the cafe’ except the silent star, Marc walks over to his table. Clara, curious, shyly follows.

Marc offers his hand and the man gracefully takes it. They shake.

“I know you work,” Mark says softly. “I love it. I love all your films.”

Clara’s eyes are wide. She has not known until know that a star is in her cafe’. The old man blushes and smiles.

“Thank you,” he says.

There is an awkward moment, then graciously, he offers Marc and Clara the two empty chairs at his table. Happily, they sit.

Marc and the silent star talk about the old films as Clara listens. There is an innocence in her father’s face she has not seen before. He is like a boy. The silent star seems pleased, quietly thrilled, to talk of his work with someone who who understands so well–to finally tell his story. He laughs and sighs and even trembles slightly, reliving it all.

There is a moment or two when each is quiet, catching a breath.

“Why, sir, are you at the Van Gogh Cafe’?” Marc gently asks. Clara waits.

The old man seems glad someone has asked. He reaches into his coat and pulls forth an old photograph. He hands it first to Clara, then to Marc.

It is of a beautiful young man in a waistcoat and top hat, standing before an old theater. Marc looks carefully at the building in the picture.

“Is this…?”

“Yes,” replies the silent star.

The building is the Van Gogh Cafe. In 1923. When it was a theater.

“He and I did some shows here together, the summer we met.” The silent star smiles and puts the photograph back inside his coat.

“Today I am waiting for him,” he says.

Clara’s heart is pounding. She feels that she herself is in a movie. Every gesture the man makes, each word he speaks is so beautiful to her. She knows the cafe remembers this man. She can feel it drawing in to him, reaching for this man who has been a part of its first magic, on the stage of the old theater.

Oddly, not one person has walked into the cafe to break this spell.

Marc offers the star a fresh cup of tea and a piece of apple pie, which is gratefully accepted. Then Marc and Clara leave the old man to his waiting.

The lunch hours come and go. Then the dinner hours. The silent star waits. Occasionally Clara or Marc offer him something, but he politely declines. And they find themselves watching the window, watching the door, for a beautiful young man in a top hat and waistcoat

Finally, it is time to close and still the old man is waiting. He seems very tired now. But unworried. He asks Marc if he might sit by the window a little longer

“Of course,” says Marc, though he offers his guest room to the man, offers to take him home for the evening and return him to the table by the window the next day.

But the man is certain his friend is coming very soon.

“Very soon,” he says.

So Marc takes Clara home and returns to the cafe a few hours later, to check on the old man.

At first Marc thinks the man is asleep. Then Marc realizes that he has died. In the old man’s hand, Marc finds a newspaper clipping, cracked and yellow. The clipping shows the face of the beautiful young man in top hat and waistcoat. It reports that he has drowned, in 1926.

And in the old man’s other hand is the same photograph that Marc and Clara were shown. But now the photograph is changed. The beautiful young man is gone, and there is only a soft empty light where he was standing.

Marc and Clara keep the photograph and the newspaper clipping inside a small box near the cash register, and on Christmas Eve when everything is quiet, they look at these again. They each think how perfect that the silent star has died where he found his true love. That he came to the Van Gogh Cafe and waited for his friend to take him home.

Whatever forces are against you, whatever pain and suffering is yours, whatever joy you have, whatever your story is, my wish for you is that you share your story whenever and wherever you choose–whether you are 11 or 90 or somewhere in between.

Sing. Dance. Play. Tell your stories. Listen to the stories of others. Live your one life. Feel. Feel its magic.