April 16, 2006

The Morning Reading: A Medieval Jewish Story

A rabbi spoke with God about heaven and hell. “I will show you hell,” God said, and they went into a room which had a large pot of stew in the middle. The smell was delicious, but around the pot sat people who were famished and desperate. All were holding spoons with very long handles which reached to the pot, but because the handles of the spoons were longer than their arms, it was impossible to get the stew back into their mouths. “Now I will show you heaven,” God said, and they went into an identical room. There was a similar pot of stew, and the people had identical spoons, but they were well-nourished and happy. “It’s simple,” God said. “You see, they have learned to feed one another.”

The Morning Sermon:

In the adult religious education program I’ve been leading recently, one question several people have asked is how we Unitarian Universalists might best respond to evangelicals who believe they have been saved through their faith in Jesus as the Christ-- people who condemn people whose faith differs from theirs-- damn them to eternal punishment, as if in hell. This Easter morning is a fitting time to look at that question, and to look at how we Unitarian Universalists might best spread our own version of “good news.”

Historically, Unitarians and Universalists have emphasized Jesus’ life and teachings, and have de-emphasized his suffering, martyrdom, crucifixion, death, and resurrection. In that way, Unitarian Universalists can all be called Ethical Christians-- The profound ethical guidelines of Jesus’ life and teachings have always been part of Unitarian Universalism, and remain a dominant part of the Principles and Purposes we developed in the mid-1980s and still use today. It’s true that there are Christians who would say that Ethical Christians are not really Christians. But their saying that does not erase the fact that there are Ethical Christians all over the world, especially in the academic arena. Unitarian Universalists have always honored Jewish teachings. And in recent decades we have broadened our religious views further to embrace Eastern religions and philosophies such as Buddhism and Hinduism, as well as learning about Islam, Native American spirituality, and earth-centered faiths. Our ancient roots are Christian and Jewish teachings; our modern-day branches are religious pluralism.

That religious pluralism itself is in keeping with Jesus’ original teachings. When Jesus began preaching, the people were awaiting a Messiah who would save their nation from political oppression and persecution by military means. What Jesus preached to them was radically different than anything they had heard before-- He preached that all nations of the world would be saved by the establishment of a “Kingdom of God” that was –not hierarchical, with some oppressing others-- but a kingdom of equals, a brotherhood of men and women, a Beloved Community. Jesus’ vision was not parochial; it was universalist. He said that we must love one another, even our enemies; love our neighbors as ourselves; show compassion for the weak and the poor; when we are attacked, we must turn the other cheek rather than retaliate. The central message of Jesus’ teachings was non-violence. In the Kingdom of Equals Jesus described, there was a place for sinners as well as saints; for the meek and humble as well as the righteous. And divine forgiveness and grace were available to those who had erred through confession and repentance before God-- That’s what alarmed the political authorities of Jesus’ day so much that they had him killed. Three days later, Jesus’ followers believed they saw Jesus walking with and talking to them, continuing to guide them, even after his death. During his lifetime, Jesus called himself the Son of Man; since his death, his followers have called him the Son of God, imbuing him with supernatural abilities, praying to him as a God in and of himself, a Savior who died to take away the sins of humankind. That doctrine was written down in what we now call the four Gospels between thirty-five and sixty years after Jesus’ death. They are called the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John-- But they were written by many different authors over quite a period of time-- Some lines were even taken out or added in by the scribes who were recording the “dictation” as it were. The Gospels were written down for the purpose of, not recording historical facts, but spreading the belief in the divinity of Jesus. The intent of the Gospels was proselytism- They were written for Christians to use to try to convert non-Christians to Christianity.

Since those early days of Christianity, many different ways of proselytizing have evolved. The intense beam of that early exclusivism has broadened into the softer light of inclusivism and pluralism, more open-minded and open-hearted, more reasonable, less pushy. Along that historical continuum, we can each discern where our beliefs best fit. In an exclusivist view of Christianity, people are inherently sinful from birth and God caused his son to suffer and die. Is that your view of human nature and of God? Whether it is or it isn’t, we are allowed to speak freely here about our beliefs, and even about our doubts and questions. The Unitarian and Universalist beliefs have been that we affirm the inherent worth and dignity of all human beings, and that, just as a loving and just earthly father or mother would never unfairly condemn and punish their earthly child, so would a loving and just God never unfairly condemn and punish its children. The scripture, “God is Love” used to adorn the architecture, windows, and alter tables of Unitarian and Universalist churches all over America. Should Christianity today be so exclusivist that all non-Christians are disrespected? Theologian Gavin D’Costa says surely not, writing, “If Christian theology denigrates the rich heritage of millions of women and men, it will fail to respect the goodness of creation affirmed within its own creed and foolishly turn its back on the many riches and glories found within other religions.” [p. 637 of “Theology of Religions”] D’Costa goes on to describe the answer pluralistic theologian John Hick gives to the question of how evangelism best be done: “Christian attitudes to other religions need not be characterized by a desire to convert, or claims to superiority, but [they can be characterized by] a will to learn and grow together toward the truth. Mission should be jointly carried out to the secular world by the religions, rather than towards each other… [which] can provide fruitful conditions for inter-religious dialogue.” [ibid. p. 629]

“Mission jointly carried out to the secular world by the religions, rather than towards each other…” “not characterized by claims to superiority but by a will to learn and grow together toward the truth.” What would evangelism like that look like if we Unitarian Universalists evangelized that way? I heard the answer to that question from the mouth of an unlikely source, back when I was in seminary. Bangor Theological Seminary is a Christian seminary-- a liberal one, but I did frequently wonder if my conversations with my classmates would end up with them feeling certain I was going to go to hell. That wondering never stopped me from trying to talk with them about the many different ways there are to be Christian today. In my Christian Doctrine class, we were graded in part on our responsible and respectful class participation. I'm proud to tell you I participated right along with the best of them. One of the best of them was my friend Bruce, a Methodist. He and I often went head-to-head on theological issues such as the trinity, original sin, predestination, and salvation. One discussion centered on the gospel calling with which Christians are charged to be "fishers of men" and spread the "Good News." I said I wanted to hear from the Christians in the class how far they thought they were supposed to go with that. My friend Bruce said he interprets that scripture as a calling to simply offer the gospel message, but then let people decide for themselves. His strongest calling is not to preach the gospel, but to represent its message by the example of the way he lives his life. That teaching is an echo of St. Francis of Assisi who said, “Preach the Gospel at all times; use words when necessary,” and I greatly admire it. Our teacher then interjected with, "But what about all the people who have never heard the Christian message? In other countries? Shouldn't we go to them?" Bruce became pensive. Clearly he could not justify such aggressive evangelism. Then suddenly his eyes opened wide and his face lit up. "What if," he said, "There could be a panel! With Protestants, Catholics, Jewish people, Native Americans, Moslems, Hindus, and Buddhists! They could go together and each would have equal time to present their beliefs, with none of them being pushy, and then the people could decide for themselves!" I said, "Bruce! You sound just like a Unitarian Universalist!!" and the class applauded. "No, no!" he said, "Not all in the same church! I didn't mean all in the same church!"

Well I say, "Yes-- Yes-- Resoundingly, yes: All in the same church."

In our Unitarian Universalist church, we profess religious beliefs that are respectful and empowering, rather than denigrating and damning. I wouldn’t have it any other way. But a side-effect of that is that we tend not to talk about guilt-- in fact, hardly ever. And I don’t think we are doing ourselves any favors in our denomination by avoiding looking at guilt and ways to resolve it. Some guilt feelings are appropriate when the acts someone has committed or omitted violated important social, moral, or ethical rules. But sometimes people are burdened with feelings of guilt when reasonably they should not be. “Survivor guilt is a type of remorse felt by people who manage to survive a tragic event involving loss of life, especially the lives of friends and loved-ones or other people commonly associated with the survivor. Sufferers often feel guilty that they get to move on with their lives, whereas other people were not as lucky… All great tragedies can provoke survivor guilt… [In fact I think I felt some after Hurricane Katrina.] Over time they become guilty over their survival to the point where they depreciate their own actions to embellish the actions of the fallen.” [from Wikipedia]

When someone suffers from survivor guilt, they keep looking back to the time before the traumatic tragedy, thinking that there must have been something they should have done to prevent it; they get emotionally stuck there, and can’t move forward with their life productively and happily. What they aren’t realizing is that during a traumatic tragedy, what anyone is able to do to be helpful is far more limited than an non-crisis situation. It can take help from a therapist for the person to see what their culpability realistically was and was not. [This information about survivor guilt is from the paper, “Guilt Following Traumatic Events,” by Kathleen Nadar, DSW, social worker and mental health professional.] Unresolved guilt can cause harm. It can lead to self-condemnation, punishing self or others, hopelessness, depression, suicidal feelings, or substance abuse. Survival guilt can produce an amplified perspective of the person who died and a strong bonding with the group or culture that is associated with the tragedy. People with a strong sense of responsibility for others are particularly susceptible to feelings of guilt.

I propose that after Jesus died, his followers suffered from survivor guilt; that that guilt was at the heart of the first evangelists’ teachings; and that it persists to this day. Interlocked with that guilt is the doctrine that Jesus died to wash away our sense of sinfulness. Then, the first Christians did not have the benefit of modern psychology. Today, we do. We can take concrete steps to resolve feelings of guilt and move on to lead more productive and happy lives. Dr. Nadar writes:

“Some survivors have continued with rescue work or other efforts and regained a more balanced perspective about what was possible… Discovering new resources, new strengths, and new methods of dealing with difficult problems and reaffirming relationships or making new ones has benefited some survivors. Some survivors have benefited from attending support groups. Others have built meaningful memorials or found ways of sharing the process of honoring the dead. In fact, survival is an achievement. Some guidance for processing survivor’s guilt includes:

· More people than you know are happy that you survived

· Even if the rest of your life seems insignificant to you, we are relieved that you are alive

· Know that there is no offense in surviving

· It is good to survive

· It is okay to delight in being alive

· Feel free to reassess your life

· Reassess what is valuable to you

· Make the best of your life

· Making the best of your life can be a tribute to your survival and to those who died

· What is or can be your purpose? Your talent? Your benefit to life?

· Bloom where you are planted. This does not mean you have to stay in your current circumstances but that you can create something good from the circumstances in which you find yourself

· Process the traumatic experience and its associated symptoms with appropriate assistance

· Put guilt to good use

· As much as it is in your nature to do so, cherish life

· Treasure being alive

· Treasure the best of each day

· Recognize the reawakening of old issues

· Survival may have triggered old feelings of worthlessness or unworthiness

· If guilt persists or disrupts life, seek appropriate therapeutic help.”

When a person is burdened with unrealistic guilt, they generally cannot resolve it on their own. But a compassionate group can help them by listening to a description of the event and circumstances that led to the feelings of guilt, then examining with them “the individual’s and others’ responsibilities in the matter and re-evaluation of the levels of responsibility so that the total responsibility adds up to 100%.” [p. 4] Think of a circle, separated into pie segments. Others can help us appropriately allocate the culpability of a traumatic event so it is realistically distributed. We can literally come ‘round full-circle. Fundamentalist Christians say that through faith in Jesus as the Christ, we can be born again, we can be returned to a state of innocence, as it were. But once we are old enough to have experienced tragedy and loss, trial and error, the pain of harm to ourselves or others, feelings of guilt attend us. We can never return to childhood’s entirely blameless days. But, beginning where we are and as we are, we can bravely commit to being a part of a circle that helps people come ‘round full circle, a loving and fair congregation that helps people re-draw what wholeness looks like. In this way we feed others with the grace of forgiveness and love, and we are fed, that forgiveness and love can be shared with friend and foe, till all feel full and complete.

This poem by Sheenagh Pugh is called, “Sometimes:”

Sometimes things don’t go, after all,

from bad to worse. Some years, muscadel

faces down frost; green thrives, the crops don’t fail,

sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.

A people sometimes will step back from war;

elect an honest man; decide they care

enough, that they can’t leave some stranger poor.

Some people become what they were born for.

Sometimes our best efforts do not go

amiss; sometimes we do as we meant to.

The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow

that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.

Let it be and, Amen.

Return to Sermon Index