|
The
Separation of Church, State, and Science © Cover quote: "I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its creed and conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one only God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die an Unitarian. But much I fear, that when this great truth shall be re-established, its votaries will fall into the fatal error of fabricating formulas of creed and confessions of faith, the engines which so soon destroyed the religion of Jesus, and made of Christendom a mere Aceldema; that they will give up morals for mysteries, and Jesus for Plato." - Thomas Jefferson, in an excerpt from a letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, Monticello, June 26, 1822 In the letter to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse that is quoted on your order of service, Thomas Jefferson warns that Unitarianism could destroy itself if it were to allow formulas of creed and confessions of faith to dominate, rather than morals or right relationship or our actions. Jesus, as Jefferson understood him, was a moral teacher, not a performer of miracles and divine exception. He was a man among men, superb in his ability to teach the simple truth that God is one, and we are to love our neighbor as ourself. Jefferson’s focus on the moral teachings of Jesus rather than miracles recorded in the Bible helps guide me in this very complicated debate about science, religion, and politics. A couple of years ago now, a group of us studied a curriculum called Our American Roots: Unitarian Universalism in North America. The creation of the curriculum was a direct response to the religious right laying claim to our nation. It helped us articulate the role of Unitarians and Universalists in the founding of our republic, lay claim to our place in religious history, help us understand the tensions that can arise in congregations that are governed by the democratic process, and understand the role of the free church in guaranteeing our individual freedoms. Recently at the Heartland District Meeting of the Unitarian Universalist Association in Grand Rapids, I was reminded of this topic by two speakers. Our keynote speaker, the moderator of the UUA, Gini Courter, and a Michigan native, told us her ‘elevator speech" – the words she uses to tell people about her faith in the time it takes to change floors in an elevator – she says something like,
Or something like that. Actually, after writing that down – those words I heard, I got a copy of the text she actually said. I think it’s always interesting to compare what we hear with what is said… in any case, here are Gini’s actual words:
The other speaker at the District meeting which reminded me of this history and the curriculum we studied, was the Rev. Dr. Brent Smith, minister of the All Souls Community Church of West Michigan, our hosting congregation for the meeting. Brent mentioned that they give their youth in the Coming of Age program a copy of the Jefferson Bible when they graduate. When he gives it to them, he tells them that the Bible was eventually published by an act of the United States Congress in 1904 and for many years, new members of the Congress were given a copy of the Jefferson Bible at the beginning of their first term. There are those in this country who would like to forget or have forgotten this history – who would like to claim that the fact that because our founders believed – even assumed belief in God, that they would not tolerate contrary beliefs – when quite the opposite is true. They were working hard to build tolerance and respect of differing beliefs into the founding of this country – even if they couldn’t imagine the kinds of beliefs people express today, it doesn’t mean they weren’t already laying the groundwork for respect of those beliefs they couldn’t yet imagine. Which isn’t to say, as this covenant points out, that the public sphere is therefore value neutral… a separation of church and state is not the same as a mandate to keep us from using our spiritual values to influence the politics of the land. But we use the conviction of our arguments and the power to persuade, not divine authority or revelation. It is not true because God said so, but rather God said so because it is true. Or so Theodore Parker indicates in his famous 1841 sermon, the Transient and Permanent in Christianity. Some things about Christianity are permanent – those are the truths revealed in Christian scripture and in nature, but there are other things, the transient, which may change over time as we come to understand them better, or as conditions change. Said Parker,
A notion much in line with the thinking of Jefferson as expressed in that letter to Dr. Waterhouse – warning destruction if we were to allow formulas of creed and confessions of faith to dominate, rather than morals or right relationship or our actions…. Or at least that’s how I interpret his letter. So, where does science fit in to all of this? This is the covenant of the separation of church, state and science, but I’ve been struggling for awhile with this topic and how science fits in exactly. You’ll notice I even left science out of the title in some announcements of this service. That’s a reflection of my confusion. I understand how politics and the marketplace can influence the funding of science and the funding directly effects what research is done, and how we can be so negatively effected by those pressures. But I do want science to inform both the state and my religion…. By science, I mean, systematic observation and experiment, a method. That’s what Theodore Parker was dong – embracing the biblical research happening at the time and letting it influence his understanding of Christianity and his religion. I want good science to influence our political decisions, too, even on the congregational level as we incorporate good democratic process into congregational life. At this stage of our development, that means expanding leadership opportunities to create a Program Council and reduce the number of people elected to a Board that then delegates programmatic decisions to the Council and limit its own work to policy and fiduciary responsibilities. This move proposed in the draft changes to the Constitution and bylaws is not just something a small group of people dreamed up out of thin air. It comes from systematic observation and experiment supported by organizations such as the Alban Institute dedicated to pursuing new knowledge in the fields of sociology, human relations, and organizational development and disseminating original research through books, educational seminars, and consulting and training services. They are experts in congregational life and church governance. Michele Root-Bernstein, a member of the Celebrations committee, cut out two New York Times articles for me to read when she heard the title for this sermon. The articles are an interesting pair. One is about the publication of Carl Sagan’s 1985 lectures on natural theology. The other is about a young earth creationist who believes the Bible is a literal account of the creation of the universe and who also just submitted a 197 page dissertation on the abundance and spread of mosasaurs, marine reptiles that vanished about 65 million years ago. I"ll begin with the Sagan article. "I would suggest that science is, at least in part, informed worship." Sagan says from the pages of this new book, And "I think if we ever reach the point where we think we thoroughly understand who we are and where we come from , we will have failed." The search for who we are does not lead to complacency or arrogance, he explains. "It goes with a courageous intent to greet the universe as it really is, not to foist our emotional predispositions on it but to courageously accept what our explorations tell us." My faith does not require my religion to be separate from science… all science was theology in the first place. Theology being the study of God, which was believed to be the cause of the universe. I think of it as the study of the outer reaches of our knowledge. Science informs my religion greatly. Like Carl Sagan, I believe that science is, at least in part, informed worship…." The Universe is amazing and to contemplate it, to experience it, inspires awe and creates, at least in me, a religious experience. I greatly admire Sagan, and even now have an image of him from the one time I saw him –we were in a Nevada desert at the nuclear test site, protesting the underground testing of nuclear weapons. This was a large gathering of people – and I remember him sitting under a large tent out of the hot desert sun, with a group of people all around him deep in conversation. I share this with you –because it was something of a religious experience for me. I had seen him on PBS talking about billion and billions of stars in the Cosmos, and to be in the desert with him – where at night, you can literally see billions of stars, working together for something so vast and difficult, so important, so big. Have you had the experience of feeling small and meek in the presence of someone famous or important? Well, this was quite the opposite – I felt more significant in his presence – the moment felt grand and important and life-changing. And that image is with me as I tell you about this new publication of his lectures…. Because my religious faith and my faith in science as a discipline complement one another rather than contradict, I struggle however, with the other article, with the newly degreed Dr. Ross, the paleontologist who believes in the biblical account of the creation of the universe. I struggle with understanding his beliefs, I disagree with him, but not his right to believe what seem to me to be contradictory positions. And perhaps, that is what this separation of powers is all about. It’s a protection – for even the most outrageous of beliefs… whether its evangelical politicians who think that my religion and faith in science is outrageous, or whether its my conviction that Dr. Ross’ faith is on the outrageous side. What is incredible about this Dr. Ross, is that he could separate his personal belief in the creation story of the bible from the science he did. Outrageous, incredible, but, considering his beliefs, appropriate. Finally, I want to address a theme in the Spiritual Covenant with America that has recurred throughout this series, including in this final covenant. Money, in America, has become our idol – it has become our false god. It is something that has distracted our nation from reaching its highest potential. Scientists research what can be funded, not what might benefit us most… of course, even as I say that, I know that we can’t always predict the benefit of research but it’s the final sentence of this morning’s reading gave me pause – "too often this has resulted in a clergy more subordinate to the fund-raisers than to their own highest moral and spiritual values." Is he talking about me? Was it a mistake for me in January to name the crisis I felt this congregation was facing about money? Am I wrong to raise this issue? [If you weren’t here on January 21, I talked about how I felt we are facing a crisis in the life of this church, and that means we also have a great opportunity before us. From your response, I think many of you heard the word crisis and not so much the opportunity in it….] However, the first step to freeing oneself from subordination, is to name the dynamic – I think we have a problem talking about money. And that is likely from preventing us from reaching our highest potential – expressing our highest moral and spiritual values. It hinders our democratic process. The pressures that exist for scientists seeking funds for research, exist for the rest of us in various and sundry ways – influence us to compromise our values, just a little, to get things we want… I have to admit to having struggled with this series… I didn’t always want to preach on what I had said I would preach on, and writing was sometimes painfully difficult. But in the end, I have to admit feeling a little more hopeful after this series, and a little less cynical. Though I want my country to protect my right to express my religion in what may seem to others as a peculiar way, I don’t need to separate my personal religious values from my politics. I need not compromise for expediency sake. Exploring these covenants has helped me re-incorporate my religious values into my political values – and I hope it has done some of the same for you. I’m still deeply concerned about the direction of this country, but I’m feeling more empowered and hopeful about my own ability to make a difference in all of it – about my ability to keep to the long view, and to stay true to my convictions and work out a third way, an alternative to the false dichotomy we seem faced with most of the time. I think that’s the power in those bracelets that other churches hand out, that say, What would Jesus do? It’s a reminder to take the long view, to not compromise, and consider… Jesus is a little too remote for me, too highly complicated with longstanding myths about his life… my bracelet might say choose a more recent prophet – what would Gandhi do? Or something like that. I’m encouraged by the fact that there’s even a UCC candidate for president – you know what they call members of the United Church of Christ? I mean it as a complement: Unitarians Considering Christ. For those of you unfamiliar with all the varying Christian denominations, Edgewood United Church, locally, is a member of UCC, and historically, we are all related to the original Congregationalists. I’d love to see a religious liberal return to the presidency. Return to this country to its original founding principles of freedom, liberty and well, I like how Gini Courter, changed the pursuit of property or happiness to compassion. Freedom, liberty, and compassion. May it be so. And may we be alive to tell the story of how we made it happen. Sermons copyright 2007, all rights reserved. *
Sermons are meant to be spoken and not written. I have not edited this
sermon to written form. This sermon is the last in a series of eight on
A Spiritual Covenant with America from the Network of Spiritual Progressives.
For more information, read the book The Left Hand of God by Rabbi Michael
Lerner, or go to the website www.spiritualprogressives.org
Unitarian Universalist
Church of Greater Lansing
|
|||||||
