Unitarian Universalist Scripture?
The term scripture usually means the sacred texts of a given religious tradition. Such texts are often viewed as having divine origin and/or inspiration. I have been thinking recently about whether or not Unitarian Universalist have a scripture or scriptures. We clearly draw upon on the scriptures from the worlds religious traditions including, but not limited to the Bible (both the Hebrew and Christian New Testament portions). But do we have texts that are foundational to our tradition that we draw upon more than others? I think we might. I would suggest that several of Emerson’s essays and addresses, some of Channing’s sermons, some of Parker’s writings, the principles and sources of the UUA, the first Humanist Manifesto and, oddly enough, the text from the Women and Religion resolution at General Assembly in 1977 and the Cambridge Platform have all influenced Unitarian Universalism significantly. I don’t know if that makes them scripture but I think that they afforded some sort of special status–maybe simply the special status of being important texts. Here’s a list of Emerson’s, Channing’s and Parker’s writings that I use frequently (and hear my colleagues use):
Emerson
The Over-Soul
Self Reliance
The Divinity School Address
Channing
Unitarian Christianity
Likeness to God
Self Culture
Parker
The Transient and Permanent in Christianity
What other writings might be considered central to our tradition? I think that Hosea Ballou’s Treatise on Atonement is probably fairly central, but personally don’t use it that often. Given that Unitarian Universalism is an evolving tradition in which revelation is not sealed how recent a person might be included on a list of foundational figures? Could you include people like A. Powell Davies, Clarence Skinner, John H. Holmes and Kenneth Patton who were alive within the memory of many now living? What about people like Thandeka, William Schulz and Forrest Church whose writings and teachings have a lot influence of contemporary ministers? Or living people like Barbara Pescan and Mark Belletini whose works have made it into our hymn books? Also, what about women like Margaret Fuller and Elizabeth Cady Staton who wrote theological texts, were clearly affiliated with Unitarianism but were not clergy or necessarily writing for a Unitarian or Universalist audience?
Perhaps this a little muddled but I would be interested in whatever responses people might have.
When I was still in seminary, and early on in my ministry, this question of whether or not there was (or should be) a UU “canon,” and what texts (or by what criteria texts) should be included in it was fairly important to me. I later came to understand that in many ways the whole issue of canonicity is misdirected — it’s a backhanded attempt to define an orthodoxy by defining a center so explicitly that the boundaries are no longer elastic or permeable. Rather than canonizing our own, new “Scripture,” what we are really looking for is a UU “Talmud” — a body of texts that we can engage in on-going dialog with in a way that also engenders dialog with one another. So to the modest list of texts and authors you have mentioned, I would also want to add Henry Ware Jr’s Formation of the Christian Character, as well as his discourse on the relationship between Pulpit Eloquence and the Pastoral Care and his sermon on “The Personality of the Deity” delivered in response to Emerson’s Divinity School address would also be on my short to medium list. His father Henry Ware Sr’s 1774 Compendious and Plain Catechism… written in collaboration with Ware’s neighbor and colleague in Hingham, Daniel Shute (who thanks to where his name falls in the alphabet gets top billing, although we all know who did all the hard work) is also a document well-worthy of our attention…since it is doubtlessly one of the principal reasons Ware was nominated and selected for the Hollis Chair in the first place. The “Wood ‘n Ware” texts are probably way too involved for general inclusion, but they might well be “mined” and anthologized for appropriate content, especially since they are considered by many to be the best discussion of the issues of predestination and free will since Luther and Erasmus debated the issue in the 16th century. Conrad Wright used to place great stock in Henry Whitney Bellows’ “The Suspense of Faith;” if memory serves, I even recall hearing him say that if he had it to do over again, he would have included Bellows as the “Fourth Prophet” in now-nearly canonical anthology that enshrined Channing, Emerson and Parker as the Holy Trinity of the 19th century Unitarian tradition.
One of the original criteria for New Testament canonicity was the suitability of the text for reading at public worship. Based on that authority, I’ve been struck by how often Mary Oliver, Annie Dillard, and T.S. Eliot (or at least that bit on “the end of all our exploring”) are proclaimed from our pulpits and lecterns on Sunday mornings. Forest Church’s passages on “The Cathedral of the World” and “the dual reality of being alive and having to die” both make my short list as well. Golly you’ve inspired me now! Maybe I’ll expand this thread back at my own home blog, the Eclectic Cleric/a>.
Comment by The Eclectic Cleric — August 27, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
I’ve been trying to post here all evening, but for some reason I can’t seem to master the anti-spam measures. But if you are interested in MY muddled response, you might check out http://eclectic-cleric.blogspot.com
Comment by The Eclectic Cleric — August 27, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
I think I fixed the problem and people should be able to post comments more easily.
Comment by Administrator — August 27, 2008 @ 11:05 pm
I like EC’s notion of a UU Talmud rather than a UU canon.
In addition to what’s already been mentioned, I would include in it some of the pre-Channing Puritan writings, especially Chauncy, Mayhew, the Salem and other early covenants, the Mayflower Compact, John Robinson’s “Farewell” sermon to the Pilgrims, and most especially John Winthrop’s “Model of Christian Charity”, aka “City on a Hill”. I would include the record of the trial of Anne Hutchinson, with its controversies over the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit and the “Covenant of Works” — two issues that, in different vocabularies over the years, have always been close to our core. I would include, to the extent available, soteriological writings of Pelagius, Origen, and Abelard, christological writings of Servetus and Socinus, and the Racovian Catechism. I would include Clarke’s “Five Points of the New Theology”. Probably also everything in Ahlstrom and Carey’s “An American Reformation”.
The more recent it is, the more I would be disposed to exclude it because of its potential for faddishness, or as Parker would have said, for transience rather than permanence. The Principles and Purposes are a prime example of this, but I might even go back as far as Humanist Manifesto I.
I might include liberal religious writings from outside the UU tradition that have nevertheless been influential on or consistent with our own thinking — writers like Schleiermacher, von Harnack, Rauschenbusch, Fosdick, Buber and Tillich.
Comment by f — September 2, 2008 @ 9:02 am
That “comment by f” was actually a “comment by fausto”. Don’t know what happened there.
Comment by fausto — September 2, 2008 @ 9:05 am
Wow! Quite a few texts I hadn’t even considered! Next time I have some spare study time I’m going to tick a few of the early American/European readings of these lists. I’m familiar with the general liberal theologians that fausto suggests and I agree that they’ve had a fair amount of influence on our tradition–two examples: I studied Schleiermacher under Thandeka at Meadville and Forrest Church has cited Fosdick’s influence on him in the past–but I do not know whether that makes them part of the Unitarian Universalist canon or us part of the broader liberal religious tradition. I suspect the later.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2008 @ 12:14 pm