(Note: To go immediately to the sermon, please click here.)

Poetry for Order of Service

Something opens our wings.
Something makes boredom and hurt disappear.
Someone fills the cup in front of us.
We taste only sacredness.

(Jelaluddin Rumi, tr., Coleman Barks)

From the hundreds of times I lost the connection,
I learn this: your fragrance brings me back.

(Jelaluddin Rumi, tr., Coleman Barks)

Call to Worship

i thank You God for most this amazing
day:for the leaping greenly spirits of trees
and a blue true dream of sky;and for everything
which is natural which is infinite which is yes

(i who have died am alive again today,
and this is the sun's birthday;this is the birth
day of life and of love and wings:and of the gay
great happening illimitably earth)

how should tasting touching hearing seeing
breathing any - lifted from the no
of all nothing - human merely being
doubt unimaginable You?

(now the ears of my ears awake and
now the eyes of my eyes are opened)

("i" thank You God for most this amazing," e. e. cummings, 1894-1962)

Lighting the Chalice

Though our knowledge is incomplete,
Our truth partial,
And our love imperfect,
We believe that new light is ever waiting
To break into our hearts and minds,
To enlighten our common path,
That there is mutual strength in willing cooperation,
And that the bonds of love keep open the gates of freedom.

Introduction to Responsive Reading

This morning I will be speaking about what The Rev. Fred Campbell calls the "Theistic faith" that he has found in Unitarian Universalist congregations, one of four basic faiths, the other three being: Humanism, Naturalism, and Mysticism. Our Responsive Reading, in keeping with the theme of Theism, is drawn from a gorgeous poem by German poet Rainer Maria Rilke from a book of prayers titled, "The Book of Hours." Typically prayer is the address of the individual to their deity, but in this instance it is the deity who addresses the individual.

Responsive Reading

MINISTER: God speaks to each of us as he makes us, then walks with us silently out of the night.

CONGREGATION: These are the words we dimly hear:

MINISTER: You, sent out beyond your recall, go to the limits of your longing. Embody me.

CONGREGATION: Flare up like flame and make big shadows I can move in.

MINISTER: Let everything happen to you: beauty and terror.

CONGREGATION: Just keep going. No feeling is final.

MINISTER: Don't let yourself lose me.

CONGREGATION: Nearby is the country they call life.

MINISTER: You will know it by its seriousness.

ALL: Give me your hand.

Rainer Maria Rilke, The Book of Hours, tr., Barrows and Macy)

Children's story

Children, I have been talking to your parents and the other adults about different ways of thinking about and seeing the world and different of responding to it and living in it. In talking about this I used the idea of a house with four large windows looking out in different directions. A person sees different parts of our world depending on what windows the person looks out of.

But the example I gave didn't have to be a house. It could have been another kind of building. It could have been a building like this church which has many windows.

So what I'd for you to do now is to follow me around the church. We'll look out the different windows to see what we can see and then we'll come back here and talk a little about what we've seen through the different windows.

Let's go first to the east side of the church where the sun comes up. What do you see out of this window?

The north side: What do you see out of this window?

The west side: What do you see out of this window?

The south side: What do you see out of this window?

Now (upon returning): Who liked best what they saw out of the window on the east side? The north side? The west side? And the south side?

Which window was the right window?

Conclusion: Our religions are like windows that frame different views of reality.

Introduction to Reading

One of the first products of human consciousness, one of the first things we become aware of when we awake and begin to reflect on our existence, is the awareness that we did not create ourselves; we are not self-made. Rather, we are part of a larger reality, a larger power, a larger process, which has produced us, which sustains us, and to which in some way we are accountable.

What is the nature of this larger reality of which we are a part? What is "It" that has always been and will always be? Is matter-energy primary and eternal? Or is consciousness or spirit primary and eternal? What is bulb and what is flower? Does "consciousness" emerge from "matter-energy?" Does "matter-energy" emerge from "consciousness?" Is it a somehow a combination of the two? The rational mind, which starts with being as a given and which makes distinctions within being, is not equipped to deal with Being-itself.

Yet it makes a difference for our living how we answer or approach this basic and perennial question. For multitudes of humans from all times and in all places this larger reality of which we are a part has been understood to be first of all spiritual or non-physical in nature. Last week I quoted scholar of world mythology Joseph Campbell who said that the basic theme of all mythology is "that there is an invisible plane supporting the visible one." (The Power of Myth, p. 71)

And what, then, if you accept this "invisible plane," is its nature? How do we belong to "It"? How does "It" belong to us? Does this larger reality in some way "know" us? Does it "care" for us? Can we address it in a personal way as we would address another human? Can we enter into "conversation" with "It?" Will "It" hear us?

Listen to these words of the ancient Hebrew psalmist, words addressed to a larger, invisible reality felt to be everywhere present and inescapable. This prayer, ascribed to King David, is set in a very different cosmology than our own, namely, a three-storied universe with "heaven" located above the solid dome that arches over the earth, "Sheol," the realm of the dead, beneath the earth, and this earth, the place of human habitation, a flat circular disc of land and sea. Psalm 139: 1-14:

Reading

O Lord, thou hast searched me, and known me!
Thou knowest when I sit down and when I rise up;
Thou understandest my thought afar off.
Thou searchest out my path and my lying down,
And art acquainted with all my ways.
For there is not a word on my tongue,
But, lo, O lord, thou knowest it altogether.
Thou hast beset me behind and before,
And laid thy hand upon me.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
It is high, I cannot attain unto it.

Whither shall I go from thy Spirit?
Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there!
If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, thou are there!
If I take the wings of the morning,
And dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
Even there shall thy hand lead me,
And thy right hand shall hold me,
If I say, "Let only darkness cover me,
And the light about me be night,"
Even the darkness is not dark to thee,
The night is bright as the day:
For darkness is as light with thee.

For thou didst form my inward parts:
Thou didst knit me together in my mother's womb.
I praise thee, for thou are fearful and wonderful.
Wonderful are they works!
Thou knowest me right well.

Introduction to Prayer

This prayer from Psalm 139 illustrates one of the distinctions between the Theistic perspective and the perspectives of Humanism, Naturalism, and Mysticism, namely, that in Theism "prayer" is often a meaningful practice and discipline. In the perspectives of Humanism, Naturalism, and Mysticism you might find meditation, but not so likely prayer.

I distinguish between meditation and prayer in the following ways:

1. In meditation the trajectory is typically inward and downward. In prayer the trajectory is typically outward and upward. And even if addressing the "God within" in prayer, it is still "the Beyond" in the midst of things.

2. In meditation one seeks to be in the center of larger or deeper consciousness. In prayer one seeks to address the center of larger or deeper consciousness.

3. Meditation has to do with stilling the mind, shedding the ego, releasing daily concerns, and letting emotions float away. Prayer has to do with bringing things to light, with naming and re-counting one's daily concerns, with touching the emotions, and with re-ordering one's ego and will, bringing it in line with a larger will.

4. And, finally, but very importantly, meditation is typically non-personal in its approach. Prayer, on the other hand, is personal in nature, addressing the Powers That Be in a personal way.

   Now one can address most anything personally: the universe at large, a part of nature such as tree, flower, stone, or star - "O star," writes Robert Frost. One can address a quality of being in a personal way - "O, Spirit of Love, we call upon You." You can feel a change in your psychology when you address something personally rather than impersonally.

   For a person of the Theistic perspective, then, one typically addresses the reality known as "God," a center of larger consciousness out of which we have come and to which we belong. Thus, as we enter into our time of silence this morning, I will begin with a prayer that in part might be thought of as an updated version of the prayer of the Psalmist I read earlier:

Prayer

Eternal God, in the quiet of this hour and in this sanctuary for the spirit, we would address ourselves to You, who art before all thought and beyond all words. Thou are both the circumference and center of our lives, power greater than all, yet present in each - before us, after us, within us, without us; life of our life, breath of our breath.

How can we truly think of Thee or speak to Thee? Each thought dissolves as it is conceived; each word shatters in the moment it is spoken.

Yet we would think of Thee and we would address Thee - not for Thy sake, but for ours.

Or do You need us as we need You? Are we Your thoughts and Your voice? Have we eyes and ears us so You can see and hear? Do we raise our questions so You can know and understand?

In the midst of this mystery and in the face of what is eternal and ongoing, we think of our own finite lives. We bring to mind those in this Fellowship whose lives may be especially difficult at this time, those who may suffer the strain of care, whose lives are ragged and rushed, whose hearts are hurting, who may be filled with anxiety and worry about their own lives or the lives of those to whom they are mostly deeply connected.

We are mindful also of those beyond this congregation, fellow humans in this community, in this country, and in other countries throughout the world whose lives are lived at the edge. To think of so much suffering and so much sorrow is almost more than we can bear. O, Source of all that is creative, do You struggle as we struggle for a more humane world? Do You sorrow as we sorrow?

Center in the midst of chaos, may we find calm in Thee. Into Thy great heart we place our heart. Into Thy infinite life we rest our own finite life.

"FOUR FAITHS IN A MODERN WORLD: THEISM"

An introductory comment

This is the final sermon in a five-part sermon series based on the work of The Reverend Fred Campbell, a retired Unitarian Universalist minister, who found that in the 11 different Unitarian Universalist congregations he served there were four basic faiths which he identified and named as Humanism, Naturalism, Mysticism, and Theism. Today I will be speaking on Theism. But before I do I have two introductory remarks that pertain to this series as a whole.

In the first sermon of this series I spoke about what I regarded as the "general ethos" or "larger belief-base" within which all four of these faiths exist and which provide a real, though unwritten, unity for Unitarian Universalists.

One of the things that I said tipped me off to this larger belief-base was an odd little quiz on a website named "Beliefnet.com." The quiz had the playful title of "Belief-O-Matic," a questionnaire designed to match your theological beliefs in terms of percentage to the beliefs of the major religions and faiths in the world. After answering twenty questions, Belief-O-Matic will immediately give you a read-out, in terms of percentage, how your beliefs stack up to 27 different religions or faith perspectives of which Unitarian Universalist is one.

Even though there are no such concrete theological statements of belief in Unitarian Universalist congregations - quite proudly we say, "We are non-creedal" - despite this, Belief-O-Matic seems to feel there is a common core of theological belief. To my mind, they make a compelling case, because over the last several years I have found that members of Unitarian Universalist congregations who go through this exercise inevitably turn up with Unitarian Universalist at a full 100% or very close to it - and remember this is just one of 27 different possibilities.

I've had the chance to test this result again in the "Four Faiths" class that I've been facilitating as a companion class to this sermon series. The class ended this past Tuesday, but before it began I invited persons planning to attend to take the Belief-O-Matic quiz. Almost everyone did and the results are quite remarkable:

Of the 25 persons who took the Belief-O-Matic exercise 16 have came in at a full 100% Unitarian Universalist, with eight of the remaining nine persons having Unitarian Universalist ranked from 99% - 92%. Only one person out of the 25 came in with a Unitarian Universalist percentage ranked below 90% and this person, who shall remain anonymous, having taken the quiz hastily, came in, greatly to his surprise, with Hinduism ranked at 100%. Now he has now gone back to re-take the quiz to try to get a more appropriate result.

The results of this Belief-O-Matic quiz confirm for me that the diversity of belief within our Unitarian Universalist congregations is set in the context of a larger unity of belief that I have named, for lack of a better term, the "modern world-view." That is, regardless of whether persons in our congregations identify as Humanist, Naturalist, Mystic, or Theist - and the numbers in this class were pretty much even - there is a larger umbrella belief-base which unites all four of these perspectives.

This Belief-O-Matic quiz confirms another thought for me that has to do with our role and mission as Unitarian Universalist congregations, namely, to be organizations that provide a religious or spiritual home for those in our society who already share our basic belief perspective and life-stance, who embrace the modern world- and life-view, but who have no intentional community to affirm their ideas, to celebrate their meanings, or to address their questions of value.

There are any number of people who take this quiz and find themselves matched, to their surprise, with Unitarian Universalist. They have no idea who or what this group is and yet they learn through this quiz that there is an authentic religious organization that is in line with their own approach to life.

Incidentally, this Belief-O-Matic quiz has been an outstanding advertising tool for our congregations. For example, at the Hope Unitarian Church in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where I was an interim minister for a year, we put a link on the website to the Belief-O-matic questionnaire.

So even though our numbers as an Association of religiously liberal congregations is relatively small, we are not a minority faith, and I don't think I we should think of ourselves that way.

And, if it is true in general in our society that a large number of people share our basic world- and life-view, it is even more true here in Port Townsend. Our world- and life-view, our life-stance, our belief-base, is not at the periphery of things, it is right in the center of things in our modern world. Thus, I think of this congregation as being at the center of life in this community, not at the periphery.

A second introductory comment

My second overall introductory remark also relates to the class I have been leading, and it has been a confirmation of Rev. Campbell's idea that these four different faiths I have been talking about - Humanism, Naturalism, Mysticism, and Theism - do indeed exist under the larger umbrella Unitarian Universalist banner.

The main exercise of the class, repeated weekly, was this:

1. The large group would divide into four, each person picking the faith-group that most closely fit - "Which group do you feel most a home in?"

2. Each of these groups would then discuss the same theological question such as: "What happens at death?" "What is the nature of Being?" "What are the sources of knowledge for your faith?"

3. Then, returning to the larger group, a reporter from each group would describe the responses so the whole group could hear how each faith-perspective dealt with that question.

At times it has been mouth-open, shake-your-head-in-disbelief interesting to hear how the different groups dealt differently with the questions, a difference that has been as much or more in tone and tenor as in content.

All groups agreed that they could identify with various aspects of all four perspectives, but by the time we were finished with the class, almost all felt more at home in one perspective than the others.

Thus, The Humanist group would speak of the meaning of their lives within the context of other human beings: the pleasure of being with other humans, communicating with them, valuing them, loving them. To live a human life was enough and more than enough. Metaphysical questions and speculations on the why, whence, and wherefore of Being-itself paled into insignificance in front of the concrete encounter with other humans.

The Naturalist group would often speak of the laws of Nature or the order of Nature as providing the context of meaning for their lives. Even Naturalists who might recognize the possibility of an invisible plane or non-material dimension to Reality would prefer the connection and communion with the material and the "natural" realm.

The Mystics would talk about an essence in all things that was part of them and with which they could connect - "I feel myself in the tree or the animal or the other person. I find my way by going inward. It is there I connect with the "ultimate reality" that belongs to all beings."

And then, finally, the Theists, who I am talking about today. An interesting group, these Theists. For the most part they expressed surprise to find themselves drawn to this group. One person said that this setting, this Fellowship, was the only place or organization in which she would be a "Theist," and the others nodded their agreement.

As a group they felt uncomfortable with the word "God" and preferred not to use it because of so many of its typical connotations. Yet they were drawn to this group because they felt a larger invisible presence and power in reality and in their own lives with which they could relate. They agreed on the term "Universal Wisdom" to describe this reality, preferring "Wisdom" to "Intelligence."

Again, they felt uncomfortable with the word "prayer" because of so many of its normal meanings. Yet they were the only group that brought up the word. And all of them did "pray." In their own way. Some of them "unceasingly" - continually addressing a "Wisdom" that was both outside and within them.

"Prayer" for them was not a way of re-arranging the world or turning it to their profit but rather a way for them to connect with this "Source of Wisdom," to open themselves to "It" and to put themselves in harmony with "It." Or, prayer was a means of offering praise and gratitude for the bounty, beauty, and wonder of things.

Modern Theism

This is a lead-in, then, to what Rev. Campbell has named "Theism." And we're talking here about "modern Theism," that is, Theism set within a modern world-view, a modern cosmology.

In a way I wish I had a different word or term than "Theism" to speak of this perspective, not only because of the typical connotations of the word "theism," but also because this is the only group whose name is associated with a particular concept of God.

None of the other four faiths we have been talking about is identified with a particular concept of God and yet I have attached a God-concept to each of them:

With Humanism, though most would prefer no God-concept, I have spoken of a deistic concept of a God, in which a Creator God sets the wheel of the worlds spinning and then stands back from it.

With Naturalism, a pantheistic concept seems appropriate in which nature and the divine are one.

With Mysticism, a pan-en-theistic concept of God works - all is in God and God is in all.

Technically speaking, "God" is a "category term" that refers to the category of "ultimacy." Whatever is of ultimate concern in your life can be named "God" - as when we say of a person, "Money is his or her God," that is, money seems to be of ultimate concern.

Thus, "God" is a category term and the different faith-stances have different concepts of God related to their ultimate concern.

In popular culture, however, there tends to be only one concept of God, various versions of the theistic one, and thus this Theistic faith is linked to that, but "Theism" is the only one of the four faiths whose name is the same as the God-concept.

I thought the term "Idealism" might work for this faith but that would take as much or more explanation as "Theism." If you can think of a better term, let me know.

Process Theology and modern Theism

Putting all that aside now, what is the "Theistic faith?" What can we say characterizes modern Theism?

First, as I am indicating, it is necessary to let go of the "old theism," to let go of the old deity associated with an outgrown cosmology in which the earth was the center of creation and humans the center of the earth and a sometimes loving, sometimes vengeful, patriarchal deity watching, directing, and intervening from the heavens just above the clouds. That deity, as philosopher Frederick Nietzsche declared well over a hundred years ago, is dead - that is to say, that concept that doesn't work anymore within a modern world-view. So clean the slate and re-work your concept of God just as our concept of the cosmos has been re-worked.

One re-working of the theistic concept is the "process philosophy" of Alfred North Whitehead or the "process theology" of a Charles Hartshorne or a Henry Nelson Wieman. Their work provides examples of modern theistic paradigms, though with individual differences.

The key idea in their work, as I understand it, in that there is "purpose' and "direction" working itself out in the universe. "Creative cosmic consciousness," if you will, is present and at work in the universe and operating in and through an evolutionary process. It is like a forward-pushing urge in the direction of developing increased complexity, greater consciousness, and even moral discernment.

And we humans, as a product of this ongoing evolutionary process, are not an aberration or an accident or an indifferent experiment in the scheme of things but rather an illustration of the cosmic direction and a clue as to what it is all about. We can find meaning and purpose for our own lives, then, in cooperating with this ongoing process and with being "co-creators" along with it.

Thus, process theology might put the following questions to you:

1. When you as a human form of life ask your philosophical questions, your questions of why and whence and wherefore, do you ask for yourself alone; or, do you ask on behalf of larger realities that seek to know through you?

2. And when you create something - bake a loaf of bread, build a building, write a poem, compose a piece of music - do you create for yourself alone; or, do you create on behalf of a Creativity that preceded you and whose work you carry on and carry out?

3. And when you seek beauty, or when you rejoice at beauty, is this beauty simply and only in the eye of the beholder and does it relate only to you; or, is there an urge for beauty in the nature of things and in responding to that urge are you working in partnership with a larger consciousness?

4. And when you reach out in an act of compassion to a fellow human or to another form of life, is this simply and only a personal preference and predilection and of no particular universal value; or, are you responding to a moral law that is written in your heart and that emerges from the very center of reality itself, and does your compassion then represent a struggle at the heart of reality for ever greater harmony and compassion?

These are the kinds of questions that process theology might put to you. Thus, modern theism has a "partnership model" of reality.

There are no guarantees of success in either individual life or cosmic life in process philosophy or theology. Process theology has given up some of the "power of God" to preserve the "moral goodness of God." What you find in "process theology" is a push and a direction, an ongoing creative process in which one is invited - yea, more than that, one is urged - to take one's place in this great cosmic adventure, to find a role in it, and to make your own creative contribution to it.

An I-Thou relationship in Theism

Modern Theism, like traditional Theism, is relational in content and approach. Mysticism, as I said last week, has to do with identity and union with the Powers That Be. Theism, on the other hand, has to do with relationship, with partnership, and with communion, not union.

In Theism one is interested to address the Powers That Be, to be in an I-Thou relationship, as Martin Buber puts it, so that there is a line of communication and an experience of engagement and even companionship.

Theism: a response of the heart

To find yourself drawn to the Theistic perspective I don't think you have to be absolutely convinced that there is a depth dimension to reality. I don't think you have to absolutely believe intellectually that there is some "Universal Wisdom" in reality at large. I think you simply have to be willing to approach Reality as if there were something akin to human consciousness at work in reality.

Or, maybe even less than that: maybe all that is needed is simply to say, "I do better when I approach Reality this way. I do better when I assume such a ‘Wisdom.' I do better when I assume an invisible plane to Reality with which I can communicate. Who knows exactly what I am tapping into? Who can say what the nature of the Eternal is? But I find that the practice of such communication brings out a better part of me, a deeper, more compassionate part. I feel more alive. I feel more connected."

Perhaps you've heard of Emerson's often-quoted line, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." ("Self-Reliance") Immediately preceding that line, and as an illustration of that idea, are these words:

In your metaphysics you have denied personality to the Deity, yet when the devout motions of the soul come, yield to them heart and life, though they should clothe God with shape and color. Leave your theory, as Joseph his coat in the hand of the harlot, and flee.

(from "Self-Reliance")

In other words, flee the theories that your mind has spun if your heart and emotion is pulling you beyond them, if intuition is calling you in a different direction. Don't get boxed in by your current ideas. Don't give up your rational brain but, on the other hand, don't let it dictate everything either. And, especially, don't let it diminish the life of your heart.

I read recently of a person, Catholic by upbringing, who is completely modern in her thinking, who does not believe in any kind of cosmic purpose or direction in the universe, especially not that has humans as having a significant role in it - that would be too much for her. Yet she prays some of the traditional Catholic prayers of her childhood, accompanied with prayer beads. This person wrote, "Fingering of the worn beads is part of the meditative comfort in this ancient practice. I don't really care about why it is so deeply comforting to me. It is, though."

In the end Theism seems to me to be a response of the heart. It seeks relationship, connection, communion. It is similar to the Humanistic perspective in these ways. Unlike Humanism, however, it also seeks a connection with planes of reality not visible to human eyes. It sees a "human face" on the Powers That Be.

In Theism's approach to reality there is something at the heart of reality that connects to our heart, something we can understand and to which we can relate, a power for goodness matching our own sense of goodness.

Something akin to our human notion of goodness and love is present at the heart of the universe and is trying to break through and manifest itself. And, occasionally, or even more than occasionally, this reality of goodness and love does break through. When we meet and experience it, and even perhaps help to create it ourselves, then we have connected with that dimension of reality that carves a hole in our hearts that can only be filled with Its own white fire of lovingkindness.

May the Love which overcomes all differences,
Which heals all wounds,
Which puts to flight all fears,
Which reconciles all who are separated,
Be in us and among us,
Now and always. Amen.

(Frederick E. Gillis)

Benediction

May the peace of God which passes all human understanding,
The strength of God which sustains us,
And the love of God which binds us together,
Be with us, now and forever. Amen.

Extinguishing the Chalice

Now may peace be in our hearts,
and understanding in our minds,
may courage steel our wills,
and the love of truth forever guide us.

(NOTE: This is a manuscript version of the sermon preached by The Reverend Bruce A. Bode at the Quimper Unitarian Universalist Fellowship on October 24, 2004. The spoken sermon, available on audio cassette at the Fellowship, may differ slightly in phrasing and detail from this manuscript version.)