THE UNITARIANS: "DEEDS NOT CREEDS" 

(This is the third of a series of reports on my visit to churches in my home town of Denton, Texas. The purpose is to inform and enlighten. to correct misunderstandings, and to show that in spite of differences we all have a great deal in common. It is also my way of sharing with you what has proven to he an exciting adventure in better understanding. — the Editor) 

The building is across the back street from the First Christian Church, not all that conspicuous to the passing public. A modest sign reads "Unitarian Universalist Fellowship." A "Family Fellowship" was advertised for 10:30, but no one was there at that time. While I waited in my car for the first arrivals, I thought of my own Church of Christ, where most of us arrive either at the last moment or late. A few women and children began to appear, but I decided that was not "family" enough for me to intrude upon and waited for the main service at 11:00. When some 20 people began to assemble I eagerly joined them. Having already attended a rather large 8:00 service at a Church of Christ, I was to have a very different experience with the Unitarians.

I could not have been received more graciously. As is usually the case in these visits there were people there that I knew. Once the service began I was asked to introduce myself. The service was informal and laid back, not unlike a gathering in a home. Announcements were made and there was a sharing of concerns. I sensed the empathy when it was reported that a friend had given birth to twins, both stillborn. There were other hurts and problems referred to. There was evidence of "a caring community of the concerned," as the Unitarians describe their idea of a church. But there were no prayers, which is reflective of their rejection of what they call "a kind of miraculous conversation bringing heavenly results."

But their official statements indicate that they do believe in prayer "as a means of articulating for our own good our concerns, fears, and aspirations." They say that prayer "helps to objectify our goals, and that is its major purpose." This means that in prayer they are talking only to themselves, a means of inspiring and encouraging one another. This is consistent with their humanistic view of things. There is no God (in the Biblical sense) to hear prayer, and when they refer to God it is in a poetic or symbolic sense, or it is equated with Nature. To them "child of God" and "child of the universe" are synonymous.

While they would not pray the Lord's Prayer in their service, they do have what they call "Our Affirmation," which was printed in their Order of Service (I doubt if they would use "Order of Worship" since, as they see it, there is nothing to worship except themselves or Humankind), and which we would all applaud insofar as it goes. 

Love is the doctrine of this fellowship
The quest of truth is its prayer
To dwell together in peace
To seek Knowledge in freedom
To serve others in community
To the end that all may grow into harmony with creation
Thus we do covenant with each other and with ourselves. 

The "Reading" of the service was the Hypocratic Oath, which was the basis of a presentation by an obviously concerned woman on health care in our community, particularly in reference to the indigent. Some discussion followed. While there was not a single reference to Scripture in this service, there might have been, for the Bible is sometimes referred to as a possible source of truth just as the Koran might be, or Tagore or Shakespeare or Emerson, particularly Emerson who is one of their patron saints, if they have patron saints. If you want a "feel" of the Unitarian spirit read Ralph Waldo Emerson. In their tract rack they have a booklet on "What Emerson Says." Good stuff!

The nearest to anything liturgical in this non-liturgical church was the singing of hymns and the lighting of the chalice. A woman lighted a candle as she told of passing the state boards in family counseling. I happened to know her and afterward offered congratulations. Unitarians are usually highly sophisticated, which makes it unlikely that a small Texas city would have a Unitarian church. But our city has two state universities.

That the Unitarians sing hymns I found a little surprising, especially hymns by Isaac Watts! No hymns of course are sung to Christ since they do not claim to be Christians, and none to God in any transcendent sense. So, how could they sing Watts' hymns, that eminent Christian poet? They sang Watts' "From All That Dwell Below The Skies," or rather their own rendition of it. Here is the first verse as Watts wrote it: 

From all that dwell below the skies
      Let the Creator's praise arise;
      Alleluia! Alleluia!
      Let the Redeemer's name be sung
      Thro' every land, by every tongue.
      Alleluia! Alleluia! 

Inspired by Psalms 117, Watts wrote that great hymn of praise to God and in adoration of the Redeemer. Alleluia of course means to praise God. Now look at it after the Unitarian redactor got through with it: 

From all that dwell below the skies
      Let songs of hope and faith arise;
      Let peace, good-will on earth be sung
      Through every land, by every tongue. 

Even the Unitarians would concede that it is easier to expunge God from a hymn than to remove Him from the universe. But do the Unitarians really want to do this? Do they really believe that we are alone in the universe? Is there no more to life than this vale of tears and no ultimate answer to the human predicament? Does it all end in death and darkness?

Their own Ralph Waldo Emerson negotiated with his own mind for something better than a hopeless, godless view of things. We would all do well to ponder this magnificent paragraph from his trenchant pen: 

The human heart requires a God. Some God, a true or a false one, it will and must have. There exists no mind but is possessed with love either of good or of evil. It will make a God of conscience, or of riches, or of power, or of science, or of honor, or of hatred, or of the belly. For everyone may see, who will look at the mind of a philosopher, that whoever made us, we were made not by ourselves, but from the beginning to the end of our structure and of our progress, do plainly discover a reference to something else than ourselves. 

We plainly discover a reference to something else than ourselves, said the New England bard, and We were not made by ourselves. If there is Something or Someone beside ourselves who made us, He must he greater than ourselves. Is this not who God is? Emerson is not far from Paul's words in Rom. 1:20: "All that may be known of God by men lies plain before their eyes; indeed God himself has disclosed it to them. His invisible attributes, that is to say his everlasting power and Deity, have been visible, ever since the world began, to the eye of reason, in the things he has made."

There is much that we can all learn from the Unitarians. We can start with Emerson's emphasis on deeds rather than creeds: "Do not say things. What you are stands over you the while, and thunders, so that I cannot hear what you say to the contrary." And so they say in Unitarian Universalists Believe, a brochure issued from their headquarters in Boston: "We are inspired and impressed 'by deeds not creeds."' They practice what they preach in terms of working for peace and justice for all. They have special interest in criminal justice, calling for a moratorium on prison construction. They insist that only violent criminals should be incarcerated. Others should make restitution to their victims. They are convinced that the 700,000 we now have in prisons can be greatly reduced by getting at the root cause of crime: poverty, unemployment, racism, classism, sexism.

While it is refreshing to find a church that has such concern for social justice, there is reflected here the basic fallacy of humanism. It is also evident in such affirmations as : "This new liberal religious movement re-affirms a positive faith in humanity" and "We assert the goodness of the individual person."

The fallacy is that there is nothing really wrong with mankind that a proper environment (social justice) cannot correct. This sanguine view of human nature fails the test of history as well as our own personal experience. In the light of history how can we believe in the basic goodness of man? It is evident that there is something dreadfully wrong with humankind, basically wrong. The Bible identifies it as sin. A religion that ignores the reality of sin can make no lasting contribution to the alleviation of human suffering, for man suffers (for the most part) because he sins against his Creator. Human nature must be changed from within. The Bible calls this repentance or reformation. Only changed people can really change society. Social justice is inextricably tied to personal righteousness.

As for what Unitarians believe about Jesus, they agree with Benjamin Franklin that his morals and religion are the best, but they question his divinity. They speak of Jesus' moral grandeur and nobility of character, and they draw inspiration from "the human Jesus." And they disavow any intention of belittling Jesus when they conclude that the traditional churches have corrupted his teaching.

If the Unitarians really followed Jesus on the basis of his moral grandeur and nobility of character, they might not be far from his first disciples who must have followed him without much of a theological base. In any event Jesus himself had a rather liberal view of discipleship: "He who comes to me I will in no wise cast out" (Jn. 6:37). The church must not be too prescriptive of the reasons why people follow Jesus, and it must certainly refrain from casting out those that Jesus receives, which might include Unitarians.

The time was when the Unitarians believed in the divinity of Jesus. William Ellery Channing, the liberal Congregational minister of Boston who shocked the orthodox clergy of his day by rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity, was a founding father of Unitarianism in this country. In his 1815 sermon on "Unitarian Christianity" he exalted Jesus as the Savior of the world, stating that the Christ was sent by God to effect the "moral and spiritual deliverance of mankind." But Jesus was not God, Channing insisted, thus rejecting the notion of the Trinity.

Later James Freeman Clarke liberalized the Unitarian "Affirmation" (They don't believe in creeds!) to read: "The fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, the leadership of Jesus, salvation by character, and the progress of mankind onward and upward forever." As the Unitarians became more humanistic Jesus became "a leader" instead of "the Savior," and in time they became indistinguishable from the Universalists, who not only rejected the Trinity but proclaimed universal salvation. In recent years these two have united and they are now the Unitarian Universalist Association of Churches and Fellowships in North America. They do not consider themselves "a Christian church" and do not claim to be Christians, though a Christian can be a Unitarian if he chose to, just as a Moslem or a Buddhist could.

In the early days when they were a Christian church, even if not Trinitarian, there was some affinity with the Campbellites, one reason being that Alexander Campbell also questioned the doctrine of the Trinity. The Unitarians also embraced Campbell because of his plea for unity on a non-creedal basis and his rejection of theological systems. Campbell knew that he could always preach in a Unitarian church, even when all others in town closed their doors to him, and he often did.

As for the Unitarians' greatest virtue and the one we would do well to emulate, I would name their openness to new ideas and their willingness to listen to each other and to others in their search for truth. How many Christian churches today could say the following? 

     Unitarian Universalists can be completely honest with one another. There is no "conforming" to which they must adhere. They can speak their minds on all issues freely, for there are no "off limit" sign. no forbidden areas of thought. no prohibited doubts, that will make one an outcast. 

If this kind of openness and honesty is also part of what it means to be a Christian, and if we compare the attitude and behavior of our churches to that of the Unitarian, we can justly raise the question as to who is more Christian after all. —the Editor.