Category: Universalist identity

Posted on

A new church

I’ve started planning a new church for Washington, D.C. To be specific, a Universalist Christian church. As I put it in a letter to denominational and local stakeholders:

My vision (much less the plans) for this new church is still developing, but I see it as a traditional-postmodern church start, as found in other denominations; including, in time, hundreds of new members; having a cooperative and inspiring spirit, while being undefensively Christian; and engaging in an optimistic, adventuresome and savvy outreach model. I do not want to let this project carry on so long that it dies on the vine. My goal is to have a functioning, gathered church fit for an application to the Unitarian Universalist Association in 2012.

Universalist National Memorial Church, my former pastorate, is a Universalist Christian church in Washington, D.C. but Washington could certainly use two (or more). The research I’ve seen suggest one would help the other, and besides, it’s not too much of a stretch to think a new church within a tradition can be planted in city every 150 years.

My goal, for the rest of 2010 is to come up with both that vision and that plan. Some conditions — for lack of a better word — are already in place.

  • First, as the organizing minister, I feel a responsibility to take a theological and structural lead. The conventional wisdom, where the people gather and then a vision takes place, seems both to get the order reversed and has had a poor record of recent success. (In this way particularly, I think Doug Muder is on to something. See his article in the current UU World.)
  • Second, the church will be necessarily more modest materially than others. Staffing, housing and mission will have to be accomplished in unconventional ways, and this new church should share what works with the larger fellowship.
  • Third, it should be born with a concept of life-long discipleship and preparation for ministry, express the best of Universalist catholicity (now in deep eclipse in an age of Unitarian Universalist particularism), and plan for new churches.

What I need from you is your spiritual support. In time, I shall surely ask you to ask your Washington-based friends and family to consider participating. Others I’ll ask for advice and some for material support. But for now, please spare a prayer for the success of this project.

I’ll be blogging as this vision and plan develop.

Posted on

My Universalism in June post

UU Salon‘s appeal to discuss Universalism as “the other U” and review of a graduate-level Universalist class curriculum at Transient and Permanent — to be put plainly — pushes my buttons.

For the last two decades or so, I’ve seen Universalism viewed normatively through a Unitarian lens, though this process is actually more than a hundred years old. Can’t we ever overcome:

  • the folklore that Universalism is a second-rate, under-class and rural form of Unitarianism, with no distinct qualities (or none that need to be respected.)
  • that we are free to make it whatever “we” want, without a careful and balanced examination of what’s come before.
  • that the polity of the Unitarian Universalist Association needn’t have both Unitarian and Universalist elements, and have only those that fit conveniently into Unitarian congregationalism. (That means the Ministerial Fellowship Committee and ministerial voting at General Assembly are not aberrations.)
  • the tendency to only respect the edgiest and most marginal forms of Universalism — Abner Kneeland’s atheism and Ken Patton’s one-world-faith among them — while rejecting what the rank and file valued for so long, warts included. (Say, a propensity to debate ad nauseum.)

So to keep this brief — when my rants run long, I never publish — I’d alter the syllabus of the Universalist course this way:

  • start with 17th and 18th century European antecedents, like the “Philadelphian” Jane Lead, the German Boehemists and Anabaptists. Examine George de Benneville and Elhanan Winchester. (Going back to biblical times or the church fathers for historical justification is Universalist polemic. Proving the “heretical origins” of Universalism is a late intrusion.)
  • have a unit on the development of Universalist polity and structure, say in an arch from 1790 to 1900, at least. Rehabilitate Elbridge Gerry Brooks. Review the role of publishing, especially newspapers, in organizing Universalists.
  • recast the sections on foreign mission and pre-WWII-war non-Christian approaches as a missological study. Or to ask 19th century Universalist minister S. J. McMorris’s question, that if Universalism is true, “what is the use of preaching it?” Include anti-Universalist literature and discuss the role of morality in Universalist mission. Don’t fall into a trap of making Quillen Shinn the sine qua non of mission; consider women’s and youth movements here fully. Review the Universalist educational mission.
  • Use pacifism and spiritualism as test cases of diversity within Universalism.
  • don’t get too caught up on recent developments like Carlton Pearson’s experience and Phil Gulley and Jim Mullholland’s If Grace Is True. These tend to recapitulate the history and sound like young people extolling the joy of sex. As if they had discovered something new. There’s plenty of other territory to cover.
  • use Ann Lee Bressler’s now-expensive Universalist Movement in America, 1770-1880. Or the first half, at least. It’s an indispensable review of what made Universalism different and a tonic to later Unitarian irenism, that cloaked a very different origin in convincing theological terms. Helps break the fever of self-referential and internal folklore masquerading as history. And no quotations, like the Murray-attributed “not hell, but hope” unless you can cite them.
Posted on

Covenant, overplayed

Minister and blogger Dan Harper thinks we should “get rid of covenant as an organizing principle.”

I think he’s right and lays out a good case, particularly about how covenantalism — as now extolled — was not what Universalists had. Consider the Gloucester, Massachusetts 1786 Charter of Compact — this was John Murray’s pastorate — and in a day when the church-parish split was well understood, and public worship was state supported. They could have had a classically covenantal church should they have chosen. (Read Dan’s blog post if you’re more convinced by Unitarian models.)

But I think the appeal of neo-covenantalism is that it dignifies and gives form to Unitarian Universalist theological libertarianism (and decorates its decent into bald sectarianism.) I’ve long been bothered by what institutional Unitarian Universalism has been unwilling and unable to celebrate with me an affirmation of universal salvation in Christ — even as one option among many — as a present reality. What’s the likelyhood such a church organized as Murray’s would be admitted to the UUA today? The Universalists turned to their professions — principally the Winchester Profession — for order and unity, for strength in this life and a guide to the next.

Spread them.

Posted on

An academic's look at Universalism's reputation as second-rate Unitarianism

Ann Lee Bressler’s Universalist Movement in America, 1770-1880 is one of the finest works on the subjects I know. This thought, from page 42, is vital to our understanding of the movement — as a social movement — in conjunction with Unitarianism.

The rise of restorationism during the second quarter of the [nineteenth] century helped ensure the common characterization of Universalism would be Unitariarianism’s poor relation, a form of liberalism that shared Unitarianism’s view of benevolent divinity and perfectible humanity but lacked its intellectual base and social standing.

What would have been the alternative? Ultra-Universalists (infers Bressler) which disavowed a temporary period of punishment after death and thus avoided the moralism that gives most religions in America their particular flavor and ferver. Ultra-Universalism was more concerned with a common humanity, the consciousness of which — among other things — overcame fear and self-centeredness.

But  ultra-Universalism was too easily painted with the brush of lax morals and the early impulse that way was quenched, leading to the quotation above.