Speaking Theologically: What about God? Minister's Reflections

Martha Hodges - 2006-07-09

If you are a practicing Baptist, or a Catholic, or a Jew, chances are you know, more or less, what the person sitting next to you in your service of worship holds to be true about God or Ultimate Reality, about our human nature and our purpose in the world, how the universe came to be, why we suffer and die… Not that everyone in the pews of the temple or church is going to agree on the details by any means, but there is a basic story line that they can agree on – or at least that they can assume some shared familiarity with. At the very least, you’re probably going to be pretty clear about what you’re supposed to hold to be true.

As Unitarian Universalists, most of us can probably agree on certain things, too – an ethical stance toward the world and a general approach to how we determine our beliefs – we believe in the authority of personal experience, reason and conscience, rather than the authority of any text or tradition -- but unless we’re sermonizing, we’re pretty much mum when it comes to the beliefs themselves. Those big life and death questions. We believe in the free and responsible search for truth and meaning, but many UUs seem strangely shy when it comes to actually talking about that truth and meaning.

I have some theories about why this is:

For one thing, we’re so afraid of imposing a belief system on anyone else that it almost seems like bad manners to state what we believe. We seem to equate such a discussion with proselytizing and we all know how we feel about proselytizing. We underestimate our ability to say to each other, “Hmm… That’s an interesting theory, but I can’t go along with it. Here’s why…”

I think, for one thing, we have been taught to avoid religion as a topic of conversation because it causes conflict. After all, at family holiday dinners, aren’t we supposed to avoid the subjects of religion and politics? We don’t want our happy family to end up throwing drumsticks and mashed potatoes at each other and storming away from the table.

But here’s the thing: This is a church – or, if you prefer – a religious fellowship. And if we can’t talk about what we believe here, where can we talk about it? And we do need to talk about it. For one thing, it’s important to know what we believe, and it’s hard to figure that out in isolation. We need other people’s ideas to bounce our own ideas off of. We need other people’s questions, insights and requests for clarification in order to refine our own thinking.

But there’s another reason we need to talk about it. We need to know each other in this way – and long to. But as much as we may wish to connect at this deep level, we’re afraid. We’re afraid of appearing foolish or naïve. We’re afraid of being laughed at or “corrected.” We’re also afraid of alienation. Afraid that the other will reject us as worthwhile people, if they reject our beliefs. And so we pretty much keep our mouths shut when it comes to questions of god and purpose and death and meaning.

Now, I believe that it doesn’t have to be this way. I believe that we can learn, as a congregation, to disagree without throwing the mashed potatoes, or calling into question the other person’s integrity or intelligence. Disagreement is not the same thing as conflict. Without disagreement, there can be no authentic conversation and without authentic conversation, there can be no authentic community. We must learn to trust each other to be both honest and respectful if we are to become the loving community we want to be.

This is a goal worth working for: to be a place where all of us feel safe to express our views, knowing that they will be received with loving-kindness and that our basic worth and dignity as human beings, with rights to our own thoughts, feelings and beliefs, is beyond question.

So… in this spirit, I am asking you this morning to venture into what may be unexplored territory: that mysterious uncharted land of our theology. Don’t be put off by that term “theology.” In this setting, you do not have to believe in god in order to have a theology. Nor do you have to have some kind of special training in order to talk about it. I’ve included in your bulletin a little diagram that you may find helpful in your conversations this morning. This diagram shows one way of understanding the process by which we form our beliefs. Many religions jump into this circle at “Belief.” If your beliefs are determined by a text or tradition, such as the Bible or Koran, this works for you. Most UUs find themselves jumping on at “Experience” or “Action.”

Let me explain: Think of some experience that you consider to have been formative or significant in your life – maybe a time of great joy, sorrow, confusion or satisfaction. To use this “theological circle”, you would then look for a pattern. Are there other experiences you have had that gave you this same feeling or led to the same conclusion? Then, looking at this pattern, what belief have you derived from these collective experiences? And given this belief, what imperative follows from it? In other words, if such and such is true, what must you do? How must you act? Then, consider the result of the action and come full circle, back to experience. Has the result of your action confirmed your belief? Maybe or maybe not. So maybe you need to revise your belief. You get the idea.

You can also work backwards along the circle. You can start with an action, for example, and ask yourself what rule about behavior, what principle, prompted that action. Then, working backwards, what pattern of experiences convinced you of the validity of that principle? Maybe you have a story about an experience that led to this conclusion. How did something that you did, a choice that you made, result in this experience? And you’re back where you began, with “action.”

This morning, as you may have guessed from our Children’s Time, I’m asking you to tackle the question of “god.” Why not jump right in the deep end? You’re among friends. Again, if you are an atheist or agnostic, do not be scared off by the word God. This exercise is meant for you, too.

I’ve heard it said, and I agree, that it’s not sufficient to say we don’t believe in God. We need to clarify. Which god don’t we believe in? There are so many ways of understanding Ultimate Reality, and if the word “god” turns you off, try another. Try “the Infinite” or “the Eternal.” “All That Is.” “Love.” “The Ground of Being.” “The Human Potential to do Right.” Or “The Natural Order” or “Nature.” Or “Creative Force.” Or “Great Mystery.” “The Highest Good.” Or, for that matter, “Spirit of Life.” Finding the name that you can live with for the sake of this conversation is one point of this exercise.

Let me repeat: If the word or idea of “God” does not speak to you, find something else that expresses for you the idea of ultimate reality, whatever that might be. The thing that inspires in you feelings of awe and reverence. The thing that you answer to at the end of the day. The thing that guides your actions or that you rely on in times of despair or trouble. What is the object of your devotion and aspiration? We all have some kind of answer to these questions, whether or not we call it “god.”

Here are some other ideas to spark your conversations this morning. Is this God-like thing or being benevolent, indifferent, cruel? Is it an entity or an impersonal force? Is it rational? Does it intervene in earthly matters? Is it possible to have a personal relationship with it? Is it supernatural or firmly located in the natural order?

And, to return to our “theological circle,” what experiences have led you to this understanding of ultimate reality? And what does this understanding dictate to you about your actions?

As you engage in this conversation, I ask you to do a couple of things: In order to make sure that everyone in your circle has a chance to speak, after you have said your piece, please wait until everyone else has spoken before you take your next turn. And second, ask for clarification if you wish, but don’t interrupt and don’t dismiss. If you disagree with what someone has said, feel free to ask gently probing questions about what evidence underlies that belief. By all means, state that you have a different opinion, and why, but do not -- please – say “That’s wrong.” “That doesn’t make sense.” Or even a well-intentioned, “Are you nuts?” The object here is to keep the conversation flowing, not to shut it down. The object is to listen and to understand the other’s point of view, not to evaluate it or argue with it, and not to change anyone’s mind. Not an easy thing for many of us, but a challenge well worth accepting. So… Let the conversation begin.