sign in sign up
<<
Home , Jared Sparks, Sermon

“Unitarian at 200” Kevin M. Carson A Given at the First Universalist Parish of Chester, Vermont May 5, 2019

On May 5, 1819 delivered his famous sermon “Unitarian Christianity” (also known as the “Baltimore Sermon”) at the ordination of Rev. Jared Sparks in Baltimore, Maryland. Does his sermon that defined in his day still speak to us 200 years later?

When you study the history of our Unitarian Universalist , there are a handful of important and books that really defined the theological direction of the movement over the last few centuries. On the Universalist side of the family tree, for example, Hosea Ballou’s famous book, A Treatise on Atonement published in 1805, outlined the theological basis for belief in universal in contrast to the harsh prevalent in Protestant America in his day, and essentially codified the beliefs on the Universalist in America for the next century. On the Unitarian side, William Ellery Channing’s sermon titled, “Unitarian Christianity,” delivered in Baltimore, Maryland at the ordination of Rev. Jared Sparks, on May 5, 1819 – exactly 200 years ago today –is arguably the most important sermon ever preached in the history of Unitarianism. In fact, it was because of this sermon that like-minded Congregationalist ministers began to embrace the label “Unitarian.” Until Channing’s sermon, “Unitarian” was an epithet their more orthodox detractors often hurled at them with disdain to emphasize their rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity. So, as we stand here 200 years later, calling ourselves “Unitarian Universalists,” I want to explore what, if anything, remains relevant for us from this famous sermon. Or, flipping the question around, what, if anything, would Channing recognize in our faith if he dropped in to one of our churches on a Sunday morning like today?

William Ellery Channing was born in Newport, Rhode Island in 1780, and died in 1842, spending all but a few years of his life in New England. He was called to be the of ’s Federal Street Church in 1803, and he served there until his death. That congregation later moved to the corner of Arlington and Boylston Streets, and it is now known as the Arlington Street Church. As a young minister, Channing became associated with the liberal side of the so-called “Unitarian Controversy,” which began at Harvard Divinity School in 1805 when Rev. Henry Ware was appointed to fill an open theological teaching position, much to the consternation of more conservative . By 1819, when Channing preached his famous sermon, many New England churches had already split from orthodoxy and declared themselves aligned with Unitarian thinking. As their ranks grew, Channing led the effort by a group of clergy serving these congregations to form the American Unitarian Association in 1825, one of the two ancestral organizations of our current Unitarian Universalist Association.

For some broader historical context, America in 1819 was mostly rural, very Protestant, and in the middle of the period known as the Second . was on the 2

upswing, and small denominations like the and Methodists would see a huge increase in numbers over the next several decades, becoming the large denominations we see today. James Monroe was President, and many of the Founding Fathers were still alive. The population of Boston was around 43,000, and most New England towns looked a lot like Old Sturbridge Village. That is no accident, of course, since the tourist attraction attempts to recreate a typical New England town from around 1830. Slavery was still an ugly fact in America in those days, and Channing spoke in opposition to slavery as early as 1825, though he was criticized for not being as zealous and vocal as many more radical Antislavery Unitarian ministers. This was also the time when the Transcendentalist movement began to emerge in New England, and though Channing had a general appreciation for Transcendentalism, he was considered to be among the more traditional, conservative members of the clergy embracing the new Unitarian name. It is one of the ironies of our tradition that what outsiders would see as radical liberal beliefs with respect to orthodox Christianity are often viewed as suspiciously “conservative” inside our faith.

As Unitarianism swept through parts of America, in Europe, the so-called “higher criticism” movement, particularly among German biblical scholars, such as Friedrich Schleiermacher, David Friedrich Strauss, and Ludwig Feuerbach, was beginning to examine the through the lenses of history, sociology, archaeology, linguistic analysis, and the philosophy of Locke, Hume, Kant, and others. Learned scholars from Harvard were certainly aware of the work of their European colleagues, and many, like Channing, spent some time studying abroad. It is easy to see parallels in the thinking of Channing and his German contemporaries, but I think it is important to remember that Channing was foremost a minister, and his liberal had immediate, practical application among the nascent Unitarian churches of America. Despite the progressive scholarship in Europe, and small enclaves of establish Unitarian churches, no significant new liberal religious awakening emerged that paralleled that of American Unitarianism.

So, back to the sermon. The text of “Unitarian Christianity” contains 13,108 words, and reportedly, Channing spoke for roughly an and a half at the service – pretty typical in those days when a good sermon was one of the few forms of entertainment available. For comparison, my sermon today contains a mere 2,854 words. Before he had even delivered the sermon, Channing knew it would stir up trouble, and he arranged with Jared Sparks to have it published almost immediately. He also encouraged the liberal clergy in attendance to spread the message throughout the land, which they promptly did, and so some people have called this the “ of America Unitarianism.”1 It didn’t take long for what became known as “The Baltimore Sermon” to live up to his expectations. Liberals embraced it, and critics were quick to respond.

1 Charles C. Forman, “Elected Now by Time,” in A Stream of Light: A Short History of American Unitarianism, ed. Conrad Wright (Boston: Unitarian Universalist Association, 1982), 23. 3

His sermon consisted on two main sections. In the first part, he described the Unitarian approach to the Bible, arguing in favor of using reason to interpret Scripture and explore theological questions. Like his contemporaries in Europe, Channing considered himself to be a liberal Christian who took the Bible seriously but not as a “divine” work. From Channing’s perspective, the authors of the Bible may have been inspired by God in some fashion, but it was written by ordinary human beings. As he says plainly in the sermon, the “Bible is a book written for men, in the language of men, and that its meaning is to be sought in the same manner as that of other books.” He believed we have a responsibility to approach the Bible rationally, as rational human beings, and God would not want it any other way, for as Channing says, “if God be infinitely wise, he cannot sport with the understandings of his creatures.”

Having laid out the case for applying reason to Biblical interpretation, the second part of his sermon outlines five principle beliefs of Unitarians that logically follow. His purpose was to clearly define what it meant to be a Unitarian, or as he says in the sermon, “to state some of the views which we derive from that sacred book, particularly those which distinguish us from other Christians.” The first, and most fundamental belief he asserts, is that the doctrine of the Trinity is not supported in the Bible. Moreover, Channing suggests it is even subversive to the core of the Christian faith. He says, “The proposition that there is one God seems to us exceedingly plain. We understand it that there is one being, one mind, one person, one intelligent agent, and one only, to whom underived and infinite perfection and dominion belong.” There was not much ambiguity in his thinking on this topic to say the least. Like Arius and many others down through the centuries, since the earliest days of the faith, it was clear to Channing that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures described our relationship with a unitary God.

His second point follows as an obvious corollary of disavowing the Trinity: was fully human. Although Channing imagined Jesus to be the exemplar of moral perfection, he could not conceive of Jesus as part of some triune godhead, nor did Jesus have an inexplicable “dual nature” that was both fully human and fully divine – a doctrine that Channing derided as being “so strange, so difficult, so remote from all the previous conceptions of men.” Channing still viewed Jesus as special – indeed, as the – but to make him out to be something beyond fully human missed the whole point of his mission. In more contemporary language, for Channing, Jesus was, by the example of his life and through his teachings, “one in whom God is fully met.” As Channing says in the sermon,

“It is our belief, that Christ’s humiliation was real and entire, that the whole Saviour, and not a part of him, suffered, that his crucifixion was a scene of deep and unmixed agony. As we stand round his cross, our minds are not distracted, nor our sensibility 4

weakened …We recognize in the dying Jesus but one mind. This, we think, renders his sufferings, and his patience and love in bearing them, incomparably more impressive and affecting than the system we oppose.”

Channing’s third point was about the moral perfection of God. For Channing, moral progress was the key to human salvation, and you often hear the phrase “salvation by character” associated with him, although that phrase seems to have originated several decades earlier among liberal New England clergy. In another famous sermon, titled, “Likeness to God,” that he gave in 1828, Channing elaborated on the idea that human beings have a fundamental morally good nature that we can cultivate throughout our lives, with God seen as the referent for moral perfection and the ultimate unity to which our souls long to return. In “Unitarian Christianity” he lays out the framework for this thinking in the following passage:

“To give our views of God in one word, we believe in his Parental character. We ascribe to him, not only the name, but the dispositions and principles of a father. We believe that he has a father’s concern for his creatures, a father’s desire for their improvement, a father’s equity in proportioning his commands to their powers, a father’s joy in their progress, a father’s readiness to receive the penitent, and a father’s justice for the incorrigible. We look upon this world as a place of education, in which he is training men by prosperity and adversity, by aids and obstructions, by conflicts of reason and passion, by motives to duty and temptations to sin, by a various discipline suited to free and moral beings, for union with himself, and for a sublime and ever-growing virtue in heaven.”

Channing’s fourth point was an extension of the idea that Jesus was fully human. Channing saw Jesus’ mission on Earth as salvific, but not because he was sent to die for our sins, rather he was “sent by the Father to effect a moral, or spiritual deliverance of mankind; that is, to rescue men from sin and its consequences, and to bring them to a state of everlasting purity and happiness.” Channing believed Jesus was sent on a divine mission, and that he was resurrected and worked miracles by God’s grace and because he demonstrated a level of moral perfection. His living example and moral teachings were what mattered most.

Channing’s final point emphasized the centrality of moral virtue in the Christian life, which he believed was inherent in human nature. Our duty was to love God, love Christ, and work on our salvation through living a moral life. It was the true measure of holiness. Though he was not one of the more ardent social justice warriors of his era, doing the work of justice was in line with his vision of moral living. He has been criticized for his cautious approach to social justice issues, but I think that reflects his sense of the individual basis of moral perfection. I think he would suggest that we would all be better off working on our own imperfections and moral progress, and if we did, everything else would simply fall into being. 5

So, there you have it, the main points of this famous sermon. So, what is still relevant to us today, what has changed significantly, and what would Channing think if he dropped in to a UU church this morning?

Some things have clearly changed. Most notably, Christianity is no longer central to Unitarian Universalist identity, and this includes seeing the Bible as our primary sacred text and feeling the need to justify how we are “still Christian enough” despite beliefs that place us outside the mainstream. We had already started down a much more diverse path by the end of the nineteenth century, though the debate about our Christian identity lingered well into the twentieth century at least until the Unitarian merger with the Universalists in 1961. Even today, we still struggle with tradition at times, and in my opinion, we haven’t quite made peace with our Christian past. That said, there are still a handful of Christian churches and a number of UU clergy who hold very “Channing-like” beliefs. Though some wax nostalgic for the “good old days” when we were more Christian, I think we have traveled too far for this to happen in a significant way.

But, if you can move beyond the Christian language of the sermon, I think there are still fundamental principles that Channing identified which continue to resonate in our tradition. We absolutely believe in the use of reason in the search for truth and meaning. Most of us believe in the full humanity of Jesus, and we can appreciate the moral truths of his teachings about the kingdom of God – embracing his emphasis on loving our neighbors and taking care of one another. We also believe, in some fashion, in the idea of living a moral life and “salvation” by character, even if we don’t think of salvation as some final destination of the soul. Many of us see salvation in this world as its own reward when we choose to live a moral life and work for the common good. And though plenty of Unitarians no longer use “God” language, most of us share a deep sense of connection to something sacred and unifying, whether we call it God, Sacred Mystery, Spirit of Life, or the web of all existence.

The world has changed a lot since 1819. I think about how technology and scientific advances such as evolutionary biology, cosmology, and modern physics have completely altered our understanding of the world Channing experienced. Even learning more about the world’s had a huge impact on our faith not long after his death. But, if Channing dropped in this morning, I think he would feel right at home. First, he would recognize a familiar Protestant form of worship in most of our congregations – even perhaps some familiar hymns. He would probably be disappointed that the sermon was so brief, but I think he would be thrilled to see the boldness in our embrace of reason, subject matter, and even other religious traditions. He would love hearing about the charitable and justice work during announcements, so long as we still focused on our own moral perfection – or what we would call “spiritual development.” He would probably be shocked to see women in ministry, but not terribly so. He might be more shocked that the Unitarians merged with the Universalists, but I 6

think he would understand how that came to pass. Perhaps his greatest disappointment would be that there are still so few Unitarians in the world, and that so many mainstream denominations still cling to irrational doctrines about the Trinity and so forth.

As I was writing this, I started wondering what it will be like 200 years from now, assuming we make it through the worst impacts of climate change. Will even be around still? I suspect it will, and I am sure that some form of always will be. I believe the call of the sacred is inherent to our human nature, and I hope we will deepen our appreciation of the sacred as we continue to evolve. Seeing how much we still retain from Channing’s time makes me think that it would probably look very familiar to us. I doubt we will have many more answers about life and death by then, and we will still be pilgrim souls, searching for truth and meaning in community wherever we might find it.

So, on this 200th anniversary of “Unitarian Christianity,” let us give thanks for William Ellery Channing and the many other pioneers in our tradition who opened our minds and re- imagined what our faith might become. It may be a far more diverse and complicated faith today than many could ever have dreamed it could be, but I think this just confirms that we are in sync with the expanding creative flow of the universe. Diversity makes us stronger and more relevant to the generations that follow, and I think we honor the memories of those who came before by living our faith into being each day.

References

The full text of Channing’s “Unitarian Christianity” is available online at: https://uuwestport.org/readings/unitarianchristianity/

7

Readings

Opening Words Quote from William Ellery Channing

“To live content with small means; to seek elegance rather than luxury, and refinement rather than fashion, to be worthy, not respectable, and wealthy, not rich; to study hard, think quietly, talk gently, act frankly, to listen to stars and birds, to babes and sages, with open heart, to bear all cheerfully, do all bravely; await occasions, hurry never. In a word, to let the spiritual, unbidden and unconscious grow up through the common. This is to be my symphony.”

Reading from “Unitarian Christianity” by William Ellery Channing, preached in Baltimore, Maryland, May 5, 1819

“We object strongly to the contemptuous manner in which human reason is often spoken of by our adversaries, because it leads, we believe, to universal skepticism. If reason be so dreadfully darkened by the fall, that its most decisive judgments on religion are unworthy of trust, then Christianity, and even natural theology, must be abandoned; for the existence and veracity of God, and the divine original of Christianity, are conclusions of reason, and must stand or fall with it. If revelation be at war with this faculty, it subverts itself, for the great question of its truth is left by God to be decided at the bar of reason. It is worthy of remark, how nearly the bigot and the skeptic approach. Both would annihilate our confidence in our faculties, and both throw doubt and confusion over every truth. We honor revelation too highly to make it the antagonist of reason, or to believe that it calls us to renounce our highest powers.”

Reading from “Unitarian Christianity” by William Ellery Channing, preached in Baltimore, Maryland, May 5, 1819

“To all who hear me, I would say, with the Apostle, Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. Do not, brethren, shrink from the duty of searching God’s Word for yourselves, through fear of human censure and denunciation. Do not think, that you may innocently follow the opinions which prevail around you, without investigation, on the ground, that Christianity is now so purified from errors, as to need no laborious research. There is much reason to believe, that Christianity is at this moment dishonored by gross and cherished corruptions. If you remember the darkness which hung over the for ages; if you consider the impure union, which still subsists in almost every Christian country, between the church and state, and which enlists men’s selfishness and ambition on the side of established error; if you recollect in what degree the spirit of intolerance has checked free inquiry, not only before, but since the ; you will see that Christianity cannot have freed itself from all the human inventions, which disfigured it under the Papal tyranny. No. Much stubble is yet to be burned; much rubbish to be removed; many gaudy decorations, which a false taste has hung around 8

Christianity, must be swept away; and the earth-born fogs, which have long shrouded it, must be scattered, before this divine fabric will rise before us in its native and awful majesty, in its harmonious proportions, in its mild and celestial splendors This glorious reformation in the church, we hope, under God’s blessing, from the progress of the human intellect, from the moral progress of society, from the consequent decline of prejudice and bigotry, and, though last not least, from the subversion of human authority in matters of religion, from the fall of those hierarchies, and other human institutions, by which the minds of individuals are oppressed under the weight of numbers, and a Papal dominion is perpetuated in the Protestant church.”