If you are new to UU, you may be thinking about asking a question. If you've been a UU for a while, you've been asked - and maybe had a hard time giving an answer. In fact, you may be on the verge of asking it yourself - What do UUs believe, anyway? A lot of us find that this is our least favorite question about Unitarian Universalism. That's because our questioners and we ourselves are accustomed to churches that are gathered and connected by a creed; a common set of beliefs that are required for membership. In some churches, that creed is recited each week. That doesn't happen here. We don't require a creedal statement of our members and in fact we don't have such a statement, so we can't recite one. So we have trouble answering people who assume that, of course, we have a creed, so why don't we just tell them what it is. To respond, we have to deal with the underlying assumption - which doesn't fit us.

Unitarian Universalism is a covenantal religion. That means we are gathered by deep promises about being in relationship while we walk our religious journeys. In fact, our legal organizing documents state early on that the ".congregations of the Unitarian Universalist Association covenant to affirm and promote." seven principles. We often talk about the principles, but we tend to skip over the part about being in covenant. So now that you're alerted to the term, just what does it mean to be a covenantal religion?

Let's be clear about one thing from the outset. We are not the only religious tradition that talks about covenant. The term is fairly common in the Hebrew Scriptures. You may be familiar with the image of the Ark of the Covenant being carried by the Levites as the Hebrews wandered in the desert. There are references to a covenant between God and the Jewish people. But most Western religions combine the idea with their statement of beliefs. Acceptance of the creed is a requirement for someone to be part of their covenant. You can be part of a special relationship only if you share those beliefs.

Unitarian Universalists covenant together, that is promise to be in relationship with other UUs, around values and understandings about the ways we live and learn together on our planetary home. That's a big difference. An important one. We don't need agreement about such things as the meaning of life, the existence of God, the possibility of an afterlife or other topics usually included in creedal statements. We do need agreement about the equality and worth of each person and the ways we treat each other; the importance of expanding our knowledge and understanding; the connections between and among us humans and all the other creatures and features of Earth. Those are the things that our Principles address - and express more particularly.

You have heard me say that we covenant to walk our religious journeys together. That involves companioning, offering support and challenge, and nurturing relationships that are respectful and caring. We want to support each other theologically, emotionally, and practically - and to challenge each other in these same areas. Let's look at the example of theology. (It seems that everyone does.) Supporting someone theologically doesn't imply agreement. It means recognizing that a theology you don't share may be meaningful and comforting to someone else, and encouraging them to explore it. Challenging someone theologically doesn't mean telling them how stupid and wrong- headed they are. Instead, it prompts us to ask them to explain where they find meaning in that theology and how it helps them to lead better, kinder lives. It may mean admitting - or asserting - that it doesn't make much sense to us, though we know it works for them. UUs don't have to agree on theology. We have room for a wide variety of theological understandings. We just insist that they mustn't hurt others. We say we must each give one another room and encouragement to arrive at the most meaningful, helpful understanding we can.

Covenants are sometimes likened to contracts, but they are different in fundamental ways. I would characterize a contract as a legal arrangement obligating two or more parties to carry out certain specific acts. Any areas of life not specified in the wording are separate - in other words, they are outside the contractual relationship. Often the parties have little to do with each other - maybe they never even meet in person. I'm thinking here of real estate contracts, where buyer and seller, owner and renter may sign at different times, even different locations. With a contract, if one party fails to honor the provisions, the other has legal recourse. It's not pretty, but it only affects the covered area. Once a contract is fulfilled or otherwise settled, the parties may have no further connection.

Covenants, on the other hand, are both more amorphous and more pervasive. I think of them as "deep promises"about being in relationship with others. They are about intentional connections and involve ongoing concern and care for those involved. Covenants recognize human limitations and frailties. When one person fails to honor another in some way (notice I said when, not if) - the Buddhists might say "when we get out of right relationship"- the next steps involve communication, perhaps remorse and forgiveness, then reconciliation and renewal. As Roy Jones' chalice lighting words remind us, we are "mindful of truth ever exceeding our knowledge and community ever exceeding our practice." We know we aren't perfect; that indeed, none of us can be perfect. At times we will fall short of our aspirations. We still make promises about our continuing connection, regard and companionship.

We find early American Unitarian commitments by covenant in the Cambridge Platform, written in 1648. It was agreed by a meeting of church leaders from congregations in the Massachusetts area, many of which later became Unitarian. It specifically names its relationship a covenant and declares its purpose to be "meeting constantly together for worship . and mutual edification" and specifies that membership will be voluntary. Now these churches assumed that anyone interested in membership would be Christian and referred to Jewish and Christian figures and Scriptures. But they did not set down a creedal statement or requirement. They promised each other mutual aid and "edification" and specified that anyone "wandering" from the Gospel or commandments would not be "cut off from the privileges of the covenant." That was radical stuff. For many churches and cultures today, it still is.

Over the next few centuries, covenants for our churches keep appearing in different forms. In fact, the words painted over our archways are one variation of covenants common among us in the 19th and 20th centuries. They begin, "Love is the doctrine" or "Love is the spirit" and all end with some kind of covenant, pledge or promise. If you look in the back of your hymnbook, readings 471 and 473 are other versions. The UU Church in Fresno has similar wording set into the walkway to the entrance of their new sanctuary. It's a reminder of the covenant that draws them together - both the content and the promises we UUs make to one another.

In addition to the general commitment to love, truth and service, our congregation (along with many others) has adopted more detailed covenants about what it means to be in right relationship and becoming the beloved community. Our Board developed its covenant first, and each new Board member has signed it in the eight years since. A few years later, we adopted a Congregational Covenant. The wording was worked out through small group input and plenty of word-smithing to reach the form that is printed in your program this morning. It was approved by a vote of the congregation. Both covenants speak of ways we will honor and interact with each other. The Board covenant, for example, speaks of being stewards of the Fellowship and considering its well-being in both the present and future. It mentions offering sincere praise for work done on behalf of UUFSC. The Congregational Covenant lists interacting with an open mind, respecting differences and seeking mutual understanding. It calls us to mentor our youth and to be generous in giving our time, talent and financial support to the Fellowship. Both covenants speak of ways we want to act in times of conflict. The covenants call on us to flesh out - to incarnate, to embody - our promise to walk our religious journeys together.

That, of course, is the hard part. It's easy to affirm love, justice and service - or appreciation, understanding and generosity - they are wonderful things! It's not easy to put them into practice. After all, that takes intentionality, time and effort. We have to put ourselves out, to make time or use resources to be generous, to pursue justice or to offer mentoring or other service. We want to accept and respect each other, to be compassionate and keep an open mind. But then we're faced with a whole variety of differences in ideas and behavior and habits and it's so irritating! Maybe more; it's aggravating, even hurtful, especially when a disagreement hits a nerve or runs deep. I'm reminded of the story of someone challenged about some less-than-sensitive action. "Of course I love mankind," came the reply. "It's the people I can't stand!" We can relate, right?

And when we're the ones who've received some outburst or been hurt by some comment or action our instincts just don't prompt us to continue interacting or to be the one to seek better understanding. We want to get away from the offender or to strike back in some way. Even when we simply hear some comment or joke that's offensive, we often duck down and keep quiet. Maybe we don't know what to say or we're taken aback that we actually heard it at all. We don't have many models for raising objection or challenge without being aggressive or rude. But far too often, our silence is misinterpreted. When no one voices an objection, the impression is that the speaker's attitude is shared by the hearers. How then can we move toward greater awareness and inclusivity? Sometimes a simple statement such as, "Well, I wouldn't say that," would be enough to show that the attitude is at least questionable.

Another problem arises when there's a conflict or someone's behavior seems less respectful or encouraging than we'd like. We may be sorely tempted to use our covenant as a way of scolding folks about what we think they ought to do. And surely, we would like everyone to embody our covenants in every action every day. But that's not going to happen. And a covenant is something we promise about how we will act, not a promise about how we'll expect other folks to act. We, then, are called to figure out how we can keep our promises - you know, that stuff about being companions in the journey, about support and challenge. That probably does not mean assigning blame to someone for not being perfect in their adherence. It probably does invite us to support and companion them in finding a different way to move forward.

Remember, we know from the outset that we won't be able to keep our covenant promises perfectly. The foundation of the covenant, however, is the deep intention to stay in relationship and not cut anyone off from its benefits. It won't always be fun. No one likes to find they've failed to keep a promise, to meet a standard. No one wants to hurt a friend. Remorse or the need for apology aren't anyone's favorites. No one wants to be hurt, to have a confidence or trust misused, much less to forgive the offender. Stay in relationship? Isn't that just inviting further injury? Yet some hard things have their part in ongoing relationships, right along with the empathy and support, the celebration and achievements.

How can we manage all this? Well, we know that being human, we'll do it imperfectly. I'm remembering a song in the teal hymnal - one titled Woyaya. One verse goes, "We will get there, heaven knows how we will get there, but we know we will. Woyaya, Woyaya!" Heaven knows how we will get there, but our intentions and efforts go a long way. The more we think seriously about what it means to be in covenant; the more concretely we can imagine the implications for our actions, the better we'll do. When we are alert for models of behavior that fit with our aspirations, the more tools we have to use. The stronger our intent, the more courage supports our words and actions.

We gather in the promise to be in relationship with one another and share our journeys of exploration, growth and change. We form a community of both spirit and flesh, intending it to reflect our highest aspirations. One thing is clear. If we are to approach a Beloved Community, we must envision and work toward it. We can model for each other. We can share our concerns and ideas. We can lament our failures and try again. We can offer and seek forgiveness and renew our connections. Some of our principles speak of encouraging spiritual growth and searching for the truth. These are ongoing processes. We keep on learning and growing. Our understandings about who we are and how best to live with each other on this earthly home keep expanding. Along with them, our habits and actions need to develop and change. We are building new patterns, new standards, new ways of being in relationship. We walk our religious journeys together.

So I return to those chalice lighting words with which we began our service, "reverently we covenant together, beginning with ourselves as we are, to share the strength of integrity and the heritage of the spirit in the unending quest for wisdom and for love." I'd say that's what a covenantal religion is all about. It sure sounds good to me!

January 11, 2009

This is one of our Minister's Sermons. We also have a brief biography of Rev. Simons, and the latest edition of Grace Notes, a column she writes for our newsletter.
We have another sermon collection, from our Guests.