Power contrasted with the joy of serving — a nod in the direction of the Coronation of King Charles III — an online gathering 14 May 2023

The take home message of this gathering for reverence was that perhaps we should stop trying. 

Teaching from many centuries ago says we could stop being afraid and stop trying to force reality.  We could learn the mystery of surrender and trust.  And we may find, then, that what needs to be done will be done to us, through us, with us, in us and very often, in spite of us.  That through learning to be still, to trust in surrender and to surrender in trust, we feed the good side of our nature and collaborate with the emergence of good in the world.  This sounds like a message from the oriental religions: Buddhism (especially Zen Buddhism), and Taoism.  But, as it’s a universal message, we can find it also in the Bible (book of Exodus Chp14 v14).

We may now be in a dark spell for politics and behaviours both for society, and for the survival of humankind itself in terms of the climate and eco-system catastrophes, and it may be very difficult to remain still and quiet in the face of it all.  Nonetheless, there are positive things we can do, to bring about change that we long for.

We can feed the right side of ourselves.

We can read the right literature.

We can tell each other the right stories about each other.

The gathering itself was characterised by a series of contrasts drawn between various pairs of opposites. We heard from Franciscan author Richard Rohr that the form and effects of dominative (aka political) power can be contrasted with the subversive anti-establishment message of the Bible. Then there was a contrast between the role and power of anger to make change, and the role and power of joy to make change. 

In terms that tipped a hat to Unitarian Universalist theologian James Luther Adams, our will to power as against our will to mutuality was illustrated by an ancient folk tale about the two sides to human nature — the two wolves within.  It is often but inaccurately said that all Unitarians hold to the idea of ‘original goodness’ of each human being, rather than the traditional Christian idea of ‘original sin’; but Adams very helpfully bins both of these as simplistic.  Rather, Adams stands with classical Greek thinking, and places the twinned tragic-comic nature of human at the base of our being. This surely more faithfully represents our lived experience.

The service was held in the week following the coronation of King Charles III, and lightly it played on the word 'kingdom'. The candle in the chalice was lit to words attributed to Jesus in the third verse of the Gospel of Thomas, about the kingdom being within us and outside us.  It goes on, “When you know yourselves, then shall you be known, and you shall know that you are the children of the living Mother Father.  But if you do not know yourselves, then you are in poverty, and you are poverty.”  

There was a reading from the book of Mark (Ch 10 vv 42-45) in which a picture was drawn of those who wish to exercise power, contrasting that with the demand that we each serve the other — which, though it is not written in these terms in the Bible, is actually a requirement for the survival of our species.  Following that, one of the prayers offered was adapted from the prayer offered by King Charles during the Coronation service.

There was also a contrast made between personal transformation within, and activity towards progressive change in society.  It was suggested, in line with the thoughts of Richard Rohr, that if we allow ourselves internal transformation, then the external transformation we so long for will generally follow.  More slowly, but more lastingly, than if we try to lunge directly for justice via ungrounded activism.

Notably, there was also a reference to a book titled Humankind: a hopeful history, by Rutger Bregman.  This is a contemporary, close scrutiny of evidence often sidelined by a cynical society and ignorant mainstream media.  It is a study of humanity, that shows we do, in real terms, have a tendency towards goodwill.  Despite depressing urban myths, as a species, we tend to be kind to each other more often than we are unkind to each other.

But the gathering was more than an ideas shop.  As a community seeking paradise, we invite participants to see reverence as primarily about direct experience, as opposed to a chance for intellectual stimulation.  There were plenty of experiential interludes, from formal hymn-singing to wordless, incidental music. There were a couple of chants, one written by a UK Unitarian, and another by an American musician, inspired by a contemporary Hindu teacher.  There were silences, guided self-reflections, and sharing of joys and concerns; and for those for whom it holds meaning, there were spoken prayers and periods for silent prayer.

Living in community, and the advice of the ancients on the art of doing it - gathering online 11 July 2021

The July gathering was an interesting confluence of ancient and bang-up-to-date streams of thought.  It was held on 11 July, which has traditionally been marked as the feast of Benedict of Nursia, whose organised rules for living monastically, written in the sixth century, have been handed down and continue to influence monastic living today.  Benedict’s insights on living in community today also influence thought-streams in the spheres of business management and personal improvement.  That was the ancient bit.  And the up-to-the-minute bit was: raising the topic of what it means to live in community is particularly appropriate in these days of hybrid living — part face-to-face and part online, and trying to sustain long-distance relationships.

We had some singing together in the way we all do on Zoom: all muted, but each hearing the lead musicians; we listened to some recordings by musicians on YouTube; we used this month’s chalice lighting words from the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists; we held our seven minutes of silence; and we spoke together the version of words of shared affirmation that are becoming a regular feature of our gathered time together. 

YouTube music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oBFBW7zQn8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfSzv_y1DCg

There were two readings, one from Bill Houff, a Unitarian Universalist in the USA, and the second from what would normally be called the book of James, in the New Testament of the Bible, but which ought to be known as the letter of Jacob.

Bill Houff spoke of the discipline needed for spiritual growth but also of the ordinariness of the spiritual life, and cited the following well-known story from Zen Buddhism:

A particularly eager spiritual novice went to the master of a monastery and said, “I am ready for every sacrifice; please teach me the way.”

“Have you eaten your rice porridge?” asked the master.

“Yes,” replied the student, “I have eaten.”

“Then you had better wash your bowl,” said the master.

The reflection by the president of the day wandered through the 'family tree' of western Christian monasticism, starting with the apostles Paul and James (who as mentioned above, might better be known in the English-speaking world as Jacob) living in a rural region outside Jerusalem, moving through the Desert Fathers and Mothers in Egypt, John Cassian of Romania, and finishing up with Benedict of Nursia.  Much use was made of the following reference sources, which are not associated with any religious institution but instead are academic historical researches:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_the_Apostle

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/bible-versions-and-translations/james-or-jacob-in-the-bible/

https://www.biblestudytools.com/gnt/james/

https://www.bibleodyssey.org/people/related-articles/james-and-paul

The reflection also looked at the message of James/Jacob, as it eventually emerged through the Benedictine order in western Europe.  It was suggested that the most important point carried down through the generations is why the church places such importance on long-lived relationships and commitments, and how that is related to the ordinariness of spiritual growth in community — the need to wash the rice bowl.  It was summed up in some words from Rowan Williams:

“The church celebrates fidelity....it lives by the regular round of worship — the daily prayer of believers...meeting the same potentially difficult or unexciting people time after time, because they are the soil of growth.”

The president concluded: “It’s hard in UK to be a Unitarian.  Our communities are so small and so thinly scattered, we all have to travel such distances.  But it’s even harder to be a Unitarian completely on your own.  That’s because the mark of a Unitarian is they are someone who has seen that it’s not enough to be a solo seeker. A Unitarian may start on their own but, if my experience is anything to go by, they get lonely, and they see and yearn for the gifts of learning and sustaining inner growth through the company of others.

"Learning and sustaining requires trust.  Trust is only built via travelling a bumpy road together, with persistence, humour, humility and generosity.  It takes time.  And these days, thankfully we have an online space that allows us to continue along our bumpy road, no matter how far apart we physically live. The mark of Unitarians is living in community, and today we celebrate the life of Benedict, who had a great deal to say on the subject.”

The unique persons we are, as we gather for reverence - January 2018 Ringwood #Unitarians

January 2018 marks the end of our fourth year and in February we will be four years old.  So this service was one of a couplet, and dealt with what we as unique persons bring with us when we come to the gathering.  The service in February will consider how we weave our personal, individual spiritual lives, like threads, together into one overall fabric of our spiritual community, as we start out on our fifth year together.  So January was about the personal and February will be about the corporate.

We started with a participative prayer, heavily adapted from a prayer from the Iona Community, reminding us of some of the many names and faces of the divine, and ending with the words:

 “Overarching power of bestowing, healing, uniting:

in these and all your many other names, in all your many faces,

in your many-ness which yet vibrates as one,

may these your characteristics be a pattern to us of community;

           hence may we bestow, heal and unite in our many-ness,

           while operating as one.”

We carried out our usual ritual of making the circle with flame, bread, water and a fourth element to represent air or spirit or nature (dependent on one’s point of view).  We lit candles of joy and concern.  We sang two hymns from the green hymn book and we also had a recorded song by Hayley Westenra “The Heart Worships”.

Our first reading was from the Hindu faith via Mohandas K. Gandhi, and the second from the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers).  They both declared a firm trust that each person has direct access without mediation to spirit, inner voice, dictates of reason.  And both were clear that we each have a responsibility to do the work to listen carefully within, so as to discern truth and light.

Gandhi in particular suggested that there is no danger at all to the world if very many people find and give voice to what they find within, so we should be prepared to put up with doubtful claimants, for the sake of hearing from as many insightful people as possible.

The Quaker reading gave some practical advice for how one can go about laying oneself open to the leadings of spirit.

Our president for the day reiterated the Quaker instruction by referring to the founder of the Quakers, whose biography can be found here:  http://bcw-project.org/biography/george-fox

The president brought forward the famous George Fox challenge from the 1690s:  “You will say, ‘Christ said this, and the apostles say this;’ but what canst thou say?” and then asserted that we must, first and foremost, understand our own being.

The following questions and assertions were thrown out to the gathering:

·         What is the pattern of your life?

·         What qualities sing out from your life to any spectator who cared to watch?

·         What are the things that you didn’t seemingly choose but were just natural to you; repeated actions that you found yourself doing wherever you were?

·         What are the things you had to set in place when you arrived somewhere, in order for you to feel at home?

·         For these are the things of your personhood, your own unique, individuated way of living; your personal way of living and loving and believing and trusting.

·         These are the things that “thou canst say”.

·         We are prompted by wise teachings to make fewer decisions, to take less time in selecting one path over another, to make less fuss over being human.  We are prompted to observe “me”, rather than to create “me”.

We were reminded that the Unitarian cause includes a challenge:  the challenge to find – and live up to – what we are capable of believing, rather than what someone else says we should believe.

And having found what must be true for us, we are challenged to live up to it.  We are challenged as Unitarians to witness to what we believe and trust, challenged to not remain silent in the face of an unappreciative and unwelcoming world.  

We are challenged to be brave, and self-consistent, and focused on what really matters to us.

We are challenged, in short, to integrity; to a kind of one-through-ness; in which there are no compartments in our lives; in which our thoughts and words and actions all marry up with the beliefs that lie at the heart of our lives.

The Unitarian challenge involves both candles and debate!

The 3 July lecture looking at atheism and Christianity

getting ready for the lecture

We enjoyed presenting a lecture for the people of Ringwood and district on 3 July.  It was given with the support of the Montgomery Trust, a charity which provides speakers of national repute on topics relating to Christianity.  Our speaker for the evening was Michael Poole, author of a number of different books dealing with his research area of the interplay between science and religion, and who is Visiting Research Fellow in Science and Religion at King’s College, London.

 

Michael made reference to what is sometimes known as “New Atheism”, explaining that he had had academic correspondence and meetings with Prof Richard Dawkins.  He was saddened by the fact that the language employed in the media and in books by certain commentators has become more strident and pejorative than in past times; otherwise he argued that there is nothing new about the arguments for atheism that are proving so popular with the public today.

 

What he then spent his talk doing, was trying to get us thinking more exactly about what we understood to be the relationship between atheism and a religious view.

 

Michael introduced a number of definitions and logical arguments to show us how we mix up ideas and categories of thought.  He showed that there are usually many different narratives about why any circumstance should be the way it is, and these different narratives do not trump, invalidate or generate conflict between each other.  For instance, it can be explained why a light is on in a room in two ways: (a) because someone wanted it to be on and (b) because the electrons in the electrical supply are flowing through the light bulb.  Similarly, two friends run across each other in the street – it turns out that one person was seeking to make the meeting happen, whilst the other had no thought of it but is always there at that time during the week.  One experienced it as random, but is only able to say this through ignorance of the hidden motive of the other.

 

Science and religion are different narratives about how the world works and it is a mistake to think that one has to be explained in terms of the other.  Michael particularly rejected the model of “God in the gaps”, in which people imagine that contemporary science can only describe the universe so far and then everything that science has not so far described can be put down to God.  He argued that, instead, to sort out what is in the gaps people have to become better scientists – rather than turn God into a leftover bit of the scientific model.

 

He suggested that the words “faith” and “belief” are identical in meaning and they both mean “non-evidenced trust”, that is to say a trust you have of, or in, something despite having no evidence on which to base your trust.  Talking about evidence, Michael showed us that jurisprudence can be used as a useful model for belief.  In court cases, evidence can either be direct, such as the eye-witness accounts, or indirect, where inferences can be drawn from scientific measurements.  In jurisprudence also there is the idea of the “weight” of evidence, where we accept the idea that an accumulation of small pieces of evidence can build up to provide substantial evidence on which we convict.  Science also operates like this.  Yet people are very willing to reject a religious view of life, built upon direct experience or revelation, or indirect evidence from others, and supported by a great body of personal experience over many centuries.

 

In amongst much more that Michael spoke about, we heard that there are problems with some very commonly accepted comments heard today.  “There is no absolute truth” – if this statement is deemed false then it may be ignored, whereas if deemed to be true then it destroys itself (because it says that 'the truth needed for it to be said' does not exist).  Michael also showed that changes in language cause us problems.  “Truth” used to mean a correspondence between a thing and a statement about a thing – something we understand better when we hear phrases similar to “she was being true to herself.”  However, in current usage, “truth” often is used as a synonym for the word “acceptable”.  So: “what is true for you is not true for me” would be more accurately phrased as “what is acceptable to you is not acceptable to me.” Similarly, “to prove something” used to mean “to test or probe something,” whereas now we tend to use it where we might better say “to place this matter beyond any possible doubt.”

 

There was a lively questions session after the talk and of course no overall agreement was found between participants.  But it was agreed that the evening had been enjoyable and stimulating and worth the effort of coming along to.  We look forward to perhaps putting on a similar style of event in Ringwood next year.