Church and State

Rev. Rali Weaver

First Church and Parish in Dedham

Sunday, November 25, 2007

I must admit I have been having trouble figuring out where to begin this sermon-- that is until just yesterday morning I flew in from the west coast on the red eye and took a taxi home to Dedham.

In order to pass the time it took to get from Logan to the parsonage the driver asked me what I do for a living. I tried to explain to him as best I could that I am a Unitarian Minister. He did not believe me at first-- and was admittedly taken aback by my gender and questioned my sense of “calling”. After explaining to him that I was indeed single it wasn’t long before the driver asked me about what I thought about-- as he put it-- “fornication”. I was too tired to ferret out exactly what he meant by his question and simply tried to explain that we Unitarian Unviersalists believe in many things, but in general we believe that the creator made all things and were good. He then pronounced (based on my response) that I could not possibly be a minister.

Coming out of my jetlagged haze I realized this was not going well.

Then I recognized that hanging from his dashboard was a crucifix and rosary beads and immediately I was able to ascertain his worldview and so I said to him are you a Catholic? He pointed to his rosary beads and said, “What do you think”.

Waking up to his system of belief I acknowledged that from a catholic point of view he was right that I cannot be a priest and fornication is a sin.

I also pointed out some other differences in our thought. I explained that baby naming were not the same as the sacrament of christening that the bread and cider communion we participated in last week was not the same thing as the transubstantiated communion he partook in every Sunday.

By the end of the conversation I do not think he thought I was any more capable to be your minister but he did shake my hand and say, “that was interesting” as though he were generally surprised by the things I had said and that he world could be any other way than the way he saw it.

I share this with you this morning because I want to emphasize how different theological belief systems can affect the way we view the world and that using a system of understanding to make sense of the world is quite common and something we all do.

Now imagine for a second if my taxi driver or I were political leaders in a system that supported our view of the world. What blinders might we have to the needs of others and what rights and privileges might we give out based solely upon our values of women or of birth control or upon our value of individual liberty?

As Unitarian Universalists I believe we often see ourselves as the good guys and we walk around as though we are the great defenders of liberty and religious tolerance without really ever taking in another’s point of view. It in fact easy to become self-righteous in defense of liberty and forget the purpose that liberty is supposed to protect.

In it’s most simple form the constitutional amendment that creates this separation between church and state is what allows me to have that conversation with my cab driver and has helped us to form our individual views of the world. Distinctly different world-views without one more right than the other but both of equal protection under the law of our land.

In other times and other places this was not the case.

Take for instance Michael Servetus who lived from 1509 – 1553. Servetus was a Spaniard martyred during the Reformation for his criticism of the doctrine of the Trinity and his opposition to infant baptism and original sin.

And Francis David who lived from 1510 to November 15, 1979, a Lutheran pastor in Transylvania; after King John Sigismund died he was persecuted when leaders with the orthodox views of the trinity regained power. Francis David was imprisoned, where he ultimately died.

And there was Thomas Aikenhead a Scottish medical student from Edinburgh who was executed for disrespecting the doctrine of the Trinity on the morning of January 8, 1679.

These are just a very few of the names of people who died for Unitarian beliefs in the years before our constitution was written. The issue of the separation of church and state was a reaction to these types of deaths and the medieval monarchs who ruled in the secular while encroaching upon the Churches’ role in the spiritual sphere. The monopoly that was crated when the Church and State worked as one led to power struggles and crises of leadership that injured the populace.

As Thomas Paine suggested in the centering thought it was “the united tyranny of Church and State, for the purpose of keeping people in ignorance” that our forefathers were trying to avoid.

I would argue that religious freedom and religious tolerance are the backbones of our liberty. In our country you can believe in anything you want or nothing at all. This ability to form our own thoughts and to make sense of the world in our own way is the hallmark of our secular society.

If you are interested in Church and State issues as they pertain to your liberty you need look no further than your winter 2007 UU World. In it Forrest Church, senior minister of All Souls in New York City) gives a cursory explanation of the perspective of each of our founding fathers and how that has influenced the debate about the separation of Church and State. For an even more in depth understanding I would also recommend his new book: So Help Me God: The Founding Fathers and the First Great Battle Over Church and State.

All through the newspapers we read about challenges to this principle of church and state separation. Debates over school prayer, creationism vs. evolutionism, abstinence only sex education and faith-based initiatives name only a few of the current events that are founded upon issues of Church and State.

In a democratic society it is the responsibility of the government to care for its citizenry without regard for race or creed or dogma or belief or disbelief. Churches on the other hand are only responsible to the people who ascribe to that faith.

In a healthy democracy there must be a separation between the two so that they may keep a critical eye upon each other. If the church and state are working together the power base is too strong if there is to be any quality control.

I talk a great deal about what we can do as a group of concerned citizens. I believe that our critical eye on our government is needed in these times.

In the same way as John F. Kennedy “I believe in an America where religious intolerance will some day end—where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice” but I also believe in an America where our government leaders act from what is right for the common good and not for individual groups of privilege. I believe in an America that does not hold up one system of belief as better or godlier than another and where political candidates do not get points for their commitment to Jesus.

Until that day comes I believe that churches must be counter cultural institutions and that we as a parish must raise our voices against injustice, and ignorance and fascism.

That is what I think – and I cannot wait to hear what you think.

So if you are willing today as an exercise in our civil liberty I invite you to stay after the postlude for a talk back session where you can tell me what you think.