Sermon

Most Modern Sin

The Rev. Jack D. Bryant

Hope Unitarian Church

October 24, 2004

First Reading: Henry Nelson Wieman, The Source of Human Good. Page 46-47/

The demand for precision and fullness of knowledge about what commands religious commitment does not exclude faith. To think that it does is to misunderstand the nature of faith. The notion is prevalent that faith can survive only when knowledge is inadequate. This would be true if faith were a belief sustained by less evidence than is required to lift the belief to the status of knowledge. But such is not the case. Faith is not essentially belief at all, although faith generally has a belief. Religious faith is basically an act - the act of giving one’s self into the keeping of what commands faith, to be transformed by it, and to serve it above all. More specifically, it is the act of deciding to live in the way required by the source of human good, to maintain association with a fellowship practicing that commitment, to follow the rituals designed to renew and deepen this commitment, to search one’s self for hidden disloyalties to this devotion, to confess and repudiate these disloyalties. All habits, interests, and structures of personality are thus condemned when they hinder the living of the life demanded. This complex act is faith; the beliefs are merely incidental to it.

Second Reading: Henry Nelson Wieman, The Source of Human Good. Page 126-127.

Sin is any resistance to creativity for which man is responsible. If we make the inquiry, it is difficult to determine the place where man’s responsibility begins, although, actually, it is not important that it be precisely determined. What is important, however, is that man recognize that his responsibility is not limited to instances in which he is consciously aware of obstructing creativity or deliberately intending to do so. Unintended and unconscious resistance is sin, too, because it is the consequence of many past decisions for which the man is responsible. Also, when we speak of man’s responsibility, we refer not only to the individual but to society and the race. Much resistance in the individual not intended by him is due to choices made by other human beings. Thus there is a collective responsibility in many cases in which the individual cannot be held solely responsible as though he lived in isolation from all others, as he never does. In fact, sin is always social, even in cases in which a particular individual must take primary responsibility. It is social because creativity is essentially and necessarily social.

. . .

When we say that sin is man’s resistance to the creative event, we refer to what was meant by the theological statement: “Sin is man’s rebellion against the will of God.” The language and the ideas are different; but the way a man thinks of the creative event, the names he uses, and the ideas he may entertain about it are not the primary consideration. Modern men are as responsible for sin as men ever were, even though they use utterly different language and mental pictures.

Sermon

A few weeks ago I preached a sermon entitled, “The Razor’s Edge”. It was about human nature. I did so because I believe the essential purpose of religion is to ask and answer three questions. First, what is human nature; second, what is the nature of sin; and third, what is the saving message that will transform men and women so that they may grow out of or avoid the consequences of sin. In summary I believe human nature is the ability to choose. As human beings we have free will. Sometimes we choose wisely. Sometimes we choose poorly. Chance and circumstance conspire with or against us with the result that if we make wise chooses and are lucky, we will do well; if we make poor choices, but are unlucky, we will do poorly; and if we make wise choices and are unlucky or are lucky but make poor choices, we may just squeak through.

But what does this have to do with sin? And why should modern folk like us be concerned with sin? Isn’t that an old fashioned idea? After all, Unitarians of the nineteenth century were famous for the attitude that they were too good to need salvation. Sin was a relic of the past, an antique that we might still talk about, but only for the sake of amusement, only for the sake of entertainment. There were moral questions, of course, but they didn’t involve “sin” as such. Sin was an idea most followers of liberal religion seemed to have abandoned because it was too old fashioned.

I wonder if any of you believe in original sin. I don’t. I believe it is an old fashioned idea. And I don’t believe in sin in the sense that it is disobedience to God’s will. I don’t believe in that for two reasons. First, it doesn’t sound like a religious idea to me. It sounds more like an idea that the Roman empire found helpful to keep people in line - because by having the Emperor endorsed by God, sin became - by extension - disobedience to the Emperor. The modern day equivalent of that idea is the rhetoric I heard from one candidate that said the contest was one between good and evil. That, of course, is the Brad Carson/Tom Cosburn contest. It’s an argument that says anyone who doesn’t support Tom Cosburn is sinful. Mr. Cosburn obviously has a high opinion of himself.

Second, I reject the idea that God is a person. In particular, I reject the notion of God as a supernatural person. Like Henry Nelson Wieman I understand God as being a part of the natural world, as being that which lures us to the good, as that which is creativity. And I believe that one expression of creativity is free will, which is why the phrases, “made in the image of God” and “children of God” resonate with me. Not as literal statements, but as metaphorical reminders that our ability to exercise free will is essential to the creative process - and that the processes within the natural world that make creativity possible - what Wieman referred to collectively as the Creative Good - are worthy of the divine name.

But why worry about it? Aren’t the old ideas of sin worn out and useless? I don’t think so. I believe they have importance for us today. And their importance has been highlighted for me because of what I haven’t been hearing from the various candidates for public office. That’s right, it’s what I haven’t been hearing from the candidates. Most of what I have heard is incessant negativism. I heard a political ad yesterday that wasn’t negative and it was so unusual that I sat up and watched it carefully. It was quite a shock not have to listen to one candidate slandering his opponent.

But I think the pervading negative campaigning hides something deeper. I believe it is not just about going negative, but about concealing what is missing from almost every candidate’s resume - regardless of the office they seek. I think what’s missing is a sense of vision and purpose. Let me repeat that. I think what’s missing is a sense of vision and purpose.

Do you remember these words:

"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills."

I remember hearing those words in 1961. I’m sure some of you remember them as well. They were John F. Kennedy’s vision, something to give you goose bumps, something to make you want to stand up and cheer. But have you heard anything like that during this campaign? I think not. All I’ve heard has been how the other candidate is a liar or incompetent. But if you have nothing to offer, if you have no vision, no dream, no purpose greater than yourself, what can you do? You go negative.

But what does that have to do with sin? I think it has everything to do with it, because I believe Henry Nelson Wieman was right about the nature of God and sin. God is the creative good of the natural world. God is that aspect of the natural world which lures us to the good. God is that which challenges us to not be content with the status quo, but to dream of a better world, to dream of what might be, and then to work for it. And sin is anything and everything that prevents people from working towards such goals.

A lot has been said about religion and the presidential candidates this year. By my standards neither candidate does well in that department, because I don’t have a sense that either of them understands what it means to cast a vision of the future, as opposed to casting a vision of the status quo, as opposed to casting a vision of reinforcing the status quo and existing private interests. At best both candidates are in favor of shuffling the deck a bit, but without fundamentally changing the nature of the way politics has been played. This attitude calls to mind Ambrose Bierce’s definition of politics as “The conduct of public affairs for private advantage,” because private advantage is almost always linked to the way things are, not the way they ought to be.

Churches struggle with this same problem. Look at the literature about churches in trouble and you will see story after story of churches striving to preserve the status quo. They will fight for anything except change. The rhetoric from churches in trouble is consistent: there may be problems, but nothing in the details needs to be changed. Every committee is functioning perfectly. No individual member or church employee can be questioned - unless they dare to change how things are done. But all this is symptomatic of the underlying problem: a lack of vision.

That’s why this church is fortunate. For the last year this church has been working on a sense of vision for the future. With the leadership of your board of trustees and the participation of the congregation through a series of polls, feedback opportunities and presentations at Adult Forums you have developed a set of core values - reason, integrity and tolerance - that support our vision - Seeking truth, sharing love, within, among, and beyond. There is more work yet to be done. For example, the board has been looking at Hope’s mission statement to see how it fits with our values and vision. And there’s also a covenant to write, words that will express how we relate to one another. But the significance of this work is that it turns us outward. It turns us as a church away from what Wieman called the created good towards the creative good. It opens us to the possibility and necessity for change and growth. Not change for the sake of change, but change that is creative and purposeful and moves us forward.

Something like that happened a few years ago when Hope started it’s Feed the Homeless program. It’s a wonderful program. And our Christmas family project is another example. But what I find most hopeful about those programs is not what they are, but what they might be. This was suggested to me the other day by a church member at the Leadership Forum when he talked about the wonderful feeling he and his family had as a result of contributing to the Christmas family project. I thought that was great. But what was wonderful was what he said next. “I don’t just want to have that feeling in December. Why can’t we have a Christmas family project in another month?” Stop and think about it. Why can’t we have Christmas in July - or March - or September. Imagine what our church would be like if we decided to celebrate Christmas every month of the year.

No matter how good our national political programs may be, no matter how good the different projects in our church may be, sin is the condition of being satisfied with what is, sin is the condition of being satisfied with the status quo, of believing that what is, is good enough. That’s why I believe the most modern form of sin is the rejection of hope - the rejection of dreams - the rejection of vision.

As the book of Proverbs says, “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” In politics, when there is no vision the political process perishes and degenerates into the kind of negative campaigning we have seen. It is a decline that has gone on for years. If you read your Tulsa World this morning you may have seen an article about David Boren, former Senator and now President of the University of Oklahoma. He spoke of the increasing bitterness of politics in Washington that has led to inertia in Congress. The same thing happens in churches that lose their sense of vision and became enmeshed in fighting to preserve the status quo of what was. And in the lives of individuals the same thing happens - and not just metaphorically, but literally. I’m thinking of people I’ve known who have retired and had nothing to do with their lives, had no vision of what they could continue to do, and within a year or two they have died. “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” It is literally true. The wages of sin - both metaphorically and literally - is death.

The most modern sin is the loss of hope, the abandonment of vision. But the cure for sin is vision. Vision is what makes resurrection possible. Vision is what breaths life back into political process, back into the life of churches, back into the life of individuals. Vision is what is exemplified by our anthem this morning: Somewhere over the rainbow. Vision is commitment to the dreams that lie beyond the rainbow. Seeking truth, sharing love - within - among - beyond. That is our vision as a church. That is the vision that calls for us to once again embrace hope, to once again believe in the future, not to abandon the past, but to trust the future more and to know that life requires us to change, life requires us to grow, life requires us to embrace the creative urge and to build lives, churches and a nation that call us to awake from our slumber and to take up the challenges of life. Not because such challenges are easy, but because they are difficult.

I wonder what kind of dreams and visions you have for the future. I hope that in the days ahead that all of us will begin to talk to each other about what those dreams and visions might be. What is it that excites you? Do you want to practice Christmas year round or is there something else that would make you want to sacrifice and give? The time for negativity is over - at every level in our society. The time for vision is upon us.

Amen.