What are the defining qualities of this liberal religion? Given that we don't have a creed or dogma we can point to and say definitively, "Yes, that's what we're about," it can be hard to get Unitarian Universalism. We know we value the seven principles identified by our national Association. We appreciate the perspectives on life that are shared here. But what is at the heart of this tradition?

The reading offered earlier, written by the seminal 19th century Unitarian minister, William Ellery Channing, points to one of our fundamental understandings: "We must start in religion from our own souls. In these is the fountain of all divine truth." We could never point to creeds or a presumed definitive scripture for just that reason. We recognize that our religious quests must begin within rather than from without. As Channing asserted: "The only God whom our thoughts can rest on and our hearts can cling to, and our consciences can recognize, is the God whose image dwells in our own souls."

Our understanding of that God cannot come from without ourselves but must arise from within for its "image to dwell in our own souls." One of The New Yorker cartoons depicts a couple departing from church at the end of a Sunday service. When they pause to greet the minister, the man says, "Good sermon, Reverend, but all that God stuff was pretty far-fetched." Yes, when that God stuff does not resonate with our own understanding of life's ultimate source, it can seem far-fetched.

What we share here is not necessarily a similar conception of the Divine. Rather, what we share is a way of being in relationship -both with one another and with all else- that seeks to honor the life-affirming creative force some religious people call the Holy Spirit. As I wade into what I perceive as a primary well-spring of this liberal religion, I will largely draw on the work of the late Unitarian Universalist theologian, the Reverend Doctor James Luther Adams, and particularly from his essay, "Guiding Principles for a Free Faith."

According to Dr. Adams, since its beginnings liberalism's general orientation has been toward promoting "liberation from tyranny, provincialism and arbitrariness and thus to contribute to the meaningful fulfillment of human existence. This aspect of liberalism we may call its progressive element: for it is always critical of the status quo and seeks new paths of fulfillment." Always critical of the status quo? That's probably why conservatives think liberals hate this country. They imagine liberals to be like the pharmacist in another New Yorker cartoon. He has an immense container filled with baseball-sized pills on the counter and explains to a customer: "It's a new anti-depressant -instead of swallowing it, you throw it at anyone who appears to be having a good time."

It's not that the portrayal of the angry, critical liberal is without merit, especially when our critique of the status quo derives from our frustration rather than from our love for life. Still, an indispensable aspect of the progressive liberal tradition is the willingness to challenge the status quo whenever and wherever it's constraining human existence. Within liberalism's general orientation of promoting liberation from tyranny, two specific concepts evolved: One being a laissez-faire theory of society, that promoted greater freedom for individuals, and the other being individualism that upheld the dignity of each person.

While these liberal creations have served human welfare, they've also harmed it. The harm has come from taking these concepts out of their communal context and making false idols of them, thereby giving them too much significance and as a result too much power. Today, we see the abuse of this laissez-faire theory of society, ironically, in conservatives' adoration of a capitalist economy in which they believe society is best served when business is unfettered by any requirements except that of turning a profit. And we see the affirmation of individuals' worth and dignity gone to seed when conservatives and liberals venerate individualism to such an extent they forget individuals live best in community as part of a larger whole.

These are some considerations Dr. Adams shared with regard to liberalism as a philosophical concept. For the most part they apply to religious liberalism, as well, but here's where religious liberals differ. I've spoken before about the Reformation in 16th century Europe when the Protestants split from the Roman Catholic Church. Within the Reformation there was also a more radical development, appropriately called the Radical Reformation or Left Wing of the Reformation. Their beef with both the Catholic and newly established Protestant churches was primarily with their authoritarian structures.

The Radical Reformers did not believe that hierarchy properly represented the true nature of the cosmos and their relationship to the Divine. Dr. Adams wrote, "[T]hey focused their protest against the use of state force in matters of religious belief. Accordingly, proponents of the left wing demanded the separation of church and state. And rather than finding their defense in the rational individual, they typically appealed to the belief in the freedom of the spirit…to create new community. The Left Wing of the Reformation, therefore, also insisted that the church is a lay church; it is not to be controlled by 'officials.'" ("Guiding Principles for a Free Faith" - hereafter, Principles)

And as heirs to that tradition, however much we may pretend from day to day that I'm in charge here, it's you, the members, who are ultimately responsible for and in charge of this congregation. The radical reformers' conception of church ownership by its members derived from their belief that all people held the potential to be imbued with the Holy Spirit. And if everyone has access to the Holy Spirit, then all are inherently equal.

Another way to understand Holy Spirit could be to think of it as life's creative dynamic or as its life-affirming creative force. Within a community of people, for example, it's that mysterious quality that opens the community to be more than the sum of its individual members. It's also that aspect of relationship that draws us toward something more than we could be by ourselves. It's that which calls us to transcend ourselves. In his book, Somewhere a Master, Elie Wiesel offers this example from Judaism's Hasidic tradition of this creative dynamic at work within a human relationship.

"One day a young Hasid came to see Rebbe Pinhas, known for his wisdom and compassion.
The young Hasid pleaded, 'Help me, Master. I need your advice. My distress is unbearable. Make it disappear. Words are empty - empty of truth, empty of faith. So strong are my doubts that I no longer know who I am - nor do I care to know. What am I to do, Rebbe? Tell me, what am I to do?…

Rebbe Pinhas invited the young man to come closer and then said with a smile: 'You must know, my friend, that what is happening to you also happened to me. When I was your age, I stumbled over the same obstacles. I, too, was filled with questions and doubts…wallowing in doubt, locked in depair…Then one day I learned that Rebbe Israel Baal Shem Tov would be coming to our town.' [The Baal Shem Tov is a remarkable being in the Hasidic tradition.] 'Curiosity led me to where he was receiving his followers. I entered just as he was finishing the…prayer. He turned and saw me, and I was convinced that he was seeing me, me and no one else. The intensity of his gaze overwhelmed me, and I felt less alone. And strangely, I was able to go home, open the Talmud, and plunge into my studies once more. You see,' said Rebbe Pinhas, 'the questions remained questions. But I was able to go on….'" (Somewhere a Master, Elie Wiesel)

When someone truly sees us and connects with our being, then we are less alone. To an outside observer nothing more significant occurred in that moment than an exchange of looks -one man's eyes meeting another. Yet, within that look the Holy Spirit was at work. For it's the Holy Spirit or life's creative force, that calls us to transcend ourselves and opens individuals and communities to new life-affirming possibilities.

The Radical Reformers sought the creation of religious communities in which the power and promise of life's creative dynamic could be evoked. That's still what liberal religion seeks today within its own communities as well as in the world for all people. In the essay to which I referred earlier James Luther Adams also offered five qualities or principles that provided further refinement
to the nature of our tradition's relationship with life's creative force.

The first quality is our understanding that revelation is continuous. A conservative religious understanding maintains that their God has revealed all truth, generally in their scriptures. Liberal religious people, on the other hand, believe that as Creation is still unfolding, so too is its truth. We are historical beings whose lives draw from the past and point to a future yet who live in a present we help shape but do not control. As such, we heed the wisdom of the past, even as our understanding of life grows and transforms through modern revelations such as science provide us.

No more radical understanding of the universe's nature, for instance, has ever been introduced than Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity. As the comic actor Charlie Chaplin once told Einstein, "The people applaud me because everyone understands me, and they applaud you because no one understands you." All the same, experiments have shown that Einstein's theories hold, and we're beginning to recognize the Universe is very different from the way it appears. And that difference will impact how we conceive of and live our lives. Yes, revelation is continuous.

The second quality "of religious liberalism is that all relations between persons ought ideally to rest on mutual, free consent and not on coercion." (Principles) As I mentioned earlier, the radical reformers believed all people potentially had access to life's divine spark and saving truth. But it could only be fully realized by people living in freedom and with dignity. This ideal conception of relationship gave rise to our form of religious community which, according to Dr. Adams, subsequently gave rise to self-governance in our country and other Western democracies. For relationships to rest on mutual, free consent, rather than coercion then justice, freedom and love must prevail in the world

This brings us to the third quality- the establishment of a just and loving community. Dr. Adams wrote, "The prophetic liberal church is the church in which all members share the common responsibility to attempt to foresee the consequences of human behavior (both individual and institutional) with the intention of 'making' history [rather than] merely being pushed around by it." (Principles) Seeking justice and freedom for all is incumbent upon members of a tradition that so highly values life's creative dynamic because freedom and justice are requisite conditions for life's creativity to flourish.

The fourth quality follows from the third in that creation of a loving and just community practically comes into being through a society's institutions. Dr. Adams asserted that "The faith of the liberal must express itself in societal forms, in economic and social organization, in political organization. Without these freedom and justice in community are impossible." (Principles)

Using a little sermonic license, we might conceive of these first four qualities as the four "C's" of religious liberalism: Continuous revelation; consenting relationships; community that's just and loving and creation of institutions. Now the fifth quality he speaks of is an "attitude of ultimate optimism." That's a hard one to fit into the C format, but we might go with "called to an attitude of ultimate optimism." So, now we can identify these five qualities as the five "C's:" Continuous revelation; consenting relationships; community that's just and loving; creation of institutions and called to an attitude of ultimate optimism.

What Dr. Adams refers to as ultimate optimism I might label as hope. Such an understanding of hope doesn't rest in the believe that all will necessarily turn out well, but in the believe that something is worth working and living for, regardless how it turns out. As the Czech revolutionary and former President Vaclav Havel has said, "Hope is an orientation of the heart; it is an orientation of the spirit."

Within this liberal religious tradition, though conditions in the world may not always seem to warrant it, we are called to live with hope. We do so in recognition that while life's creative force, which some call the Holy Spirit, does not depend on us, we depend on it. And it is through our hope, and through our willingness to engage in the world's work, as well as our promotion of justice, freedom and compassion that we open our own hearts to life's affirming promise and serve life's creative source. So may it ever be.