|
|||||
|
Many of the other Ethical Societies have, somewhere on their building and often near or above the area where the platform speaker stands, some version of the Felix Adler quote, “The place where people meet to seek the highest is holy ground.” (Felix’s original words actually were about “men” but he did seem to mean that in the inclusive sense.) The reference is to the idea in many religions, and especially in the Hebrew scriptures, that there is some space that is especially holy — a place set aside, a place to be especially respected. Adler’s idea was that it was not the place that was holy; it was the act of taking seriously high ideals together, as a community, that created “holiness.” It’s an extension of the idea of the worth of the individual human being: when such human beings act in ways that help to bring out that precious worth in each, we create something that serves, in an ethical society, the same function as a priestly dedication of a space might serve for another group with different emphasis and beliefs. When our Society got started, using rental space, we had no way to put that wording on our space, so we included it explicitly as part of opening words. Now, thanks to the creative and generous gift of member Amy Anderson, we have a banner with the words on it to put on the speaker’s lectern. And so, it would be redundant to use the words as part of our opening. Any change in ritual — even in groups like ours that eschew ritual or deny that we have rituals — will bother some, and please others. For the remaining months before our summer break, we’re going to experiment with some different opening words, seeing how they work. I’d ask that you not react just the first time you hear them, but “try them on for size” as you hear them several times over the next few months. Then, in June, take some time to reflect on which words resonated for you, and which ones didn’t. And also take some time to listen to others about which of the opening words resonate for them, and which haven’t resonated. Perhaps some of the words will just take hold, like the candleholder of the “ethical person” migrated from the food table at a festival to the front table and transplanted what had been at the front table, with very little comment from members — and now she or he just seems to be part of our Sunday mornings. It seems no matter what words we use in the script for Sunday morning, some people like some parts, and dislike others. We’d love to magically find something that speaks to everyone — whether a founding member or a curious newcomer sitting in our midst for the first time, or everyone in between — and that’s not likely to happen. But who knows? Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “All life is an experiment. The more experiments the better.” In our non-ritual rituals, let’s give these experiments some time, and see what happens. MSNBC – We count, therefore we are : “Roman Catholics had the largest reported religious membership, with 66.4 million Americans, followed by the Southern Baptist Convention, with 16.2 million members (and over 94,000 pastors). Utah had the most self-identified Christian residents — over 74 percent — while Nevada and Oregon hovered at just 30 percent. On the more modest side, 11,000 Americans identified themselves as Rastafarians; 4,000 as devotees of Ethical Culture.” Originally posted online on December 18, 2004
I am often asked how I can have faith in the inherent worth and dignity of every human being. If someone abuses you or others repeatedly, seriously, are they still persons of worth? Here’s my quick summary of conclusions I’ve come to, over many years of thinking about these questions. Believing in the inherent worth and dignity of someone does not mean that anger is somehow “wrong,” or that all actions are equally “right.” Belief in worth and dignity does not mean that you “have to” forgive in the absence of changed behavior. You may, at some point, decide to give up anger and even hatred for the sake of your own emotional health, even in the absence of changed behavior — but I think that’s different from forgiveness, which comes only when there’s some genuine understanding and a choice to change and often, also, the choice to make proportional amends, on the part of the person whose actions you found hurtful. Even when someone’s behavior is hurtful to another, the belief in inherent worth and dignity even in that person is what makes me decide not to treat the person out of vengeance but only to stop the behavior and help establish consequences in proportion to and appropriate to the wrong. Thus, the person can be reported to authorities, such that our legal system’s consequences would apply — but responding in kind with abuse or torture would be something I’d avoid — for my own sake and for the sake of building a more humane culture. Belief in worth and dignity of others is far more about how I will behave than it is about what quality exists in the other. Even those we call “abusers” — people whose habitual actions hurt others — are human beings, and if we treat them as subhuman, it’s my belief that diminishes us more than it punishes them. But giving consequences to others for hurtful behavior, and establishing boundaries that protect ourselves and others, is not the same as treating someone as subhuman. Note: the original of this message was written in 1998 as a contribution to the AEU email list, Dialogue, in 1998. I might write it somewhat differently today, but I’m still in general agreement with these past words. In my experience, and from long and many talks with people who identify themselves as Ethical Culturists or Ethical Humanists who are attending UU churches because there is no convenient or well-functioning local Ethical Society: the key differences between the two are not theological diversity (Ethical Culture has almost as great a proportion of naturalistic deists/theists as does the midwestern Unitarianism in which I grew up) nor “creed” but the following: The following is my attempt to tease out key ideas from Felix Adler that can find wide consensus in today’s Ethical movement. Adler, as a human being who founded this Ethical movement, was fallible, and not all his ideas are relevant today. Others may find other ideas from Adler also important; my hope here is that this list starts conversation rather than is taken as any sort of “ultimate answers.” – Jone Johnson Lewis, 2002-2009 |
  |
||||
|
Copyright © 2010 Ethical Platform - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
