“Saving Souls - A Few at a Time”

Dave Weissbard

UURockford

10/12/03

[individualism]

           Our first Unitarian Universalist principle is “We affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person.” I believe we are actually saying more than that. By our tradition and practice, what we really do is affirm “the inherent worth and dignity of every individual.” Unitarian Universalist churches are individualistic to the max. We are so concerned about individual freedom that it is almost a miracle that we are able to agree when to gather and where, much less what we will do when we get together. We border on the pathological when it comes to cherishing individualism.

           Our responsive reading from the words of Emerson is a case at point. Emerson wrote, “How many persons we meet in houses whom we scarcely speak to . . . [and] How many we see in the street or sit with in church, whom though silently, we warmly rejoice to be with!” So we meet people and scarcely speak to them and only silently do we rejoice to see our friends in church.” What an isolated world that leads to, which is, to the best of our knowledge, the way Mr. Emerson lived.

[escaping that prison]

           It was in the ‘50's that Erich Fromm wrote the Art of Loving, in which he addressed our desperate desire to escape from the prison of our aloneness. A half a century later, Robert Putnam, in his book Bowling Alone, suggested that our isolation has increased since Fromm’s time because of the ways in which we live.

           I have discovered a book which I am anticipating will have a significant impact on my theology. It is called A Buddhist History of the West, and is written by Dr. David Loy, who was my guest on Fusion last week. Dr. Loy is a Buddhist, and it is his contention from that perspective that many of the problems we face are due to what he sees as the fact that individualism is not a reality but a delusion that we are determined to sustain. Our insistence upon that delusion is what causes our isolation. We are, in reality, integral parts of a greater whole who have been seduced into a lie that causes us misery. We did not create ourselves, we did not nurture ourselves, and we could not survive alone, physically or emotionally. It is to our peril that we assert our independence and deny our relatedness. [I will be coming back to Dr. Loy’s book in a future sermon.]

[the need for others]

           My major in college was sociology. It has always been a fundamental reality to me that we know ourselves only in relationship to other people. I certainly do not deny the impact of psychological inheritance, but that does not detract from the importance of what we discover about ourselves in the course of interacting with others: our parents, our siblings, our grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, playmates, schoolmates, teachers, neighbors – we learn who we are, not only by looking within, but also by the reflections of ourselves in the eyes of others. We need other people.

           The problem is that our society has become structured in a way that works against our establishing and maintaining significant relationships with others.

           In his book on Covenant Group Ministry, from which I took my title for this sermon, The Rev. Bob Hill cites the experience of Allen Ward, professor emeritus of Speech Communication at the University of Arkansas in Little Rock. Professor Ward asked his students every year “What do you personally want most in your own communication?” Bob tells us:

The most frequent answer from persons of all ages and background was “to find other human beings to talk with without barriers or reservations.” These students said they wanted a community in which “they could be totally and openly themselves,” Ward reports, adding, “The majority said they did not have even one such person. But they sought such a community.” . . .

When Ward asked one communications class what sort of religious community they desired, they said they wanted a community:

                       where people liked each other

                       trusted each other

could talk about everything without arguing or taking unchangeable positions or trying to convince or dominate

that explored the accumulated experimentations of humans over millennia to glean the best aspects

they could look at th cosmic aspects of existence and at the same time deal with the hourly details

was a supportive group that would consider the various forms of reverence, learning, and self-insightfulness without drawing conclusions, but rather continuing to make discoveries.. . .

While this list was being generated, one person in the classroom was quiet. Challenged by a more talkative student to say where such a group might be found, she came out of deep concentration to say that such a group exists. “It’s the Unitarian Universalists,” she said.

[measuring up]

           I have, throughout my ministry, been concerned with our churches measuring up to this promise. That concern may be rooted in my own experience. As a kid, although my family was active in the Unitarian Church in Albany, I decided to stay home Sundays after a run-in with a first grade Sunday School teacher. Being good liberals, my parents were constitutionally unable to force me to go to Sunday School, although I kept hoping they would. I grew up, therefore, with a sense of isolation from peers who shared common values. I knew I was a Unitarian, but I didn’t have the experience of being with others my own age who looked at the world in a similar way. Then, when I got to high school, we had a new minister who invited me to a breakfast for Unitarian high school kids, and I went. And suddenly I had the new experience of being part of a group where my values fit right in. The youth group became tremendously important to me. It may be those years of depravation (by my own doing) that have made the community of the church so important to me, and that led me into ministry to try to make such supportive communities available to others.

           It has been my experience that people in the congregations I’ve served have held up the importance of community as #1 when asked why they come to church.

           Community has been the ideal, but I have always been uneasy about the magnitude of the gap between that ideal and the reality. While believing in the possibility of community present in our churches, I have known that many people have experienced more of Emerson’s “silent” rejoicing in church than the kind that actually lets us know that we have established contact with other human beings.

           Our churches have tried to address this issue at various times over the years. There was the sensitivity training movement of the 60's, the “T-Groups” that were popular for a time, but fizzled out. They focused largely on group dynamics, but with no content. There were the “extended families” of the 70's most of which focused on activities, doing things together. Unitarian Universalists have always had various kinds of discussion groups, but they tend to keep a safe intellectual distance.

[lessons form the mega-churches]

           For a terribly long time, we have tended to be oblivious to what has been happening in the world around us. Small groups of fundamentalist Christians have blossomed into mega-churches with memberships in the thousands.

           I tried to be clear in my last sermon, on our “Uncommon Denomination,” that I do not believe we will have mega-churches if we continue to be the kind of uncommon denomination we have been - most people do not share our values. But that does not mean that we cannot learn anything from the other churches. We need to ask ourselves what it is people are getting from being part of such enormous congregations. Paradoxically, what those churches have been offering is intimacy. Intimacy in a church of 10,000? How can that be?

           The mega-churches have gone back to the early days of the Christian church, and to the practices of John Wesley in the 18^th century and focused on the importance of small groups in providing intimacy. Dana McLean Greeley, the first president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, returned from a visit to Japan in the early 70's amazed by the tremendous success of the Rissho Kosei-kai, a liberal Buddhist sect founded by a former milkman. One of the cores of its practice and keys to its growth to over 2 million adherents is the Hoza, or circle of compassion, which flies directly in the face of traditional Japanese privacy. People meet face to face in small groups daily or weekly to discuss their lives in an intimate way, seeking guidance in applying Buddhist principles to their lives.

           Jim Robinson, who was Dana’s assistant minister when he was serving our church in Concord, Massachusetts,            took that idea with him 20 years ago when he went to the little church in Brewster, Massachusetts. That church, which has spawned a new congregation, now has 750 members. He attributes its success to the use of small groups in offering the opportunity for intimacy as a part of participating in the church.

           It took a while, but word finally spread in our movement and small groups have taken off. At our continental ministers convocation in Birmingham, Alabama two years ago, 75% of the ministers present indicated that small group programs were underway in the churches they served.

[Rockford]

           We had, by that time, made a small attempt to initiate such a program here. Phil Lund, our intern two years ago, did a sermon on the subject and, with Colleen, began a group. It never took off. I believe the problem was that it began on too small a scale and it never reached critical mass.

           Deciding that we really needed to give it a serious shot, last Fall, at about this time, I addressed this issue in a sermon, described the process, and asked how many people would be willing to engage in an experiment for a limited period of time. We had 78 positive responses. We trained facilitators and nine groups began in November. Eight of the nine continue to meet regularly – one monthly, one every three weeks, and the rest twice a month. A few people have dropped out, and a few have joined during the year. The current membership is 70.

           These groups go by different names in different churches. The most common seems to be “Covenant Group.” A covenant is an agreement among two or more people. The members of these groups agree on how they will proceed – they form a covenant -- and they commit to the regular participation which is essential for them to work.

           The unique thing about these groups, and the reason why I believe they will be of continuing value, is the way they combine the personal dimension with the thoughtful. There is a structure to the groups that each follows.

[structure]

           Every session begins with the lighting of a chalice or candle and the sharing of an opening reading. Then there is a check-in time where the participants share, for up to four minutes, what is happening in their lives. I don’t believe any of our facilitators has had to resort to a stop watch, but the point is that this is not simply an opportunity to dump, and it is important that the time, which is finite, be shared. The group does not try to “solve” anyone’s problems, nor to psychoanalyze one another. It is not a therapy group. Members do not compete for the most miserable experience of the week, nor do they try to pretend that everything is rosy. The goal is to build awareness of what one another’s lives are like, and to be there for one another.

           The second hour is spent in the exchange of ideas about a relevant subject, introduced by a short reading. The topics have included: Community, Anger, Body Image, Forgiveness, Gratitude, Living Simply, Poetry, Mothers, Living and Dying, Mentors, and Living through Loss. These are not debates with winners and losers – they are opportunities to share diverse perspectives in a climate of respect.

           At the end of the discussion, there is an opportunity for each participant to share reflections of the session, which is followed by a closing reading.

           One of the other important components of the process is that each group is expected to engage in service projects – either to the church, or in the larger community. It is important that the experience of the group is not simply inward, but that connection to the larger community is affirmed. One of our groups has been working at a local food pantry. Another helped to host the August photo directory session. This morning, one of the groups has provided the flowers, ushers, and coffee hosts for our service. One has served lunch to people working on a Habitat for Humanity construction project. Another took on cleaning the church kitchen. One has worked on our adopt-a-highway project.

[how’s it going?]

           Most of the respondents to an evaluation I sent out in the spring, at the end of the initial phase, said that the groups had exceeded their expectations. I have solicited comments this Fall. Here are some representative ones:

☻                     With the whole congregation as my extended family, my covenant group is my nuclear church family. It’s a great way to develop friendships instead of acquaintances.

☻          My favorite part of the covenant group is a chance to speak for myself and to listen to others.

☻          My covenant group means “a more intimate connection to others within our church, almost equivalent to family closeness.”

☻          I love my covenant group. We share lots of stuff and it has helped us to create community. We have formed friendships which are comforting and extend beyond the group to church.

☻          It’s a chance to learn that I’m not the only one who thinks the way I do and you really get to know what others value.

☻          This has “a great value to a shy person who does poorly in big groups.”

☻          My favorite part about it is the various responses and different points of view that are expressed relating to the chosen topic. I am able to look at things differently. We have a lot of fun in addition to being serious.

☻          Covenant group to me is about relationships. We have become a group of friends and a support system to each other. Tonight was a perfect example. I was feeling really awful about all that has occurred in my life lately. By the time I left, I felt supported and able to face tomorrow. People didn’t do anything but listen and express their support for me, and that was what I needed. How fortunate we are to have such a great bunch of people in our group and that we have all connected to each other.

[what now?]

           It is clear that our Covenant Group experiment has been a success. The lives of seventy members of our congregation have been enriched by the opportunity that these groups offer for breaking through the walls of isolation to get to interact with other people on a more intimate level than is usually possible. The question is, are there other members of our congregation, beyond the 70, who might like to have similar experiences?

           We aim to have ten members in each group – an absolute maximum of twelve. The Covenant Group theory was that each group would grow by welcoming new people, and when it reached twelve, it would split and start a new group. Our members, like those in most of the other UU churches offering these groups, have made it clear that they are too attached to their groups to be willing to split, so we have to consider first filling available spaces, and then starting new groups. With eight groups but 70 participants, you can see we presently have openings for ten, and we have one trained facilitator presently available to start a ninth group. There are also some participants who have indicated that they might be willing to be trained to start new groups.

           We presently have covenant groups meeting Sunday afternoons and evenings, two weekday mornings, one weekday afternoon, two weekday evenings, and Saturday mornings. Most of them meet in homes – one meets at the church. Some couples are together in the same group, some have chosen to be in separate groups. We have participants from a wide age range, from the 30's to the 80's, male and female.

           The next step is for us to find out who else would like to be in a group and when they are available. We ask for the same commitment we sought from the initial enrollees: you promise to attend at least six sessions to give the process a chance. We will fill the available groups first, and then look to creating new ones as needed. We have prepared a brochure about the groups which includes a tear off form for indicating interest and showing when you would be available. It also has a place to indicate if you would be willing to be trained to be a facilitator.

           The role of facilitator is not an onerous one. The facilitators get to participate in their groups – they just have the added responsibility of watching the time and being sure that everyone gets a chance. We have been providing the materials for the sessions, although each group is free to choose its own if it prefers.

[an important opportunity]

           It is my belief, based on the feedback I have received, that the Covenant Groups are one of the most important opportunities that this church has offered to its members – an opportunity to address the sense of isolation which is so much a part of modern life in this country. I would not want to suggest that everyone would appreciate them equally, nor that every group is perfect for everyone. It is a time commitment, but it is one which offers rich rewards.

           The Jewish theologian, Martin Buber, observed:

The fundamental fact of human existence is neither the individual nor the aggregate as such. Each, considered by itself is a mighty abstraction. The individual is a fact of existence so far as he [or she] steps into a living relationship with other individuals. The aggregate is a fact of existence in so far as it is made up of living units of relationships.

I still remember when I was at the New York world’s fair and saw the wall of quotations in the Vatican exhibit that was calligraphed by Sister Mary Corita Kent. The one that leapt out at me was Buber’s “All real living is meeting.”

           Our theologian/affiliated minister, Thandeka, has suggested that Covenant Groups provide “Sacred space” in which we may relate to one another in a special way:

As Unitarian Universalists, we know this sacred space when two or more persons gather together as a ritual practice of right relationship. We know it as the healing and transformational power of life itself. We are transformed by this act into a religious people, a people whose purposes and principles explain and affirm this sacramental act of right relationship. When we embrace one another openheartedly, we feel the presence of life in a human embrace.

[saving souls?]

           When Unitarian Universalists speak of salvation, of “saving souls,” we are not talking about something that happens in a supernatural realm. We are talking about this life, of people on this earth living life more richly. I am delighted that we have been successful in offering such opportunities through our covenant groups. It is my hope that more of us will exercise the opportunity to participate also so more may experience life more richly.