When John Murray, the founder of Universalism in America, was preaching, an opponent of his theology threw a rock that I imagine was very much like this one through the church window, narrowly missing his head. He picked up the rock and said, "This argument is solid and weighty, but it is neither rationale nor convincing."  This would not be the last rock thrown in his direction. Yet, he would say later, "Not all the stones in Boston, except that they may stop my breath, shall shut my mouth."

        I begin with this story because it is important that our new members know what they have gotten themselves into. I say to you, you have joined a tradition that dates back over 200 years that was born in dissent to authority, one that always has been in the minority and probably always will be. So what was this heretical preaching that attracted those rocks through John Murray's window: that God loves every human being. Saint or sinner, Christian, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist or atheist, male or female, religious or secular, God loves you. That is the historical message of Universalism and, even though we have updated the language and vocabulary with which we describe the ultimate reality, it still is the message of Universalism.

        Now, permit me to back up a moment.  The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Montgomery is a member of the Unitarian Universalist Association, which is an association of over 1000 congregations which has its headquarters in Boston. The UUA was formed in 1961 through the consolidation of the American Unitarian Association, founded in 1825 and the Universalist Church of America, which, though it has undergone a few name changes, was formed in 1793. According to the by-laws of the UUA, each congregation is autonomous, which means each congregation is self-governing, own its own property and calls its own ministers.

        This morning, I am focusing on the Universalist part of our tradition because, at the time of the consolidation, the composition of the UUA was about 2/3 Unitarian, including this Fellowship, and 1/3 Universalists and my experience has been that the Universalists have been given short shrift in our accounts of our history and their contributions are undervalued in our Association, even today.

        By way of background, it is important to remember that the dominant theology during the colonial era and early national period in our nation's history was Calvinism.  That theology is characterized by the doctrines of the total depravity of man, which is rooted in the idea of original sin, and election, which is rooted in the idea that only a few elect people have been chosen by God for salvation and there's nothing anyone can do about it. The Unitarians distinguished themselves by challenging the first doctrine with their own belief in the capacity of humans for both good and evil and more particularly the capacity to choose between the two.  The Universalist went after election, arguing that all souls are destined to be reconciled with God. It often is said, the Unitarians did away with original sin and the Universalists did away with Hell.

        Let me say a little more about that.  The Universalists didn't invent the doctrine of universal salvation, but it was their embrace of that doctrine that came to define, which in some ways is unfair because there is much more to Universalism.  Nonetheless, the basic idea of universal salvation is that everyone eventually will be with God in heaven.  The most effective argument for this position was articulated by Hosea Ballou in his Treatise on Atonement, written in 1815.  In short form, he argued from both reason and the Bible.  If God desires that all humans come to love God and be reconciled with God, then it would thwart God's plan for some humans to be condemned to eternal banishment in hell, and to say that God's will can be thwarted is to deny God's sovereignty. Ballou also noted the many biblical passages stating that Jesus came so that all might be saved. That phrase, "so that all might be saved", appears in several of the epistles. What Ballou might say today is, what part of "all" don't you get.

        So that's the basic idea. Consider it's implications, though. If faith is not necessary for salvation, then why believe anything? Because faith and moral discipline, the Universalists argued, fills our lives with goodness and happiness, which is what God wants for all of us because God loves us so much.  So, like the Unitarians but for different reasons, our Universalist ancestors gave us a present day faith that is made for the here and now.

        Theology was not the only area where there were areas of agreement and disagreement. They also had different takes on freedom of religion. As an organized faith tradition, the Universalists really came into their own during the American colonial area but Unitarians had been organized in different forms since at least  1571, when Unitarianism was named the official religion of Transylvania by the only Unitarian monarch in history, King John Sigismund. As you all know, however, it also was this same King Sigismund who, in 1568, issued the Edict of Torda proclaiming what was for its time a very progressive freedom of religion.

        The line from Transylvania to New England is not a straight one, but I mention this story for a reason. It is possible to believe in having an official state religion while advocating for religious freedom for all those who believe otherwise. To wit, I ask this question, who do you think live their lives more freely and without fear of discrimination, Unitarian Universalists in Montgomery, Alabama or Unitarians in England, where there is a state religion? The answer, of course, is England.

        Massachusetts had an official state religion until 1833, and that religion was the Congregational Church. That church had been established by the Puritans and essentially was a Calvinist version of the Church of England without the Bishops or a King. The Unitarians came out of the left wing of the Congregationalist church, which is to say, even though they carried with them the heritage of John Sigismund and a visceral opposition to creeds and dogma, they were part of the establishment and benefited from the tax used to pay the salaries of ministers of the so-called Standing Order, meaning approved churches.

        In contrast, there were many dissenting churches to the Standing Order, including the Baptists, Quakers, and Catholics, among others.  John Murray founded the first independent congregation that affirmed universal salvation and he soon was followed by others. These early Universalists were not too far removed from the general Baptists, and many early Universalists were converts from the Baptist churches. All of these dissenting churches though, strongly favored a strict separation of church and state and that insistence on freedom has become one of the genes in our spiritual DNA.

        The early Universalists clearly understood themselves as Christians and part of the Christian church. I will not use this occasion to describe their particular takes on God, Jesus, the Bible and other topics. As a general principle though, I can say that from the beginning, the Universalists shared with Unitarians an openness to diverse understandings of these topics. As early as 1803, the Universalist convention adopted a confession of faith known as the Winchester Profession that included a liberty clause which read, "While we adopt a general Profession of Belief . . . we leave it to the churches and societies to continue or adopt within themselves such more particular articles of faith as may appear to them best under their peculiar circumstances, provided they do not disagree with our general profession or plan."  The Convention revised this profession several times, noting in 1899, "neither this nor any other precise form of words is required as a condition of fellowship, provided always that the principles above be professed." The principles referred to here include the spiritual authority and leadership of God's son, Jesus, and the trustworthiness of the Bible as a Revelation from God.  

        If you parse those words out, you see here a tradition that has embraced Jesus as teacher and exemplar and the Bible as just one source of truth. The key word if you didn't hear it was that they professed the bible to be a revelation of God, not the revelation of God. Implicit in this profession of faith is that Truth with a capital T is not limited exclusively to the Christian church.

        By 1943, the General Superintendent of the Universalist church proclaimed,

        "Universalism cannot be limited either to Protestantism or to Christianity, not without denying its very name. Ours is a world fellowship, not just a Christian sect. For so long as Universalism is universalism and not partialism, the fellowship bearing its name must succeed in making it unmistakably clear that all are welcome: theist and humanist, Unitarian and Trinitarian, colored and color-less. A circumscribed Universalism is unthinkable."

        As a quick aside, Unitarianism went through a similar transformation much sooner and much more profoundly, but that is a story for another day.  The larger point is that neither the Unitarians nor the Universalists ever denied the Christian faith, but both enlarged their faith to recognize the truth found in all of the world's great faith traditions and even outside of those traditions. Thus, the Christian faith is part of our heritage but it is not how we define ourselves today. Today, I respectfully suggest that Unitarian Universalism is defined by its commitment to acceptance and diversity, freedom of faith, and for the ultimate authority of conscience in moral decision making.

        We have members who identify themselves as Jews, Christians, and Buddhists and secular humanists. I  must add here two things we are not. We are not some homogenized religion built around the least common denominators of the world's religions. Nor are we a forum in which individuals may come to practice their own respective religions. We don't presume, for example, to say that the Hindu concept of Nirvana is the same as the Christian concept of heaven or that the Taoist understanding of the way is really another way of describing the laws of the Torah.  As to those ideas and doctrines of creation and sin and salvation-things that can only be affirmed in faith-we say follow the truth to which you are called. The universalism we promote is a recognition that there is common ground among all people of all traditions that can be cultivated in community-those here and now, every day kinds of challenges that are part of the human condition.  We invite you into membership here not to learn how the world was created, but how to be a better partner, parent, lover, child, co-worker and citizen.  We don't pretend here that we can reduce the teachings of the world's great religions on the subject of good and evil into some affirmation we all could embrace. Whatever our differences might be on the cause of suffering or its consequence, each of us needs a hug from time to time and to know that we are OK.  That is the universalism to which we aspire.

        So, membership in this Fellowship is not defined by a creed, but by a covenant. We do not ask new members to affirm any particular belief, but rather, to enter into a relationship with one another that affirms the inherent worth of each other and our interdependence with one another and commits us to equity, justice and compassion in all of our affairs, and to the use of democratic principles in our governance.

        As a matter of form, the ceremony in which we are about to engage is not a requirement for membership, but simply is a way of welcoming our new members. You don't have to do this, and some members have preferred not to. Our participants this morning became members when they signed the membership book as a sign of their understanding and sympathy with our principles and purposes.  Now, the time has come, as I just mentioned, formally to welcome them as members of this congregation. For that purpose, I invite our new members and the Membership Committee chair to come forward.