• Home
• Visitor Center
  • Frequent Questions
  • Contact the Church
• Sunday Morning
  • Upcoming Services
  • Recent Sermons
  • Announcements
  • Newsletter archive
• Our Church
  • Directions
  • Giving
  • Art Gallery
  • Board Reports
  • Church Documents
  • Brief History
  • Architecture
• Music
  • Music Program
  • Our Choir
  • Guest Soloists
  • Sunday Concerts
• Our People
  • Minister and Staff
  • Our Congregation
  • Board of Trustees
  • Photo Gallery
  • UUCS Columnists
• Social Justice
• Activities
  • Committees
  • Chalice Groups
• Learning
  • Religious Education
  • Freethinkers
  • Lifespan Education

Sermons by Reverend Don Beaudreault

METAPHORICAL THEOLOGY, PRACTICAL ETHICS: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HESTER PRYNNE AND THE SCARLET LETTER, AND YOUR GRANDMA AND HER POTATO PANCAKES (PART ONE)
Rev. Don Beaudreault
Unitarian Universalist Church of Sarasota, FL
January 23, 2005

OPENING WORDS: "Two things fill the mind."

Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing wonder and awe - the starry heavens above me, and the moral law within me.

Immanuel Kant

MEDITATION READINGS: "But it is not the minds of heretics."

But it is not the minds of heretics that are deteriorated most by the ban placed on all inquiry which does not end in orthodox conclusions. The greatest harm is to those who are not heretics, and whose whole mental development is cramped and their reason cowed by the fear of heresy. Who can compute what the world loses in the multitude of promising intellects combined with timid characters who dare not follow out any bold, vigorous, independent train of thought lest it should land them in something which would admit of being considered irreligious or immoral?

John Stuart Mill

SERMON: "Metaphorical Theology, Practical Ethics: The Difference Between Hester Prynne and the Scarlet Letter, and Your Grandma and Her Potato Pancakes" (Part One)

The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers. But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.

These simple words by Sarah Ban Breathnach get to the core of what I want to say to you this morning.

I want to talk about the need to dream and to do.

For me the concept of "theology" is the dreaming part.

Some definitions of "theology" include:

. The learned profession acquired by specialized courses in religion.
. The rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth.
. A particular system or school of religious beliefs and teachings.

Please note that these definitions from the Internet are broad, meaning that they are eclectic and post-modern.

Compare these with the narrow definition postulated by Mr. Webster's dictionary in the 1992 edition of what the editors purport to be the "New Universal" opus. Here the first definition of "theology" is:

The field of study, thought, and analysis which treats of God, His attributes, and His relations to the universe.

This definition is certainly less "new" or "universal, don't you think? I believe it is more 19th century "theology" - one articulated by a male-hierarchical (probably Christian) association. Webster goes on in a more open manner, but only to the point of referring to "theology" as:

A particular form, system, branch, or course of this science or study.

And here, let me emphasize that the Webster community is referring back to these particular ways of studying a theology based on a male godhead.

How absolutely limiting a definition! The meditation reading from John Stuart Mill applies to those who seek to constrain theology in this way:

Who can compute what the world loses in the multitude of promising intellects combined with timid characters who dare not follow out any bold, vigorous, independent train of thought lest it should land them in something which would admit of being considered irreligious or immoral?

The Unitarian Universalist movement historically has attempted to be "bold, vigorous, (and) independent" in our thinking about theology - or most anything else! We have expanded our thinking on "theology" - often speaking a "God language" of our own devising, or considering such a practice to be abhorrent.

And frankly, not always understanding each other when we do - or don't - use such language!

Of course, we are not the only ones - institutionally or independently - to speak "God language" in this more protean way. But we do it with great universal flair.

That is where the term "metaphorical theology" comes into play for us. And this is how we as a spiritual movement "dream."

But what is a "metaphor"? Specifically, what might be some Unitarian Universalist-type "metaphors"?

A "metaphor" is a word that comes from the Greek "meta" - meaning "beyond" and "pherein" meaning "to carry." It is a way of explaining in a less strictly, defined way, what a word or a concept can mean - just the way we Unitarian Universalists try to define "God." That is to say, we try to "carry beyond" how a literalist might explain things.

Technically speaking, a "metaphor" is:

A comparison made by referring to one thing as another.

We Unitarian Universalists do a lot of that when we use "theological" terms - including that basic word "god." For one thing, most of us do not want to capitalize the word, nor any pronouns referring back to it - specifically, "he."

The deity and the concepts associated with the sense of the "divine", therefore, become poetic images, calls to action, an ethical stand.

Ultimately, of course, many of us believe right to our bones what Ezra Pound was talking about when he spoke of the failure of language to really express what we might feel or know. Says this much-maligned poet who spent a number of years in a mental institution:

The sum of human wisdom is not contained in any one language, and no single language is capable of expressing all forms and degrees of human comprehension.

And yet, even most people have a need to make some attempt to at least contemplate those theological assumptions and perhaps ask questions.

Most of us have a need to fashion into some form that longing. Many do it through language - some more poetically than others. For example, here is a lovely thought by Mary Oliver who is attempting to define "prayer." Says she in her poem "The Summer Day":

I don't know exactly what a prayer is.
I do know how to pay attention, how to fall down
into the grass, how to kneel down in the grass,
how to be idle and blessed, how to stroll through the fields,
which is what I have been doing all day.
Tell me, what else should I have done?

Well, this is metaphorical theology - technically, an "extended metaphor" - that attempts to define "prayer."

Now, those who are more strict about their definitions of prayer - taking their clues from "orthodox" church teachings - would certainly attempt to answer Mary Oliver's question: "Tell me, what else should I have done?"

And I could go on with this, but won't!

I won't because I prefer talking about the joys of metaphorical theology - whereby each of us as individuals can be creative in our "wordsmithing."

So, we Unitarian Universalist and "near" Unitarian Universalists like Mary Oliver - can do all kinds of verbalizing about those classical terms of "theology" (all words we begin with a small letter), words like "god," "prayer," "communion," "sin," "forgiveness," "salvation."

Frankly speaking, I think it is just plain fun to be a Unitarian Universalist - and if there is a deity, that said personage or non-entity or force or creative impetus or prime mover or big bang is having as much fun as we are!

Still, it isn't all about fun! Theology of a strictly NON-metaphorical type can lead to all kinds of conflictive behavior.

Consider all the puritanical flack over all this "stuff" of human experience that some people in our nation - including our highest elected officials - have taken on as their personal agenda - all in the name of "religion" or "morality."

Let me ask such folk: "What are you doing in the bedrooms of America?"

And let me make a statement to them: Get out!"

And: "Stay out of the courts, the school rooms, the public demonstrations for causes, the libraries, our personal email accounts, our telephone answering systems, our computer records!"

That is where Hester Prynne comes into the picture this morning. Remember her? She was Nathaniel Hawthorne's heroine in his novel The Scarlet Letter. She was the one who got the flack in her day and time (19th century Salem) when she had an affair with the town preacher, the Rev. Arthur Dimmsdale (talk about a guy with major existential angst!). You know the story - Hester was the one reviled for the sexual liaison. She was publicly humiliated by being forced to wear a scarlet letter - that infamous "A" (supposedly for "Adultery"). Some scholars believe that because the Puritans didn't put her to death for such an act, their loving presence was at least made manifest.

Nice rationale!

But back to Hester. Certainly, she wasn't the first in our country's history, or the world's to be set apart for going against the established ethic of the time. But she has become a symbol for me of that Webster-defined explanation of "theology" - one set up as a kind of chauvinistic "reign of terror." Those judgmental of her character represent that rock-hard perspective on "God's ways." They know what a god wants (they say); the rest of us do not!

Yet, as time goes on Hester becomes a moral philosopher in her own right, speculating on those bigger questions about human purpose. Not that she agrees with the fundamentalist-type theology of her day! No, her thinking leads her to the position of freethinker and stoic.

I guess you can call her one of the "sheep" running with our particular flock!

Saying this, I stop and wonder when Hawthorne's novel will be pulled off the public and school library shelves across America - the way some of the other classics have been (including Huckleberry Finn). When and if that happens, my friends, it is time for civil disobedience on a massive scale!

Let's hear it for Hester Prynne! Reviled woman turned heroine!

As one critic says of her:

By the novel's end, Hester has become a proto-feminist mother figure to the women of the community. The shame attached to her scarlet letter is long gone. Women recognize that her punishment stemmed in part from the town fathers' sexism, and they come to Hester seeking shelter from the sexist forces under which they themselves suffer. ("Spark Notes")

Okay, call it "revisionist history" but this analysis seems quite relevant today, doesn't it?

In fact, what Hester Prynne evolved into being as a character, is a symbol; as an individual who has turned away from a literalistic theology based upon fear of earthly as well as eternal punishment, into a character representative of metaphorical theology - as a person who deeply ponders spiritual questions, moving beyond the established modus operandi, beyond the so-called "acceptable," seeking a greater grandeur with all of creation - well beyond Salem!

In other words, she becomes the opposite of the kind of person John Stuart Mill is talking about -

.those who are not heretics, and whose whole mental development is cramped and their reason cowed by the fear of heresy.

The ones:

with timid characters who dare not follow out any bold, vigorous, independent train of thought lest it should land them in something which would admit of being considered irreligious or immoral.

Not Hester! She transcends the narrowing circumstances of her time and place, and seeks to resonate with the timelessness of the universe itself.

Speaking of such "timelessness," let me tell you of another way that some of us enjoy applying metaphorical theology. We do it by studying "cosmology" - or

The branch of astrophysics that studies the origins and structure of the universe.

and/or:

The metaphysical study of the origin and nature of the universe.

Personally, although I like to imagine the latter - feeling often like Immanuel Kant when he said:

Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing wonder and awe - the starry heavens above me, and the moral law within me

I prefer to actually "study" astrophysics in order to get closer to "god." "Not being overly scientifically-minded, however, I must rely upon popularizers of complex astrophysical facts. Such a recent "read" for me is the book by Bill Bryson, called A Short History of Nearly Everything. A few quotes will suffice to say what I mean about such a study being an exercise in metaphorical theology. Here is "god" for me - in Bryson's description of the creation of the universe. Speaking of when the Big Bang occurred, he says:

The consensus seems to be heading for a figure of about 13.7 billion years.

And then he tells us that there is still evidence of the Big Bang around today:

Turn your television to any channel it doesn't receive, and about 1 percent of the dancing static you see is accounted for by this ancient remnant of the Big Bang.

So if you want to see and hear "god," turn on your television! But make sure you don't turn it to an actual channel!

And if this isn't enough to give you existential chills, think about this fact - according to Bryson (who got it from others):

.Statistically the probability that there are other thinking beings out there is good. Nobody knows how many stars there are in the Milky Way - estimates range from 100 billion or so to perhaps 400 billion - and the Milky Way is just one of 140 billion or so other galaxies, many of them even larger than ours.

All I can say to that - as we metaphorical theologians attempt to move beyond the laughable, limiting, prideful human attempts to put "god" into a box via dogma, doctrine, creed, and ecclesiastical imprimatur is

HA!

And to all those who would think so highly of themselves or of the human species as to create a god fit to meet their needs; and to those who act as the oracles for their own divine designs - from preacher to politician; from parent to police officer - let me passionately but hopefully politely disagree. And let me do so with these words from Billy Collins entitled "Introduction to Poetry" - which is really about "metaphorical theology" - that is, here is a poem about a "poem" which is merely a metaphorical way to talk about "god":

I ask them to take a poem
and hold it up to the light
like a color slide

or press an ear against its hive.

I say drop a mouse into a poem
and watch him probe his way out,

or walk inside the poem's room
and feel the walls for a light switch.

I want them to water-ski
across the surface of a poem
waving at the author's name on the shore.

But all they do
is tie the poem to a chair with rope
and torture a confession out of it.

They begin beating it with a hose
to find out what it really means.

Yes:

The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers. But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.

In a future sermon let us talk about the doers - the ones who imbibe "practical ethics" and also, let us see how they connect with the dreamers we've spoken of today.

In the meantime, be a dreamer as well as a doer!

CLOSING WORDS:

What is moral is what you feel good after.

Ernest Hemingway