"May I Have This Dance!" (Script)

 

When I was in the 6th and 7th grade – back in the early 60’s,

 I was in a club for girls at the Statesboro Recreation Department

called the “Happy Go Lucky Club” – or HGLs.

 We met every Monday night during the school year –

and although we played other games and had refreshments,

 the big activity of the evening was DANCING.

Mrs. Russell would put on the music and the older girls – who had learned the previous year – would teach the younger girls how to jitterbug and slow dance too.

Mrs. Russell had ways to make sure we all had partners, and we would swap often.

There were also dance contests –

and the best dancers would always partner up so they could win.

But that was okay, because for the most part we all had a great time together.

 Now I was trying to remember the grade levels for this Club,

and posted a question about it to my FACEBOOK women friends

who grew up in Statesboro and perhaps attended.

Several responded and many of them also shared their memories of this club.

 Interestingly enough, most of these memories were of the big dress up dance

held at the end of the year in which we invited BOYS.

And some had good memories of this – with special dates and full dance cards.

 And others remember sitting on the side lines

and learning the meaning of the word “wall flower.”

Because you see, we’d been taught that on the night the boys came,

the proper thing was for us to sit nicely along the wall and wait for a boy to ask us to dance. And the boys had been taught that they should bravely risk rejection

 and should walk up to a girl, extend their hand and say, “May I have this dance?”

 Of course, many were very shy about doing this – so the dance floor didn’t fill up

till the “Girl’s Choice” dances – which were rare.

 Now as you might imagine --- I don’t LIKE to sit by a wall.

 I like to DANCE. So. the words, “May I have this dance?”

used to be somewhat problematic to me because of these memories.

But all that has changed now.

Anyone can ask anyone else to dance.

And you can dance with any one regardless of gender

and with one person or a group.

And you can just dance by yourself!    How great is that!

Although I have no problem dancing by myself,  I do enjoy dancing with others.

So, the words, “May I have this dance?” are becoming happier words to me

in this world of more dancing opportunities.

Ric Masten, songwriter and UU troubadour,

 included these words in the 2nd Line to his song, “Let it be a dance.”

Ric was, of course, talking about LIFE itself. Let it be a dance!

But he included this invitation --- “May I have this dance with you?” –

because he understood the need to invite others into that Dance of Life!

Similarly, we are here in a faith community together –

knowing that we need one another for some of the dance steps we take in life.

And we need to INVITE others to participate.

Therefore, I am extending my hand to you this morning –

and asking you to dance WITH me in this Ministry!

As I do that, let me be clear – I do think that professional ministry is important.

Believe me – I would not have spent years in preparation – taking seminary courses,

writing a boatload of papers, doing practicum and intern experiences,

working in a hospital as a chaplain,

 and jumping through all those hoops that the ministerial fellowship committee put before me – if I did not believe in the value of professional ministry.

But this is one dance folks—this dance of the ministry of this congregation –

that I do not want to do alone, nor should I – nor could I.

For one thing, I’m supposedly serving this congregation “half-time.”

Even so, our needs and the needs of this community are great.

But sharing ministry is not about freeing up my time!

It’s about growing through love together and reaching out to others together.

So, again, my question to you today is: “May I have this dance with you?”

Will you share this ministry?

Before I go any further though, I should clarify what I mean by ministry. (Silence)

 I wish I could. Ministry is one of those things like pornography.

You know it when you see it and experience it – but it’s somewhat difficult to define.

Rev. Mark Morrison Reed, a Unitarian Universalist minister in Toronto, Canada

agrees with the difficulty in defining ministry but makes a pretty good stab at it, I think.

He says: “It is a quality of presence we bring that is grounded in our liberal religious faith. Singing and preaching, teaching and leading, caring and justice work are all ministries.

It is what we do together when we gather in community.”

Although the phrase “Shared Ministry” is relatively new –

or at least has received more attention in the last couple of decades, -

 the concept of sharing ministry is not new at all.

  Religious folks have been encouraging their lay folks to minister to others

from the very beginning.

But we Unitarian Universalists have a particular history that lifts up this possibility even more.

And because having a good history lesson prepares us for the present and future,

 I’m going to share a little of that with you here today.

After all, we are Unitarian Universalists, and most of us are fans of history. Plus, I was a teacher for many years, and sometimes I feel the need to teach a little.

The Unitarians and the Universalists merged in the early 60’s –

but the history I’m going to share today is more from our Unitarian side of the family –

because that’s where a lot of emphasis on sharing ministry can be found.

The Unitarians, along with the Anabaptists and others, were the RADICAL Protestants.

 And the Protestant reformation is what really re-opened the door

to this concept of shared ministry.

Rev. Jan Carlsson-Bull puts it this way: “Shared ministry emerges from a notion called

 ‘the priesthood of all believers.’

(You see) -The early Christian church had no priests.

 It was informal and egalitarian, with each believer expected to use her or his individual gifts to build up the Christian community,

 which was pretty wobbly in those days of the Roman Empire.

This understanding receives especially strong emphasis in the First Letter of Peter.

Believers are implored to “Come to him, to that living stone….

and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood.”

Of course, it only took a couple of centuries for the church to become

 a hierarchical empire of sorts.

 And one could only be a bishop or priest if he (and that HE is intentional of course)

 was in apostolic succession.

 In other words, Peter had been ordained by Christ,

 then in turn, he ordained others – who ordained others – all the way up to today!

The Anglican and Episcopal churches also consider themselves to be in that same Apostolic order that the Roman Catholics lift up because the bishops in the Church of England

(when it split from the Roman Catholic Church) were ordained in that line.

And they ordained others all the way down.

Many years ago, I attended the ordination of a priest in the Episcopal tradition.

 And they make a big deal of that apostolic succession.

The bishop and priests came from all around to lay their hands on this young man

and to designate him as one in that succession

to both bring God’s message and to serve others.

But there was once another young priest who disagreed with this –

and his name, of course, was Martin Luther.

Now Luther, you may remember, was a German priest and theologian

who was very upset about the selling of indulgences –

 and the church’s practice of taking advantage of folks by having them, in effect,

 buy their way into heaven.

 So, he nailed his 95 theses to a church door in 1517 to protest.

And as far as the Church was concerned – all hell broke loose.

When he refused to recant, the Church excommunicated him –

and thus, the Protestant revolt began.

Luther’s theology challenged the authority of the pope

and taught that all baptized Christians were part of a holy priesthood –

 thus, the priesthood of all believers.

Well, when he opened up the possibility of folks reading and thinking for themselves –

 folks like US took him seriously.

 And that part of the reformation – the part that included the Unitarians in Europe –

 became known as the radical reformation.

Our history is a little complicated – though.

And the Unitarian churches in the U.S. did not descend directly

from those Unitarians in Europe.

Instead, we “evolved” from the Puritans.

But even our Puritan ancestry gives us a foundation for shared ministry.

You see the Puritans were separating themselves from the hierarchical Church of England. And they declared their independence in something called the Cambridge Platform.

This independence was not needed because of differing beliefs.

They still maintained a similar doctrine.

The Cambridge Platform was basically a document that shared

with the Church of England that “You are not the boss of me” –

and we will walk together over here with one another as independent congregations –

but in association with one another.

The big word for this is “Congregational Polity.”

And congregational polity also lends itself to shared ministry –

sharing with each other within the congregation,

and sharing in association with our fellow Unitarian Universalist churches.

Now just as our early Unitarian churches evolved from the Puritans, we continued to evolve – and as our Unitarian ancestry was evolving – so was our Universalist ancestry

(who also, by the way, had congregational polity) – till they both reached a point in 1961

 that they felt they could do better sharing their ministries together rather than separately.

 And so, the Unitarians and the Universalists got married and covenanted together

 to affirm and promote our shared principles and sources.

Today the “Priesthood of the Believer” has evolved in Unitarian Universalist congregations

to be the “Ministry of each person in the congregation.” Yes, you are all ministers!

This was affirmed by one of UUA’s Commission on Appraisal Reports in 1997.

In this report is the following finding:

“One key aspect of Unitarian Universalism is our belief that ministry of the congregation

does not belong exclusively to ordained clergy, but to everyone.”

One of my Unitarian Universalist heroes and a giant 20th century theologian,

James Luther Adams, took this idea of “Priesthood of all Believers” a giant step further.

He stretched that notion to the “Prophethood of all Believers.”

 Now when he talked of prophesy – he was not referring to fortune telling.

 “Prophets, we might remember, were those annoying flower children of the Old Testament – Jonah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos.

Troublemakers all, they called the populace of their day

 to take seriously stuff like loving your neighbor as yourself

 and honoring the divine by so doing.” (Jan Carolson-Bull)

Here is a quote from Adams –which is very relevant today:

“The prophetic liberal church is not a church in which the prophetic function is assigned merely to a few….

The prophetic liberal church is the church in which people think and work together

to interpret the signs of the times in the light of their faith,

to make explicit through discussion the epochal thinking that the times demand.

(Listen) - 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

 in place of merely being pushed around by it….

 Only through the prophetism of all (members) can we together

foresee doom and mend our common ways.”

Wow – that’s a lot for us all to live up to – to be priests and prophets.

 But it’s sure a lot easier if we all do it together.

So, I’m asking you to join me and others in this dance of ministry!

Some of the folks in this congregation have been on the dance floor for a long time,

and we are encouraging and inviting everyone to join us in the ministry of this church.

So, what specifically does that mean for you?

 Do I want you to come up here and preach next week?

Well, actually – Randy Blasch has already danced his way into that spot.

But there are many wonderful ways you can share the ministry of this congregation.

The chair of our membership committee, Beth Stevenson, is going to be sending out a survey asking you to indicate what talents and skills you can share with us – plus noting lists of things that we currently do – and asking you to share your interest. 

As you complete that form, ask yourself three questions:

1.   What am I good at?; 2. What do I like to do?; (and those are not always the same thing); and 3. What needs to be done?

But you don’t have to wait till you complete the form or till someone asks you to serve.

The music is already playing.

We need folks to come to the dance floor now.

Don’t wait for me or another leader to hold out our hand and ask you to dance.

Remember when the HGL’s had the girl’s choice dances the dance floor filled up.

Well, as the DJ today – I’m calling for a Members and Friends choice! 

If you see a need, or have an interest – tell one of us and we will try to make that happen!

AND - We are attempting to be a voice on the side of love in this community.

Are there ways you can be that prophetic voice?

Or join others in serving the needs of this community?

Now - I realize that there are some in our congregation who have a lot of difficult “stuff” going on in their lives right now; and may not be able to dance every dance.

But there are things we all can do – whether it’s sending cards to those in need;

or even just being present to support others.

What is your ministry?

Jan Carson Bull asked her congregation:

“What are you doing right now that speaks to the faith and works of this congregation, that feeds the hungry, that teaches our children, that hollers to the powers that be in our own time to change course, that keeps the kitchen clean and the facilities painted, that helps the flowers grow, that helps us all grow?”

The little doves in our story for all ages couldn’t lift that net with just a few flapping their wings and flapping in different directions.

To lift our wonderful free faith to higher heights, we need to share this ministry.

May I have this dance with you? I’m borrowing from an Anne Murray tune to close this out –

May I have this dance? I ask all of you
Dancing together in all we go through
When we dance together, what wonders we do
May I have this dance – for the next year or two!

If you accept, join me in singing the chorus to Let it Be a Dance!

SLIDE

Sing: “Let it be a dance we do! May I have this dance with you? In the good times and the bad times too, let it be a dance?”

"Where have all the Flowers Gone" - A Lamentation

 "Where Have All the Flowers Gone" is a folk song written by Unitarian Pete Seeger in 1955, inspired by his reflections on the cycle of war, loss, and longing for peace. The lyrics are inspired by an old Cossack poem and the melody was adapted from an old Irish folk song.  He wrote the first three verses at that time and the last three were added by Joe Hickerson in 1960.  This was a difficult time for Pete professionally.  Pete was not shy about his devotion to the labor movement, social justice, and peace.  This was the McCarthy era and he and many other artists and performers on the left were blacklisted and banned. (We are seeing this again folks.)  Pete did not budge but continued to sing at folk festivals and more.  And we can take a lot of inspiration from him, his persistence, and his music. 

Pete’s intention for this song was to highlight the senselessness of war and the longing for peace.  It was recorded by the Kingston Trio and others like Peter, Paul, and Mary in the 60’s and gained wide attention during the Vietnam war as an anthem of the anti-war movement. Some describe this as a “timeless song.”  I am sad that is so. 

I would have hoped that by 2025, we would have learned how to resolve disputes without violence.  But each day on the news we hear how talks have failed, and wars continue in Gaza and Ukraine.  These are just the two in the news, though.  According to the Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights (aka – Geneva Academy) which monitors armed conflicts, “today there are more than 110.  Some of these conflicts make the headlines, others do not.  Some of them started recently, while others have lasted for more than 50 years.”  (https://geneva-academy.ch/galleries/today-s-armed-conflicts)

Now it is true that the number of combatants killed in these conflicts has declined over time with the use of better medical equipment and procedures and different techniques for destroying targets that do not involve boots on the ground.  But those numbers do not include the “collateral damage” that has increased with these new techniques – with many civilians, including children being sacrificed at the altar of war. 

Is World Peace Possible?  Many thought so after the Great War – now referred to as World War I.  That was supposed to be the war to end all wars. The Kellogg-Briand Pact was an agreement to outlaw war signed on August 27, 1928. Sometimes called the Pact of Paris for the city in which it was signed. Signatories included France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Italy and Japan. Later, an additional forty-seven nations followed suit, so the pact was eventually signed by most of the established nations in the world.  There was no way to really enforce it though. 

Again, I ask, is peace possible?  During some of the marches I’ve participated in, the marchers chanted, “No Justice, no peace.”  Now I attempted to frame that idea to mean that we would continue to make noise and “good trouble” till justice was done.  But some say, no – there are times to fight physically, with weapons if necessary.  Can we not grow beyond that? 

This song – and this sermon – is a lamentation.  But I don’t want to just be sad about the ongoing wars and armed conflicts throughout history.  I want to understand why we don’t seem to be able to move beyond this destructive, deadly, strategy.  In my efforts to understand – where have all the flowers gone – I read several articles and excerpts from studies, including a Psychology Today article by Allen Lickerman.

Lickerman (I like saying that) is a medical doctor and practicing Buddhist, and an author who has studied this concern.  The title of his article inspired me and gave me some hope.  It’s called: “Just Because Something is Hard, Doesn’t Mean it’s Impossible.”

Now Lickerman does indicate that some wars could be justified.  He says:

“In a world in which tyranny continues to exist, war may in fact sometimes be justified. In the same way it's necessary to fight to defend oneself when attacked, so too it's sometimes necessary to go to war to put down injustice, or even the possibility of injustice when its likelihood is great enough. (Then these words are in bold) - Rarely, however, is this given as a primary reason. Even democracies seem to be roused to war only by self-interest.”

Countries have gone to war for various reasons throughout history, and these reasons often stem from a combination of political, economic, social, and cultural factors.

I searched for some meta- analyses of reasons and found similar categorizations – though the orders changed somewhat.  Nevertheless, those at or near the top – were the same for all – and those at or near the bottom were similar as well. Of course, most causes of wars are complex – pulling from more than one of these reasons for conflict. I’ve combined a couple of these where it made sense and will share some of them with you.  The number one reason is the same for all these analyses.

·       Territorial Disputes:  Leaders throughout history seemed to measure their success by how much space they can take up on the map.  Russia is still number 1 in this regard – and perhaps that is why Trump jokes about (maybe) acquiring Canada and Greenland.  And even Russia is not satisfied and wants more.

·       Resource Scarcity and Economic Gain:  Access to natural resources like oil, minerals, fertile land, and waterways has often been a major driver of war. We saw a lot of this during the expansion of colonies throughout the world – but even now, this appears to be a factor. 

·       Nationalism and Patriotism:  Strong feelings of pride in one’s nation—has played a central role in many conflicts. Historical examples may be The American Revolution – or the Balkan Wars – but we see it today perhaps in Ukraine not wanting to give in to Russia. 

·       Religious, Ethnic, Cultural and Ideological Differences:  Conflicts driven by religion, ethnicity, culture, ideology, or belief systems are common. The Crusades and the Thirty Years' War were, of course, religiously motivated, as were some of the middle eastern wars.  The war in Gaza – though it could be proclaimed as a territorial dispute, may have underpinnings related to this category. 

·       Defence and Protection:  Countries may go to war to defend themselves from external threats. This includes wars of self-defence or to protect allies. World War II is a prime example of countries like Britain and France declaring war to defend Poland after Nazi Germany's invasion.

·       Civil Wars and Internal Conflicts:  Internal struggles within a country, such as civil wars or revolutions, can also lead to war. These wars often arise from ethnic, social, or political divisions. The American Civil War and the Russian Revolution are notable examples of this type of conflict.

·       Revenge or Retribution:  Past grievances, territorial losses, or perceived injustices can lead to wars of revenge. For instance, World War II can be seen as partially motivated by a desire for retribution following the outcomes of World War I. 

·       Security Dilemmas and Pre-emptive Strikes:  In some cases, countries go to war because they perceive an imminent threat and want to strike first. This is known as a security dilemma, where one country’s efforts to increase its security lead another to feel threatened, escalating into war.  Russia uses the threat of NATO as a reason for going to war with Ukraine before Ukraine can get more aligned with the West.

·       Humanitarian Reasons (Usually at or near the bottom for all analyses):  Wars have occasionally been waged with the justification of protecting human rights or stopping atrocities, such as during the Rwandan Genocide or Kosovo War.

Each war is a complex interplay of many factors, and motivations often overlap. The causes of war have evolved over time, but many of the fundamental reasons remain the same.

Now back to Likerman and his thoughts.  He shrinks all of this simplistically to three words: greed, anger, and stupidity. And he contends that the only way to peace is by more and more individuals becoming experts at living.  What is that? “An expert at living isn't a person who never experiences greed, anger, or stupidity but rather one who remains in firm control of those negative parts (which can never be entirely eliminated), who's able to surmount his or her darkest negativity, and displays a peerless ability to resolve conflict peacefully.”

Lickerman further explains his theory: "What generates this expert ability to resolve conflict? Wisdom and joy. Wise people are happy people, and happy people are wise. If enough people in the world's population became happy and wise, violence would be used far less often to solve conflict. If this pool of experts at living became large enough, we'd start seeing some of our leaders being picked from among them. And if enough leaders were experts at living, war, too, would be used far less often to solve conflict and further the interests of nations.”

Okay – so with that thinking, we have to have enough wise and happy people in this world – to attain peace -  and that’s a big task.  Where do we start.  Well, I guess here is where we sing – “Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me.”

Now Lickerman is not that naïve.  He doesn’t expect that we can achieve world peace in his lifetime – and certainly not in mine.  Here’s a quote where he attempts to tell us what we can do: “As Gandhi famously said, ‘by becoming the change we wish to see.’ Strive to become an expert at living. Be good to those around you in concrete ways. Create an island of peace in your own life. If you do, it will spread. If enough of us do this, our islands will meet, ceasing to be islands and becoming whole continents. World peace exists literally in the actions each one of us takes in our own lives.”

Lickerman knows that everyone will not be easily enticed to become experts at living.  What will draw others who are obsessed with greed and more.  Now this response really does sound kind of like Pollyanna – but bear with me.  Lickerman thinks the draw is happiness.  People think they want more money and tax cuts, perhaps – but they really want to be happy – and they are not getting there. 

Another quote: “We must convince them to follow our lead by becoming so happy ourselves—so ridiculously, genuinely happy—that they decide on their own they want to be like us, that they want what we have. And then we have to show them how to get it. Good ideas are our weapons. When people come to deeply believe in notions that promote peace, peace will follow like a shadow follows the body.”

Now this is a very long-term goal of course.  But as John Lennon wrote: “You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.  I hope someday you’ll join us.  And the world we’ll be as one.”

May it be so!

 

 

I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free: An Exploration of the Yearnings of Women

 I Wish I knew how it would feel to be free-- #151 in our UU hymnal was composed as a jazz piece by African American jazz musician Billy Taylor in the 50’s.  He said he wrote it for his daughter Kim.  That instrumental version was recorded in 1962 and I’ll play that at the end of the service as our traveling music.  Dick Dallas added lyrics to the song and it became a staple of the Civil Rights Movement when it came to the attention of many with the recording by Nina Simone in 1967 on her Silk and Soul album.  Others recorded it as well – but I think you’ll agree, no one sings it like Nina Simone.   When I first heard this song – and later read through the lyrics, I was deeply moved.  I connected with it – not as Civil Rights marchers did in the 60’s – but as a woman who had felt those emotions and who had advocated for others who felt those same yearnings. 

I’m not going to ask you to sing it – but I invite you to say these words with me – and either think of times you may have felt this way – or if you are blessed enough not to have felt this way, put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

The words on the slides are from our hymnal – minus the last repeated line of each verse.

I wish I knew how it would feel to be free.
I wish I could break all these chains holding me.
I wish I could say all the things I could say,
Say ‘em loud, say ‘em clear for the whole world to hear.

I wish I could share all the love in my heart,
remove all the bars that still keep us apart.
I wish you could know what it means to be me,
then you’d see and agree everyone should be free.

I wish I could give all I’m longing to give.
I wish I could live like I’m longing to live.
I wish I could do all the things I can do,
though I’m way overdue I’d be starting anew.

I wish I could be like a bird in the sky.
How sweet it would be if I found I could fly.
I’d soar to the sun and look down at the sea,
then I’d sing ‘cause I’d know how it feels to be free.

This is Women’s History month so – though many can connect with these yearnings for freedom, today’s focus will be on the struggle of women, the progress made by women, and yes, the challenges as well. 

We are in a Unitarian Universalist church this morning, so pardon me – for lifting up some important Unitarian and Universalist women in this exploration of yearnings of women.  This morning I’m going to share briefly about the struggles and the gifts given to us by three women who were contemporaries:  Julia Ward Howe, Clara Barton, and Francis Ellen Watkins Harper. I’m sharing these in order of birth.

Julia Ward Howe was a Unitarian who is best known for writing the Battle Hymn of the Republic.  She was encouraged by Unitarian minister James Freeman Clarke to write new lyrics for the melody he heard union soldiers singing about - John Brown’s body.  She is also known as one who called for the first celebration of Mother’s Day – not as a day to honor mothers – but as a time for mothers to come together to protest their sons being sent into needless wars.  But I want to share about the Julia Ward Howe that I see as the yearning feminist – hoping for a better day for herself and other women. 

Julia was born into a family of prominence in New York.  Her mother died when she was just five years old, and she came to be under the very strict constraints of her father.  While her brothers went to school, Julia learned at home and became a gifted writer and poet.  Her father kept a tight reign on her for he was very religious and thought women should be raised to be good wives – seen and not heard, etc. He died when Julia was 20 – and for a while, she retreated even further and became more religious and separated from society.  However, Julia did fall in love with and married another prominent man.  Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe had made a name for himself by doing work with deaf children. He admired Julia’s money more than he did her poetry – and was adamant that she not share her talent.  Her husband once wrote these words to her – that some might see as loving.  “I give you fair warning; I shall not help you out of the cocoon state at all, you are a sweet, pretty, little mortal & shall not be immortal if I can help it, this many a long year. I suppose you think you would look very beautiful emerging from the chrysalis state & I should be proud to see a pair of wings sprouting out from your white shoulders...but no such thing & I advise you not to show even a feather, for I shall unmercifully cut them off, to keep you prisoner in my arms, my own dear earthly wife, who is to go forth with me through this pleasant world.”

Though they worked hard to display a happy marriage, Julia’s letters and poetry portray a different story.  A colleague who studied these letters wrote:

“Julia's letters throughout her marriage reveal anger, bitterness, fear and guilt. She wanted to convince others and herself that she was happy, but she and (her husband) were caught in a constant cycle of argument, frustration, and misunderstanding. She wrote in one letter that men are foolish who ‘think a woman's happiness is ensured, when she becomes tied for life to one of them-God knows one's wedding day may be worse than the day of one's death-one's husband may prove anything but a comfort and support.’”

They did separate for a year – though this was a secret from most – and her husband indicated he would happily grant her a divorce, but he demanded that his two favorite children remain with him.  Julia did not agree to that demand, and they reconciled.  Before his death, she published a book of her poetry under another name – but it was easy for him and others to figure out that she was the author – and he became furious.  Julia once wrote to her sister, “My voice is frozen to silence, my poetry chained down by an icy bond of indifference.”

Sometimes, freedom comes with a death.  Julia’s husband was 18 years older and died in 1876.  The following day, Julia wrote in her journal, “My new life begins today.”  And, indeed, it did.  Julia became a prominent poet, author, abolitionist and suffragette.  And – she preached regularly at Unitarian and Universalist churches.  She traveled widely and shared her message of freedom for all. 

In preparation for a sermon about her many years ago, I read a novel by Julia Ward Howe that wasn’t published till 2004!  It was called The Hermaphrodite.  Do not let the old-fashioned terminology prevent you from reading this.  As she explored what we would now term the fluidity of gender and sexuality, I was amazed that I was reading this very compassionate – and yes – passionate novel written by a prominent woman from that time period. 

Julia Ward Howe yearned to be free and used her freedom to promote freedom for others.  She lived to be an old woman – a liberal and liberating crone.  And that “old bird” (as her brothers called her) is still teaching me. 

Clara Barton was a Universalist – best known, of course, as the founder of the American Red Cross.  Because of that – many folks think of her as a nurse, but she had no formal nursing training.  Barton did learn many nursing skills when she was young as the main caregiver for her brother David, who had sustained a severe head injury after falling off the roof of the family barn. Yet, Clara did not go for nursing training as an adult.  It seems that her father employed a phrenologist to examine Clara’s skull – and the bumps I suppose on her head led the phrenologist to determine that she should be a teacher, though she was painfully shy. 

She began her teaching career at the age of 18 and founded a school at her brother’s mill for the children of the workers at age 24.  She established the first free school in Bordentown, New Jersey in 1852, but resigned when she discovered that the school had hired a man at twice her salary, saying she would never work for less than a man.

In Washington, DC, she interviewed for the job of a patent clerk and got it – becoming the first woman to have such a job and she was paid the same salary – $1400 a year – not bad for back then – as the male clerks.  But then a new Secretary of the Interior who was opposed to women working demoted her to a copyist at a lower salary. 

When the Civil War broke out, she quit her job so that she could support the Union war effort.  She didn’t want to do it from behind the scenes though and begged to be sent to the fields.  And, indeed, she was on those battlefields using her nursing and caring skills throughout the war, earning her the nickname, “angel of the battlefield.” 

All of this work during the war took its toll on Barton’s health – so she went to Europe for “the cure.”  But it was not long before she was doing the same kind of nursing work there.  While in Switzerland, she learned of the International Red Cross.  After learning all she could from them, she was determined to return to America to begin an affiliated organization.  She had a hard time getting it going – but finally on May 21, 1881, the American Association of the Red Cross was formed; Barton was elected president in June. In 1882, the US joined the International Red Cross. Though her health problems continued, she remained with the Red Cross till 1904.  During this time, she also became a big supporter of the women’s suffrage movement.  This excerpt from a letter to her friend Frances Gage, written in 1870, reminds me of some of the arguments women have continually had to hear regarding their rights.  She wrote: “Woman should certainly have some voice in the matter of war, either affirmative or negative and the fact that she has not this should not be made the ground on which to deprive her of other privileges. She shan't say there shall be no war—and she shan't take any part in it when there is one, and because she don't take part in war, she must not vote, and because she can't vote, she has no voice in her government, and because she has no voice in her government, she isn't a citizen, and because she isn't a citizen, she has no rights, and because she has no rights, she must submit to wrongs, and because she submits to wrongs, she isn't anybody, and ‘what does she know about war—' and because she don't know anything about it, she mustn't say or do anything about it."

I hear you sister – and thank you for your determination.

Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was blessed to be born to free parents in Baltimore in 1825. She held dual membership in Unitarian and African Methodist Episcopal churches in Philadelphia and believed the struggles for black Americans and women of all races were connected. Her works were largely forgotten until scholars and Unitarian Universalists resurrected her legacy.

Before her marriage, she was active on the lecture circuit – speaking on abolition and on women’s suffrage.  Some of her writing seemed to be of great interest to middle class white women, while she also wrote protest literature in the black liberation tradition. 

She dropped away from the lecture circuit and decreased her writing when she married Fenton Harper in 1860.  He was a widower with three children, and they had another child together.  Now I did not read the kinds of negative things about Fenton Harper that I read about Julia Ward Howe’s husband, but it is interesting that both women became more active in their writing and speaking after their husbands died.  Fenton Harper died just four years after their marriage, and that is when Francis EW Harper returned to the lecture circuit. 

You’ve heard the phrase – “Progress sometimes comes in a hearse.”  Well, it seems that for some women, freedom comes in a hearse.

In May 1866 Francis EW Harper delivered an address to the National Woman’s Rights Convention in New York, saying before thousands, “Justice is not fulfilled so long as woman is unequal before the law. We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul.”

Harper’s works are still being read and lifted up by feminists, scholars, and of course, Unitarian Universalists. 

My friend Dr. Leon Spencer shared with me that he attended with other Black UUs the dedication of a new grave marker for Harper in 1992.  Here is the quote written by Harper that is on it: “I ask no monument proud and high, to arrest the gaze of the passers by; all that my yearning spirit craves, is bury me not in the land of slaves.”

Dr. Spencer told me there were two reasons for them creating and giving a new gravestone – 1st, the old one was unreadable – as happens with time, and 2nd, they wanted to let folks know that she was a Unitarian! 

Here are two other quotes from Harper that are inspirational for us at this time and place.

"We want more soul, a higher cultivation of all spiritual faculties. We need more unselfishness, earnestness, and integrity. We need men and women whose hearts are the homes of high and lofty enthusiasm and a noble devotion to the cause of emancipation, who are ready and willing to lay time, talent, and money on the altar of universal freedom."

 “There is light beyond the darkness, joy beyond the present pain . . . the shadows bear a promise of a brighter coming day.”

I am proud that we have women like this in our history.  None of them lived to see women get the vote – but they continued working for good into their old age. This is an inspiration for me.  Just as Nina Simone was able to change the lyrics --- and say she finally knew what it was like to be free, we need to persevere through these difficult times when freedoms and rights are being trampled. 

Sometimes, we do not know what to do. What choices should we make in this struggle?  But that does not mean that we should do nothing.  So, I want to close with words – not from a UU woman in our history – but to let you know we UU women are still writing and preaching and trying to make a difference - I want to share an excerpt from a poem by a living UU woman and colleague whose poetry gives me constant encouragement – Lynn Ungar.  Here is what she says about choices we must make:

Every choice will

wound someone, heal someone,

build a wall and open a conversation.

Things will always happen

that you can’t foresee.

But you have to choose.

It’s all we have—that little rudder

that we employ in the midst

of all the eddies and rapids,

the current that pulls us

inexorably toward the sea.

The fact that you are swept along

by the river is no excuse.

Watch where you are going.

Lean in toward what you love.

When in doubt, tell the truth.

 

May it be so- beloveds!