Beppers

Monday, September 1, 2025

Back to School Banned Book Story Time 2025

Welcome Back boys and girls and non binary

friends across the gender spectrum to the second

year of our Banned Book Story Time.

Unfortunately like most sequels,

the banned book saga has grown and expanded its reach

across the country. So let’s dive in.

We are here today, to talk about Banned Books,

but more importantly, we are here to celebrate the diverse

and imaginative stories and authors who create these books.

At UUCB we partner with Foundation 451, who helped us

create our Little Free Library out front.

We are part of a network of locations in Brevard county

that help people, and especially kids, have access to these books.

We want everyone to be able to read stories they can identify

with, and to learn about the stories of others.

Florida has set the blueprint for banning books

with several pieces of legislation, but we are not the only ones.

Instances of book bans are most prevalent

in Florida and Iowa, followed by Texas, Missouri,

Utah, and South Carolina.

PEN America defines a school book ban as any action

taken against a book based on its content…that leads

to a previously accessible book being either

completely removed from availability to students,

or where access to a book is restricted

or diminished.

So even when a book is not banned, the content can

be restricted due to overreaching policies and those

restrictions have gone national, with 3 letters

D-E-I. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.

Let’s break it down.

Diversity:

This refers to the representation of different individuals within a

group or organization. It includes aspects like race, ethnicity,

gender, sexual orientation, religion,

and socioeconomic background.

Equity:
Unlike equality, which provides the same resources to everyone,

equity recognizes that individuals may need different levels

of support to reach the same outcome.

It's about removing barriers and providing targeted

support to those who need it most.

Inclusion:
This is about actively creating a culture where everyone feels

a sense of belonging and can contribute their unique perspectives.

Inclusion goes beyond simply having

diverse representation; it involves ensuring that everyone feels

welcomed, respected, and valued.

DEI initiatives are often implemented to address historical and

systemic inequalities and create more equitable and inclusive

environments in workplaces and communities.

Sounds great, so what’s the problem?

On January 20, 2025, the current President issued an

executive order entitled

“Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing” -

which states the Office of Personnel Management shall

coordinate the termination of all

discriminatory programs, including what they call “illegal DEI”.

So once again a vague policy can remove content

without actually banning the book.

Last year we featured two great children’s books.

The first one was Hair Love by Matthew A. Cherry,

which is the story of a dad and daughter and how they

learn together to do her natural hair which as zuri says

has a mind of its own.

While not usually banned, it is avoided because it can start a

conversation about race through differences in types of hair.

And by Pen America’s definition,

if the content is not allowed, the book is essentially banned.

The second book we featured last year was

And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell.

This is the story of two male penguins at the Central

Park Zoo who adopt “Tango” and raise him from an egg.

It is based on a true story, and is one of the

most consistently banned books in the country, simply because

it portrays two parents of the same sex.

LGGTQ books in Florida, are routinely banned through

H.B. 1557, the 2022 The legislation, called the Parental

Rights in Education law, that opponents

have dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law.

It prohibited teachers from discussing sexual orientation

and gender identity in the classroom.

Also they use

HB 1069, 2023 legislation defining biological “sex”

that limits material that depicts or describes

sexual conduct from schools.

This year, the first book we are reading is

I Am Jazz by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings.

This is the story of a transgender child based on

the real-life experience of Jazz Jennings.

This book is often banned for many of the same reasons listed above.

Often citing discomfort with the story of a transgender child,

stating it is against people’s

beliefs or that the book is not appropriate for young children.

If a parent has an issue, in most schools they can limit

access to a book for their child, the problem is when they

try to restrict it for everyone, and more

and more content is being suppressed, either by

parent challenges or legislation both at the state

and national levels.

We want all young people, especially those who have

felt marginalized, to be seen, heard, and represented.

And that is why our partnership here at UUCB

is so important for our community. So in that spirit

let us read our first book.

I Am Jazz by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings.

(Read I am Jazz)

Now our second book is banned not just for what is in the book,

but what it makes us feel. The 1619 Project: Born on the Water,

by Nikole Hannah-Jones and Renee Watson,

a children's book stemming from The 1619 Project.

Both books are often targeted for

discussing the history of slavery in this country, and the

discomfort that can cause.

Race, along with gender and sexuality, are common reasons

books are removed.

The law in Florida most often used to ban books related to race is

HB7, known to many as the Stop W.O.K.E. act

and officially called the Individual Freedom Act.

Among other things, it prevents teachers from discussing

advantages or disadvantages based on race.

So here’s some more letters that have a big impact

C-R-T. Critical Race Theory. Let’s discuss what Critical

Race Theory or “woke” is, and what it is not.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a legal academic framework

that examines how race and racism have shaped American

laws, institutions, and society. It says

racism is not just individual bias, but is systemic and

embedded in legal systems and policies.

CRT originated in the 1970s and 80s among legal scholars

who felt that the progress of the Civil Rights Movement was

insufficient in addressing racial inequality.

While history is taught in public schools, CRT specifically is not.

"Woke" originated as a call for Black Americans to be

aware of racial injustice, but has been weaponized by

white politicians in recent years and culturally appropriated.

These are often catch all terms for any discussion of race,

racism, diversity initiatives, progressive or social justice-related ideas,

or inclusive education.

The ideas of systematic racism can also be found in works

like the 1619 project which talks about the larger and far

reaching impacts of slavery and systemic

racism in American society.

In another executive order, the current President issued

Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling on January 29, 2025,

specifically targeting what

he considered CRT, as well as gender identity.

It states innocent children are compelled to adopt identities as

either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color

and other immutable characteristics.

In other words, we want to make history and reality “comfortable”.

Well that’s not how education or history works and

that’s not how we grow and learn.

We as UU’s love a good conversation, and our beliefs are

diverse and inclusive. We should welcome learning about

each other, even when it’s uncomfortable.

Now we are going to read our second book,

The 1619 Project: Born on the Water,

by Nikole Hannah-Jones and Renee Watson.

And I will be honest, it is a difficult read, even for a

children’s book. It tackles a big topic, the history of

slavery in the Americas,

as told through a grandmother’s eyes.

When the class is asked to trace their family tree, Grandma

teaches them their history through slavery and beyond

to their roots in Africa and their perseverance

today as a people born on the water.

You, like me, may feel a lot of emotions while hearing this book.

Anger, guilt, sadness and many others. And those of us like me

with white European ancestry

may feel uncomfortable.

But it’s OK to learn about things that make us uncomfortable,

in fact it’s important to learn about and share these stories.

History is important and people’s

stories are important, even the uncomfortable ones.

(Read Born on the Water)

So, what can we do to keep access for everyone?

First we can help inform others about banned books,
and the importance of having access to diverse stories.

You can support people providing access to these
books like Foundation 451, who has a network of
libraries at churches, and local shops.

You can build a little free library in your yard or a
place of business and stock it with a variety of books.

You can attend board meetings, sign up to speak
and share information online.

And you can vote, and support those who
support access to books.

We here at UUCB believe in the mission of the Little Free Library,

which is to build community, by inspiring readers

and expanding book access around the world.

And the mission of our other partner, Foundation 451

is to get banned and challenged books directly into the

hands of students, to heighten awareness

of the need for a plurality of ideas,

and to build a society that truly honors freedom, justice,

and inclusivity.

Remember to share those voices you have heard today,

help us to create spaces where we can learn about one another,

stretch beyond our comfort zones and Read Banned Books together.

Thank you.

SIMPLE SONGS FOR THE MOVEMENT

8 24 25 SIMPLE SONGS FOR THE MOVEMENT
From our Service on the Separation of Church and State

Songs:
We Rise by Batya Levine
#1007, There’s a River Flowin’ in My Soul
Somebody's hurting my (people) by Yara Allen
Solid as a rock, rooted like a tree by Elandria "E" Williams

Prelude: We Rise by Batya Levine
We rise - humbly hearted
Rise - won’t be divided
Rise - with spirit to guide us
Rise!

In hope, in prayer,
we find ourselves here
In hope, in prayer,
we’re right here (repeat)

Reflection: #1007, There’s a River Flowin’ in My Soul
There’s a river flowin’ in my soul.
There’s a river flowin’ in my soul.
And it’s tellin’ me
that I’m somebody.
There’s a river flowin’ in my soul.

Offertory: Somebody's hurting my (people) by Yara Allen
Somebody's hurting my people
& it’s gone on far too long
Gone on far too long,
gone on far too long
Somebody's hurting my people
& it’s gone on far too long
And we won’t be silent anymore

Postlude: Solid as a rock, rooted like a tree by Elandria "E" Williams
Solid as a rock, (Solid as a rock)
Rooted like a tree, (Rooted like a tree)
I am here, (I am here)
Rising strong, (Rising strong)
In my rightful place (In my rightful place)

What UU Should Know about the Johnson Amendment

slides

What UU Should Know about the Johnson Amendment
(slide 1)

OK, so let’s talk about politics, about non profits,

about that fundamental principle of the separation

of church and state and what something called the

Johnson Amendment has to do with any of it.

This has been in the news recently, and you probably

missed it, well, because there’s a lot more “news”

going on. But it’s important to know, so

we are going to share with you today what “UU”

should know, about real rules of engagement

with social action and politics.

Let’s dive right in.

First, let’s talk about the separation of church and state.
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/establishment-clause-separation-of-church-and-state/
(slide 2)
This concept of the separation of church and state,

goes back to 1791,

when we ratified the bill of rights

The First Amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging

the freedom of speech, or of the press;

or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to

petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Though not explicitly stated in the First Amendment,

the clause is often interpreted to mean that the

Constitution requires the separation of church and state.

Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island used the metaphor

of “a wall or hedge of separation” between the

“wilderness of the world” and “the garden

of the church. Williams believed that any government

involvement in the church would corrupt the church.

He was banished for preaching ideas of religious freedom.

He helped establish in Providence a government with

limited power that only addressed civil matters.

This was a revolutionary concept in a time when many governments

were established with divine

rights to rule and was influential in establishing the democratic

governance of our new country.

(slide 3)

This brings me to one of my favorite stories, the Cheshire

Mammoth Cheese Wheel. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison

of Virginia fought against state support

and taxation of the Anglican Church, which had long been

established in the colony. They argued that

compelling citizens to support through taxation a faith they

did not follow violated their natural

right to religious liberty.

They were supported by other denominations, like the Baptists,

Presbyterians, and Quakers. Which helped support the addition

of religious liberty in the bill of rights.

https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/mammoth-cheese/
https://npg.si.edu/blog/big-cheese-presidential-gifts-mammoth-proportions

In 1802, In appreciation of his support of religious liberty,

the Baptists of Cheshire Massachusetts made a

“mammoth cheese wheel”. Made by free born farmers,

their wives and daughters, It has the milk

of the 900 cows in the county.

It was formed in a 6ft cider press, and had engraved on it

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God”.

(Jefferson’s personal motto). It weighed 1235 lbs and

was delivered in a wagon drawn by 6 horses.

Jefferson by policy refused gifts while in office, so he

paid the Baptists $200 for the wheel. Fun fact,

(with their recent discovery in the new world),

this marks the first recorded use of the word “Mammoth”

to describe something large.

A local newspaper joked that bakers in New York were

now creating an oven to make a giant loaf of bread and

glass blowers were making a giant wine bottle

for a fine American porter. It remained at the residence

for several years, deteriorating in quality until it

was reportedly dumped in the Potomac river some time after 1805.

(slide 4)

So we’ve established that the first amendment is interpreted

to mean that the Constitution requires the separation

of church and state. But as we know, over time

these laws require interpretations by the courts.

So this brings us to post World War II America,

and Public School Religious Education.

A couple of noteworthy cases for the interpretation

of this clause include
Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

A New Jersey statute gave school boards the authority

to reimburse parents for the cost of busing their children

to private schools, including Catholic and other

parochial schools. Everson, a taxpayer, challenged this

law as an impermissible expenditure under

the establishment clause.

The Supreme Court ruled as constitutional because it did

not breach the “wall of separation” between church and state —

and held that the establishment clause

of the First Amendment applied to state and local

governments as well as to the federal government.

Justice Hugo L. Black stated
“New Jersey cannot . . . exclude individual[s] . . .

because of their faith, or lack of it, from receiving the

benefits of public welfare legislation.”

Another pivotal case you may know as “The Lemon Test”
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/lemon-test/
In Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) - the court

established a three-pronged test.
It must have “a secular legislative purpose,”

it must have principal effects that neither advance nor inhibit religion,

and it must not foster “an excessive government

entanglement with religion.”
This was abandoned in 2022 and is currently

interpreting the establishment clause “by ‘

reference to historical practices and understandings.’”
Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022)
upholding the right of a public school football coach

to offer a prayer on the 50-yard line after a game.
This was established on the principle that neither

teachers nor students shed their First Amendment

rights at the schoolhouse gate

So we see just a couple examples here of how

the separation clause has been interpreted differently over time.
https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/church_state_historical.htm

(slide 5)
This brings us to The Johnson Amendment. Now as I said earlier,

this has been in the news recently, because of

recent changes of interpretation of this law.
The relationship between church and state is complicated,

and you have probably heard people say that non profit

and church organizations must be “non partisan”

or not engage in politics.
This is the Amendment that establishes those rules

and as you have seen from the previous cases,

it is open to interpretation. So let's get into it.
First, what is the Johnson Amendment?
The Johnson Amendment is a provision in the U.S. tax code,

since 1954, that prohibits all 501(c)(3) non-profit

organizations from endorsing or opposing

political candidates. ranging from charitable

foundations to universities and churches.
The amendment is named for then-Senator and future

president Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, who introduced

it in a preliminary draft of the law in July 1954.
Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity

by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization

as one "which does not participate in,

or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing

of statements), any political campaign

on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."

Churches and other 501(c)(3) organizations can engage

in a limited amount of lobbying (including ballot measures)

and advocate for or against issues that are in the political arena.

The IRS also has provided guidance regarding the difference between

advocating for a candidate and advocating for legislation.
(in simple terms - Issues not Parties)
https://afj.org/article/fact-check-president-trump-has-not-repealed-the-johnson-amendment/

(slide 6)
So What Changed (and what did not):
What changed:
May 2017 Executive Order: Trump signed an executive order

directing the Treasury Department to avoid penalizing

religious organizations for engaging in speech

about "moral or political issues from a religious perspective".
In a July 7, 2025, court filing, the IRS carved out a significant

new exception to the Johnson Amendment, saying churches

are allowed to endorse political

candidates in their "usual channels of communication"

with no tax-related consequences
Religious services, concerning electoral politics viewed

through the lens of religious faith, it neither ‘participate[s]

’ nor ‘intervene[s]’ in a ‘political campaign,’

within the ordinary meaning of those words,” the filing said.
The filing was part of a joint motion by the IRS, the

National Religious Broadcasters, and two Texas churches,

to settle a lawsuit through a consent judgment.

What Did Not Change:
Repealing the Johnson Amendment would either require

an act of Congress or the Supreme Court ruling that the

law is unconstitutional. Neither of these

possibilities have occurred, so the law remains in place.
IRS does not have the authority to repeal legislation

like the Johnson Amendment through a consent judgment.

Therefore, no changes to IRS policies or the laws

governing political activity for nonprofits have

been finalized or fully enacted.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/30/us/johnson-amendment-church-free-speech.html
(slide 7)
Who Advocated for this Change?
Starting in 2008, a group now called the Alliance Defending Freedom,

which worked in recent years to help

overturn Roe v. Wade, tried to manufacture a

court challenge to the constitutionality of the law.

The group organized pastors to speak about candidates

and elections from the pulpit, a plan intended to provoke

the I.R.S. into a legal confrontation with

churches for speaking out in violation of their tax-exempt status.

Among the advocates of that plan was Mike Johnson,

then a conservative lawyer and now the speaker of the House.
“I think we would defend that as a constitutional right

to free speech,” Mr. Johnson, said in 2008 about the effort.

Over four years, the group organized some 4,000 pastors

in the campaign, including some who sent their sermons to

the I.R.S., inviting a crackdown.
https://sidewithlove.org/ourstories/2025/7/15/side-with-love-denounces-irs-undermining-of-the-johnson-amendment
https://www.uua.org/pressroom/press-releases/irs-response-religious-pluralism
(slide 8)
UUA and Side With Love - Response
Our Sacred Duty is to Protect Democracy and Religious Pluralism

Affirms Commitment to Separation of Church and State

Our faith has a long history of faithful statements and resolutions

that unequivocally support the separation of church and state.

As such, we are deeply concerned

by the IRS’s actions which would further erode this fundamental

principle and democracy itself.
The UUA maintains adherence to this principle and calls on all

people of faith and conscience to uphold this cornerstone of democracy.
Our shared values of pluralism and interdependence mean

that a multiplicity of religious voices must thrive for our

nation to remain on solid ground.
As we face a rising tide of authoritarianism and the infiltration

of white Christian nationalism into government and public policy,

now is the time to re-assert these values.

We understand that religious institutions and congregations play

a role in shaping and advocating for the values and principles of our members –

values that will in turn

shape the public square, the democratic processes that UUs hold sacred,

and the public morality

that helps guide this nation.
We believe these are appropriate roles for UU congregations –

and all religious organizations – to play. What is not appropriate

is for religious leaders to use the

authority invested in their status to endorse political candidates.
To do so becomes a corruption of the religious leaders’

role and, in fact, harms our ability to help guide the people

who turn to us for guidance and support.
(slide 9)
UUA has some great resources on how to be

“Prophetic, Not Partisan,”
If you really want to dive into what you can and can’t

or should and shouldn’t do, the “The Real Rules” —

is a handy guidebook on appropriate political activity

and justice organizing.

It details out almost every scenario you can think of

so when you ask Can I do that?

It has an answer.

But here are the basics broken down into a list.
WHAT’S ALLOWED FOR 501(C)3 ORGANIZATIONS
The UUA, UU congregations and organizations can:
Engage in issue advocacy and organizing for justice
Conduct voter education
Voter access through voter registration
Get Out the Vote drives
Combat voter suppression
Support or oppose ballot initiatives
Educate candidates on issues
Sponsor candidate forums
Prepare and distribute non-partisan voter guides
Lobby elected officials
Host a variety of activities at our congregations
The UUA, UU congregations and organizations cannot:
Have advocacy as their only activity
Endorse or oppose candidates running for elected office
Intervene in campaigns to influence the outcome of an election

Progressive people of faith can be powerful and prophetic

without being partisan.
We can engage our neighbors, educate our communities,

mobilize voters, rally around ballot initiatives, and shape

the public discourse with values-based framing,

rooted in our theology and principles.
Electoral cycles offer heightened opportunities to engage

and inspire people, mobilize around key issues, and to

strengthen democracy, and win real advances

on key issues on the ballot.

(slide 10)
https://sidewithlove.org/actioncenter
Side with Love
is our UUA Action center and here are some examples

of the way the UUA encourages us to engage with these political issues.

How do we Side With Love? (sidewithlove.org/)

Our intersectional justice priorities are:
Climate Justice (inclusive of Indigenous sovereignty and Climate

Resilience) with Create Climate Justice
Democracy and Electoral Justice (inclusive of Voting Rights and

electoral participation) with UU the Vote
Decriminalization (inclusive of Racial Justice and Immigration Justice)

with Side With Love
LGBTQIA+ and Gender Justice (inclusive of reproductive justice

and abortion access) with UPLIFT Action

The work that we do together to build a world in which all of us are

free and thriving is interrelated. When we ground our spirits,

grow our skills, and act strategically

for justice in deep relationship with each other and our Movements,

we choose to Side With Love.
Action Center is a place where we unite in work towards a world

where we all thrive. Together we take action, Side With Love,

and make deep impacts in this critical moment.

(slide 11)
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-share-your-rights
Now to protect yourself while engaging on these issues,

here are some basics from the ACLU. There is a short

and a longer version on your screen, and

these can all be found at ACLU.org

Know Your Protest Rights:
You don’t need a permit to protest in streets or on sidewalks

if you’re not obstructing traffic or access to buildings.
You have the right to photograph anything in plain view,

including police.
If stopped by the police, ask if you’re free to go.

If yes, calmly walk away.
If arrested, ask for a lawyer immediately.

Don’t sign, say or agree to anything without a lawyer present.

(slide 12)
https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/trends-and-policy-issues/protecting-johnson-amendment-and-nonprofit-nonpartisanship
And finally, why does this matter? Here’s some thoughts

from the council for non profits.
Our society is better today because charitable nonprofit

organizations operate as safe havens from the caustic

partisanship that is bedeviling our country, places

where people can come together to solve community problems.
Repeal or revision of the law would damage the integrity and

effectiveness of all charitable nonprofits and foundations.
Attempts to repeal or weaken the Johnson Amendment would

have the effect of politicizing and thereby erasing the public’s

high trust in charities, houses of worship,

and foundations to benefit politicians and paid political consultants.

And there is plenty of Support
The majority of organizations support keeping the Johnson

Amendment and protecting nonprofit nonpartisanship,

as reflected in the Community Letter in Support

of Nonpartisanship, signed by more than 5,800 organizations in all 50 states,
in the Faith Voices letter signed by more than 4,300 faith leaders,

in the separate letter signed by more than 100 denominations

and major religious organizations,

and in letters from the law enforcement community.
In addition, polls show that 72% of the public support

keeping the Johnson Amendment in place and nearly

90% of evangelical leaders say it is wrong for

preachers to endorse candidates from the pulpit.

So, the short answer, can we talk about politics from the pulpit?

It’s complicated. Will someone stop us, probably not.

But should we mix our political parties

and our religious freedom? In the spirit of

Thomas Jefferson and those cheese loving Baptists,

I would uphold our values of religious freedom

and keep that a wall or hedge of separation” between the

“wilderness of the world” and “the garden of the church.
(slide 13) Thank you. Any questions.

Sunday, July 6, 2025

Back to Baltimore - 200 years of the American Unitarian Association

By Beth Anz

Thanks to uua.org and uuworld.org and other sources for all this information and credit to all their authors.

https://www.uuworld.org/articles/baltimore-william-ellery-channing-sermon-unitarian-universalism-history-general-assembly

https://www.uua.org/beliefs/who-we-are/history/aua-200th-anniversary

Beth Anz is the Director and Service Leader at UUCB. She enjoys juggling her many hats.

This year’s UU GA (General Assembly) happened in the

great city of Baltimore to celebrate the 200th anniversary

of the American Unitarian Association.

It is in Baltimore where we American Unitarians trace

our origins from the famed “Baltimore Sermon” of

William Ellery Channing which led to the formation of the AUA.

But before we dive into the American Unitarian “mic drop”of its time,

let’s go back in time, and start with the basics.

First thanks to uua.org and uuworld.org and other sources

for all this information and credit to all their authors.

You may already know that we as Unitarian Universalists

come from two distinct religious traditions, the Unitarians

and the Universalists. Here is a very condensed history

of how we started and became Unitarian Universalists.

Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religious tradition formed
in the consolidation of these two traditions. In America,
the Universalist Church of America was founded in 1793,
and the American Unitarian Association (AUA) in 1825.
In May 2025, we celebrated the 200th anniversary
of the founding of the AUA.

First a simplified overview of our other tradition,
Universalism, which is defined by a belief in universal
salvation (that we are all worthy and all saved by God).
Universalists believe that the God of love would
not create a person knowing that person would be
destined for eternal damnation.

They concluded that all people must be destined
for salvation. This was a reaction to some
beliefs of the time that humans were
inherently sinful and damned.
Unitarians rejected the idea that our
lives are already predestined and that a
loving god would cause eternal damnation.
They believed that everyone would eventually
be saved as a loving God shows mercy and compassion
(and so should we).

Our other legacy tradition, Unitarianism,
which we are talking about today, traditionally
focuses on reason, social justice, and personal experience.
Jesus as a (possibly) divinely inspired teacher
to humanity, is shown as an example for his life
and good deeds more than his divinity and resurrection.
Good examples of Unitarian worldviews
include A Christmas Carol and Little Women.

Unitarian Universalism later named direct experience
as an important Source of religious and spiritual
understanding, an idea that originated with
nineteenth-century Transcendentalism and Universalism.
Unitarians explored the religious meaning of the
experiences of their lives through sharing of personal
stories and reflection, often in small groups,
just as we do in service today.

These two American traditions merged in 1961
to create a new religion "Unitarian Universalism"
that took aspects of both faiths.
We believe as a living tradition that
we should review our guiding values frequently
(which we did just last year),
so that we continue to grow and evolve with
a changing world. One of the taglines of the UU
faith is "deeds not creeds".

We talk to each other about how to live our
values in the world and encourage a freedom
of religious thought.

Both religions have long histories and have
contributed important theological concepts
that remain central to Unitarian Universalism.
Since 1961, Unitarian Universalism has nurtured
its Unitarian and Universalist heritages to
provide a strong voice for social justice
and liberal religion. In fact, Unitarians were
known as the “liberal church” before Channing
owned his critic’s insult and claimed the word
“Unitarian” for this liberal faith.

The UU commitment to building Beloved Community
has roots on both the Unitarian and Universalist
sides of our tradition.

Beginning with the 1648 Cambridge Platform
signed by English settlers in Dedham, Massachusetts,
our self-governing congregations have gathered
in the spirit of mutual love. In the late nineteenth
century, Universalism’s core message that all
are saved through God’s love had expanded to
embrace the idea that the kingdom of Heaven
is reflected in love for one another.

Both Universalists and Unitarians were involved
in the Social Gospel movement, in which Christianity
is practiced by serving those on the margins of society.
Today’s UUs build community within congregations and
also work for the liberation of all people.

So when do we get to Baltimore?

Six years before the AUA was chartered, the
Rev. William Ellery Channing turned the term "Unitarian,"
until then used pejoratively by religious
conservatives in New England, on its head,
and as we would say today, it went viral.

His sermon “Unitarian Christianity,”
given at First Unitarian Church of Baltimore,
MD in May of 1819, used the word to name a
liberal faith that rejected the commanding
trinitarian God of Calvinism in favor of
an understanding of Jesus as human, not God,
among many other radical and deeply influential
ideas and embracing the name Unitarian.

It was the mic drop of its time.
And it brought together a movement.

In the ninety minutes of what’s commonly
called the “Baltimore Sermon,” Channing
laid out tenets of the new faith:
the unity of God in contrast to the idea
of a Trinity; the use of reason in
understanding religion and interpreting
the Bible; a concept of Jesus as human
rather than human and divine; a rejection
of Calvinism’s idea of depraved humanity
where salvation was reserved for a select few.

Channing preached about a benevolent,
loving God who had endowed humanity with
innate goodness, rationality, and the wisdom
to discern between good and evil.

In the hour-and-a-half-long address,
Channing took on several arguments.
First, he established reason as valid and
necessary for the interpretation of
scripture—not as the only basis for religious
belief, but as an aid to revelation, for reading
and understanding the meaning of the Bible.

He said “Our leading principle in interpreting Scripture
is this, that the Bible is a book written for men,
in the language of men, and that its meaning is to
be sought in the same manner as that of other books...
With these views of the Bible, we feel it our
bounden duty to exercise our reason upon
it perpetually; to compare, to infer,
to look beyond the letter to the spirit.”

Next, he laid out four reason-based conclusions
of Unitarian Christians. He began with the
unity of God, as opposed to the doctrine of
the Trinity. Next, he postulated Christ as
fully human, as opposed to having two natures,
human and divine. Then he spoke of the moral
perfection of God, which negated such doctrines
as Original Sin and the eternal suffering of
some while others were elected to salvation.

Finally, he talked about the purpose of Jesus'
mission on earth. He rejected the idea that Jesus'
death atoned for human sin, allowing God to forgive
humanity. Channing admitted Unitarians differed
on Jesus' role in human salvation. Some, he said,
saw Jesus' life as a moral example. Others
understood Jesus' death leading humans to
repentance and virtue.

Yet, he said, Unitarians did not consider Christ
and his death as a blood atonement for human sin.
Christian virtue had its foundation in the moral
nature or conscience of humans, defined by love of God,
love of Christ, and moral living.

The wealthy men who a year earlier had established
what’s now called First Unitarian Church of
Baltimore knew exactly what they were doing when
they invited Channing to preach at the ordination
of its first minister, Rev. Jared Sparks.
They made sure Channing’s seminal message would
reach as many people as possible, inviting many
leading liberal clergy and arranging for the
sermon to be quickly printed and disseminated
around the country and in Europe.

He was a sensation, drawing large crowds
and creating buzz. So much so, that six years
later, it led to the formation of the
American Unitarian Association.

On May 25, 1825, the idea of creating the
American Unitarian Association was presented
to the Berry Street Conference. The next day,
May 26th, the AUA was officially formed with
the approval of bylaws. (In a fine coincidence,
the British and Foreign Unitarian Association
was also formed on May 25, 1825!)

In the beginning, only individuals could join the AUA.
In fact, William Ellery Channing was asked to serve as
the AUA’s first President — and Channing refused,
because he felt that by accruing power,
the institution would take power away from individuals.
American Unitarians also did not evangelize their faith
in the traditional ways, although they did share pamphlets
and print outs of sermons with others.
Which meant they only reached literate populations
and therefore grew mainly in cities and not in rural areas.

But the legacy of William Ellery Channing and
Unitarianism continues in our faith today.

In his second-most-famous sermon, “Likeness to God,”
Channing in 1838 argued that humans are made in
the image of God, which later led him to the idea
of the divine spark in each of us, Kirk explains.
That “later leads us to the inherent worth and
dignity of everyone”— one of the Seven Principles
of Unitarian Universalism that were adopted in
1984—which, in turn, “leads us to Love at the Center,”
a core tenet of the statement of UU Values
adopted at general assembly in 2024.

Early Unitarians like Channing helped to
shape our core values today, and ground us
in our values, especially when we see them
under attack in the world today.

The first principle adopted by the Unitarians
in 1887 was “We believe that to love the
Good and to live the Good is the supreme
thing in religion”.
Today we share that value with our statement a
dopted last year. “Love is the power that
holds us together and is at the center
of our shared values. We are accountable
to one another for doing the work of
living our shared values through the
spiritual discipline of Love.”

As we do the good work of this world,
let us remember our heritage and our
obligation to put love at the center
in all things. And in this timely quote,
from Channing The great hope of society
is in individual character.
May we remember his courage to live
his truth and so may we.