parker’s controversial theology by mark decourval

8/8/2019 Parkers Controversial Theology by Mark DeCourval

1/4

FIRST UNITARIAN CHURCH OF PHILADELPHIA

A UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST CONGREGATION

2125 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia PA 19103

Office (215) 563-3980 www.philauu.org Fax (215) 563-4209

PARKERSCONTROVERSIAL THEOLOGY

Delivered by Mark DeCourval on August 22, 2010

Reading

The Starfish Author Unknown

There was a young man walking down a deserted beach just before dawn. In thedistance he saw a frail old man. As he approached the old man, he saw him

picking up stranded starfish and throwing them back into the sea. The young mangazed in wonder as the old man again and again threw the starfish from the sand

into the water. He asked, Old man, why do you spend so much energy doingwhat seems to be a waste of time? The old man explained that the stranded

starfish would die if left in the morning sun. But there must be thousands ofbeaches and millions of starfish! explained the young man. Will any of this

make a difference? The old man looked at the starfish in his hand and as hethrew it into the safety of the water, replied It only has to make a difference for

this one.

Sermon

This month marks the 200th

birth anniversary of Theodore Parker who was born on

August 24, 1810 and died fifty years later on May 10, 1860. Now-a-days, he is cited as one ofthe prophets of Unitarianism along with William Ellery Channing and Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Today, with your indulgence, I would like to take a few minutes to explore the person ofTheodore Parker, some of his theology, what made him controversial, and what meaning it has

for us today.

The person of Theodore Parker: He was born in Lexington, Massachusetts, the youngest

son of a large farming family. He was educated privately until he went to Harvard College wherehe graduated in 1831. He considered a career in law but his strong faith led him to theology.

Accordingly, he then went on to Harvard Divinity School where he specialized in a study oftheology and languages. He graduated from there in 1836. He excelled in his studies and he

learned no less than twenty languages while there. However, Parker considered Harvard to be anembalming institution and found himself discarding much of the theology being taught there.

By graduation day, he had begun to have doubts about the miracles described in the bible and thevirgin birth of Christ. He was ordained in 1837 and almost immediately found himself involved

into the religious controversies that were boiling up in the Boston area. He was increasinglysympathetic to the leaders of the transcendental movement, especially Ralph Waldo Emerson. He

embraced their core belief of an ideal spiritual state that "transcends" the physical and empiricaland is realized only through the individual's intuition, rather than through the doctrines of

established religions. Like Emerson, he favored a religion that dispensed with creeds, rituals, andchurch polity and substituted the relation of the individual soul to the oversoul.


2/4

2

Parker, not only, accepted the transcending ideas without shadow of qualification but wasable to state them with concrete sharpness. An example is his word formula of a republican

government a government of the people, by the people, for the people which later influencedLincolns Gettysburg Address.

Parker was a preacher more than theologian, philosopher or scholar. He had a great gift

of language and the ability to employ resources of illustration from history, literature,biographies, theology, and nature. His emotions were genuine and deep ranging from humor totender tears. However, Parker was also guilty of personal injustice in holding individuals

answerable for their sins and for vices transmitted to others. He had little tolerance for injusticesafflicted onto the innocent.

Parker was said to be a person of favoring equity and this was attributed to his faith. Hisspiritual philosophy was one which affirmed the worth and dignity of all persons being that they

were children of God. He worked hard for social and political causes. In lectures and sermons hefought hard for the improvement of public education, prison reform, equal rights for women,

elimination of poverty conditions, and the abolishment of slavery. Regarding women, he stated:Woman I have always regarded as the equal of man entitled to the same rights as man and

only kept from the enjoyment of these by might not right. The deep struggle over slaveryhowever aroused his greatest efforts as well as his fiercest opposition. He wrote a scathing letter

To a Southern Slaveholder in 1848 where he stated that I think slave holding is a wrong initself, and therefore, a sin. He took an active part in attempts to rescue fugitive slaves from the

Massachusetts authorities, hid them in his home, and advocated violating the Fugitive Slave Lawof 1850.

Parkers ill health forced his retirement in 1859. He developed tuberculosis and departedfor Florence, Italy. Where he died in 1860, less than one year before the Union split. He had

sought refuge in Florence because of his friendship with Robert and Elizabeth Browning.

So perhaps you are wondering at this point so where is the controversial theology? So far

it seems that he was quite the acceptable minister. He affirmed the worth and dignity of allpersons, promoted a free and responsible search for truth, advocated justice, equity and

compassion in human relations and respected the interdependent web of all existence. It soundslike Parker was embracing, living, and promoting our current principles. Yes, with respect to our

current principles that is true but in the early and mid 1800s during Parkers time, Unitarianismwas more traditional and less liberal than it is today.

Unitarianism at this time held a theology that advanced that Jesus was less than God (notequal and not of part of a Trinity deity), but one that still accepted Jesus as the chosen prophet of

God, fully human, yet exalted above all the other prophets of God and accordingly considereditself still a Christian faith. This Unitarianism embraced the miracles and supernatural events of

Jesus that characterized his life and ministry as necessary evidence of Gods election of Jesus ashis chosen one. It also held that the Gospel was of divine authority founded on a special and

miraculous intervention of God for the redemption of mankind. As previously mentioned, asearly as Parkers graduation from Harvard Divinity School, he was already having doubts about

the validity of the miracles described in the bible and on resting his beliefs on the biblicaldoctrine. In 1839, only two years after his ordination, he delivered his infamous sermon entitled

The Transient and the Permanent Christianity at the ordination of Charles Shackford of theHawes Place Church in South Boston; wherein, he expressed his doubts and suggested that


3/4

3

Christianity could not be validated by miracles or by scriptural authority or even by the authorityof Jesus Christ.

He went on to say that if Christianity is true, its truth must be self evident, and would bejust as true if Jesus had never existed, or the message had been claimed elsewhere. The forms

and doctrines of Christianity, he insisted, are all transient. What is permanent is the word of God

expressed in each human heart, the word of God spoken through Conscience, Reason and Faithand that truth existed before Jesus, and after him and in all times and places.

I quote from his sermon. Christianity does not rest on the infallible authority of the New

Testament I cannot see where it depends on the personal authority of Jesus Jesus was anagent through which God spoke If Jesus of Nazareth had never lived, the truths of Christianity

would still stand firm If Christianity be true, we should think it was so; not because its recordwas written by infallible pens; nor because it was lived out by an infallible teacher but that it is

true, like the axioms of geometry, because they are true of their own accord If it rests on thepersonal authority of Jesus alone, there is no certainty of its truth

Parker had made it clear that Christianity was to be seen as one expression of eternal

truth; that the same truth found expression in other religions and was rooted in the human soul.Many of the more conservative in the audience were hurt and shocked by what he said. Severaltook notes and published their review of Parker asked whether he represented the thinking of the

denomination. They suggested that in all fairness, Unitarians should either disown the heresypreached by Parker or else make public that he did represent the position of the Unitarian

denomination. Stung by the suggestion that Parkers views were normative in the denomination,many ministers were eager to distance themselves from him. Some, calling him an unbeliever

and an atheist, refused to speak to him, shake his hand, or sit next to him in meetings, Most ofthe Boston ministers refused to exchange pulpits with him. Many of his friends doubted that he

could be considered a Christian anymore. In 1843, the Boston Association of CongregationalMinisters sought his resignation (he refused) and which could not be forced since under

congregation polity there was no way to remove him from ministry while he was supported byown congregation.

Bostons Unitarian leadership opposed him to the end, but the younger ministers admiredhim for his attacks on traditional ideas, his fight for a free faith and pulpit and his very public

stance on social issues such as the abolishment of slavery. They determined that he should stillbe heard and in 1846 organized the Twenty-Eighth Congregation Society, with Parker as its

settled minister. For years, Parker, rejected by his own denomination was one of the mostpopular and influential preachers in Boston.

He continued to insist that systems and doctrines were inconsequential, rejected the divinity ofJesus and advanced that reason should be used in bible interpretation. He was seen to have taken

the tools handed to him by a liberal tradition and used them against the tradition. It was so muchso that in 1853, the American Unitarian Association flirted with creedalism in adopting a

declaration affirming a belief in Jesus Christ as the everlasting Son of God. The statement wasfor the most part forgotten later in the century.

As controversial as was his theology, his stance of slavery was considered even more so.He was adamantly against slavery and would write sermons with a loaded pistol on his desk to

defend the runaway slaves that he was harboring and denounced the Constitution of the UnitedStates as a pact with the devil because of its position regarding slavery. In his journal entitled


4/4

parker’s controversial theology by mark decourval

Documents