|
|
|
|
There’s Something About Ruth (Smith) You might not be aware of it, but our spiritual ancestors include the Pilgrims and the Puritans. But the Pilgrims and the Puritans were from a time and place long ago and far away, and many generations have come and gone since they dominated religious thinking on this continent. Many other people have helped pave the way for the kinds of journey that we can take together, including Freethinkers, Deists, agnostics, humanists and folks of MANY traditions outside the “Pilgrim and Puritan” mold. I want to tell you about ONE of those spiritual ancestors, and the impact on my life from someone you’ll never have the chance to know.
We have agreed to walk together. We are fellow travelers, in a way, and we are all on journeys, each exploring.
There is a story in the Christian Bible that I like to recall when I think about my religious journey. It is the story of Ruth, and it goes like this: Elimelech, Naomi, and their sons emigrated out of Judah to Moab due to a
famine. Their sons married Moabite women, and finally Naomi, and her daughters
in law Ruth and Orpah were left in bereavement and poverty with the deaths of
Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion in Moab. RUTH 1:16,17
The poet, T.S. Eliot, wrote, “... A people without history With the drawing of this Love and the voice of this We shall not cease from exploration (Little Gidding, the 4th of four quartets, 1942) T. S. Eliot (1888 - 1965)
So, having set the stage (and hopefully piqued your curiosity) with those readings, let me tell you a little about some 20th century history, with a few obscure characters. My wife is a member of a large and close-knit extended family, with deep roots in Michigan. Her ancestors emigrated to Michigan just about the time that Michigan was gaining its statehood, in the early 19th century. They came, Azarial and Mary Smith, from the New England town of Bethel, Connecticut. I don’t know exactly what material possessions they brought with them to the wild frontier lands of Hillsdale County, but we DO know some of the intellectual and historical baggage they carried. For starters, it is clear that they brought the New England religious traditions of Congregationalism with them, because they soon helped to found a Congregational church in Somerset. They brought a love of learning with them, as well, and also helped in the establishment of Hillsdale College not long after settling in their new farm. And we also know that they brought a tradition of celebrating Thanksgiving as a huge, extended-family extravaganza with puppets and skits and eating and being together. We know they brought this traditional celebration with them because the large Smith family still celebrates Thanksgiving in that way, and consciously attempts to carry forward these traditions and instruct younger family members (and newcomers) in the ways of that tradition. Now, my own family has New England roots, too, having come to the so-called “Western Reserve” in Northeast Ohio in the 1820’s. But the key difference between Cindy’s family and my family is the sheer SIZE of her extended family. My father had two sisters, and those two sisters had a grand total of ONE child, so I am somewhat “cousin deficient”, you might say. On the other hand, Cindy’s mother was the youngest of 8 Smith children in her family, and there were several other Aunts and Uncles, each of whom had largish families of their own. A typical family reunion for Thanksgiving runs into the 100, 110, 120 family members in attendance, in a bewildering variety of relationships. At least four generations are present, often five (another thing that my family experience never prepared me for). I never knew what a second cousin once removed was until I became acquainted with my wife’s family. Now I know. So, the Smith family has a great big family get together for Thanksgiving every year, and renews traditions stretching back over 170 years to their Connecticut homes. I, on the other hand, am not familiar with large crowds (having grown up on a farm, and being a fan of the Cleveland Indians baseball team in the 1960’s and 1970’s). And so, it was with a certain amount of trepidation that I accepted my wife-to-be’s invitation to come to meet her family at Thanksgiving. But, I remembered about the Biblical Ruth, a Moabite who married an Israelite, and who told her mother in-law that “thy people shall be my people”. How could I do less? And so I went. Boy, a hundred people inspecting the new boyfriend of one of the “Smith girls” is a pretty tough standard to pass. One small part of the traditional Thanksgiving celebration as practiced by
the Smith clan is singing the doxology. There are many excellent singers in
Cindy’s family. There are many LOUD singers in Cindy’s family. A few are both.
So, this whole gang of people are standing in the basement social hall of the
Congregational Church in Somerset (a setting that had already made me a little
nervous), and OUT they come with the doxology: Praise Him, all creatures here below; Praise Him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” (I told you that there are good singers and there are loud singers…) Now I was beginning to squirm a little, because I was feeling like I might possibly be making a mistake, coming to this family get-together, maybe even joining this family. I certainly didn’t grow up thinking that God was the person from whom all blessing flow. I dislike the idea of us creatures here below owing some obesience to an unseen diety. I never in my life (some 20 or so years long at that time) had felt moved to praise the Holy Ghost. And, I wasn’t used to the idea that I didn’t have to believe it, I could just say (or sing) the words in the spirit of family unity. Could I really be comfortable in this family? But, off in the corner, there was this little old gray-haired lady. She wasn’t one of the loud singers, and to tell the truth, she wasn’t one of the singers with the soaring, beautiful voice, either. No, what caught my attention was the WORDS she was singing, “From all that dwell below the skies, Let Faith and Hope and Love arise. Let Beauty, Truth and Good be sung Through every land by every tongue.”
“Who is THAT?”, I asked Cindy as soon as possible after the song ended. I was thinking, that maybe, JUST maybe, there was someone there (besides Cindy) that I would feel a kinship towards, someone maybe who thought like me. “Oh, that is Aunt Ruth, come on, I’ll introduce you” she replied, and so I got to meet the most remarkable and marvelous person I have ever had the privilege of knowing. Ruth was an “in-law”, having married into the Smith clan. Her husband, Donald, was my future mother-in-law’s older brother. As I chatted with Ruth, I learned that she was a minister, not of the Congregational church we were standing in, but of the “Universalist-Unitarian Church of East Liberty”. Hmm…..what’s that? And that was the start of my personal journey to learn about the Unitarian Universalist church, and about Humanism and about a real spirit of acceptance and magnaminity. There was just something about Ruth that was compelling and interesting and that was the epitome of loving all souls that utterly fascinated me. Ruth was born in Ohio, and her place of birth and even her birthday were close to mine. She had been a professional as a young man, attending Schauffler College in Cleveland to study religious education. She taught on the Sioux Indian reservation in South Dakota as a young woman, and then became assistant minister of the very Congregational church where Smith family Thanksgivings have been celebrated since the building was put up. There she met Donald, and fell in love, and married him. As a city girl, it wasn’t particularly easy for her to move to the farm which lacked electricity and running water at first, but she was nothing if not strong willed, and her marriage flourished, including the growth of her family by the birth of four sons. Ruth And Donald stayed married for 61 years, and only death did part them. In 1961, Ruth was asked by the congregation of the tiny Universalist Church of East Liberty, just a few miles from Somerset, (and also started with significant contributions from Donalds great grandparents – Cindy’s Great great grandparents) if she could “fill in” for a few weeks while they searched for a new minister. Ruth was thrilled to re-enter her professional career. Somehow, the weeks stretched out, and Ruth retired from the pulpit of that church in 1981. Ruth was always enamored with the congregation of that small, rural church, and she helped it double in size during her tenure. She also helped expand the ranks of the U-U’s in the world by two, by teaching Cindy and me about this wonderful faith tradition, and by agreeing to perform our wedding ceremony in the fall of 1981, just as she had performed the ceremony for Cindy’s parents in 1941. Ruth lived out her commitment to loving ALL souls in many ways, but often said that the most meaningful of all the services she performed over the years were officiating at the marriage of her Jewish granddaughter and then at the commitment ceremony for her gay grandson. When I hear people talk about “family values” I think of Ruth, not people like Jerry Falwell.
Ruth was a humanist, in the best senses of that word. Let me explain a little. In the religious arena, many words have a number of different meanings. Some examples are: the terms Humanism and Humanist. They are essentially meaningless when used by themselves; their meanings only become clear when preceded by an adjective, as in: Religious Humanism has been loosely defined as religion with deity worship and traditional theological belief deleted. Replacing them is a belief in humanity as the highest known form of intelligent life, and a belief in the scientific method as the best way to determine truth. Secular Humanism is a non-religiously based philosophy promoting humanity as the measure of all things. It had its roots in the rationalism of the 18th Century. Ruth thought of herself as a humanist and an atheist – odd for a minister, isn’t it? But there aare good reasons why she felt that way. The document, “A Humanist Manifesto” was prepared in 1933, and updated as the Humanist Manifesto II in 1973. 6 These documents outline the themes and concepts that humanism embraced in the 20th century (a sort of humanist creed, if you will):the preciousness and dignity of the individual person as a central humanist value." a rejection of a created universe in favor of the theory of evolution and a universe that obeys natural laws a rejection of divinely inspired ethical and moral codes in favor of codes derived by reason from the human condition the belief that full responsibility for the future of the world, its political systems, its ecology, etc. rests with humans. There is no God in heaven to intervene and save us from a disaster Humanists value knowledge based on reason and hard evidence rather than on faith. Humanists accept democracy and reject both theocracy and secular dictatorships as political systems that are dangerous to individual freedoms. They have a history of combating bigotry, hatred, discrimination, intolerance and censorship. They are energetic supporters of the separation of church and state. They believe that "moral values derive their source from human experience." Since most believe that an afterlife is non-existent, they regard life here on earth to be particularly precious. Many are active in refugee, human rights, anti-death penalty, environmental groups, etc.
Many people feel that ethical and moral behavior must be based on the absolute teachings found with the Christian Bible. Without a belief in the Christian God, the hope of Heaven and the threat of Hell, they believe that an individual will not be motivated to behave decently. Humanists have successfully developed moral and ethical systems which are independent of divine revelation from a deity. They are based upon such beliefs as: Systems of morality and ethics can be developed through mutual agreement much like we develop laws and social customs They can be based upon common needs that humans have for survival, security, personal growth and love Humans are social animals who can make their greatest achievements through mutual cooperation
Ruth wrote to explain some of the books that influenced her development, and dedicated a section of her response to “Books that have affected my religious thinking”. She wrote, “There is a whole section or array of books that have without any doubt helped me become the person I am today as regards the subject of religion…First, the textbooks and accompanying reading I had at Schauffler College – which…totally (well, maybe, almost) destroyed my childhood…theology and eventually led me to feel at home in humanism and atheism…Second are the books I got from Beacon Press when I first went to East Liberty…I still have a good share of these, so in my bookshelves you will find such titles as The Quest for the Historical Jesus, by Albert Schweitzer, The First Christian (Paul) by A.Powell Davies…Man’s Search for Meaning by Victor Frankl and The Pursuit of Meaning by Joseph Fabry.
She quoted at some length from Fabry: “We must take life one step at a time – We must not look for the grandiose plan but for the challenge of the moment.” “One should not search for an abstract meaning of life. Everyone has his own vocation or mission in life…Thus, everyone’s task is as unique as his specific opportunity to implement it. What matters is not the meaning of life in general but rather the specific meaning of a person’s life at a given moment.”
Ruth went on in that note to say, “I know that many people pray to God – “Oh, god, help me” and many find strength and guidance in this way. Of course, that is not for me – and instead I talk to myself: Well, Ruth, see what situation life has now brought you? How are you going to…deal with it? It’s up to you…no one else can do this for you – they can help, but YOU are the one who has to respond---and remember, remember, remember your sense of well-being depends on how you do this – so shape up!” Ruth died on October 6 2004 at the age of 89. At the celebration of her life in the Universalist Unitarian Church of East Liberty, dozens of nephews, nieces, neighbors, family and friends all extolled her loving kindness. People who had been in Sunday school classes 40 years before talked about how GOOD Ruth made them FEEL when they were around her. Grown men spoke with feeling about the unconditional love and acceptance they had felt when, as young men, they had broken some sort of rule of law or just plain common sense.
Ruth and her abundant, loving humanism exemplified an important part of our Universalist heritage. She didn’t preach in academic robes. She never believed that one book help all the answers to life’s puzzles and mysteries. She wasn’t argumentative or overwhelmingly intellectual. And she NEVER felt that following some dogmatic set of rules would get you into heaven. Ruth just knew, from her heart, that people needed to be loved and to be able to give love back. Her concrete mission was to make the world right before her a better place. Throughout her life, she helped everyone around her feel loved and safe and welcome. If there are “angels of our better selves” as Abraham Lincoln wrote, Ruth was certainly in the front rank. Ruth was a wonderful example to me, and she is the reason that I’m a Huumanist and a U-U. To her memory, I say, “Ruth, Whither thou goest, I will go… thy people shall be my people, and your God, my God”.
|
|
|
|