 Good morning. Welcome to First Unitarian Society of Madison. This is a community where curious seekers gather to explore spiritual, ethical, and social issues in an accepting and nurturing environment. Unitarian Universalism supports the freedom of conscience of each individual as together we seek to be a force for good in the world. My name is Teresa Kaufman. I'm a member of the congregation. And on behalf of the congregation, I'd like to extend a special welcome to visitors. We are a welcoming congregation, so whoever you are and wherever you are on your life's journey, we celebrate your presence among us. We gather today out of the routines of our week to give pause, to take a deep breath, and listen to our hearts. We give thanks for this extraordinary blessing. Here may our minds stretch, our hearts open, and our spirits deepen. Here may we be stirred by love's infinite possibilities. We're so very glad you're here. I invite you to join me now in a few moments of silence for contemplation, meditation, prayer as we settle in and come fully into this time and place together. Our opening words this morning are from Lindsay Bates. Come, let us worship together. Let us open our minds to the challenge of reason. Open our hearts to the healing of love. Open our lives to the calling of conscience. Open our souls to the comfort of joy. Astonished by the miracle of life, grateful for the gift of companionship, confident in the power of living faith, we are here gathered. Come, let us worship together. I invite you to rise and body your spirit and join in our unison words of chalice lighting that are in your order of service. At times, our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has caused to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us. And I invite you to greet your neighbor on this kind of cloudy, I guess, summer morning. Please be seated. I invite anybody who'd like to come on up closer for our story today to come on up. Hey, how are you guys? Good? Did you have a good summer? Welcome, come on up. So it is Labor Day weekend. So I thought in honor of Labor Day, we would read this story called Brave Girl. You'll see why in a minute. Hello, come on up. A steamship pulls into the harbor, carrying hundreds of immigrants and a surprise for New York City. The surprise is dirt poor, just five feet tall, and hardly speaks a word of English. Her name is Clara Lemlic. This girl's got grit and she's going to prove it. Look out, New York, here she comes. Clara knows in her bones what is right and what's wrong. What's wrong begins a few weeks after the Lemlics move into their tenement in America. No one will hire Clara's father. They will, however, hire Clara. What do you think of that? What if your parents stayed home and you had to go to work? It would be hard. It'd be tough and you can't drive a car. Those are all really good points. Companies are hiring thousands of immigrant girls to make blouses, coats, nightgowns, and other women's clothing. They earn only a few dollars a month, but it helps pay for food and rent. So instead of carrying books to school, many girls carry sewing machines to work. Clara becomes a garment worker. Do you see all of them in that room? Those are all rows and rows of girls at sewing machines. From dawn to dusk, she's locked up in a factory. Rows and rows of young women bend over their tables, stitching collars, sleeves, and cuffs as fast as they can. Hurry up, hurry up, the bosses yell. The sunless room is stuffy from all those bodies crammed inside. There are two bathrooms, one sink, and three towels for 300 girls. 300 girls and two potties? That's not a good ratio, is it? In my house growing up, there were three girls if you count my mom and one potty. My dad had no time in there at all. And that was only three of us to one. And this is 300. Clara learns the rules. If you're a few minutes late, you lose half a day's pay. If you prick your finger and bleed on the cloth, you're fined. The doors are locked and you're inspected every night before you leave to be sure you haven't taken anything from the factory. But Clara is uncrushable. She wants to read. She wants to learn. At the end of her shift, though her eyes hurt from straining in the dim light and her back hurts from hunching over the sewing machine, she walks to the library. She fills her empty stomach with a single glass of milk and goes to school at night. When she gets home in the late evening, she sleeps only a few hours before going to work again. As the weeks grind by, Clara makes friends with the other factory girls. At lunch, they share stories and secrets as if they were in school where they belong. Clara smolders with anger, not just for herself, but for all the factory girls working there. This was not the America she'd imagined. The men at the factory tell her that they have been trying to get the workers to team up in a union. Then they would go on strike, which means they would refuse to work until the bosses treat them better. But the men don't think the women are tough enough to do it. Not tough enough. Oh, yes they are. Clara knows it and she'll show them. From then on at the sewing tables and on the street corners, Clara urges the girls to fight for their rights. When the seamstresses are overworked, she says, strike. When they're underpaid, she says, strike. When they're punished for speaking up, she cries, strike. And they do. Each time Clara leads a walkout, the bosses fire her. The police arrested her 17 times. But after every time, she's on the picket line again. And the other girls think if she can do it, we can do it too. For weeks, the small strikes go on. But the bosses find other young women to do the work for the same low pay and the same long hours. We got to do something bigger, thinks Clara. Something huge, a giant strike at every factory in the whole city. So the union holds a meeting. Look at that room. Do you see how packed it is full of people? Their walls are full. The hall thrums with excitement. Clara listens to all the speeches. The speakers want everyone to be careful. After two hours, no one recommends a strike. Finally, the most powerful union leader in the country gets up to the podium. Not even he proposes action. So Clara does. That's right, Clara. She calls out from the front of the hall. The crowd lifts her to the stage where she shouts, I have no further patience for talk. I move that we go on a general strike. And she starts the largest walkout of women workers in US history. The next morning, New York City is stunned by the sight of thousands of young women streaming from the factories. One newspaper calls it an army. Others call it a revolt. It's a revolt of girls. Some of them are only 12 years old. The others are barely more than teenagers. And in the coming weeks, Clara's called a hero. She lights up the chilly union halls with her fiery talks. Her singing lifts the spirits of the picketers. She yells, stand fast, girls. And they do, all winter long in the bitter cold in their thin coats, tired and hungry and scared. The girls walk alongside the men on the picket lines. They spill out of the union halls. They block the roads. They fill the street corners and the public squares. There's newspaper articles about them. College girls raise money for them. Rich women covered in fur coats walk on the picket lines with them. By the time the strike is over, hundreds of bosses agree to let their staff form unions. They shorten the work week. They raise salaries, which means they pay them more money. The strike emboldens thousands of women to walk out of garment factories in Philadelphia and Chicago. And the strike convinces Clara to keep fighting for the rights of workers. Her throat is hoarse. Her feet are sore. But she's helped thousands of people, proving that in America, wrongs can be righted. Warriors can wear skirts and blouses. And the bravest hearts may beat in those who are only five feet tall. So thank you for listening to this story of Clara. We're going to rise in body or spirit and sing you out to summer fun. Have a great time. Reading today is ancient wisdom from the biblical book of Amos. I hate. I despise your festivals. And I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them. And the offerings of well-being of your fatted animals, I will not look upon. Take away from me the noise of your songs. I will not listen to the melody of your harps. But let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. The second reading this morning is from the liberal theologian and Unitarian Universalist Paul Razer for those of you who were at regional assembly a few years ago, you may remember his presentation to that body. This is a book called Reclaiming Prophetic Witness. Most of the counter prophetic tendencies in religious liberalism can be linked to its largely positive orientation towards modern culture. This perspective does more than encourage liberals to interpret religious texts in light of historical scholarship and keep their theologies consistent with modern sciences. It also encourages them to become actively engaged with the world, to embrace the world, not withdraw from it, to live fully in the world while bringing their religious values to bear on it. Liberal theologian Peter Hodgson argues that this engagement is essential if liberals are to fulfill the vision of a just society. Without actual engagement in the messy realities of the world, cultural transformation is not a possibility. But prophetic practice requires both cultural engagement and theological distance. It must be grounded in religious values independent of cultural norms so that it has a clear reference point for forming judgments. At the same time, its theological reference points cannot be so foreign that its critique becomes incomprehensible. The prophet thus lives in this tension between participation and independence, standing both inside and outside society. The biblical prophets did not have to deal with such tensions. One of the most important roles was to help preserve the proper covenantal relationship between God and the people. The prophets were understood as speaking directly for God, and they stood beyond the authority of the political leaders. Their critiques were grounded in the values of the covenant by which all social, political, and religious aspects of Israel's communal life were ordered. When Amos condemns the leaders and merchants of Israel as you that trample on the needy and bring ruin to the poor of the land, there is no doubt whose message he is delivering and whose norms they are being judged by. I was back here last year on Labor Day, so I guess I'm the designated hitter for Labor Day sermons. Wonderful to be here. Last week, on August 28th, we celebrated the 55th anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, led by Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King and a number of other civil rights leaders. As is often the case when we remember Dr. King in connection with this March, much of the focus is on the I Have a Dream portion of his speech at the Lincoln Memorial. As we now know, this was actually just an add-on by Dr. King that was not part of the original text. Rather, it was added at the urgings of Mahalia Jackson as Dr. King was finishing his prepared remarks. It was based on the passage that he used some months earlier in a speech in Detroit. But earlier in the speech, Dr. King had offered this insight. He said, we cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and the Negro in New York believes he's nothing for which to vote. No, no we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. The ancient Hebrew prophet Amos was a native of the southern kingdom of Judah who went into the northern kingdom of Israel in approximately 783 BCE to proclaim what he said was the word of God. Now, this was a period of relative peace and prosperity in both Israel and Judah because the major powers of the time, Egypt and Assyria, were at peace and not looking for smaller countries to grasp into their orbit. However, the prosperity was not equitably apportioned. As one biblical commentator put it, there was prosperity, quote, at least for a few but according to Amos at the expense of the many. Does this sound familiar? Speaking what he described as the word of the Lord, Amos prophesied that judgment would be brought down on the people of Israel and Judah from an outside source, the empire of Assyria, as punishment for their mistreatment of the poor and needy. Here is elsewhere in his preaching, Amos juxtaposes justice and righteousness and tandem. Justice is the establishment of the right through fair legal procedures in accordance with the will of God. Righteousness is that quality of life in relationship with others in the community that gives right to justice. Amos challenged the existing economic and political power structures of his day, arguing that the treatment of the poor and powerless was an affront to God. Their solemn assemblies and their bird offerings were not pleasing to God in light of their treatment of the ordinary people. Other Hebrew prophets including Micah and Isaiah delivered the same message to the rulers of Israel and Judah. Your oppression of the poor will bring down the judgment of God upon you. And in fact, this happened. Israel conquered Syria, we now call the lost 10 tribes, and marched them into captivity. Judah would suffer the same calamity 200 years later at the hands of the Babylonians. Now the work of the Hebrew prophets was not to predict the future or as Christians would believe foresee the coming of Jesus. Rather the Hebrew prophets calling was to reflect the judgment of God upon the rich and powerful classes because of their mistreatment of the poor and the powerless. In so doing they spoke in the name of the God of the Hebrew people. The preaching of Jesus of Nazareth was in the same vein. In Matthew 25, Jesus describes how the son of man will separate those who sit at his right hand and those who will be cast into darkness. Those who will receive the favored treatment will be there, those who cared for the least of these are brothers and sisters. Those who did not, they will suffer eternal punishment. Similarly, in the story of the rich young ruler followed in chapter 19 of Matthew, Jesus tells a rich young man that to inherit eternal life, he must give all that he has to the poor and then follow Jesus. Well, this was too much for the rich man who went away sorrowfully because it was stated in the gospel, he had many riches. For many Jews and Christians, these passages from the Hebrew and Christian Bibles form the basis for their social justice ethic and work. Jim Wallace, an evangelical minister and social justice activist, describes the interplay of his faith and ethics. Wallace says, let me be blunt. The behavior of Enron and other guilty corporate executives is a direct violation of biblical ethics. The teachings of both Christian and Jewish faith excoriate the greed, the selfishness and the cheating that have been revealed and condemned in the harshest terms their callous and cruel mistreatment of employees. Read your Bible, Wallace says. Christianity and Judaism have a strong social justice bent around it in their understanding of the Bible. And many Christian and Jews, such as Dorothy Day, Jim Wallace and Michael Lerner, articulate their ethic of social justice explicitly, explicitly in terms of their religious faith. So where does this leave religious liberals in general and unitarian universalists in particular? How can we ground our acts of justice in our faith? For those who identify as liberal Christians, Jews, et cetera, including unitarian universalists exposing these views, they read the same Bible as their conservative and fundamentalist counterparts, but reach much different conclusions. But what are those unitary universalists, including the humanists, for whom the Bible is not the sole source of religious inspiration? How can they articulate a religious grounding for their social justice work? Paul Razer, Labral Theologian, Unitarian Universalist, addresses this question in his book, Reclaiming Prophetic Witness, Liberal Religion in the Public Square. The first problem that Razer identifies is that religious liberals are uncomfortable with religious language. Because of our origins in the Enlightenment and our reverence for scientific method, we are more comfortable framing our arguments for social justice in the language of social and natural science. We are not comfortable with asserting a religious sanction for our positions. In fact, as strong believers in the separation of church and state, we may even doubt the legitimacy of religiously based social action. Now, this is somewhat ironic given the fact that many of us revere the work of Dr. Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. For both of these men and for many others, their religious faith was the basic driving force for their activism. Dr. King's writing and speaking are full of religious and biblical illusions. While he was seeking political, economic, and social justice, he often spoke of it in religious terms. He could not or would not separate the two. Razer suggests that one problem that religious liberals have is that they often cannot separate their political and social views from their religious convictions. And this makes it difficult for them to argue that they are proceeding from a religious perspective. A basic concept of what is known as liberal theology is that we look at the world in light of contemporary knowledge and experience as opposed to what is written in ancient sacred texts. It is easy to sound religious when you quote the Bible or the Quran or other holy book. It is more difficult when you are looking to contemporary knowledge in fields like social sciences and economics or inspiration. Razer suggests that a way to address this dilemma is to be explicit about identifying the religious and moral dimensions of the positions we take. For example, in the immigration debate, while it is possible to identify economic and legal justifications to promote the fair treatment of undocumented immigrants, the liberal religious value of inherent worth and dignity of all persons is one of our central religious values which should be raised up in the policy debates. And we should not be afraid to espouse these as religious positions. A few years ago, I had the experience during my chaplain residency of being part of our small group. We came from different religious traditions including Catholic, Lutheran, Reform Protestants, Seventh Day Adventists, and myself, the Humanist Unitarian Universalist. We had come together in a setting where we were encouraged to share our beliefs and religious outbooks. Now initially as a humanist, I felt defensive and at times afraid to openly express my views. But as time went on, we all began to learn that we were not that far apart in our fundamental outlooks. And it was more a question of how we articulated our beliefs than what our beliefs were. We all agreed on the importance of recognizing the inherent worth and dignity of all persons. My Christian friends would state this dignity arising from the fact that we are created in the image of God and our children of God. I would frame it that simply by reason of being human, we are entitled to be treated with dignity and respect. Whatever route we took, we found ourselves at the same destination. Similarly, the more that I talked about the interconnected web of all things, the more my colleagues found comfort and meaning in that metaphor. My personal outlook is of the humanist variety. For those Unitarian Universalists who find their spiritual sucker in Earth-centered traditions or Buddhist or other non-Western religious practices, it is equally possible to ground your social justice work in these religious expressions. Unitarian Universalist Christians, or those from a Jewish background, can relate to biblical teachings to inform their social justice practices. Razor's basic point is that the particular form of religious expression is not the most important thing. What is important is that the expression of the religious element be explicit. Razor also argues that notwithstanding the particular form of its expression, the liberal religious outlook has certain common elements. Thus, liberal Christians or Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, humanists share many of the same outlooks. He summarizes some of them. The fundamental unity and interdependence of all existence, the transforming power of love, the inherent worth and dignity, human freedom, rejection of moral dualism of good and evil, social justice in effort to create communities, cooperative power, religious freedom, theological openness. For Razor, these concepts form the basis of a liberal religious outlook. The actual theology that one places within this framework is not important to him. Rather, this basic frame will provide a common bond among religious liberals of various kinds and allow them to do their work in the greater world. Also, these are concepts that will allow religious liberals to collaborate with their more conservative or orthodox counterparts in other faith traditions to promote justice in the world. So what does this mean in practice? If we look at the history of Unitarian Universalism, we see that we have been a strong voice for social justice and freedom of conscience. In the 16th century, the Unitarian King John Sigismund of Transylvania issued something called the Edict of Torta, guaranteeing religious freedom to all in his realm, not just as Unitarian co-religionists, but people of all religions. In the United States, both the Unitarians and the Universalists similarly argued for openness in religious exploration. Unitarians and Universalists were active in the movement to abolish slavery and to secure the right to vote for African-Americans and women. In the 1950s and 60s, Unitarians and Universalists were active in the modern civil rights movement with Reverend James Reeve and Viola Liuzzo of Detroit being martyred in the cause. More recently, Unitarian Universalists have been in the forefront to promote LGBTQ rights, including the right to marry and to advocate for fair and humane treatment of all immigrants, notwithstanding their status as documented or undocumented. Too often in recent decades, religious voices on public policies are defined and identified as those from the religious right. While progressive values are asserted, only rarely are those seen as religious values. When pollsters identify values voters, the values they identify are not those that religious liberals would normally espouse. This is not because of an insidious conspiracy against religious liberalism, rather it is because we have hidden our liberal religious light under a bushel. The time has come to take that bushel and throw it away. The time has come for progressive values to be seen as religious values grounded in our liberal faith. It's time for us to take risks to promote justice in our communities. Earlier, I mentioned that Unitarians were deeply involved in the movement for the abolition of slavery. One of the leading Unitarians in Boston in the early 19th century was the Reverend Theodore Parker. Parker's church was a stop on the Underground Railroad and Parker was reputed to have kept a revolver in his desk to be used to protect the fleeing slaves seeking refuge with him. More radical than some abolitionists, Parker was an informal advisor and fundraiser for John Brown in his attempt to incite a slavery vote with an attack on Harper's Ferry before the Civil War. Whether or not we might approve of all the methods that Parker supported, we must admire his commitment to freedom and justice. In more recent times, Unitarian ministers marched with Dr. King in Selma in a confrontation that ultimately claimed the life of one of those ministers, James Reeb. In a couple of years ago, UUA President Peter Morales and other Unitarian Universalists were arrested and jailed in Phoenix for their participation in direct actions against the anti-immigrant policies of the state of Arizona and the actions of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. As we be in our church year, one of the questions I would like to ask is how we can find practical ways to make the prophetic voice of Unitarian Universalism heard in our state and in our community. I have attempted to suggest a theological message of social justice. According to Paul Razer, what he calls theological clarity is critical. It affects both our understanding of ourselves as religious liberals and how such understanding affects the prophetic message we bring to the world. Razer concludes, we know the challenges we face. A world awash in militarism and violence, a debilitating global economic crisis, dehumanizing poverty and suffering on all continents, life threatening environmental disasters, persistent xenophobia and racism. Yet we also know there is a better way. As religious liberals, we know that we are united in a single interdependent world, that human beings have the ability to create good as well as evil, that our diversity is something to celebrate rather than fear and that we can build a just and liberating human community. This is the message of healing and hope. Our prophetic social justice brings to the world. And so as we leave this sacred space and this community this morning, let us go into the wider world to build the promised land that can be. And now it's time for our morning offering, which will be shared with the worker justice Wisconsin, which was formerly the Interfaith Coalition for Worker Justice and the Workers' Rights Center. I invite you to take a look at the description of their activities in the order of service and give generously. Many gifts of those who helped our service this morning. Our greeter was Roz Woodward. Our worship associate, thank you for your help, is Teresa Kaufman. Our lay minister today was Anne Smiley. Usher's Elizabeth Barrett, Mary Ann Newman. Anne Smiley and Sam Bates. Hospitality and Coffee, Jeannie Hills. And welcome to Infotable Dorit Bergen. We thank all of you for your assistance. We join together each week, a community who gathers with joys and sorrows written on our hearts. In this place we love and are loved, we give and receive and return. We come together to find strength and common purpose, turning our minds and hearts towards one another, seeking to bring into our circle of concern all those who need our love and support. In our book that is out for signature each Sunday, we have two entries, the first by Anne Smiley. Sorrow and concern on the death of Senator John McCain, a moderating voice of reason, conscience of us all, better soul reaching across party lines to bridge the divides to mind and blend with hope. And sorrow for Bruce Houdl, mineral point sculpture who died unexpectedly last week and for his wife and son. And for all those other joys and concerns that we carry in our hearts, which have not yet found their voice, we think of those as well. Our closing hymn is number 118, this little light of mine, to heed the words of the prophets and to go out in the world to build a better place for each and everyone in it. We have concluded our worship service this morning, but our service to the world is not concluded. So go forth, go in peace and go in blessing. Please be seated for the postlude.