There had been a controversy in neuroscience over the past few years about something called the “modular” theory of the human mind. The theory states that the brain is organized into distinct modules that handle specific kinds of neurological tasks. There is supposed to be an area in the brain where, for instance, we organize the physical details of our experience. A different area was devoted to keeping track of time, and so forth. It was thought that all the tasks that required neurological function could be located and the brain mapped out.

Well, it turns out the theory was not a very good one. The brain is a vastly more intricate network, a much more adaptable and fluid organ than the modular theory proposed. But I would reserve the modular theory for one section, of at least my own, brain. I am convinced that there is a piece of my gray matter that is entirely devoted to storing my own personal collection of stupid things I have said. These memories are burned in. I say “burned” because every time I say something stupid I almost immediately am able to conjure up the humongous list of stupid things I have said over almost the entire span of my life. There’s no delay, there’s no struggling hard to remember. Since the recall process is virtually effortless it’s seems there must be some very important function that is served by these well burnished memorabilia. But what that function might be? I haven’t a clue. You would think that at the very least I would have learned by now how to avoid saying stupid things. Well, I think I have gotten better, but only marginally.

Part of the problem is that as I minister I am called upon to talk—a lot. Probability would have it that my chances of saying something stupid are therefore increased. Perhaps the order of service could carry one of those bright orange labels, “Warning—minister’s sermon may contain some small parts that could be a choking hazard.”

I’m at my best when I can control the output, as in a written sermon. When I go freestyle however, things can get tricky. And according to a book whose review I have read and can’t wait to get, there is an explanation for some of the behavior. The book is titled Bozo Sapiens: Why to Err Is Human. The review suggests that when it comes to our search for useful ideas and useful expressions we are not much better off than squirrels looking for acorns. Apparently, if you’re going to find a few useful good ideas you have to dig a lot of little pointless and potentially stupid mental holes.

I mention this capacity for poorly timed and chosen words because we have in comparison just spoken some very important words to the newest members of the congregation. I truly love the phrase, “We promise never to turn our hearts against you.” And I believe there is no more sacred nor more important oath that we can make to one another. And much of the time we do live up to that standard. And yet, I am saddened by the fact that sometimes people do feel that hearts have been turned against them or they themselves feel their own hearts so turned. Sometimes the things we say to one another are not entirely pleasant. On rare occasions some things we say are not entirely charitable. We are, after all, human beings, not angelic saints. Sometimes we find ourselves in a dispute with someone else over something we deem very important. I have sometimes found myself in the middle of such disputes and it rarely goes well. But however it goes, sometimes we may feel, indeed, that our heart has turned. And when that happens it’s off we go—away. What most profoundly saddens me is that such departures disconfirm the central reason for this congregation’s existence. My own private sorrow I can mostly accept. But I continuously feel an obligation to help Emerson be the kind of congregation where such departures are rare.

I feel they should be rare because, at least on paper, we are the kind of community that is very open to embracing people in all their magnificent diversity. We are theoretically open to all kinds of ideas, all kinds of people, all kinds of differences. Such a community, to me, is not only just a nice place to be; but is a very important kind of community for the future of our species. Human beings already know how to “turn their hearts” against one another and hunker down into their smallish tribal boxes. Human beings already know how to turn small distinctions into reasons for suspicion and exclusion. These well trod paths are causing us great harm right now. If anything these past few decades have been a period when the boxes have turned into bunkers and the suspicions and exclusions have turned increasingly ugly and violent. So what we need to learn is how to break out of those boxes, how to overcome those tendencies toward suspicion and exclusion. And if we Unitarian Universalists, who at least theoretically affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every human being, cannot get this figured out then I sincerely doubt anyone can. I believe it’s a job with our name on it. It is a job which is in our congregational inbox. Good news for us all, this task is hardly impossible. It is not easy, but it may turn out to be easier than you think.

Most people think about becoming a part of a congregation because they are looking for a community. That instinct is absolutely on target. And it is imagined that since we state that we affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every human being than they will not be disconfirmed here.

“Hey honey, imagine that, a congregation that doesn’t think I’m out of my mind.”

So far so good. But then after a awhile it becomes impossible to miss the fact that there are other people in the congregation who hold cherished beliefs and practice behaviors that are very different from yours. Okay, what do you do about that? What human beings have typically done in the past is adopt a stance of polite silence, following my grandmother’s advice, “If you don’t have something nice to say then don’t say it.” That might be an acceptable response but what kind of affirmation is it to feel like you have to keep your mouth shut in order to maintain the appearance of being a part of the gang? Being ever so careful about what you say so as to not upset the congregational cookie cart strikes me as the exact opposite of what we are trying to do here. When we are at our best we are not encouraging cautious restraint but instead, like Annie Dillard in the reading, encouraging you to take a few aerial turns, do some wing stretching. We don’t want you knocking over the furniture, but we do want you to fly. We are here, taking up some expensive real estate on Bering Drive to help you grow into the marvelous creature your are becoming. We do not exist to help you feel diminished. We do exist to help you feel bold enough, powerful enough to say out loud your biggest dreams, your deepest fears, your most extravagant sense of anything. That possibility requires risk, requires trying things out, requires at the very least speaking up, and includes the increased possibility that you too will say something stupid.

But imagine, if you will, four hundred and fifty people boldly flying around all at once. What inevitably happens is that some people will bump into each other, sometimes not always in an entirely kindly or helpful manner. “Hey you—get out of my airspace!” And if all we had were people flying around all over the place, the roar would be deafening. No one would be able to hear anyone else, no one would be paying attention to anyone else, no one would care very much about anyone else, as long as each individual got his or her own chance to fly, when and how they wanted to fly.

Some are willing to join a community if it happens that they get to fly as they wish when they wish. It might not occur to such individuals that such an aspiration makes flying purely a solo act which only happens to occur in the company of others. If they really do aspire to being part of a community they will have to think about moving beyond the purely solo act. There just has to be another way because, in essence, solo acts that merely happen to occur in the company others do not ever lead to the feeling of being part of a community. Truly being part of community does not occur when you only happen to fly here—it occurs when you feel like your flying is part of a larger flight plan which can therefore be affirmed by others. Fly with a sense of being coordinated with other flyers, on other hand, leads to an automatic feeling that you are part of the community.

To achieve that sense of some larger flight plan some in the congregation have suggested that Becky and I issue flight instructions. There will be a correct way to express yourself at Emerson Unitarian Universalist Church. There will be approved subjects which we favor and others which we discourage. Anyone who gets out of the approved flight path and we ground you—you’re out of here. Well, there is one boundary: adult sexual expression with children—zero tolerance. You’re done. Actually what you are is arrested. Verbal, physical, or sexual abuse of any kind—you’re done. You might not be arrested, but, abuse is just not something we can countenance. At the very least we have to be committed to personal safety.

Beyond that—Becky and I are very unwilling to issue flight instructions. It is obvious that we do have opinions about things, and we are not usually reluctant to share them. But we are quite clear—they are our opinions. We do not expect them to be your opinions. And, perhaps most importantly, this notion of ministers’ issuing flight instructions runs counter to our history of congregational polity and the freedom which we each are accorded as Unitarian Universalists. Yes Becky and I could make the congregational train run on time, but that is so not who we are as a faith community. In addition, not only does this notion of our setting congregational flight patterns run counter to our tradition; it isn’t even an effective means to build the community that Unitarian Universalism proposes. It is ineffective because it looks at the problem of coordinated flight at the wrong end.

Rather than trying to coordinate behavior, a better, and more Unitarian Universalist way, would be to suggest that there can be a naturally shared intention which makes it possible for many different people to not only pursue their individual flight paths, but also feel like they are doing so as part of a community. The primary shared intention I have in mind is our inevitable interest in self -esteem.

Self esteem is an interesting reality the more you look at it. On the one hand it is something that is individual—but is also very social. Clearly all people are individually interested in self-esteem, but it is not something that any one of us can successfully generate all on our own. Pure individually derived high regard is nothing much more than egoism—not nearly as much fun and far less attractive. Self esteem, on the other hand, is what you think about yourself as has been affirmed in the company of others. So even as you would individually seek self-esteem, it can only really be done in some coordinated fashion with others.

So let us say that Emerson’s central focus is the dedication to promoting self-esteem. It certainly could be viewed as a means to giving greater specificity to the phrase, “never to turn our hearts against you.” By turning our hearts toward you, we promise to help you support a true sense, a real sense of self-esteem.

All that sounds good so far, but is Emerson merely then a mutual appreciation society? Hardly. Think about some of the means by which we support self-esteem at Emerson. There are some which are perhaps understandable; but ones that, upon reflection, we would not want to emphasize. For instance, think of the places to which you might go, and the people with whom you might associate that would enhance your own sense of your worth. Would you rather buy your cup of coffee at MacDonald’s—or Starbucks? Doesn’t the Starbucks cup of coffee make you feel just a little more special? But how appropriate is such a marker in this congregation, particularly among those who claim to affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every person?

We imagine that we should resist these sorts of distinctions among us. But I do not believe that merely instructing ourselves to disregard matters of apparent well being will not lead to their being consigned to the trash bin of consciousness. There are so many such markers, many of which we remain largely unaware, by which we are almost automatically driven to make an assessment of the people with whom we associate. Almost all of us always prefer to feel better about ourselves and so do not wish to associate with individuals who do not help us feel better about ourselves. If we believe classical music is indicative of sophistication and cultural success our teeth will tend to grate when we hear drumming. If we hear classical music and equate it with our grandfather’s Victrola our teeth will grate because we are certain that success requires much more vibrant and colorful music. But that’s just the music spectrum. Think of all the possible behavioral distinctions that could be made What if you showed up at the church potluck with a jell-O salad and everyone else brought canapes with caviar or crab? What if you drive a Lincoln but notice the parking lot is filled with clunkers? Styles of dress, patterns of speech, levels of education, all of these have an impact on the degree of comfort we feel in the company of others.

You might wish these things did not matter, but ironically, they only matter far too much when you do not acknowledge that they are part of the normal ways that human beings manage their self esteem. Very often, people who visit will not stay unless they see among the people who are already present those sorts of people they believe will help them feel more positively about themselves, certainly not worse about themselves. Much of this reaction and decision making occurs at a considerably less than rational level. We would like to think we are above what might seem like such petty distinctions—and we can be, but that rising above will not take place by pretending that such smallish matters do not exist.

So if denial and pretending doesn’t work, what can? What we might try, instead of denial, is a kind of replacement therapy, a substitute system of providing self-esteem that makes the less admirable ones become irrelevant.

The replacement? Ask yourself, what are the sorts of things that help you take pride in yourself? They are not the kinds of things that come your way easily or accidentally. Rather they are those things that are difficult, a challenge. And the more difficult the challenge to which you respond with “all the energy you possess” your wit and skill, those are the sorts of challenges upon which a real sense of self-esteem can be built. These are the sorts of things in which the outcome is far from certain and which, if you experience even some success at making progress—you slap yourself across the forehead in self-astonishment. “Well,. I’ll be, I never thought it would happen!”

There is such a challenge to be found here, a worthy object of effort which could well use as much energy and wit and skill as you could offer. The opportunity to participate in this project is without a doubt the very best thing that we have to offer you. Sure, we can be pretty, smart, cool and interesting people to hang out with. And by hanging out with such people you might feel a little extra smartness and coolness yourself. But don’t worry, that will pass because eventually you will say or hear something stupid. No, if you want to really feel like you are someone you have to participate in doing something that matters—a lot. And if that something is really difficult, you are going to have to have some assistance. Indeed the project we have in mind around here is something that cannot be done by any one person acting alone. It can only be done in the company of others. And in fact, once you discover the nature of that project, all the smallish matters about coolness, and hipness, and smartness fall aside. Who cares about those things when you know that what really matters is that you got a chance to help do something that is perfectly amazing.

That project is nothing less than the creation of an unprecedented community. It is a unprecedented because it has not yet been really seen, except perhaps as it is imagined in the longing of our hearts. It is a community in which we truly do break down the little boxes by which people attempt to confine themselves and others. It is a community that blasts out all the bunker mentalities that keeps humanity separated into suspicious and warring factions. It is an unprecedented community because there are amazing and entirely new insights about what keeps human beings together and what keeps human beings apart, insights which we can use to move toward that vision of what Becky and I frequently call the beloved community. Yes, there are precedents in that religion as we have known it has pointed the way ahead. The next time I speak in June I will look at how our religious ancestors have built a foundation upon which we can construct this land of our dreams, this Zion of our hopes. But imagine now, what it is like to work on this project, and how you can come to understand both yourself and others, as equal partners in a most amazing effort to set us all free, to give us all room to fly. Being a part of that kind of project, that can only give you a sense of self esteem that truly matters, that endures, in fact, gives a real lift to some wings you didn’t even know you possessed.