Theodore Parker, an American theologian who lived from 1810 to 1860 was a prominent Unitarian minister in American history. He's more well known for his tireless efforts to eliminate slavery but his contributions to theology in this country are overlooked because of his activism; though his activism and his theology were quite interconnected.

Theodore Parker, was born in Lexington Massachusetts, birth place of the revolution. He always carried a New England sensibility and prejudice in his theology. In fact, he would live most all of his life in his beloved Massachusetts. What is Parker's theology and how did it affect his activism, Unitarians, and this country?

Parker in 1834 already in Harvard Divinity School had come to the conclusion that the theology of revivalism such as hell, damnation, and the utter depravity of men, and emotional feeling was not the place of real religion. He was a lover of books and even at a young age had dived into Greek, Latin, Hebrew, French, and German which would serve him well. "He would dive into the college library and fish up huge venerable tomes in Latin and Greek and lug them up to his room and go into them as a boarding school girl would go to a novel." (Albrect, 24)

At Harvard he had rejected divine inspiration of scriptures, substitutionary atonement, and the nature of Jesus as divine: all of which would clash with Unitarian doctrine and set the stage for future ecclesiastical battles. He helped contribute to the jounral The Scriptural Interpreter and before it folded in 1832, he had raised angry denunications from fellow students for his articles which questioned miracles, showed mythical aspects of books such as Job, and questioned the prophecy texts of the Christian faith such as Isaiah. He had already come under the influence of German higher criticism and Parker was one of the first to bring that methodology to the US. (Albrecht, 25)

Parker's biggest contribution at Harvard was the translation of biblical scholar Wilhelm De Wette's Einleitung in Das Alte Testament . Parker was taken in by German historical-critical methods. He noted that Germany was "the only land where theology.. was studied as a science and developed with scientific freedom." (Dirks, 34). He worked for six years on the translation but it was also a commentray, where he thoroughly went through the text adding his own notes as well as noting what other German scholars were saying. He hoped to create a basic encyclopedia for Biblical learning which could be used in this country for the layperson. Parker always as a scholar wrote primarily for the clergy and the layperson, not just between scholars.

Parker believed that higher criticism of the Biblical text could help us distinguish mythology from history. It also would help in formulating his basic theology on what is transient and permanent in Christianity and religion in general. Obviously the Bible was written in a progressive manner, with conceptions of God becoming more and more universal. He used this idea in his study of the Bible, concluding that more advanced notions of god regardless of where it is found in the Bible shows itself to be newer than more cruder notions. God as someone who needs to be appeased by sacrafices is older than God who demands social justice for the poor.

Parker engaged in a thorough process of Biblical investigation which is still held today. He accepted the JPDE idea and was able to draw the various strands of thought in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) and what was the source and times of those strands. He believed much of Deuteronomy was written after the Exile, perhaps by King Josiah reforms, to ensure that there was a theology to explain why such exiles occurred. He also notes that the Pslams were probably not written by David, but were hymns and liturgies that span centuries, including some exile songs "how can we sing praises to the Lord in a foreign land?". Through this methodology he was one of the first to date the book of Daniel. "There seems to be abundant reason for placing the date of the book in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (175-160 BCE) and towards the latter part of his reign...the author seems to have written with the design to arose whatever patriotism and religious feeling was left in their (the Jews) heart." (Dirk, 46)

The prophetic writings was the thing that most excited Parker and their verbal attacks against the establishment might sound like the future attacks that Parker himself would lay. Parker's analysis of the New Testament was not as thorough but he was especially attracted by F.C.Bauer (who some regard as the father of the historical criticism) and David Friedrich Strauss who wrote one of the first books on the search for the historical Jesus. Parker believed in some sort of source theory, with Luke and Mark working off of Matthew. Like many a theologian down the road such as Rudolph Bultmann, he wished to separate mythology and the history and so he came to believe that Jesus was a Jewish reformer. (Dirk, 48)

The Gospel miracle stories are of course fabrications though they represented the "popular" view of messiahship. Prophecy was always retroactive..ie the fall of the Temple was predicated after it had happened. Parker like Strauus doubt a literal resurrection though much mythical meaning can be derived from it. While such views worked well in the school of Tubingen, it would hardly do in the US, especially Calvinist New England. Even early Unitarian reformers such as William Channing believed the Bible to be the unique revelation from God as well as the divnity of Jesus (though not the trinity).

As Parker would enter his first parish, a fight would soon brew which would allow Parker's views to be out in the open. In 1838 Ralph Waldo Emerson, the national spokesperson for the Transcendentalists which Parker was a part of, delivered a speech to the class of 1838 at Harvard Divinity School. He noted that miracles themselves are monstrosities as presented in the Gospels. The authors made the mistake that Jesus did not make, that the real miracle is life itself and nature. Emerson lambasted Unitarian ministers and the association of being dominated by people with no heart or soul. All religious feeling was ignored and submerged and yet these feelings was the basis of true religion. (Albrech, 33)

The speech produced a firestorm of criticism. Most Unitarians were still under the influence of the Enlightenment and they believed like Locke that human knowledge was derived from sense impressions. Thus the miracles are the divine proof of who Jesus was, the only basis for knowledge that Jesus was the son of God. The Boston Association of Unitarian Ministers convened and reprimanded Emerson. Parker and some clergy took Emerson's position while respected and noted scholar such as Andrew Norton took the opposition. A civil war in the church was about to ensue and Parker jumped into the fray.

Emerson felt no need to respond to the critics but Parker, George Ripley and others in the Trascendentalist circile did jump into the debate. Parker's publishing of The Previous Question Between Mr.Nortion and His Alumni Moved and Handled in a Letter to All Those Gentleman . Though he wrote it with a pseudoynm by Levi Bodgett, this work would establish Parker in this debate. The basis of this letter was that Christianity was not based on miracles which in themselves are nonsensical, since God established the natural laws and regularity of nature. Miracles would be in violation of these God created natural laws. Christianity rested on the truths that anyone could ascertain, they were truths found by reason, intuition, and study and as such were not dependent on the messenger or miracles.

The intensity of this dispute was also on the insecurity of the new Unitarian movemement. Only twent years earlier the Congregationalist/Unitarian split created charges by the Congregationalists that rejection of the trinity would cause the rejection of all other doctrines. Their prophecy seemed to be self fulfilling, and the charges Parker and others laid on the Unitarian Association were ones they leveled against Congregationalists 20 years earlier.

Parker like many Transcendentalists worked for their journal The Dial where he was able to present a more systematic basis of his theology, which in some important ways did differ from his transcendentalist colleagues. The basic theology of Parker advanced in the journal and in his own famous speech of 1841 called The Transient and the Permanent in Christianity .

Why do people have religious beliefs at all and why are the fundamental expression of religion similar in various historical forms of religion? On what evidence do people come to believe in religious truth? It certainly was not in miracles, even though Parker conceded that miracles very may well have occurred. But if Christianity rested on miracles than why isn't the other religions of the world true? Certainly more primitive religions have much more miracles, in fact the best religion logically would be the religion with the most miracles. (Dirk, 74)

Once you admit that miracles form the basis of a religion then any pagan religion with magic, miracles, and so forth would have to be considered legitimate. The truth of Christianity is not found in the divinity of Jesus either. How would the message be the dependent on the messenger? We don't accept Geometry just because of the personality of Archimedes. We don't accept the Law of Gravity because of the personality of Newton. We accept the message because it is indeed true, independent of the messenger. (Dirk, 75) Is the truths of Christianity established by the Bible. Well Parker's intensive study of the Bible with the tools of higher criticism also negated that idea as well. The truths of Christianity can be found by a thorough study of history, human nature, etc. Parker started with two ideas 1.human consciousness and the source of religious feeling 2.historical evidence to back up number one.

Parker believed that human beings have an essentially religious nature or a spiritually faculty as he would call it. The intuition of the reality of God that people have is drawn from his own extrapolation of Emmanuel Kant, but Parker used Kant for his own purposes, to establish an innate category of the transcendent. One is aware of religious feeling first by the sense of dependence we have. Like Schleiermacher (who Parker had read as well) this dependence is produced by the reality of how finite we really are. The fact that human have a sense of dependence must mean there is someone humans are dependent on..that being God. "Thus the existence of God is implied in the natural sense of dependence, implied in the religious element of itself"

Parker thus disagreed with enlightenment rationalists who believed that sense perception alone determined knowledge and he disagreed with Transcendentalists in that he sought to establish universals from particulars. If empiricism of the rationalists won the day and we are limited by sense data than nothing noble can come of it. The ethics would be dominated by Utilitarianism, might makes right, and expedienc. In a way the popular theology, a term he used in a disparaging sense, had also adopted this view. (Dirks, 91)

For Parker ethics, religion, God, etc. derive from human nature. There are four intuitional faculties that humans have.

Humans have an inherent sense of right and wrong, a natural tendency to love God and other people: these are the facts of consciousness, innate and thus moral law established by God. Thus true religion is falling in line with these moral laws and sin is violation of them. Only religion, not secular ethics can bring people to act in accordance with these laws, because to follow these laws would mean to go against self interest. If one followed these laws one could not have exploitative business relationships, one could not engage in slavery, one could not hide such and such a nationality. All those things would be put aside for the sake of human solidarity based on religion.

Thus Parker's views departed from Emerson and other Transcendentalists because he didn't believe truth was highly personal, but was in fact universal. One could observe in history the idea of progress towards these innate human consciousness. Religion as well as civilization moves continually to that goal of falling in line with this consciounsess. Take for instance the Bible. In the Hebrew Scriptures just like in the older writings of all religion, the religion is based first on fetishism or animism. Pantheism is the next stage where the divine is not just in rocks, etc but more of a distinct idea. Polytheism is the next stage were the clarification of the spiritual and the material occurs. In polytheism a priesthood develops, war emerges, slavery results because of war booty, and then prophets emerge to demand justice and not ritual. Dualism comes next where the principle of absolute good and evil are personified, which sets the stage for monotheism.

As one can see the particular cosmologies change, the doctrines change but the progress is to the fulfilling of the religious conscience found in humans which is the permanent. The transient in religion is the window dressing, the creeds, the holy books, rituals, and cosmologies. Unfortunately popular theology is entranced with the transient and seem to believe that this is the whole substance of religion. Thus any attack on the transient is itself considered an attack on God, Jesus, and morality.

Unfortunately because many people assume that religion is all about believing unbelievable miracles, angry gods who need appeasemant, or holy books as talismans, thoughtful people reject religion all together. The theology of the orthodox dehumanizes and debases human nature by declaring humans as inherently depraved. It is hostile to learning, intellect and reason since they believe truth is only found in the Bible. (Dicks, 113). God's revelation really though is found through the study of science, history, and human nature which tends toward perfection.. thus the progressive nature of history from lower to higher, which is evident in all disciplines and studies. (Dirk, 118)

The progressive stages of religious consciousness is first recognition of the innate human nature. Humans interact with this consciousness and religious ideas are produced. Third is acting on what we know is inline with God's will expressed in nature. The problem with the orthodox is that they somehow think that human knowledge ended with Jesus, when in fact we're still progressing.

Parker's willingess to garner facts, statistics, and observations from science, history, and other disciplines allowed him to draw universals (not a transcendentalist past time). The noted controversy he created with his theology alienated him from the Unitarian Association, but because they themselves had never drawn any lines of essential beliefs they never had the wherewithal to remove his pulpit. Emerson and Parker: both free thinkers though Parker always had his battles inside the association as a clergyman as opposed to Emerson who left his ministry position. The affect of the Transcendentalists was to transform the Unitarian Assocation from a liberal Christian organization to more of a non-creedal faith. He also helped introduce higher criticism to this country, a fact that many a person may take for granted but one in which Parker was almost alone at in the early 19th century.

His pulpit increasingly changed from theology to politics and the human situation. Partly this is due to the result of his own theology. Parker believed that the sole moral laws established by God would pave the way for an almost utopian vision of the world, and especially America. He envisioned America becoming better and better. The popular theology that he had spent his lifetime trying to demolish had decided to concentrate on the transient..ie defending such and such a doctrine, but also was in clear rebellion to the law of progress and moral laws God established. The rebellion consisted in slavery and brutalizing capitalism. Both were inherently opposed to the very freedom needed for people to progress in God's moral laws, and certainly was an impediment for the progress of this country. The fact that abolitionism especially would dominate most of his life from now on, hardly meant that Parker had abandoned theology: in fact he was putting it to practise.