The Epicureans of the 21st Century, or an Epicurean, a Diest
and a Unitarian Walk into a Bar – Frank Strada
So, here we all are! - THE EPICUREANS OF THE 21ST CENTURY, or to put it another
way, an Epicurean, a deist and a Unitarian walk into a bar…
As you might guess from the title of this sermon and the readings this morning, it
is my contention that most of us here are Epicureans. Also, I believe, most of us
here probably would be considered deists. And though we may not know exactly
what an Epicurean or deist is, I think we could agree that almost all of us here this
morning are Unitarians or at least thinking of becoming a Unitarian. So my task
here this morning is to show how present day Unitarians have evolved from and
are today very similar to the Epicureans of 2300 years ago and to the 18th century
deists. Yes, they are all connected and here’s how…
The love of food and drink. Enjoying life to the fullest. To hell with virtue! Who
cares! So let’s eat, drink and be merry, for life is short. The pursuit of pleasure
and happiness in the present trumps everything else. Materialism to an extreme.
Such is the philosophy of Epicureanism, named for that 4th century BCE Greek
philosopher, Epicurus. (BTW, it’s at this point that an Epicurean enters the bar.)
Or is this really Epicureanism as Epicurus taught it? Those of us who have studied
Epicureanism would quickly recognize that this generalization of his philosophy is
an exaggeration; that it is taking his ideas to an illogical conclusion. Many of us
realize that drinking and eating all you want can be pleasurable and may make
you happy for now, but lead to disastrous and distinctly unhappy consequences.
As did Epicurus himself. In this material world, moderation was his mantra.
Thinking of future happiness was just as important as happiness in the present;
but we’ll get back to happiness in Epicurus a little later.
Epicureanism had its enemies; the early pagans, the Jews and particularly and
most harshly critical, the Christians. Perhaps much antipathy toward
Epicureanism, especially during the middle ages, can be traced to one quotation
from Epicurus himself: “It is not possible to gain unmixed happiness without
natural science.”
Which brings us to the deeper meaning of Epicurus’ philosophy. Like others
before him, Epicurus taught that the natural world is built by “seeds” or “atoms.”
These constructs are all that are necessary to explain the world. These atoms,
which cannot be created or destroyed, account for all existence and all change in
the world. Supernaturalism had no place in this way of thinking. He also had a
cosmology and a theory of evolution based on natural selection, as did other
thinkers after him and before Darwin. These thinkers included Lucretius during
the last century BCE. But I’ll come back to Lucretius in a minute.
Epicurus lived a simple, uncomplicated life. According to Seneca, visitors to
Epicurus’s garden were served simple meals, such as barley, gruel, salads, fruits
and water. This despite the sign out front that said, “Here the highest good is
pleasure.” Epicurus said in a letter, “When we say then that pleasure is the goal,
we do not mean the pleasures of the prodigal or the pleasures of sensuality.” To
Epicurus, the key to lasting pleasure is peace of mind. Eating, drinking and sexual
pursuits of course have their place, but when taken to an extreme lead us away
from peace of mind. As one follower of Epicurus said, one can’t really live a
pleasurable life “without living prudently and honorably and justly and also
without living courageously and temperately and magnanimously, and without
making friends, and without being philanthropic.”
Much of what we know about Epicurus’ thoughts comes from fragments of his
written texts and what others had written about him. However, we get our most
complete picture of Epicureanism from Lucretius, a 1st century BCE Roman poet
and philosopher. Lucretius is best known for his poetic Epicurean treatise called
De rerum natura, translated from the Latin as On the Nature of Things, which
introduction includes a consecration to Epicurus. To quote philosopher and
lawyer Michael Kellogg, “De Rerum Natura is undoubtedly the most important
explicitly philosophical poem ever written.” We’ll see why this is so in a few
minutes. As you might guess, Lucretius was thought of in a negative light by the
Christians, primarily to discredit the philosophy of Epicurus. Indeed, some stories
were made up out of whole cloth simply to show the Christian community the
evils of Epicureanism and materialism in general.
The Christians, after they took over the western world, did all they could to
ensure that On the Nature of Things was erased from history. They were nearly
successful in obliterating everything written by Epicurus (although some
fragments from letters survive). However, as in all important causes, there were
those who were willing to take great risk to preserve the ideas of Epicureanism, in
this case through the preservation of copies of On the Nature of Things. And they
almost failed in this endeavor. For about a millennium and a half there were no
copies of this world-changing philosophical poem known to exist. Then, in 1417,
one copy was discovered, thanks to an obscure scholar and book hunter by the
name of Gian Francesco Poggio Bracciolini, or just Poggio. He found a copy of On
the Nature of Things, transcribed in the 9th century, in a monastery in Germany.
By the 17th century, other copies were found, but by then, thanks to Poggio’s
discovery, this great poem had gone a long way toward unsettling western
thought and transforming the world through its influence on European thinkers,
as well as on a few unorthodox thinkers on the American continent.
But before we get to these unorthodox thinkers on the American continent, let
me say a bit more about what was so revolutionary about the Epicurean ideas we
see in Lucretius great poem. Though Lucretius ran into some opposition in 1st
century BCE Rome, it would not compare to the danger that readers of his major
work would face in the late Middle Ages. Galileo was a reader of his epic poem.
Giordano Bruno, the dangerous materialist thinker, is said to have carried in his
pocket a copy of On the Nature of Things. Could he have had one in his pocket
the day in 1600, when he was burned at the stake in Rome’s Campo de Fiori?
Baruch Spinoza was excommunicated from the Synagogue. Spinoza, who along
with John Locke, probably had as much influence on the founders of the new
nation in America as any other European thinker, also had a copy of On the
Nature of Things. Again to quote Michael Kellogg, “The materialist and
antireligious message of the poem, seeking natural explanations for natural
phenomena, has been of overriding importance for philosophy and science since
the Renaissance.” So here are some of the Epicurean ideas found in this
philosophical poem, On the Nature of Things:
- The concept of the atom, already mentioned
- The idea of swerve (in Latin, clinamen) that Lucretius uses to mean the
random movement of these elementary particles that allows us to have
free will
- And through these particles, humans are linked to all other things, organic
and inorganic
- The universe was not created for humans.
- The soul dies and there is no afterlife.
- Religions are mostly composed of superstition and delusion.
- And finally, perhaps most importantly, the highest goal in life is to increase
pleasure and reduce pain.
We generally call this last idea “hedonism” from the Greek hedon, which means
pleasure. But the early Christian church put a negative spin on this concept. They
portrayed Epicureanism as the immediate gratification of sensual desires, with no
thought for the future or of all other aspects of life that are good (which is, of
course, the way some people today think of Epicureanism). But, as scholar
Matthew Stewart says, “Epicurus’s idea of the good life is one of moderate,
sociable, and rather ascetic virtue.” This is more akin to ataraxia – another Greek
term meaning the absence or reduction of pain. Epicurus, as I’ve said, is known to
have lived on simple food. In fact, Epicurus is quoted as saying: “You should be
more concerned about whom you eat and drink with, than what you eat and
drink.” And Plutarch writes that Epicurus’s idea is that it’s “more pleasurable to
confer a benefit than to receive one.” A virtuous philosophy indeed.
So perhaps, with the Epicurean emphasis on happiness and natural science, and
virtue without God, it is understandable why Epicurus and Lucretius were thought
so dangerous by the Christian world and why the eradication of these ideas was a
primary goal of the Christian church.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, there are philosophical and
political stirrings. Men with names like Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, George
Washington, etc. were being mentioned in newspapers and circulars. What is it
that all of these men have in common? Ok – they are white and European in
origin. They were not all old when their great project to form a new nation was
born, though we do think of them as “old white men” now. Not all of them were
highly educated, though all were what we might say “well read.” With a few
exceptions, notably Sam Adams and Patrick Henry, who were orthodox Christians,
one important similarity between almost all of them is this: they all were deists.
(and then the Deist walks into the bar to join the Epicurean). Deists believe in
God, but generally speaking, believe that God created the universe, but does not
intervene. Most of these men were, directly or indirectly, strongly influenced by
Epicurus through Lucretius. Jefferson had copies of On the Nature of Things in his
library and from his letters we know he was a self-proclaimed Epicurean. Hence,
“the pursuit of happiness,’ in the Declaration of Independence.
Ben Franklin enjoyed good food and wine and ale and of course the ladies, yet he
devised a list of thirteen virtues – of which the first was temperance: eat not to
dullness; drink not to elevation. He was an Epicurean through and through.
James Madison was an orthodox Christian into his twenties, but later became a
deist and shared many of the same religious predilections as the other founders
of our republic.
So, to sum up our founding fathers’ religious bent: they were deists (i.e. they
believed God to have created the universe, but kept a “hands off” policy since),
who were heavily influenced by Enlightenment thinkers from Spinoza to Locke, as
well as by classical philosophy, particularly Epicureanism. Some of you may be
aware of Jefferson’s Bible. He cut and pasted, the old fashioned way, with glue
and scissors, so that all, or nearly all mention of miracles, including any mention
of the divine or supernatural, was cut out of the New Testament, so that basically
all that remained were the moral teachings of Jesus. He, along with deists in
general, considered Jesus to have been a great moral philosopher. Some believed
him to have had a “special” relationship with God, but none believed in the
divinity of Jesus. Hence the term, “nature’s God,” a very Epicurean and deistic
term used in the Declaration. In Matthew Stewart’s words, the founders wanted
“a God they could revere, but not obey; a God of publicly promulgated laws, not
of private and inscrutable acts; a God who could stand as an ideal, but who would
never stand in the way.” So it’s understandable that these nation builders
wanted to establish a secular government for this new nation.
Unitarianism, (and now the Unitarian walks into the bar to join her two
companions), enjoyed a special relationship with deism. In writing about that
relationship, UU minister James Ishmael Ford recently observed, “…several issues
that were in fact spiritual, in fact theological, shaping the formation of American
Unitarianism, were at the very same time flowing into that seminal document for
our republic, the Declaration of Independence.” John and Abigail Adams were
liberal Congregationalists originally, but by the time Adams returned to Boston
after the Revolution, they were Unitarians. Jefferson once stated that if there
were a Unitarian Church in Virginia he would be a Unitarian. He wrote in a letter
in 1822, “…I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States
who will not die an Unitarian.” No one ever claimed he was a great
prognosticator; however, I think it is fair to say that if you discount the extreme
religious beliefs that are, in my opinion, outliers, the American Revolution with
our Declaration of Independence and our secular constitution set up an ideal for
religion that we must admit is much more humane than it could have turned out
to be. In fact, in the words of writer Benjamin Kerstein, “The dominant ethos of
our age is defined by a scientific consensus remarkably similar to the
metaphysical concepts of Epicurus.”
I won’t go very much into the history of Unitarianism. It has a long history, as
Rev. Ben, Bernie Norcott-Mahany and others had so eloquently outlined for us in
previous sermons. Suffice it to say that throughout the 1800’s Deism became
more and more important among Unitarians. So if we look at the
Unitarian/Universalists of today, what do we see? Well, we see a variety of
world-views, just like we saw in our founders and as Ted Glenn’s survey a while
back showed, but most views are roughly within a deistic framework. Sure, some
of us are atheists or agnostics, but some of the founders could arguably have
been atheists or agnostics also, but just like today, it wasn’t politically feasible to
be open about one’s secular beliefs. In fact, recent polls indicate that roughly half
of the US electorate would not vote for a candidate they know to be an atheist.
So things haven’t changed much, in that respect, since those times. We also call
ourselves humanists, pantheists, freethinkers, and a dozen or so other assorted
names. But what is true for all of us is this: We do not need a holy book or
priestly authority to determine for us how to lead a virtuous life. We’re voracious
readers and love discussing the big issues. If you ever happen to walk by the
room where Fiske’s book group is meeting on a Sunday night, you might get an
idea of what I mean. As someone once said: arguing with a UU is like mud
wrestling a pig; pretty soon you realize the pig likes it. You also may have noticed
that we UUs tend to enjoy life – food and drink, theater, movies, music, etc. But,
again, in keeping with the views of Epicurus, we do so while helping others: from
those in our own congregation to children in Africa; from those who live orthodox
life styles to those who choose to live an alternate life style. As the Epicurean and
would-be Unitarian Thomas Jefferson wrote, “without virtue, happiness cannot
be.”
So you see there is a direct line from Epicurus to Unitarianism. It goes through
Lucretius (thanks to Poggio) and on into the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment
thinkers, which included many of our founding fathers, read On the Nature of
Things, studied the classics, and created a new nation based on the same
principles that are now a part of Unitarian Universalism.
So now I guess you’re wondering about the punch line to the bar joke. Well, I
really don’t have one! However, you can imagine that the Epicurean ordered a
watered down Greek wine, the Deist, a dark ale brewed by Sam Adams himself or
by our very own Curt Box, and the Unitarian, a bottle of a very fine Bordeaux or
perhaps a bottle of wine made by our own Ted Glenn. And then they probably
shared each other’s drinks and argued the merits of each. And then they
probably all left the bar together (not drunk, being the moderate drinkers that
they are) singing songs about the joys of life.
So, here’s your assignment: after the service today in Fellowship Hall, go eat,
drink some coffee or lemonade (but not too much), have a friendly debate about
how to live a virtuous life, think up a good punch line to the bar joke (let me know
when you find one) and above all, be happy. AMEN
Sources:
American Unitarian Conference, 12/23/14,
http://www.americanunitarian.org/fisherhistory.htm
Fontaine, Michael. A review of Tending the Epicurean Garden by Hiram Crespo.
In http://thehumanist.com/magazine/january-february2015/arts_entertainment/tending-the-epicurean=garden 22 Dec 2014
Ford, James Ishmael. “Was Jefferson a Unitarian? And Other Questions
Concerning the Influence of an Emergent Unitarianism on the Founding of the
American Republic” In Patheos.com, 17 Nov 2013
Greenblatt, Stephen. The Swerve: How the World Became Modern
Kerstein, Benjamin. “Epicurus and Job” in Philosophy Now, Sep/Oct, 2014
Kellogg, Michael K. The Roman Search for Wisdom
Lucretius. On the Nature of Things. Translated by Frank O. Copley
Stewart, Matthew. Nature’s God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic
Others who helped and/or provided encouragement: Ted Glenn, Mary
Matzeder, Danny Hewett, Dorothy Murray, Ed Brown and The Homers Group
where we solve the problems of the world every Wednesday morning
The Reading (from TS Eliot’s poem “Little Gidding”):
We shall not cease from exploration
And at the end of our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And to know the place for the first time.