"Why We Think We Are the First" by Rev. Thomas Schade

There is no prize for being the first Unitarian Church in New England, or the United States. The church so considered does not get to march first in the banner parade at General Assembly. Our ministers are not accorded any greater respect, not are their pronouncements on theological subjects given any more weight. In fact, nobody in their right mind gives a toot, but that has never stopped us before. Like some dear old soul dragging some ghastly knick-knack from the attic up to the table on Antique Roadshow, we seek personal validation from the past. Such is the devotional life of the cult of New England; dedicated to our regional trinity of antiques, architecture and ancestors.


So, it is with a great deal of churchly pride, that we scratch into the parchments of history, our claim to be the first genuine, real and authentic Unitarian Church in all of New England, and perhaps North America and any other associated galaxies. Everywhere, church historians look up from their dusty labors and say “What?” Everywhere, everybody else choruses, “So What?” How could a church gathered at the late date of 1785 be the first Unitarian Church? 1785 is even after the Revolution (the founding our our nation, not the soccer team). Churches dating back into the 1600’s are as common as Dunkin Donuts stores here in New England. Such institutions as the First Parish in Salem were formed in 1639. And the First Parish Church of Plymouth was organized in Leyden, in the Netherlands, in 1606 and touts itself as the “oldest continuous church in New England.”


We, of course, bow to their longevity, but point out that they are competing in a different class. When did they become Unitarian Churches?


When the English Puritans arrived here in Massachusetts, they set up a church in every town. That church was to be supported by everyone in the town, or the parish. The “church membership” was a smaller body of the most committed believers in the community. You can tell those churches today because they often go by the name of “The First Parish of East Overshoe.” They often are that picturesque church on the town common. That system of state supported churches was called the “Standing Order.”


When they were founded, you might say that they were Puritan Churches, although “Puritanism”” was a much broader religious, cultural and political movement, and not a denominational name.


The churches of the Standing Order divided into Congregational and Unitarian branches during the first half of the 19th century. However, in 1785, decades earlier, the First Parish of Worcester divided into two parishes along theological lines.


The story of the founding of First Unitarian Church is this: The First Parish of Worcester was long served by the Rev. Timothy Maccarty. When he grew ill and died, the congregation heard Rev. Aaron Bancroft several times. A portion of the congregation favored his more liberal preaching and wished to call Bancroft to the pulpit of Worcester’s First, and then only, Parish Church. However, the majority preferred someone more orthodox.


After all attempts at compromise failed, the liberals, 67 of them, petitioned to divide the parish, creating the Second Parish of Worcester. They did not propose to divide the parish geographically, but to have two parishes in the same physical space, but divided theologically. The liberals met on March 20, 1785 to hear their preferred minister, Rev. Bancroft. In essence, they were a breakaway group who left First Parish Worcester for theological reasons. They knew what they were doing. The church formed to serve Worcester’s Second Parish was, and remains, the First Unitarian Church of Worcester.


We believe that the split in the First Parish of Worcester was the first division of a Parish of the Standing Order for theological reasons. And hence, the First Unitarian Church, Second Parish of Worcester is the first Unitarian church in New England.


Others make the same claim. King’s Chapel in Boston also makes a claim to be the first Unitarian Church in North America. Theirs is a different story.


King’s Chapel was an Anglican church, whose connection to the Church of England was understandably compromised during the American Revolution. Unable to find an Episcopalian priest to serve, church leaders hired James Freeman, a Congregationalist, to be their lay reader lead in 1782. Freeman asked for and received permission to revise the liturgy and the Book of Common Prayer to reflect his more Unitarian views. In 1785, the new liturgy was adopted and in 1787, Freeman was ordained by the congregation there, instead of by a Bishop of the Anglican church.


While King’s Chapel has a long and wonderful history, in the spirit of friendly rivalry, we at First Unitarian Worcester contest their claim to being first.


The creation of the First Unitarian Church, Second Parish of Worcester, was a deliberate and conscious act of breaking away from the First Parish. The 67 persons who made this move left their former companions for a new religious journey; they took on new costs, built a new church. It was an act of conscious commitment; they knew they were starting something new. This is what change looks like.


On the other hand, the congregants of Kings Chapel committed themselves to nothing very novel at all. They stayed in their building, sitting in the same pews, listening to the same preacher, and yes, assenting to barely perceptible changes in the liturgy and the prayer book. We would say that their act of ordaining their own minister, two years later, marks the real transition to a new spiritual path.


Now, does it matter who went first? In the great scheme of things, obviously not. But now, in the context of our 225th anniversary, engaging in this bit of competitive boasting, helps to focus our thoughts on what makes a Unitarian church Unitarian.


It is not the words that we say that makes us Unitarians. It is our actions: joining with others in a spirit of religious freedom to worship God, stepping out from the comfortable confines of a conforming community. It is not the nuances of the wording of the prayers we say, but our eagerness to hear bold and provocative preaching.


And on score, I think we can claim, “We’re number one!”.