On My Honor, I Will Try…
Posted in Editorials on August 6th, 2014by Elizabeth
Tags: Feminism • Religion
This post is adapted from a service I led at my Unitarian Universalist congregation.
Readings
The Girl Scout Promise
On my honor, I will try:
To serve God and my country,
To help people at all times,
And to live by the Girl Scout Law.
The Girl Scout Law
I will do my best to be
honest and fair,
friendly and helpful,
considerate and caring,
courageous and strong, and
responsible for what I say and do,
and to
respect myself and others,
respect authority,
use resources wisely,
make the world a better place, and
be a sister to every Girl Scout.
Romans 12:9-13
Let love be genuine;
hate what is evil,
hold fast to what is good;
love one another with mutual affection;
outdo one another in showing honor.
Do not lag in zeal,
be ardent in spirit,
serve the Lord
Rejoice in hope,
be patient in suffering,
persevere in prayer.
Contribute to the needs of the saints;
extend hospitality to strangers.
***
When I was a child I remember hearing about certain things being “on the honors system,” a contest or an exam given to older kids “on their honor.” I asked questions about what this meant, and I developed my own definition of honor. It means to do the right thing, even when no one else was looking. This seemed like a big responsibility. I hoped I would be up to the challenge when my turn came.
In my own life I don’t often hear of honor spoken of much in the way I have defined it – doing the right thing, even when no one is looking, being true to your word and keeping your promises. A quick search of my own Twitter stream and of google news and I see the word being used in two ways – to describe an achievement, “It’s an honor to win this award.” And to talk about something that is almost the anthesis of my meaning – honor killings.
From the website of the NGO – “The Advocates for Human Rights:”
Human Rights Watch defines “honor” crimes as “acts of violence, usually murder, committed by male family members against female family members who are perceived to have brought dishonor upon the family.” According to a report by Dr. Sherifa Zuhar of Women for Women’s Human Rights, killings committed in the name of “honor” may be motivated by “a perceived violation of the social norms of sexuality,” or they may be “crimes of passion, wherein a husband kills his wife whom he or other family members suspect of adultery.” U.N. Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women Radhika Coomaraswamy has described “honor” killings as one of many practices that “constitute a form of domestic violence but have avoided national and international scrutiny because they are seen as cultural practices that deserve tolerance and respect.
“Motives for crimes committed in the name of “honor” have included: suspicion of adultery, premarital sex, or some other relationship between a woman and a man; being a victim of rape or sexual assault; refusing to enter an arranged marriage; seeking divorce or trying to escape marital violence; and falling in love with someone who is unacceptable to the victim’s family according to The Global Campaign to Stop Killing and Stoning Women! Even seemingly minor transgressions have been identified as the reasons for carrying out “honor” killings. In one case, a teenager in Turkey had her throat slit in a town square because someone had dedicated a love ballad to her on the radio. Although the victims are most often women, men and boys may also be targeted for crimes committed in the name of “honor,” usually when they are relatives, alleged partners, or “accomplices” of a female victim according to the Special Rapporteur Asma Jaha, Commission on Human Rights. Similarly, while men and boys are usually the perpetrators, women may be involved in, or supportive of, the commission of these crimes.
According to Wikipedia, honor killings are also sometimes committed against LGBTQ people.
And so I must make a clarification as to what honor is not. Honor is not patriarchal violence. Honor is not chauvinism. Honor is not even chastity. Violence against women and other people who do not meet ancient codes of sexual purity is in no way honorable.
Honor cannot be bestowed upon a person or taken away by other people. It is a quality describing how a person lives.
There is no group of people who hold a monopoly on honor. In some misogynist corners of the internet, Men’s Rights Advocates are fond of saying that “Honor is a male abstraction. Don’t expect women to understand.” I reject this definition and its limited worldview.
Honor is not pride. When someone cuts me off in traffic and I slam on my horn and yell something not very polite, because of my own bruised ego, I’m not defending my own honor. I’m embarrassing myself in a potentially dangerous way.
The reason I wanted to talk about honor here today began when I was thinking about the seven principles of Unitarian Universalism. I was trying to decipher what meaning they had for me as a whole, and not just as individual precepts. And what I started to conclude was that they are about doing good for the sake of what is good. This fits so neatly with my girlhood definition of honor – doing the right thing when no one is looking. And it reminded me of that promise I made “On my honor, I will try…” I went back and looked up the Girl Scout Law and I was surprised at how it echoes our principles:
to be honest and fair,
to respect myself and others,
-
Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
to be friendly and helpful,
considerate and caring,
-
Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
to use resources wisely,
to make the world a better place
-
Respect for the interdependent web of life of which we are a part.
I also looked to see what the Bible has to say about honor. There were many passages, but the one I read today echoes the message I’m trying to impart:
[H]old fast to what is good;
love one another with mutual affection;
outdo one another in showing honor.
….
Contribute to the needs of the saints;
extend hospitality to strangers.
So what does this have to do with how we live our lives day today? How is this concept relevant if it’s not spoken of in this context much anymore? And how does this specifically relate to Unitarian Universalism?
This past May I attended the UU Metro NY district conference, and I went to a workshop called “Getting to the Roots: Our UU Theology of Collaboration” It was led by Rev. Joan Van Becelaere a UU Minister in Ohio, that was described this way:
The Puritan ancestors of the Unitarian side of the UUA were much bolder than we commonly think. They envisioned an association of individual congregations far more collaborative and connected than commonly thought. The vision was actually quite radical. In these times of change in society and the world as well as in our districts and regions, can this collaborative theology at the roots of our organizational DNA help us meet our current challenges and give us a new perspective on what it means to work for the creation of the Beloved Community?
At this workshop, I learned about how many early American congregations were based on covenant. Covenant was and is “the matter and form of the church.” People who were living together in community also vowed to worship together in covenant. And the value of the covenant is the honor of it’s participants. It was their honor to keep their word and do what’s right for the community.
Today we are in covenant with each other in our congregation, and as a congregation with other UU Congregations throughout the country and the world. The value of our covenants is the strength of our honor.
We also see this at the end of our Declaration of Independence. The signers pledged, “our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”
Honor is the glue that holds us together.
August 6th, 2014 at 5:16 pm
Thanks for this posting. I really enjoyed reading it especially since I missed Sunday’s service.
August 8th, 2014 at 10:20 am
I wrote, and did a lay service about this topic some years ago from a historical prospective. In this country their are two almost entirely different cultural understandings about honor. One introduced by the Scotch-Irish but reinforced by other later ethnic immigrants right up to today, views honor as something fragile which can be taken away by the actions or words of others and which must be vigilantly defended at all costs. Thus the code duello and fights to the death over even trivial slights. The honor killings are an extension of the same thing. On the other hand from our Puritan ancestors we have an entirely different interpretation, essentially the one you are proposing. Honor is entirely internalized and belongs to the individual and cannot be sullied unless the individual fails to uphold his/her highest expectations of probity, honesty, and fairness. This kind of honor cannot be wounded by others. Indeed in its extreme it seems to view persecution for upholding values as both a test and proof–witness the early abolitionists who sometimes almost welcomed attack and even martyrdom. These to different values are so at odds that some ethnologists hold them to be responsible for many of the lingering cultural and even regional divides that beset our nation. We literally cannot understand each other.
August 8th, 2014 at 2:28 pm
That’s very interesting, Patrick. Thanks for that comment!