Is E Pluribus Unum Viable Now?

In 1776, two centuries and 45 years ago, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson proposed a Great Seal for the United States. The only words on the proposed seal were E PLURIBUS UNUM, a Latin phrase meaning “one from many.”  

Viable for the United States?

According to the E Pluribus Unum Project of Assumption College (now University), e pluribus unum “offered a strong statement of the American determination to form a single nation from a collection of states.”

That phrase also indicates “America's bold attempt to make one unified nation of people from many different backgrounds and beliefs. The challenge of seeking unity while respecting diversity has played a critical role in shaping our history, our literature, and our national character.”

But is that motto still viable in the U.S.? After all these years, it seems that the nation is hardly one/unified on anything.

Oneness/unity does not depend on sameness or the denial of differences. But surely it does mean having mutual respect for those with whom we disagree and treating each other civilly. In addition, any sense of unity means people with differing views working together for the common good.

Originally, I was intending to list some of the great political, social, and religious differences now harmfully dividing USAmerican society. But perhaps those divisions are too evident to need further elaboration here.

Viable for the World?

This blog post was largely prompted by the ubuntu emphasis on the inherent oneness of humanity, which I wrote about on April 24. Even though a South African word and concept in its origin, proponents of ubuntu now speak of “the global family” and the basic oneness of humankind.

There have been many individuals and organizations longing for and working for the idea expressed by e pluribus unum to be descriptive of the whole human race.

The World Federalist Movement and One World, one of its associate members, are good examples.

The latter says on its website, “Inspired by such visionaries as Einstein and Gandhi, we regard inclusive federal democracy at the global level as a necessary precondition for justice, peace and prosperity for all of humanity.”

And they cite these words spoken by Einstein in 1945: “With all my heart I believe that the world’s present system of sovereign nations can only lead to barbarism, war, and inhumanity. Mankind’s desire for peace can be realized only by the creation of a world government.”

That assertion takes the idea of e pluribus unum to a whole new level.

What Can We Hope For?

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” Those words, based on a statement by Theodore Parker, a 19th-century clergyman, were most notably emphasized by MLK, Jr. and later by President Obama. They have been powerful words of encouragement for many justice-seekers.

But I wonder if we can also say that the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward unity/oneness. Teilhard de Chardin wrote about the universe moving to a future Omega Point, meaning that everything is spiraling towards a final point of unification.

In a helpful February 20 article, a religion professor in South Africa wrote,

As a philosopher and theologian, [Teilhard] developed a unique synthesis of science and religion based on an evolutionary understanding of what he called the ‘cosmic Christ’ – the idea that the universe and everything in it is constantly moving towards a point of perfection defined by unity and love.

That is what Teilhard later called the Omega point. And that is why the author titled her article, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin: prophet of cosmic hope .

Well, whether considering the current situation here in the U.S. or the world as a whole, it is abundantly evident we still have a long way to go. Omega of course is the last letter of the Greek alphabet, and it seems that at present we may be no further than at beta (the second letter).

Still, grounded in cosmic hope, we can dream of and diligently work for the goal of e pluribus unum not only in the U.S. but for the whole world.