If you read this blog, you'll know that I often refer to the natural grouping of humanity as the tribe. This is not my idea. It's documented. Birds form flocks, wolves form packs, humans form tribes.
Like anything, tribal tendencies can be perverted and have been blamed for many of the conflicts in Africa. So much so that many have called for conscious abandonment of tribalism. As an aside, I think this is a mistake. We can't deny what we were made to be. The conflicts come because the tribal balance was artificially disrupted by the European colonization of these places which drew national lines right through ancient tribal holdings irrespective of their boundaries and told all the people to grow up and be Western. But that's not my point.
My point is that Christianity is a restoration of things. As such, it is inherently tribal. The lifestyle of Jesus and the organization of the early church are very much tribal. People are given an identity, which is permanent and personal. They aren't members of...they ARE something. Membership implies that you join and therefore can unjoin. It's an affiliation that one chooses. Tribal belonging is who you are. You ARE this thing. It is part of you and you are part of it. It is less what it is without you, and you are not all you are without it.
It has an identity. The tribe is about something. People of that tribe look a certain way, live a certain way, and believe certain things about themselves and the world because they are of that tribe. Yet the tribe is formed because the people share these things. The identity is the lifestyle, and the reverse. (Are you catching the organic bidirectional synergy here?)
They both have the same type of government. Christianity is organized under leaders who both have a divine appointment, and are confirmed by the community. This may not be your understanding from your version of Christianity, but research the descriptions of the early church in the Bible and you'll see. "elders" (your translation may say "Bishops", but that term implies a meaning not in the original) are people God has given an ability to lead, usually experienced and older than the headstrong young. But they aren't self-appointed. The tribe selects and confirms them through their natural respect of these people. Those who are elders will be and those who are not will not be. No one campaigns for it. See the synergy again? A council of elders helps guide the group and everyone participates in the government of the group as they have ability.
Many tribes are run the same way. Often even calling them elders! You may have romanticized ideas of tribal kings and chiefs and such, but this is far less the fact than the council of guiders. Plus in root tribal society, there are usually no laws as we know them. People are guided by what is "right" and "wrongness" is rejected. They don't need laws because they all know naturally. In cases of dispute there are procedures to resolve it, or a split may occur. Which leads to the next way Christianity is tribal.
Tribes are not always homogeneous. Within tribes there are bands, within bands, families. Tribes themselves may sit within nations of related or federated tribes. Examples include the Iroquois, the Five Civilized Tribes, and the Sioux Nation...to name a few from the US (which I'm most familiar with). Incidentally, the US governmental system of states and congress was largely patterned after the Iroquois who consulted at the Continental Congress, albeit Westernized with Greek and Roman ideas which the Iroquois were against. Really...look it up.
So it is no surprise that there might be 41,000 versions of Christianity across the world. One nation/faith with many tribes/denominations which are full of bands/local churches. Each may vary in their customs, style, and coping strategies, but they are part of the one nation of God.
I could go on and on about how there is allowance in tribes for geographic and environmental adaptation just as Christianity has diverged and adapted to various cultures and situations, how typical roles in the tribe equate to spiritual gifts described in the Bible, how even the conflicts among Christian groups and other faiths mirror tribal conflicts. But this is enough to chew on for now.
I encourage you to look it up. Research the organization of ancient Israel, American tribes, and other tribal societies. Also check the organization of the early church. Read the Biblical sources, check the Greek, look at extra-Biblical writings from the same period as the Bible, compare anthropological evidence. Use credible sources and get a diversity of opinions. I bet you'll come to the same conclusion.
And that makes perfect sense if Christianity is a restoration of the way things were intended to be. The closer people live to how things were originally intended, the more they should look similar, right?
The next question is of course, what should this understanding mean to us? But I'll save that for later.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
41,000
There are an estimated 41,000 Christian denominations. This varies depending on how you count, but lower numbers are around 33,000. Wow. That's a lot. And I'm sure this doesn't pick up many 'flavors' and styles within denominations.
The fact that there are so many doesn't really concern me. Humans are a persnickity people who love to lump and split and join and faction. Especially with things so dear to our hearts, like sports teams, and colleges, and fashion styles, landscaping, music, and religion. I believe this to be a natural, though often perverted and at times over active tendency based in our genetic tribalism. I've said it before; wolves have packs, birds have flocks, humans have tribes. Best to simply accept it and move on.
But anyway, the thing that concerns me is what happens amongst Christians...they tend to assume people are on their side. I can't tell you how many times I've talked to someone who finds out I'm a Christian who then assumes I believe so many things that they associate with it. When statistically, I'm far less likely to believe what they do. Of course it would be more prudent to discover a little more about my beliefs before getting into controversial topics, or simply avoid them altogether, but prudence is not a popular quality, nor is logic taught widely enough to achieve the same effect simply from efficiency.
So why do so many people automatically assume I am of their particular bent in what is truthfully quite a diverse pool? Some of it is probably that people don't really encounter that many of the denominations in their lives. Many are very small and regionalized, so it's a much smaller set of groups people encounter. But even if there were only five major groups (I believe most people encounter far more than that) the beliefs could be different enough to teach us we may not be talking to someone who believes like we do.
So then there's training. Most people really only know one or two in any depth. Even if they've encountered others. And if we know more, we're usually taught they are wrong. This isn't usually the actual teaching, nor the reason the denominations split. As CS Lewis said, those at the center of the wheel are much closer together than those at the end of the spokes. If you research it, you'll find it is usually a very minor point of order or belief that caused the split. Then culture and human nature did the rest.
But to return to the point, people may assume I believe like them, because I wouldn't be where they are, and friendly, if I didn't. Or else, I've just confessed I do (in their mind) by the use of the term Christian, which they take to mean their version of it (which could be the only version they know).
Then some of it may be due to the fact that we don't talk about it in America. I truthfully talked more publicly about my faith, and to a much more receptive audience, I might add, in Japan. Coming from a pluralistic background, and in the safety of their decidedly non-Christian culture, my beliefs were no threat to them. I was in no danger of wrecking their country with my weird ways. So they could be genuinely curious and respectful. I don't know about other countries, but I imagine other cultures range up and down the spectrum of tolerance from my two experiences.
Anyway, we don't talk about religion much in America, so it's almost a cagey thing to even bring up...even in a church. We aren't used to explaining our beliefs or talking openly about them. So when someone finds a 'clue' that I might share their beliefs, they drop guard and assume without thinking about the reality.
To branch out a bit, I'm convinced that many people abandon the term Christian altogether for more or less the same reasons. Some don't want to be associated with the notion they have in their head of one denomination or experience when really their beliefs are very close to many other types of Christianity. Some don't want others to think they're "one of those people" because of the negative connotation they bring to it.
So doesn't one of these denominations have to be right? How can I be so loose about it? Well, sure, Truth, by definition can't be pluralistic. But we're talking about human systems here. At the root of Christianity there are some basic tenets that most groups will align on. For one, they all center on the man Jesus. They may differ on exactly who he was or what he did, but those distinctions are for the individual to root out. We also all pretty much follow the same moral code...which incidentally we share with every other major world religion because (here's a secret), it wasn't created by Jesus. It's innate to all humans. The Bible even talks about this. The rest is mostly just style, culture, and opinion.
Of course, ruling out all the distinctions for a watery ecumenical faith is not good either. I'm simply suggesting we, first of all, know what we believe and recognize it as part of a wondrous diversity. The God who could generate such a world of lifeforms could certainly reflect some diversity in music style and opinion. Secondly, don't be afraid to explain your beliefs...which is tied to my third point: don't assume others believe the same way. Go ahead and investigate and decide what's right for yourself. Then stick to it. But just because I go to certain place or say a certain thing, doesn't mean I'm also number 31,234...I could just as well be 31,235, or even 14,657! And my version may just have an answer for the burning problem you want to talk about.
The fact that there are so many doesn't really concern me. Humans are a persnickity people who love to lump and split and join and faction. Especially with things so dear to our hearts, like sports teams, and colleges, and fashion styles, landscaping, music, and religion. I believe this to be a natural, though often perverted and at times over active tendency based in our genetic tribalism. I've said it before; wolves have packs, birds have flocks, humans have tribes. Best to simply accept it and move on.
But anyway, the thing that concerns me is what happens amongst Christians...they tend to assume people are on their side. I can't tell you how many times I've talked to someone who finds out I'm a Christian who then assumes I believe so many things that they associate with it. When statistically, I'm far less likely to believe what they do. Of course it would be more prudent to discover a little more about my beliefs before getting into controversial topics, or simply avoid them altogether, but prudence is not a popular quality, nor is logic taught widely enough to achieve the same effect simply from efficiency.
So why do so many people automatically assume I am of their particular bent in what is truthfully quite a diverse pool? Some of it is probably that people don't really encounter that many of the denominations in their lives. Many are very small and regionalized, so it's a much smaller set of groups people encounter. But even if there were only five major groups (I believe most people encounter far more than that) the beliefs could be different enough to teach us we may not be talking to someone who believes like we do.
So then there's training. Most people really only know one or two in any depth. Even if they've encountered others. And if we know more, we're usually taught they are wrong. This isn't usually the actual teaching, nor the reason the denominations split. As CS Lewis said, those at the center of the wheel are much closer together than those at the end of the spokes. If you research it, you'll find it is usually a very minor point of order or belief that caused the split. Then culture and human nature did the rest.
But to return to the point, people may assume I believe like them, because I wouldn't be where they are, and friendly, if I didn't. Or else, I've just confessed I do (in their mind) by the use of the term Christian, which they take to mean their version of it (which could be the only version they know).
Then some of it may be due to the fact that we don't talk about it in America. I truthfully talked more publicly about my faith, and to a much more receptive audience, I might add, in Japan. Coming from a pluralistic background, and in the safety of their decidedly non-Christian culture, my beliefs were no threat to them. I was in no danger of wrecking their country with my weird ways. So they could be genuinely curious and respectful. I don't know about other countries, but I imagine other cultures range up and down the spectrum of tolerance from my two experiences.
Anyway, we don't talk about religion much in America, so it's almost a cagey thing to even bring up...even in a church. We aren't used to explaining our beliefs or talking openly about them. So when someone finds a 'clue' that I might share their beliefs, they drop guard and assume without thinking about the reality.
To branch out a bit, I'm convinced that many people abandon the term Christian altogether for more or less the same reasons. Some don't want to be associated with the notion they have in their head of one denomination or experience when really their beliefs are very close to many other types of Christianity. Some don't want others to think they're "one of those people" because of the negative connotation they bring to it.
So doesn't one of these denominations have to be right? How can I be so loose about it? Well, sure, Truth, by definition can't be pluralistic. But we're talking about human systems here. At the root of Christianity there are some basic tenets that most groups will align on. For one, they all center on the man Jesus. They may differ on exactly who he was or what he did, but those distinctions are for the individual to root out. We also all pretty much follow the same moral code...which incidentally we share with every other major world religion because (here's a secret), it wasn't created by Jesus. It's innate to all humans. The Bible even talks about this. The rest is mostly just style, culture, and opinion.
Of course, ruling out all the distinctions for a watery ecumenical faith is not good either. I'm simply suggesting we, first of all, know what we believe and recognize it as part of a wondrous diversity. The God who could generate such a world of lifeforms could certainly reflect some diversity in music style and opinion. Secondly, don't be afraid to explain your beliefs...which is tied to my third point: don't assume others believe the same way. Go ahead and investigate and decide what's right for yourself. Then stick to it. But just because I go to certain place or say a certain thing, doesn't mean I'm also number 31,234...I could just as well be 31,235, or even 14,657! And my version may just have an answer for the burning problem you want to talk about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
