An Urban Pastor Comes to Grips WIth His Backwoods Roots
Among the more conservative, fundamentalist and less educated segments of Christian faith, it is a commonly held belief that "illumination," or the ability to discern and understand the meaning of scripture, is a strictly spiritual experience in which God's Holy Spirit "illumines" the mind of the reader, if that reader is a born-again Christian and allows them to correctly interpret and understand what was written. That's not something outside the realm of understanding for anyone familiar with the contents of the Bible. But there's a legitimate question about whether simply reading and committing to memory verses of scripture translated into English is actually what the Apostle Paul meant when describing this experience, mostly in I Corinthians 2, or whether it includes understanding the original languages in which the Bible was written, along with the cultural context that its writers addressed.
The fact that there is major disagreement on doctrinal minutia, the kind that leads to conclusions on either side of the debate that the other side is operating from outside a genuine Christian experience, is the result of interpretations based on "illumination" of those who are otherwise uneducated about the historical and cultural contexts that informed the Bible's writers, assumptions that every verse is of equal inspiration, and the use of the King James text, rather than the original languages of scripture, of which those who are uneducated have no familiarity. The wide variance of interpretation on virtually every doctrinal and theological point, from the nature of conversion to speaking in tongues, is not the kind of unity of spirit that would be supporting evidence for the truth of these claims.
The Apostle Paul was an Old Testament and Torah scholar, with an education in the detailed and finer points of the Jewish scripture and practice of faith and worship. In I Corinthians 2, he is introducing the depth and scope of the same kind of study, applied to the Christian gospel, for which the scripture was still in the process of being written, to the Corinthian church which was using, in this particular example, the "backwoods, old time religion" way of figuring things out, and which was proving as divisive and inaccurate in the Corinthian church as that same approach does now among those "backwoods fundies".
God's "Final Say" on Christian Faith and Practice
My family ancestry is found, on my mother's side of the family, in rural West Virginia, in one of the most sparsely populated counties in the state. I remember the church experience at the Brushy Fork United Pentecostal Church, well off the paved road, twenty miles or more out in the hills from the county seat, where my great aunt was the "preacher." The first line of contention between different groups believing they were particularly gifted with the truth was whether a woman could preach. The Pentecostals said yes, and pointed to scripture to support their perspective. The Old Regular and Primitive Baptists said no, and pointed to scripture to support their perspective.
My mother had family members who attended churches in all of those traditions, who would not speak to each other because one side didn't believe the other side was Christian. Church was an endurance contest. At the Pentecostal church, it began with a shared breakfast at 8:00 a.m. on the one Sunday of the month that they held services, a practice that dated back to the good old days when churches shared circuit riding preachers. That was the way they'd always done it. Then, while the women cleaned up, the men had prayer meeting. Worship started at 9:30, consisting of "sangin'" during which several members, who wailed in an Appalachian folk style, led various hymns and songs, with no instrumental accompaniment, because that's not the way they did it in the old days.
"Sangin'" was followed by "preachin'" during which my great aunt, with her long, floor-length hair wrapped up in a beehive on top of her head, would start out in a sing-songy voice, working up to a climax during which she would burst into "tongues" as people in the church clapped, stood up, blurted out in similar babble, some passing out or falling to the floor in the aisles. This "altar call" would last as long as people kept it going. It would be as late as 1:00 p.m. when the service would end, and there would be "dinner on the grounds" in the spring and summer under a "brush arbor" next to the church building, in the winter, in the basement. After that, while the women cleaned up, the men went in for prayer meeting, and then another session of "sangin'" and "preachin'" before dismissing around 5:00 p.m.
Most sermons included several references, based on their interpretation of the Bible, as to why the people in other churches were wrong, and they had a corner on the truth. One of my great aunt's favorites was to say that it didn't matter if "them other churches cite the Bible back'ard or forwards," they got it wrong, and they would fail to see heaven when they died. Any inkling of confidence I ever had in anything she said was erased when I heard her in the barn below her house "practicing" her speaking in tongues. I though that was supposed to be a spontaneous, spiritual experience. As it turned out, her explanation to me--I must have been about 12 years old--when I asked, was to say, "Well, honey, sometimes you have to prime the pump."
They were convinced that the spiritual word they had, right there, in the remotest part of West Virginia, in the 1970's, was the highest point for all of Christianity. In their minds, Satan ran the rest of the world, even the larger churches in the state, in the larger towns. All that prosperity was a sign of satanic influence, deception and wickedness and they wrote it off just as easily as that. They cannot see their own sharp divisiveness as evidence of the lack of spiritual unity in their faith practice, since they only consider their own beliefs as the truth, and all of those around them as false.
That's not something to mock, or make fun of. It's a reality, created by the circumstances of cultural isolation, fear of the unknown, fear of a rapidly modernizing "outside world," economic depravity and uncertainty and a measure of pride and dignity. None of the Pentecostal, Old Regular or Primitive Baptist churches that were fairly numerous in that county in the 1970's are there any more, all gone. In fact, on a trip there in 2016, to visit my Mom's family's cemetery, we passed only one church on the way, a "half-time" (two Sundays a month) Baptist church affiliated with the most liberal Baptist denomination, ABC-USA.
There is Not Much in Common Between the "Old Time Religion" and Christian Orthodoxy
The lack of unity among the more conservative, fundamentalist branches of the American church does present a dilemma for all of it, since many of the doctrinal differences are irreconcilable and dive deep into areas where most Christians claim some common ground, specifically soteriology. It is deliberately deceitful not to acknowledge soteriological disagreements that present completely different views of Christian conversion, or salvation. Though you will not find it written in a statement of faith, Fundamentalist Christians, especially those of the "King James Only" brand, have a two step conversion process which requires acceptance of their unique set of "fundamentals of the faith" before a genuine salvation or conversion experience can occur. This contradicts the Apostle Paul's statement that salvation is a matter of God's grace alone, responding to faith alone, which generates the spiritual act of sanctification of the soul and justifying it before a Holy God.
Fundamentalism teaches that unless one understands, and assents, to their list of correct doctrine, they can't genuinely experience conviction from sin, which is the act that starts the process of salvation or conversion. So someone can only be "saved", in their vernacular, in the context of what they define as a "Bible-believing church" which they define by their literal interpretation of a few passages of the King James version of the Bible. "Sin" can only be defined in fundamentalist terms, by them, and their approach to conversion is faulty. That is a "salvation by works," which the Apostle Paul says is not the way conversion occurs.
"In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity," is a commonly used phrase, believed to have originated with Augustine, that many Christians use to describe what they perceive to be remarkable unity in doctrine, theology and practice among Christians of all persuasions. By observation, study that includes a graduate degree from a theological seminary, and a lifetime of experience, I would say that unity doesn't even exist in the very core essential beliefs of the gospel, with Fundamentalism at odds with every essential doctrine except, perhaps, the nature of God as a trinity.
Even drawing this conclusion, however, I will not criticize or ridicule the adherents of fundamentalist "old time religion," as they often call it. There's way too much of that kind of thing going on all across the Christian spectrum. I no longer consider it either my personal mission or a personal accomplishment to deliver the better argument for Biblical soundness of doctrine, or convince another Christian that their perception of their faith is wrong. Though the fundamentalists may think I'm headed straight for hell, I don't believe their deviations from orthodox Christian truth disqualifies them from faith in Christ, which comes by God's grace, not by adherence to their interpretation of doctrine and theology. I believe that the Christian tent is much broader than any single denomination or faith expression.
They get most of this wrong, and it makes it difficult to see the truth through their error. But the Christian gospel is a message of grace, the nature of God is love, and forgiveness and restoration between humanity and God is its theme. These are the folks who, as the joke goes, will have to be placed in a separate room in heaven until they eventually come to grips with the fact that they aren't the only ones there.
Why This Matters
From a position that once shunned political involvement as "worldly," this branch of Christianity has some characteristics, based on their emphasis on Bible culture and lack of it on Bible principle, that it is introducing into far right wing politics. Most notably, Christian Nationalism, with white supremacy thrown in, has some proponents who have made their way into Congress and this philosophy, which is based on the Old Testament, is attractive because of its racism. But the kind of misogyny exhibited in some aspects of right wing politics, including the disgusting, crude manner in which many right wing politicians, including Trump, treat women is also straight out of the fundamentalist book.
One of the reasons the Southern Baptists, along with many other right wing Evangelicals, are having fits with sexual abuse scandals involving clergy is their complementarian manner in which they view the role of women in the church. Their position justifies lower pay for women, exclusion from certain occupations, lack of recognition of their leadership capability and seeing them as fit for having kids and keeping house, and not much else. They teach that women getting out of traditional cultural roles from the 50's is the reason there is so much disorder and chaos in society, another false assumption.
If people choose to stifle their own freedom, which, for those who believe in the Christian gospel is that part of who they are in the image of God, that's one thing. But belonging to a group which feels a compulsion to control its members through misogyny and legalism disguised as religion, and which seeks to expand its control and enforcement of its morality on the culture at large through government is quite another. That's why we have religious liberty.
For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. The Apostle Paul, Galatians 5:1
No comments:
Post a Comment