This week I've read a couple of posts where people are thinking about how much or little people, especially post modern people, whatever that means, feel any sense of allegiance to connectedness to historic denominations. As I've read, commented (rather ham fistedly) and reflected, I think there is something subtle here that I am missing.
My own Christian experience has been strongly influenced by 'small c' congregationalism - i.e. local authority and autonomy but with come sort of associationalism or connexionalism. I only discovered this when I was in membership of a church that didn't operate on a congregtional model. Realising that this mattered to me, meant that the roots of this movement in the East Midlands/East Anglia area where I grew up became important to me. People were willing to be arrested, imprisoned, fined or executed for their right to practice this approach to Christianity - so it mattered to me that their tradition was honoured.
But how much is this a reflection of my own personality and interests? I have always loved history and felt it held the key to avoiding the endless reptition of errors that humans make (OK, I was an odd child, thinking about deep questions when anyone else was playing with Barbies or Action Men). I am also, apparently, by personality type, loyal - once I sign up with something it is difficult for me to abandon it - as well as a whole load of other rather serious attributes. So maybe who I am means that denominations and their histories are inherently more attractive to me than to others?
There are lots of people who recongise the value of, say, congregational governance believer (NOT, NOT, NOT adult!) baptism, liturgy, sacred dance, two or seven sacraments, or whatever, but have no similar sense of allegiance to, or fascination with, the traditions from which they emerged. That isn't wrong, but it is different. Subtley maybe, but none the less relevant, perhaps especially in thinking about the potential longer term survival of these funny things called denominations. Whilst I think that Christianity >> Church >>> denominations, I also think that denominations have an inherent worth in preventing the "big C" Church sliding into a monochrome extreme. Perhaps denominations are a necessary heresy?!
One thing that intrigues me, though I know little about it and have scant evidence to make any claims, is that the same poeple who feel little or no denominational allegiance feel strong allegiance to football teams or nations. Whilst loyalty to Tottenham Hotspur over Arsenal is entirely laudible (Oops, that's a fail in my doctorate then), I don't readily see how someone can feel loyal to a football team, and interested in the scores of matches no one remembers, but not to the faith tradition that has nurtured them. I think I'm missing something subtle and important somewhere. Maybe someone clever can help me out here...?
Comments
I reckon everyone is loyal to something, and that loyalty will actually grow out of some sort of attachment, something in their personal history that has helped them to form an identity and a set of positive associations about themsleves and the world. It's not just about the significance of the tradition or the place (sorry, that word again!), it's what it says about them and who they are - the meaning they give to it and the meaning it gives back to them.
Did you see 'Who Do You Think You Are?' last night? John Hurt discovered he wasn't really descended from the illegitimate child of the Second Marquis of Sligo, but actually from a man who had invented a respectable and accomplished reputation/past in place of his father's humble occupation and eventual imprisonment for debt. Interesting and, for the onlooker, mildly amusing, but for him a great and highly significant chunk of his identity totally gone. He'd moved to Ireland and was proud to have a son born there. He'd felt a spiritual affinity with the place because of this connection. The man was totally undermined! Why? Why logically should people from another century, who he'd never had any chance of knowing or being influenced by have any effect on how he felt about himself today? Why should his ancestors coming from Croydon rather than Ireland make any difference to his self regard or sense of place?
The meanings and identities we embrace (Spurs, Irishness, Northapmtonshireness, socialism, anabaptism, evangelicalism) become a defining part of us, but even within one religious tradition those identities will not be homogenous; their meaning may even be contested - OK perhaps Spurs only have one meaning (discuss) - but Baptist heritage has multiple threads (whether that be Thomas Helwys, Martin Luther King, evangelistic preaching and extempore prayer, separation of church and state, sacred dance, Songs and Hymns of Fellowship Book 3 on laptop and digital projector, Jimmy Carter, Michael Taylor, the green hymn book, the red hymn book, the blue hymn book (no, that was congregational!), religious liberty, believers' baptism, the EA Doctrinal Statement or Purpose Driven Church). One of these or a combination will probably keep you getting up in the morning and going to church because it says who you are, what is really important to you and what your 'ultimate concern' is (as the man said 'What would you be willing to die for? That is your ultimate concern'), but it's pretty certain the person in the next seat will have a different bundle of meanings and identities and they may equally find an approximation to the bits they value bundled up in another denomination or tradition as in the one where they happened to find them to begin with...
Rats, I've just read your last sentence and realise how pretentious all this looks. Sorry. Back to writing 1500 words on children in church for Wednesday before I make myself look even more pseudy. Spot the displacement activity!
I think you are right that people become loyal to something or other, and that's kind of where I think I'm coming from...
Regarding your penultimate statement - nah, you got your first more recently than I got mine ergo you are more brainy cos my brain is more atrophied.
But my brain has probably atrophied quicker than yours. There is evidence to suggest this, Galadriel Moltmann!