Category Archives: culture

A Yoke Around My Neck

3 Replies

tiesThey say that neckties are making a comeback. Too bad, I say. I’m not a fan.

I especially don’t like the way ties have been used in churches in developing nations. In many countries, the tie is seen as a symbol of Christianity. Schools of preaching require their students to wear ties, some of whom return to their home congregation, trying to impose the fashion there. In countries where neckties are virtually unknown, you see preachers wearing ties (often in garish colors that in no way match the clothes they wear). In Argentina, if you saw someone wearing a tie walking down the street on Sunday, you had almost certainly found an evangelical.

On Islamic websites, posters ask if the tie is meant to be a symbol of the cross, or if the imposition of ties in business settings isn’t an attempt to proselytize. One reporter who was held captive by the Taliban told of being questioned on several occasions as to what magic Christians saw in neckties.

Wear your ties, if you like. Just don’t mix fashions and faith… neither here nor overseas.

Finally, during some Bible study yesterday, I discovered that neckties are criticized in the New Testament! Note this from the book of Acts:

“Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear?” (Acts 15:10)

There you have it. Why put on the necks of the disciples a yoke that others have not been able to bear? That settles it. No neckties.

(OK, maybe I’m not totally serious on that one…)

Photo by Jane M. Sawyer via MorgueFile.com

Should church be a Huxtable sweater?

Leave a reply

Jason preachingWe had a Unity Service on Sunday, joining our bilingual service with the group that meets in the main auditorium. The service featured videos of members who spoke different languages (most of them speaking their native language). The prayers at the communion table were in Spanish, Swahili, and Portuguese, translated into English.

Our youth minister, Jason Craddock, did a wonderful job of preaching bilingually. He compared the church to a Cliff Huxtable sweater, a collection of varied fabrics woven together into one functional unit. The variations in textures and colors make the sweater/church the unique entity that it is.

Songs were in English and Spanish, as were all prayers and announcements. Much time and planning went into this service.

I was one who pushed for us to begin these services, then became worried about them becoming too frequent. (we’re talking about doing four this year) All of the feedback that I’ve heard has been good, and the elders have assured me that their experience has been the same.

I was reminded of reality yesterday, though, when a friend from another congregation mentioned having seen one of our long-time members at their church. When my friend greeted this member, the member smiled sheepishly and said, “It’s bilingual Sunday at UCC.” No further explanation… in his mind, that was reason enough for going elsewhere.

Not everyone wants the church to be like a Huxtable sweater, I guess.

Holy kisses and ignored commands

9 Replies

320px-Flickr_-_europeanpeoplesparty_-_EPP_Congress_Bonn_(515)I lived fifteen years in Argentina. My wife is from there, as are my kids. I’ve had the privilege to learn a lot about the culture of Argentina.

80% of the population of Argentina is of Italian and/or Spanish descent. The Mediterranean culture has had a tremendous impact on Argentina. That can be helpful at times when looking at the New Testament, for it was principally written by and for people of that region.

In Argentina, no one argues that the “holy kiss” of the New Testament is something restricted to the past. As in the culture in general, Christians greet one another with a “kiss,” though in most cases only the cheeks touch. There’s nothing remotely sexual about it.

But if we examine the holy kiss in New Testament writings, we’ll find some interesting things about this “command.” It’s only found in the final section of letters, in the midst of other greetings. It took me a while to realize that this is not a command at all.

Romans 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.
1 Corinthians 16:20 All the brothers send you greetings. Greet one another with a holy kiss.
2 Corinthians 13:12 Greet one another with a holy kiss.
1 Thessalonians 5:26   Greet all the brothers with a holy kiss.
1 Peter 5:14 Greet one another with the kiss of love.  Peace to all of you who are in Christ.

Imagine getting a letter from a friend that says, “Tell your mom I said hello.” How would you interpret that command? It’s not really a command, is it? It’s doubtful that your friend will quiz you later on your fulfillment of that order.

When I receive letters from friends from Latin America, I often receive hugs and kisses, sometimes for other people. It’s common to end a letter with the phrase “un abrazo” (a hug) or “un beso” (a kiss). Some will write “un abrazo fraternal” (a brotherly hug). Sometimes they will send you a hug or a kiss for someone else.

When Peter and Paul ask Christians to greet one another with a holy kiss, it’s not a command for the church. It’s not some new instruction they hadn’t thought of, some sort of law that they will transgress if they don’t obey. There was no fear that (a) they wouldn’t greet one another; (b) they wouldn’t kiss; nor (c) it wouldn’t be holy. Saying “Greet one another with a holy kiss) was a courteous expression.

There are commands in the New Testament that we don’t follow. Many who obey the commandment in 1 Corinthians 16:2 to collect money on a weekly basis disobey the instruction in the same passage to save said money until Paul comes to take it to Jerusalem. And other commands are understood to not be intended for us today.

But don’t point to the holy kiss as an ignored command. That’s not what it is.

And by the way… tell the members at your church that I said hello.

photo from Wikimedia user Zil

Bible-shaped culture or culture-shaped Bible?

2 Replies

Bible in the shadowI realize in talking with others that there are lots of different views as to how the Bible interacted with the culture of the people who wrote it. No surprise, I know, but I understand better now how that deeply affects how we read the Bible.

Some people, for example, take an extremely low view of Scripture. The Bible, for them, is merely a sacred text like other sacred texts written by ancient peoples. Prophecies were written after the fact and adjusted to fit what actually happened. Laws were written to give “divine sanction” to existing situations. The slaughter of other nations is justified by describing it as holy war, while attacks on one’s own people are an affront against God. Women are oppressed and slavery is upheld because the Bible was written to uphold the status quo.

Others see the Bible as coming down from heaven untainted by human culture. If the Bible says God has storehouses for snow, then there are some sort of heavenly structures filled with frozen precipitation, waiting to be sent. If God said not to trim the corners of the beard, then there’s a heavenly reason for that. Laws were not shaped around man; man was shaped around the laws.

Then there’s a myriad of views in between, seeing God as speaking to human culture within the framework of a specific historical context. Heavenly truths expressed through earthly means. God’s word for a particular situation needing to be translated into God’s word for our situation.

That’s why some look at demon possession and say “epilepsy.” Others look at teachings about greeting with a holy kiss and say, “Yes, but that was then.” Others will only take the Lord’s Supper in an upper room.

If you had to state your views on how the Bible shaped and was shaped by the culture of its time, what would you say?

photo from MorgueFile.com

Worship styles as cultural differences

4 Replies

old churchI’m finally reading Paul Hiebert’s Transforming Worldviews: An Anthropological Understanding of How People Change. Hiebert was a pioneer in the field of missionary anthropology. I had looked at the book a few years ago when searching for a textbook for a sophomore level missions class. I saw that the book addressed the themes of the class, but that it was too advanced for sophomores.

Now I’m finally getting back to it. Being a student of culture and culture change, I’m finding the book fascinating. I’m reading the Kindle edition, which allows you to highlight passages. I told Carolina that the highlighted passages outweigh the non-highlighted passages!

I found one chart very interesting, a comparison of three church styles: high church, evangelical church, and charismatic church. Interesting to see them analyzed as different worldviews.

Services in a high church focus on mystery, awe, and holiness. They take place in cathedrals, using the following forms of expression: rituals, chants, liturgy, candles, procession and high order. People often kneel or prostrate themselves. The overwhelming focus is on God the Father.

Evangelical church services, according to Hiebert, focus on peace, order, and hope. They take place in churches, using preaching, hymns, testimonies, silence and meditation. People stand, sit and bow their heads. The focus is on Jesus.

Charismatic churches focus on ecstasy, power, and action. They take place in meeting halls, and have prophecy, choruses, dancing, clapping, and healing. People lift their hands and raise their faces. The focus is on the Spirit.

It seems to me (not Hiebert) that much of the “worship wars” have to do with people in one tradition wanting to incorporate elements from another tradition. It’s also about people judging their outlook to be correct and the others as “boring” or “entertainment-focused” or not “decent and in order.”

Any insights that you pick up from this?

photo from MorgueFile.com