Man-Made or God-Made
Over the years, I’ve heard this said a few
times by a hand-full of people –all practicing-Christians of the non-liturgical
persuasions– something like “I don’t believe
in man-made traditions, just the traditions that come from God.” I’m sure there are others that believe this
too, though. The impression here is that they only give credence
to those traditions they perceive as coming directly from God. The
other traditions, human made ones, are just that… human-influenced traditions,
and therefore not only not authentic, but not worthy of giving any significance
to. Interesting though how they celebrate
birthdays and other secular festivities.
And maybe even some religious holidays, like Christmas.
Now I’m making a few assumptions about these
people; 1– Since they were all Christians, I assume it would follow in their
minds that Christianity (or the
form of it they were familiar with) would be the religion that fits in this
category of “God-made”, and 2– I also assume this has to do with the idea of
biblical authority. The logic here is
that since from their perspective the bible comes (directly or otherwise) from God, then
the traditions listed in the bible would also be “from God”.
But I have a hard time discerning which Christian
traditions (if any) they think would be directly from God, and which might be human-made. Would
Christmas be one of those “God-authorized”
traditions?… I’m not sure. All of us Christians celebrate Christmas. Don’t all of us Christians celebrate the birth
of Jesus as December 25th? You’d think. But no, this is a trick question. Our Western
churches celebrate the date on December 25th, but the Orthodox churches celebrate Christmas
day on January 7th. But that’s
not what the bible says. Sorry, another
trick question – not only does the bible not
tell us when Jesus was born, it doesn’t even mandate this be celebrated. Well, to be fair, the bible doesn’t tell us not to celebrate Christmas either. It is
in the Bible though, so the question is:
Is it a God-made tradition or is it a human-made tradition?
Before we look at the traditions, let’s look
at the story itself. The bible has the
“Christmas story” in two places; the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke. In Luke, for example, Jesus is born in a
manger. But in Matthew Jesus is born in
a house. The Star… this is just found
in the Matthew story. But only Luke has
the story of the Angels. Matthew has the
story of the kings (or
magi, wise-men, but doesn’t say now many), but Luke has no kings… just shepherds (again, here, the text doesn’t say how many). Matthew has the story of the murder
of the innocents and the fleeing into Egypt.
Luke does not include this. There’s more, but you get the idea. They have the same main character in baby Jesus,
and they’re generally similar stories, but the details are very different.
So, different stories… maybe different traditions. Considering
the variations and nuance surrounding Christmas celebrations around the world,
past and present, how could we judge which to be most “true” or authentic? Almost all of us use some kind of coniferous
tree, or an approximate facsimile thereof.
But… but… in the biblical stories there is no mention of a tree like
that. And there certainly there is no mention of
putting lights on said non-mentioned tree.
Christmas goose? Cranberry sauce
and apple cider? Oh, so yummy, but not
in the stories either. But these are
just customs continued in our 21st century America. Continued
from when? And where? What about the Christmas customs from our continent
from previous centuries? Or the Christmas
customs from other countries and places… throughout these past 2 thousand
years? Pray tell, which are the most “authentic”
customs? I’m not sure even they might know which
tradition(s) would be the “God directed” “right” ones.
“But the bible doesn’t say to celebrate
Christmas – so we’re on our own on that one.
Have fun” Okay, let’s look at
some traditions that God does tell us
to continue.
The Orthodox Jewish tradition has this
practice of using phylacteries, leather boxes containing certain verses of
scripture in them bound to the forearm and forehead with leather straps. Deuteronomy 6 and 11 call the faithful to
wear them as a reminder of the covenant God made with the people, and the peoples
response to this covenant. Deuteronomy
6: 7 Repeat them (the words of the law
of God) again and again to your children. Talk about them when you are at home
and when you are on the road, when you are going to bed and when you are
getting up.8 Tie them to your hands and wear them on your forehead as
reminders.9 Write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. Deuteronomy 11: 18 and following repeats the chapter
and verses above, "So commit yourselves wholeheartedly to these words of
mine. Tie them to your hands and wear them on your forehead as
reminders.19 Teach them to your children. Talk about them when you are at
home and when you are on the road, when you are going to bed and when you are
getting up.20 Write them on the doorposts of your house and on your
gates,21 so that as long as the sky remains above the earth, you and your
children may flourish in the land the LORD swore to give your ancestors. Because… Deuteronomy 7: 12 "If you
listen to these regulations and faithfully obey them, the LORD your God will
keep his covenant of unfailing love with you, as he promised with an oath to
your ancestors.”
“Yeah, but we’re not Old Testament
Israelites!” True, even though Paul
thought God had grafted this new Christian sect into the branch of the ancient Israelites,
we were not bound by the old covenant and laws, even though for sure God’s
faithfulness would transcend this. And
yet, in spite of this, some Christians still look to the 10 commandments as a
source of moral law, even though the wearing of, and praying with, which
ostensibly would be a pretty dramatic reminder of God’s laws and faithfulness,
and our faithfulness to God, is now
off the table to the typical Christian.
But let’s keep looking. What about the New Testament idea of
Communion. Don’t all of us Christians
celebrate Communion in some form or other?
Sure. Okay, what is Communion? It’s symbolic correct? Not to the liturgical churches. To them it’s more than symbolic – it’s “real”. The bread and wine indeed become the body
and blood of Christ. How “become”? You mean, the bread and wine change into
something else? Yes according to Roman
Catholic theology. But Lutherans think that
while the bread is still chemically bread, Christ is indeed “really present”
in, with, and under the bread and wine. Non-liturgical churches say this is just
symbolic. Otherwise it would be
cannibalism! John 3:51-54 – Jesus says he is the living
bread come down from heaven. If anyone
eats (the Greek verb
here really means to chew, gnaw- quite literally “eat”) this bread, they will live forever!
The Leaders respond by saying basically, “That’s cannibalism – it makes
no sense!” But Jesus’ response is very
explicit – “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood,
you will have no life within you. The
one who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise
them up on the last day.” And then in Matthew and Luke, Jesus calls his
disciple to do and repeat this in his name.
Liturgical
Christian Theologian: “Pretty clear!”
Non-liturgical Christian Theologian: “Yeah, okay… but where are we going to get
Jesus’ body and blood?”
Liturgical Christian Theologian: “In
our communion!”
Non-liturgical Christian Theologian: “That’s
just bread and wine!”
Liturgical Christian Theologian: “Nu-uh!”
Okay so that’s not real. The reality has been a lot worse than this
at times. In fact wars were fought on
stuff like this. The thing is, we can’t
even really agree on stuff that we supposedly agree on!
Let’s move on to something easy! No one questions that Jesus calls the
disciples (and us) to baptize in his name. Sounds
good – but how? And how does one baptize? Do you dunk someone under the water
entirely– as per Baptists. Or is
pouring water on their heads enough– as per Lutherans and Episcopalians. To be fair these two don’t reject full
immersion, it’s just not mandatory.
And can you baptize babies? The
former say no, the latter say yes. And
each has their own theological structure for their position. We agree Jesus tell us to do it… we just don’t agree how, or to whom!
Regardless, the idea that the people I
mentioned above are trying to express is that human-stuff; traditions, customs,
etc., are either not as sacred or
holy as “God ordained” traditions, or not sacred at all, since they do (did) not come from God. I can see where a belief that some
traditions come –directly or otherwise– from God does give the traditions a real
sense of authenticity, specialness… authority even. But I wonder what would have happened had I
asked some probing questions when they’d said these statements?
I had a discussion once with an African
Christian man that asked why I’d gone to do a Sweat with some Native American people. I said it was just another form of prayer. He didn’t
like that it came from another religious custom that wasn’t explicitly Christian. I said
obviously this comes from another culture, but really prayer, and pretty much
every religious custom we have, is based on some culture – that there was no tradition
we have as Christians that isn’t connected to culture (one or more). For
example, I asked him how he prays in church.
He said he puts his hands together, closes his eyes and bows his
head. I said that’s cultural. For many
centuries Europeans would do this as a sign of respect to royalty or others..
and I have to assume it would follow these same customs would apply to God. This could very well be (and have been), to us and our European ancestors, a “natural”
or intuitive sign of reverence and respect.
But there is biblical evidence
that people often would pray to God with arms and hands open, and with eyes
open and heads raised heavenward. A
different culture.
Then I asked him what language he spoke when
he prayed. I can’t remember if he said English or one of the
languages other than English spoken in his country. But regardless, I said that since Jesus didn’t
speak any of those languages, that’s an expression of culture.
What do you wear when you go to church? Do you dress up – as an expression of “giving
your best to God” and offering God respect in this way? Or do you dress down, expressing the idea that
not only do you want to be more comfortable, but that it doesn’t matter what you
wear, God accepts you as-is. That’s
all cultural, coming from either a corporate culture (like a church community), or a culture
of one – you.
I’ve said before, I had a friend who was an
anthropologist (the
study of ancient peoples), and she shared with me that all cultures
have at least three things in common; Music, Taboos/Prohibitions against
certain behaviors and/or actions, and Religion. Every culture has reached out to the Sacred
in its own way. Every religion has been
centered around a people, and every people is squarely enmeshed in a
culture. If religion is the program…
culture is the operating system that the religion expresses itself
through.
Saying something like – “There is no tradition
that has come directly from God” can sound very iconoclastic. This case can, and has been made, with
tremendous effect. But believe me, I don’t
say this lightly. I don’t say this
lightly because many might hear this in the negative; if the assumption that human-made traditions
are not holy (only
God-made ones are), and if there are no God-made ones, then
none of them can be sacred or holy anymore!
If there is no religion that comes directly from God, then none are “authentic”??
I suppose you could look at it that way, but that’s
not the only way to look at this question.
I have an adopted daughter, and although
she never said this, I have heard from some adoptive parents that their kids
have at one point, in anger, blurted out, – “You’re not my real parents!” And what’s the response? “Yeah, well it sure seems pretty real to
me!” My question is, why would you
assume man-made religion isn’t real? It
sure seems pretty real to me! When a
people recognize their human experience has been a journey… a sacred one… and
they start marking sacred time, with Creation stories, and other stories
telling about their journey with the divine, stories with the Holy… IN the
human experience… yeah, it’s pretty real!
When our ancestral parents reached up to the
cosmos, or into the depths of their own souls…
when they touched their own human experiences, and imbued them with
meaning… it was pretty real.
When they marked and recognized and made
sacred the cycles of life; births, growth, rites of passage, growing old, and
death…
When they set aside time to look inward, like
in the various cultural manifestations of a Vision Quest…
When they evolved some purification rituals
with elementals of human experience such as fire or water…
When they generated –over time – the notions
of sacred meals, using staples of existence, like bread…
When our ancestors did this… when we do this…
we are touching the numinous. We are peeking behind the veil…
And it’s always real!
I do know some people, and some traditions, that
just DO NOT like –or CANNOT accept – the idea that others besides themselves can
have access to the same divine-ness that
they have access to in their traditions, and through their customs. But alas, in the words of author William
Easum, Sacred Cows do indeed make gourmet burgers!
The Celts recognized “thin places” – places where
the division between this world and the Spirit world were very thin. And as time went on, and the Christian
church took over more and more control of that part of the world, they ended up
building many churches over the very same “thin places”.
There are thin places, they’re real. There are thin times – times where, for just
a moment… the two worlds overlap.
See, here’s the thing, we humans have
tendencies to mark these places, and these times. We mark them as sacred. We mark them in our lives, in our memories,
we carry them forward from generation to generation. And we tell stories that remind us of the sacred
in our lives.
As imperfect as our humanity is… it’s very real.
Maybe God made
us this way. Maybe that’s why our ancestors reached up to the stars. Maybe
that’s why our ancestors looked within. Maybe that’s why we still do this. Why do
we do this? Because – and here’s the down-to-earth
really human (and sacred!) part – it’s in us to do that! It’s in us to seek God… somehow, some way. Maybe
we’re hardwired for this. This would explain humanity’s desire and need
for that God-thing. This would explain
why all peoples, in every time and place before us – that we know of – have
reached out, in the midst of their own cultures and places.
Maybe God made
us to reach out – not as Lutherans, or Baptists, or even Christians… but as
Humans! As humans, God calls us. Our cells
are made of little tiny pieces that quite literally vibrate. Could it be they vibrate with the resonance
of the divine, cosmic, harmony of life?
Maybe we could say God doesn’t love
us because we’re Christians, or Jews, or Muslims. God loves us because we’re Humans! And
we respond to this total, celestial love… each in our own ways… as humans, in
our own cultural contexts!
Some of these themes we lift up in our “man-made”
religion are recognitions of patterns... holy patterns. Like resurrection! It might disturb some to hear this (like the other stuff wasn’t disturbing to some
already!) the idea of a God-man dying and coming back
in some form or other isn’t unique to Christianity. The Ancient Near-East has some pretty interesting
examples of this; Ba’al, Tammuz, Melqart.
The Egyptians had the gods Ra,
and Osiris as examples of this. The Hindu
tradition has Krishna. The Greeks and
Romans had some example. Some of the ancient
peoples of Japan, Central America, and Europe… they all have stories of a god,
or a god-man dying and coming back to life somehow. The Mythic story of the Phoenix is
another version of this story… the bird
that arises, is reborn, from the ashes of its predecessor.
These stories aren’t exactly the same as the
Christian story, they usually relate to agriculture, the changing of the seasons,
the growing seasons, etc. But the thing is, they don’t need to be exactly the same as the Christian story! What all these stories are doing, at their
core is recognizing the primal story of life coming from apparent death! It’s a sacred story!
We Christians have our stories we hold up
about life coming back from death.
When addicts recognize the addiction will destroy
everything they love, and eventually kill them, and they stop this destruction,
and move in a good way, getting their lives together, when they step back from the
brink... and begin to live life for real
again… that’s resurrection!
When a relationship is over, and the person
works through grief, and anger, etc. and is able to see life as new again… that’s
resurrection!
The story of the resurrection of Jesus is our human story. It’s our
version of the primal, fundamental, sacred story of New Life coming from
death. Honestly, this disturbs some
people, because they want this to be unique to them. They want resurrection to be just
theirs. It’s not! It’s
all of ours! It always has been and
always will be!
When you look at the story of the resurrection
of Jesus… celebrate! We celebrate and
lift up RESURRECTION; In the person of
Jesus! In the story of humanity! In
our lives!
Alleluia.
He is risen!
He is risen indeed! Alleluia!
No comments:
Post a Comment