How you ever looked around and examined the attire when you attend your worship service? What do you see? Mostly you see what one wears when going to a sport game or any other casual activity. As I reflect on this, the contrast to church attendance in my youth is striking- more so in some congregations than others. Growing in the small country towns of Nocona and Belcherville, Texas, church attire was what we would call in yester years “business” attire- coats and ties for men and certainly all dresses for girls and women. My grandparents (who raised me) were poor sharecroppers—we had no electricity or running water. Pa kept a nice pair of Kaki pants and shirt to wear—or a hand me down suit from his more affluent brother. He would never have worn his farmer overalls to church. Moma wore her Sears Roebuck dress instead of the flour sack dresses she worn ever day. Dress was done out of respect for God and the occasion and not for show. Our culture has changed all of that. I wonder if it is really for the better?
As our worship services grow more casual and personal preference becomes the guiding authority, I believe deep biblical teaching now faces unprecedented pressure. Because our age is shaped by comfort, emotion, and individual experience, the church’s shared doctrinal truths struggle to be at the forefront of teaching and instruction. I suggest we need to think about the answers to three questions: 1) What is “doctrine”? 2) How is our informal culture affecting the teaching of doctrine and 3) How are we to preserve doctrinal concepts in this age of elevation of individual experience and emotional needs?
What is “doctrine”? Most bible students recognize the Hebrew word for the first five books of the Old Testament—Torah. Some may recognize the term Didache used in the New Testament. It is also the name of one of the earliest descriptions of Christian meetings. Both of these terms carry the meaning of authoritative teaching or instruction. In the Old Testament Torah conveyed covenant identity and communal faithfulness of the Jews. This “doctrinal” instruction shaped moral formation and patterns of behavior in both testaments. Religious doctrine is teaching that has binding authority.
In the Catholic faith group doctrine is maintained through scripture, tradition, and the teachings of the church expressed in creeds, catechisms, and formal councils. Mainline churches emphasize published creeds. Evangelical churches stress biblical authority, acts of conversion, and doctrinal orthodoxy. The Restoration Movement, the early churches insisted on using the bible alone. Eventually, the pressure of individualism produced fragmentation of this group into different interpretations of what constituted true “doctrine.” Nevertheless, all faith groups have what they consider “core” I.E. essential doctrinal principles.
In this discussion by “ formal” I mean systems with “ ritual order, authoritative teaching, and established norms”[i] . Informality in the sense I am using has several cultural characteristics including: 1) emphasis on personal experience, 2) informal emotionally expressive, therapeutic, culturally familiar choices .3) authenticity, entertainment-shaping practices, casual expression, and consumer-driven choices[ii]
The question I have for you is this: “How has our secular culture of informality shaped doctrinal teaching in the church at large?” : Part Two will address that question. But next week is Christmas week–requiring a different kind of Reflection.
[i] Berger, Peter L. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books / Doubleday, 1967. Internet Achieve
[ii]J. K. A. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom, Baker Academic, 2009; ] P. Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship, SPCK, 2002
