Give Me Tradition

GIVE ME TRADITION

My undergraduate work was in fine art with an emphasis in art history. So, here is your art history lesson for the day.

Even into the early 20th century, artists like Picasso learned their craft by imitating the techniques of the masters who preceded them. They usually did this under the guiding influence of a qualified instructor or arts’ institute. Once they could demonstrate competency with the techniques of the masters, they were then allowed to experiment with developing their own personal style. This insured a certain level of mature development while honoring the contributions of those who came before. It was understood that each generation stands on the shoulders of those who precede them.

All that came to a sudden end by the mid-20th century. By the 1950’s the wind that drove all the sails was originality. Pure originality. Nothing mattered except creating something no one had seen before. And this explains why the average person cannot fathom, appreciate, or even like modern art. Only those who are art-wonks can keep up with the maniacal speed of the crazy-quilt world of art.

Art history, though, does not exist in a vacuum. Art history is part of the larger thrust of Western culture. You will, of course, note our cultural obsession with all things new, young, hip, and fresh. Contrary to what you may realize, it hasn’t always been that way. Here is an example. Look at paintings depicting the Founding Fathers. Notice their powdered wigs and the cut of their clothes. The powdered wig was grey in order to imitate age and signify wisdom rather than the follies of youth. The cut of their coats highlighted an expanded waistline to, again, imitate age. The last thing men of the founding colonial age wanted to do was to look “young.” Youth was associated with uncontrolled passions, folly, and mistakes. One wanted to look wise and to recognize that we owe a great debt to the past and the people of that past. Not so today.

What am I getting at? I am suggesting that a lot of contemporary Christian culture is caught up in the frenzy for originality that developed just a few decades ago in Western Culture. This frenzy for originality is a form of cultural idolatry we cannot see because we are so immersed into it and because our anti-historical bias cuts us off from evaluating ourselves in the light of the past.

You may be shocked to learn that words like original, brand new, innovative, creative, etc. would have been avoided at all costs in the ancient church. These words (or their equivalents) would have been associated with heretical sects and not the orthodox “great church.” The ancient church understood itself to be part of a “revealed” religion from Jesus that had been handed down from the Apostles and was not to be changed. Read this.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.”

Paul actually used the word “traditions.” What! Yes, Christianity was first passed on as an “oral tradition” and then gradually written down, but it was understood to be a tradition originating with Jesus and the Apostles that was NOT to be changed. In fact, Paul “commanded” believers to disassociate from innovative teachers or people who claimed to be Christians but failed to follow the “traditions”. This, of course, sounds totally shocking to our hip Evangelical ears.

This morning I received an email from YouVersion introducing the latest-greatest, new, young, hip Evangelical preacher. Jefferson Bethke has written a hot, new book titled (interestingly) “What if Christianity Isn’t What You Think.” The “kid message” of the title obviously is that young Jefferson has discovered the real truth about Christianity that, somehow, everyone else for 2,000 years has missed. Hmmmm. I watched him long enough on YouTube to map him historically and philosophically. I will give it to you in summary form. He is a product of the deconstructionist movement influencing Evangelical Millennial minds with its “narrative” ideology (it is all a “story”, not really objective truth) mixed with Sentimentalization.

Next I watched a series of Evangelical services broadcast on cable networks. They were a dizzying array of innovative interpretations of Scripture.

Finally, I watched a humble Catholic mass broadcast out of New York. The congregation looked dorky but the music was superlative, yet, there were no drums or smoke machines. The priest walked through the liturgy in a methodical and un-exciting way. It all seemed so un-hip. However, I found myself profoundly moved by the content of the liturgy. I think that is the whole point. With the liturgy, the point is not about how hip or innovative the pastor’s preaching or style may be. In the liturgy, we (not just me) are swept up into a tradition handed down long before our generation was born. The liturgy anchors us into real history that includes the saints and angels who abide in heaven. Instead of glibly giving lip-service to “God’s story”, we actually participate as a communion of believers in a reality that is simultaneously both temporal and eternal.

Now, because of my moral failing, I exist as sort of a Christian “castaway.” I relate a lot with Tom Hanks’ character in the movie with that title. In the movie, when his character returns to civilization, he doesn’t fit. He is not quite comfortable and people aren’t completely comfortable with him. He sees things differently. His experience on the island has marked him. He escaped and was rescued, but he can’t help but view life differently. So, likewise, I see the church-world differently. I see it more like a regular sinner in need of something substantial to hold on to. Fads, passing fancies, and innovative teachings are not that helpful. Give me tradition. Give me something grounded in God.