KEEP THE FOLLOWING IN PRAYER:

Our congregation Various friends, relatives and co-workers

Our nation, military and leaders The coming election

TRADITION, CULTURE AND BIBLE IN CHURCH

“And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matthew 15:3).

In many of the recent controversies in churches of Christ, or for that matter almost any controversy, a number of ideas seemed to be ignored. Sadly this has brought about anger, resentment, ridicule, and division. A major problem has been the failure to understand three important items that we have to recognize. We have been a group of people who do not have a written creed but we do have slogans. Among them is that we speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is silent, we just want to be New Testament Christians, and we interpret the Bible by command, example and necessary inferences. One must be careful with such slogans because they can lead to misunderstands of scripture.

First there is the concept of tradition. Traditions can be good or bad, beneficial or abused. We all have traditions in families such as birthday celebrations and Christmas practices, in society such as national holidays, and in church. Yes we have traditions that sometimes have become laws and have been equated with scripture, when in really they have been our way of doing things for decades.

Secondly, there are cultural influences. Some think that we can read scripture without such influences but fail to realize that the Bible was written in a Middle Eastern and Mediterranean culture and that we live in a different, Western culture with two thousand years of church history to draw upon. We are also affected by the history of churches of Christ in America, often called the Restoration Movement or the Stone-Campbell Movement. Beyond that, we have the American culture, past and present, that, like it or not, affects us. All of this and more goes into our understanding of scripture.

Third, there is scripture itself. We believe in the God-given inspiration of scripture and that is the authority by which we live, what we practice, and the teachings we believe. In all that we do we appeal to the Bible to understand what pleases God.

With this understanding, we are going to look at what one might see when one walks into a church of Christ on a Sunday morning and ask questions. Is it tradition? Is it culture? Is it Bible? When we were in a missions class in 1975, Yevette and I had a list given to us asking these questions. I have looked at that list occasionally since then and found that I have changed my mind on what is and isn’t in a certain category.

One is looking for a church to attend on a Sunday morning. We drive into a parking lot and in front of the building is a sign that says “Church of Christ.” Is this tradition, culture or Bible? While there were signs over various shops in the first century world, there is no indication of a meeting place with a permanent sign so this would be both traditional and cultural. Next, there is the building itself. It could be a small or large structure. Again this is traditional and cultural. The early Christians met in the Temple in Jerusalem in Acts 2-6 and later in house churches. We know from archaeology discoveries that in the following centuries there were “church” buildings. We do need a place to meet, and in the free world a building of some type fulfills that need. Expedient yes. Traditional yes. Culturally depends on the national situation. A persecuted church might meet secretly. One could meet in a field, a school, or some other structure. The Bible only requires us to meet.

When we walk in, we will be greeted and invited into the auditorium. That is both traditional and cultural. The shape of the auditorium is fairly consistent. Pews will be facing forward in either a rectangular or a fan shape auditorium. This is traditional. One congregation attempted to put new chairs in a circle so that they would be facing each other. This was a cultural move that was met with anger by traditionalists. This cultural and traditionalist conflict is something that we all face today.

In looking around one will see a pulpit at the front of the auditorium. That is a traditional thing. Most are made of wood though in a larger congregation you might see a clear, see-through style, another cultural idea. You will see a baptistery at the front, most likely with some type of painting behind it. This too is traditional. There is a place where someone needs to be baptized. The ocean, a pond, swimming pool, river, and bath tubs have been used to baptize people. In some really old churches the baptistery was covered and the pulpit was on top of it. Again both tradition and culture reflect this. The Bible teaches that we need to be immersed into Christ so all we need is enough water to do it.

At the front one will see a table called the Lord’s Table and on it a communion tray and container for the fruit of the vine or wine. Some will use a single cup following what Jesus did when He introduced what we call the Lord’s Supper. Others use multiple cups. In a recent article in the Christian Chronicle, they pictured a brother in Africa drinking out of a gourd. So this would be traditional, cultural and to some extent Biblical, as far as the use of cups and plates are concerned. The Lord’s Supper itself is a command.

You might receive a bulletin or program for the service listing songs and scriptures. It will say something to the effect that this is worship or a worship service. The term “worship service” is not found in scripture and worship is more than just meeting together (see Romans 12:1-2). It is traditional for us to call this a worship service.

When it is time to begin, a song leader will step to the pulpit and announce a song number. Books will be taken out of the pew and everyone will turn to that page. This is all traditional. There is no indication in scripture of any one called a song leader. It appears that a song could be started by anyone (see 1 Corinthians 14). In a bigger congregation you might see a praise team made up of men and women singing different parts, a more cultural thing than traditional. Since neither an individual leader or a team is mentioned in scripture, one must be careful not to reject one or the other based on what scripture does not say. One might not be comfortable with one style but that does not make it wrong.

The song styles are traditional as well. We do not know the style of singing in the first century. In the Jewish culture, a male leader would sing a line and the synagogue men would repeat it; the women were not allowed to sing in a public setting. Over the centuries chants developed, then two part songs, then three, and then the more familiar four part harmony. In the genre of four part harmony are classical styles, country and western, folk, and contemporary. Keep in mind that anytime a new song was introduced, it was “new” to the older people, and often not liked. Isaac Watts and his songs were often criticized for there style but today are standards.

There will be a period of prayer, which is Biblical. A sermon will be preached, also Biblical. The preacher is usually dressed in a suit, traditional. In recent years a cultural shift has occurred where preachers no longer wear suits but nice casual shirts. It might have the church’s name on it. The use of computers and other items is both traditional and cultural. An invitation is offered at the end of the sermon. This is traditional and cultural for many. There is no text where an invitation is offered, though obviously implied. It does not have to be done, though a traditionalist can become very upset when it isn’t. This happened one Wednesday night and a brother was very upset. Just thinking about it, everyone there knew what was expected; there were no visitors and everyone had heard invitations for most of their lives. There was no need to be upset. This will be a time of prayer, confession and immersion. Most of the time, when a person responds, a person will write on a card his or her request. In African-American churches, a person stands and when invited, makes his or her request. Here we see two different traditions. It would be interesting to see the response if this happened in a predominantly white congregation.

A baptism might occur at this time. A person, man or woman, confesses that Jesus is Lord, another place where a woman is allowed to speak traditionally. That person is then immersed into Christ. When he or she comes out of the water, a song related to baptism is usually sung. One of the most popular in the past has been O Happy Day, sometimes too slowly. Today one might find a more contemporary song sung and people clapping. This is a cultural thing that has caused problems. Some see clapping as entertainment, others as praise. When visiting Yevette’s parents congregation one Sunday, this happened and I noticed that her mother did not clap. I asked her afterwards why she did not and she said that that was just not her thing but that other people could do it and it did not bother her. What a great attitude to a cultural shift! Tradition and culture in conflict is a difficult idea to deal with, but we need the mind and attitude of Christ as seen in Philippians 2:1-11.

The last thing done in a worship service would be the Lord’s Supper. This too could be done before the sermon, which happens most of the time. Recently I learned that this is a relatively new way. Somewhere back in the middle third of the 20^th Century, bus ministries were tried. Bringing in children not accustomed to sitting quietly caused some problems. So rather than have the entire assembly disturbed, the Lord’s Supper was moved from last to the middle. Interestingly, I have heard it argued that this is where it should be; being first is trying to get it done to quickly, and doing it last is an after thought; the middle is just right - traditional but just right. Men are selected to “wait” on the Table and to offer a prayer for each emblem of the Supper. It is then passed out in silence. One brother asked the question, why silence? Nowhere in scripture do we see silence. In fact, two examples of the Supper are found in the context of meals (Jesus introducing the Supper in the context of the Passover and 1 Corinthians 11:17ff). Silence is a traditional and cultural idea. Men waiting on the Table is traditional. Some have even required that men be dressed in at least ties, if not with jackets. Again this is traditional. If one was in Hawaii, one would find that everyone wears Hawaiian shirts. In the Philippians one wears a traditional Filipino shirt. These are cultural traditions and not Bible.

In recent years, some congregations have allowed women to wait on the Table and others have allowed them to read scripture. Right now this is a cultural thing. Many would argue that women are to be silent in the worship service (or better assembly) and will use 1 Corinthians 14:4-35 and 1 Timothy 2:9-13 as texts to show this. However, they were written in a cultural context as well and what was happening in Corinth and Ephesus raises a number of questions concerning those texts. Many traditionalists argue that those who allow women to participate are caving in to the feminist movement and allowing culture to dictate such involvement. They also argue the same for some modern translations such as the TNIV and NRSV. But are they defending a Biblical perspective or a late nineteenth and early twentieth century perspective that women are to be seen but not heard. We really are not consistent with this because we want women to sing in the worship service but that is all. An extreme example of this conflict can be seen when two couples sat at opposite ends of a long pew. When the Lord’s Supper was passed, the sister sitting inside, got up and walked along the pew carrying the bread and gave it to her sister. An elder saw this and in the next business meeting stated that she had usurped some type of authority, though what that was was not clear. To the surprise of many, in the late nineteenth century, one well known preacher had a woman song leader and in the early twentieth century, a number of single women went to Japan as missionaries.

Most of what we do in our assemblies is based on scripture but the details are left up to us. Over the years and even centuries, we have been influenced by traditions, not only from among churches of Christ, but also from denominations that have contributed to our understanding. Now I know there are those who say that we should not be like the denominations and that we should not do what denominations do. That has been part of our theology. What it fails to recognize that with the exception of instrumental music, choirs, the less than weekly practice of communion, they sit in the same style of buildings, have a table and pulpit, and sing many of the same songs.

We have to be careful that traditions do not become laws. To equate a tradition to scripture can be misleading and dangerous. The Pharisees were criticized by Jesus for doing so. Even Jesus participated in a tradition that was not found in scripture. When the Passover was practiced by Jesus, He made use of the cups of wine (there were four cups used in the Passover). But when we read Exodus 12, we do not see any wine mentioned at all. It was a cultural tradition that had developed to enhance the Passover celebration.

An example today of a tradition becoming a law would be Sunday morning, evening and Wednesday night gatherings. The Bible does not tell us how many times we meet, just that we gather together. Many congregations meet twice on Sundays and some have made this a law. When asked why we do this, the most common answer is that the elders decided this. In reality, many do not know what this started at all. Going back to the nineteenth century, the assembly was an all day affair, primarily because of travel to and from church and farming communities. When did two Sunday services start? No one can really pin it down. Some have suggested that the advent of street lights and electricity contributed in cities to the beginning of two services. Another suggestion is that of round-the-clock factory work during the war years caused this to happen. Men and women working in the factories during the day could then go to church at night. One author stated that it began in northwest Arkansas after the war when a couple of denominations began doing it and the churches of Christ decided to follow that example. Culture and tradition have contribute much to the things we do and there is nothing wrong with that, if we recognize that. Some cultural influences are not good and some traditions have been carried too far.

You might enter a church and see a cloth over the Lord’s Supper items. Why? Tradition. Back in the days when there was no air conditioning, windows were opened in the summer to keep air circulating but it also brought in the flies, hence the covering. Tradition became law even though air conditioning was added to buildings.

Using the word “Sunday” is offensive to some. They state that it is “the Lord’s Day” from Revelation one or “the first day of the week” from other texts. To use “Sunday” is to use a pagan designation. But today, which is a more common usage?

I did not mention in our traditional service the act of giving. Usually this occurs around the time of the Lord’s Supper for convenience. It would be separated by words like “separate and apart from the Lord’s Supper” we will give. A plate is passed and money collected, today mostly in the form of checks. In the eighteen hundreds people would also give food or clothing for the support of the preacher. In one Mississippi congregation, a basket was left at the door and people put their contributions in there. We just leave the plate on a table for anyone to contribute. Different traditions, none of which are wrong.

We want to be Biblically correct but many of the things we do contribute to that correctness. They are “a” way of doing things but there are other ways, and this must be recognized. As culture changes, like it or not, traditions might have to change as well. As we understand scripture better, so too the way we do things. There is nothing wrong with this. We must realize that traditions are not laws and can be changed when they no longer accomplish what scripture demands of us. Just compare the worship services of the nineteenth century with the twentieth century and one can see this.

I also like the song from Fiddler on the Roof. The Jewish father had three daughters and there was the traditional way of marrying them off. They would go through the matchmaker. Well, each daughter had other ideas and challenged the father’s tradition. He would sing, “Tradition. Tradition.” Then he would change for daughters one and two. Number three went too far and he would not change, though at the end it appears he acknowledges her desire.

Change is difficult for many of us because we have become use to one way of doing things. But sometimes change is necessary for the benefit of the congregation. We need to examine ourselves and our traditions as well as our culture to see if we are helping or hurting others. All of this is done in the light of scripture. Once we understand that many of the things we do are traditional, then hopefully we can address the disagreements we find today. Think about it.

George B. Mearns