Two Individuals Are Greatly Affected by Traditionalism

by Gardner Hall

Before thinking of any issue or determining how to proceed, the first person asks either, “What have my parents taught me?” or “What is my religious tradition, and what has it always taught?”

The answer to those questions will determine how he lives.

For example, if the first individual has been brought up in Roman Catholicism, he will worship as the Catholic Church has traditionally worshipped, dress as the Catholic Church has taught him to dress, celebrate all their holidays, and practice their customs. He would have a hard time giving any spiritual or biblical reason for what he does, but that’s OK with him. When asked about his religious practices, he would say, “That’s just the way we’ve always done it.”

If the first individual has been raised in churches of Christ, as defined by historians, a loose network of congregations that evolved from the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement, that will determine his answer to almost any question regarding spirituality.

• “Why do you partake of the Lord’s Supper each Sunday?” Answer, “I was raised in the church of Christ, and that’s what we do.”
• “Why do you worship without instruments of music?” Answer, "I was raised in the church of Christ, and that’s what we do.”

If you stop and think about it, his attitude is little different from that of his Roman Catholic friend. He does what he does because that’s how he’s been raised. He would also have a difficult time providing any scripture to back up his practices. He should be concerned about that, but probably isn’t.

The second individual prides himself on being nontraditional. In fact, he almost automatically rejects anything taught by his parents or by congregations where he was raised. If he were raised by strict parents, he would probably be lenient. He will reject weekly participation in the Lord’s supper and insistence on acapella singing as reflecting “legalism.” Perhaps he had a bad experience with his parents or with brethren, and that explains his desire to almost always promote the opposite of what he has been taught.

What the second individual doesn’t realize is that his nonconforming approach is just as much affected by traditionalism as the overly compliant approach of the first. The first is dominated by his blind allegiance to the traditions of his youth, the second by his blind animosity towards them. The bottom line is that both are overly affected by human traditions.

But thankfully, we can think of a third individual who represents those devoted to Jesus Christ, not to agendas formed by either loyalty or disgust with the traditions of his youth. He will probably realize that some things from his childhood were in conformity with the teachings of Christ. He will hold on to them. However, he will often see that some of his parents' or congregants' habits from his youth were unhealthy and then make the necessary adjustments. Perhaps they didn’t emphasize grace enough, or perhaps they weren’t as careful as they should have been in submitting to Christ. However, any adjustments he makes will not be characterized by bitterness or rancor, but by a sincere desire to perfect his discipleship. The first two individuals are ruled by men's traditions. He is ruled by his love for Christ.

(The two-man or two-individual template is one I learned from my uncle, Bill Hall.)