"Christianity - Is it a Hierarchical Authoritarian Organization?"

Hierarchical Authoritarian Organization?

Where in reality is there not organization and order?  Even in and among those who decry order, there is some degree of organization.  Perhaps one would posit such things as certain diseases that disrupt the order found on a cellular level.  Or maybe one could cite certain disorderly mental processes as examples but overall the universe and all that is in it is only possible because of order.

Overall, there is more order to be found in reality than there is any other notion such as randomness and theoretical science.  In fact without an overwhelming predominance of order, there would be no reality and certainly no foundation to postulate the theoretical.  In other words for there to be the existence of anything in the field of reality, there must be some sort of order and then as well consider in social systems that where there is order there is authority.

A companion to this discussion is found in the article, “Christianity – Is it Authoritarian?” available at http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-authoritarian.html.  It too is based upon the discussion found in the pamphlet from which come many of these questions.  It is to be noted that the pamphlet treats the subject of authority two times and so shall these writings.

The Christian Church Reflects Creation

To decry Christianity for it being hierarchical and authoritarian is inconsistent with what is known about nature.  Any number of systems found in creation function based upon order and authority.  For example the human body is made up of cells which would not function without authority and order.

In particular for cells to function they must have a nucleus which via enzymes then guides the function of that cell.  Thus on a micro level, there is organization and authority.

Another example is described as “pecking order” or the social order among chickens and other animals.  Such order and authority is found even in the most “laissez-faire” family.  Add to nature such things as a country’s economy, government, business, charity, and the list goes on and on as to where one finds authority, hierarchy, and organization!

Servant Structure

The source mentioned below is also naïve in its treatment of the function, roles and relationships, and other elements of the group.  Every group will develop either a formal or an informal organization and such organization simply means that there are differing roles with various levels of responsibility.  The Christian Church as a social organization is no different than any of a number of social groups. 

In any group both formally or informally someone will rise to the fore as leader and other position will fill behind that leader.  However, here the similarity disappears as in almost all other social organizations there is a top down authoritarian influence.  Properly understood in the Christian Church the pyramid is turned so that the organization is based upon a bottom up servant structure.

The Christian Church

One might ask, being that man is so surrounded by order and authority why would the Christian Church be singled for criticism?  At best one reading the criticism tendered concludes that it is because of a misunderstanding of what constitutes ecclesiastical authority.

It is as if the Church, Roman Catholic and otherwise, has some mysterious power over its adherents which through threat and coercion keep the faithful, faithful.  Such takes a very low view of man.  The reality is far different for if that were the only force at work then such groups that have no authoritarian threat structure would cease to exist. 

Take for example service clubs such as Rotary or Kiwanis, or fraternal organizations like the Elks or the Eagles, or veterans organizations such as the VFW or the Fleet Reserve Association.  Each of these groups has standards for membership, standards by which members function, mores, and agreed upon purposes.  None of these groups employ coercive authority yet they function and have functioned for years.

Excesses

To be sure there have been excesses in the Christian Church.  However, to judge all by the mistaken behaviors of a few is both illogical and unfair.  Once again the criticism laid at the doorstep of the Christian Church is unfounded by reality and ignores the capacity of the individual to make decisions and as well the mental-emotional-social needs of the person individually and people corporately.

Unifying Purpose

Another element missing from the discussion is that of a unifying purpose.  Groups both long term and short term form around mutually agreed upon purposes.  Such would be so for a labor union, neighborhood group, humanitarian relief groups, and the list goes on and on.  Even those who claim that they are against organized religion and against government may not realized it but they too have joined together because of a shared and unifying purpose.

Of course, when it is a positive purpose such as feeding the homeless, the Red Cross, Farm-aid, or some other humanitarian purpose such groups form and exhibit certain qualities and characteristics that keep it unified and purposeful. 

When groups form for negative purpose such as the Occupy Wall Street, the Anarchists, and the like their unifying purpose is negative and thus they tend to be more dysfunctional, fail to grow beyond a minority of malcontents, and eventually disorganize.

Abusive Leadership

To discount all leadership based upon the manipulation, excesses, and errors of a few is a most serious mistake.  Such denigrates those who genuinely serve with not greater purpose than that of care for the destitute, the homeless, the poor, and the defenseless. 

Most pastors, priests, rabbis and the like who provide care are much more concerned with the care they offer than the materialism they might receive.  In fact, many die in poverty after a life spent sharing in the needs of others.  Indeed there is abuse in Christian Church leadership and it is in and among those religious leaders who deprive and abuse themselves to serve others.

Low View of Man

The article takes a very low view of people referring to them as "unwashed masses."  In doing so it seems a bit condescending toward such people.  Additionally, it sees man as being at the mercy of hierarchical authority and organization. 

However, there are two issues that are not given consideration in taking such a position.  First, the incidents in which people move from one faith group to another or even give up on church attendance all together suggests that such a “control” perspective is in most cases not true.

Second, even the author’s background as an Anarchist is at variance with the whole notion that one is inextricably controlled by the larger and more dominant social group (e.g. Church, Business, or Government).  That is not to say that there is not or cannot be manipulative control but most often it is with those who claim special truth and not with orthodox Christian denominations.

Summary

What then is to be made of the accusation that the Christian Church is a hierarchical, authoritarian organization?  Well, yes the Christian Church is hierarchical but then so are many other organizations.  Yes, the Christian Church is authoritarian but no more so than any other group that people voluntarily join.  Yes, the Christian Church is organized but then so too is any of a number of other groups. 

So what is the issue being addressed in the article?  Though not stated it is the writer’s agenda born of his ignorance of what the Christian Church is really all about.  You see properly understood the Christian Church is all about service and as a matter of fact even a cursory reading of history will reveal that the notion of Christian service is the foundation for many of the benefits that people in the West enjoy today.

Background

To see the list of subjects to be discussed in this series see my blog (Christianity – Is it a Faith Driven by Fear? http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-faith-driven-by-fear.html).  Contained within that blog is a reference, 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity and in that reference is a list which is the springboard from which this subject has been discussed.

"Christianity - Is it Opposed to Science?" Part I

Part One

Christianity Opposes Science

The notion by those critical of Christianity is that the Church has opposed and continues to oppose science.  The idea is that during the Dark Ages the Church of Rome was opposed to scientific investigation and that then lead to a current anti-intellectual and anti-scientific mind set on the part of some elements of the Christian church. 

The argument is that the period which has been titled the Dark Ages, seems devoid of scientific discovery and the growth.  It is said that such a consequence is because the Church was not scientifically progressive.  It further suggests that the Church limited its vision to what is in Holy Scripture had to say about Science.   

Thus the there are the 1,000 years in which the body of knowledge ceased to grow.  That assumption is then brought up to date with some pretty general statements about where Christianity is today.

As well various quotes and anecdotal examples are provided in support of the claims of the position.  The outcome is what is viewed as a legitimate position on the place of the Church in restricting science.

The Given of Science

Before looking into the accuracy of the above claims, take a moment and consider this question.  Does not science require order?  In other words, how could there be science if there was only the condition of randomness?  Of course most people understand that the basis of any genuine science is order.  Every law and rule of science presupposes order. 

The question then becomes this.  How did the world of science gain such order in light of the tendency of systems, physical and otherwise, to degrade into randomness and then into chaos?  How then can one defend the notion of order coming from randomness when there is not one shred of evidence to support such a claim? 

Why the Dark Ages of Science?

To understand why Western Europe struggled in this approximately 1,000 years of little if any scientific progress, one must consider the periods prior to the Dark Ages and the period following.

The Greek Period:  This is not the period of time during which Alexander the Great ruled but the period of time in which Greek writings were broadly circulated.  The body of scientific knowledge was recorded using the Greek language.

The Roman Period:  Some equate the beginning of the Dark Ages with the decline and eventual disintegration of the Roman Empire.  While that certainly had an effect there is a much greater issue involved.

The Great Schism of 1054 AD.  Consider the following observation.

“The story of the Middle Ages is a story of extremely slow recovery from the collapse of the Roman Empire. The thousand year lull in scientific progress could probably have been shortened if the Church had not been split into the same two parts as the Empire. The Roman Church had the scholars (the potential scientists). The Eastern Orthodox Church had the Greek language (the scientific language and the scientific texts). There was very little connection between the two branches of the Church. After the permanent split in 1054 (the Great Schism), the original Greek texts were almost lost as the Turks took over the Byzantine Empire.”

The author goes on to say

“The Church was not deliberately anti-scientific, only passively indifferent to science (as long as it respected the authority of the Church).  In fact, most of the scientists of the Middle Ages were Christian monks or priests.  Natural Philosophy (which was what science was called) was considered to be an acceptable extension of theological investigation Into God's work of creation. The exaggerated mythical conflict between science and the Church has done much to create the conflict that now exists. Most of the conflicts between the Church and science have been battles of extremes and extremists — involving attitudes and politics more than theology and heresy.”

Curtis, Harold, Following the Cloud, p.115

Therefore to lay the anti-intellectual and anti-scientific claim on the steps of the Church is less than accurate.  But then when your science is agenda driven as it is today (e.g. the global warming hoax), what else would one expect in the treatment of science’s history.

But what about the end of the Dark Ages?  Again the one with agenda will cite the Renaissance but again there is more than the biases of an “historian” to consider.

Those who popularize the notion that the Renaissance was the key to unlocking the influence of supernatural evils foisted upon the European populace are once again guilty of distorting history in order to support the unsupportable.

Renaissance Period Science

The truth of the matter is that the Renaissance began in the 14^th Century by focusing primarily upon recapturing the arts to include literature as had been practiced in the Roman Empire and the proceeding Greek Empire.  While there was scientific study for the most part it relied heavily upon previous scientific study and such as we left of it. 

A survey of lists of scientific accomplishment and discoveries in this period, will show that very little in terms of genuine advances in Science occurred.

Reformation Period Science

Later the Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation (16^th Century) would occur.  Though there had been other religious movements, these movements had the effect of breaking open the religious culture and thus setting the stage for other movements outside of the Church such as would occur some two centuries later.

On October 31, 1517 Martin Luther nailed his 95 thesis to the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg.  Beginning shortly thereafter discoveries and advances took place in such varied subjects as human anatomy, microbiology, physics, and astronomy.  So began advances in science that would extend far into the future and more and more insights and understandings of the natural world took place. 

Examples

For example, Vesalius makes discoveries about human anatomy (1538), Copernicus discover the earth revolves around the sun (1543), Galileo discovered laws of falling objects (1604) and that Jupiter has moons (1609), Kepler discovers that planets have elliptical orbits (1609), Harvey discovers the human circulatory system (1628), Newton discovers laws of uniform gravity (1666), and Leeuwenhoek discovers microbes (1674) to name a few. 

Enlightenment Period Science

It was not until the 18^th Century, two centuries later that the Age of Enlightenment would arise and gain traction with the writings of Spinoza, Locke, Voltaire and others.  It was now that science continued to gain insights and understanding as men like Newton, Halley, Linnaeus, Herschel, and Jenner make new discoveries and/or build upon the previously mentioned discoveries.  However, unlike the previous periods Science now sought to explain the natural world without the Scriptures.  This instead of science explaining the Scriptures.  So it is that the movement toward secular Science gained a footing.

Light in the Darkness

What those who are so critical of the Church might ask themselves is just who was it that preserved such knowledge as had been discovered? 

So it would appear that secular science as we have today arrived on the scene much later than the Renaissance, much later by as much as two or even three centuries.  But that is not the only problem with this line of thinking.  Take for example the case of Galileo which well be discussed in the following blog.

Background

To see the list of subjects to be discussed in this series see my blog (Christianity – Is it a Faith Driven by Fear?).  Contained within that blog is a reference, 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity and in that reference is a list which is the springboard from which this subject has been discussed.