Origin Stories

Way back in the 70's I coined the term "creedal group" for a group that is held together by nothing but a mostly meaningless "creed." The creed is seldom if ever, discussed but there is a tacit understanding that everyone in the group kinda gets it, and people outside the group kinda don't.

This creed appears on the home page of the United Church of Canada:

“God is Holy Mystery, beyond complete knowledge, above perfect description…. Nothing exists that does not find its source in God.”

Obviously, our friends at the United Church have more or less given up on drafting something that means anything. How could you disagree with that statement, especially since Liberal Christians are more or less free to define what they mean by "God?" One thing you learn in a United Church seminary is that a perfectly acceptable definition of God is "The ground of all being," which makes the above creed circular. What I'm saying here is that it doesn't really matter. You will not find issues like this discussed from the pulpit or in the coffee break after the sermon. In fact, it is the blatant silliness of the creed that makes it work.

A longer, more specific creed exists on the site, adopted way back in 1968:

We are not alone,
    we live in God’s world.
 We believe in God:
    who has created and is creating,
    who has come in Jesus,
       the Word made flesh,
       to reconcile and make new,
    who works in us and others
       by the Spirit.
We trust in God.
We are called to be the Church:
    to celebrate God’s presence,
    to live with respect in Creation,
    to love and serve others,
    to seek justice and resist evil,
    to proclaim Jesus, crucified and risen,
       our judge and our hope.
In life, in death, in life beyond death,
    God is with us.
We are not alone.
    Thanks be to God.

A lovely bit of poetry to be sure. But must one believe, for example, in life after death to be a member of the United Church? As mentioned, you are totally free to define God any way you like. In practice, anybody off the street is welcome in a United Church as long as they don't loudly question the (more or less meaningless) creed. In fact, it's hard to question the Creed since not one in 1,000 Church members has seen it or care about it. It's basically a bit of poetry adopted by a convention back in 1968.

So what is the United Church? I'd say it's a "creedal group" held together by smoke.

But would it be possible for a Jew or Muslim to be a member of the United Church? We note that the "creed" is vague about some of the issues that a Jew or Muslim might think matter. For example, the creed doesn't exactly claim that Jesus was the son of God. In fact, many upstanding members of the Church would take all the talk about Him being crucified, risen, and being our judge with a huge grain of salt. Said out loud, it sounds kinda "right-wing fundamentalist." Folks who take this stuff seriously really should join the Pentecostals. As a former candidate for the Ministry of the United Church, I can tell you that people who make these metaphysical claims literally are not welcome in the professional clergy. Obviously a Jew or Muslim would have no problem with the first creed I quoted, which is apparently the current one. You just need to kinda believe in God, sorta, but who knows?

Not all groups that call themselves "Christian" are this wishy-washy. In fact, the more "fundamentalist" branches of the faith seem to do a lot better, especially in Africa and South America. As a total outsider, it seems to me that what's going on here is that people are lead to believe and experience something they regard as powerful and outside of themselves. Sad to say, I think the same thing happens all the time in populist movements of all sorts, not necessarily "religious." In populist politics, there is always a strong man who will solve all the problems. Usefully there are "outsiders" identified who do not believe in the leader. It is revealing that the leader need not propose anything consistent or logical. "We" are the people who wear the red hat. As someone once said, "We're pissed off, and we're not going to take it anymore."  What is "it"? Shhh.

Belonging to a passionate group solves a deep need for many people. They need to feel "in." They need to feel they understand the world in a particular way (vaguely) shared by the other members of the group. They are encouraged if the group is attacked by outsiders. Paradoxically, the shared "creed" is made more, not less powerful the sillier it is. The answer to opponents is "fuck you," along with an enhanced feeling of belonging.