Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy - Two "Rights" Making Us Wrong

One of the ways that people talk about the divisions in the church is along a fabricated line between orthodoxy and orthopraxy. One is about having the right beliefs while the other is about doing the right actions. One elevates the head while the other elevates the hands. One wants to be sure you are able to confess the correct beliefs while the other wants to be sure you are doing the correct pro-social behavior.

It is too simple to say that those who elevate orthodoxy do not care about what you do or that those who elevate orthopraxy do not care about what you believe. It is rather that in any sort of dichotomy there will always be one that is elevated as slightly more important than the other. We may say we hold these two equally, and for the most part we do, but inevitably we will put things in a slight order. Like going to the grocery store. You don’t get the milk last because it is least important, but because that is how the store is organized.

And so, over time, the church fabricates a division between the orthodoxy and the orthopraxy. While making the case for their slightly elevated preference, a fine line is created. Over the years the line gets more and more visible and rigid to the point where now there are “camps” within the church. There are those who feel that if we do not have the correct beliefs then the church will become obsolete since you can do correct action in a lot of places. There are others who feel that the mystery of God is so vast that the narrowness of belief will turn people off to the church thus making church obsolete, so liberate people to have a wide beliefs so the church can promote the right actions of Christ.

The irony is that both approaches are much closer than they realize.

It might be thought of in this way. The Orthodox group want people to first believe the right things, then they will do the right behaviors at which point they will belong to the Church.

Conversely, the Orthopraxy group want people to first do the right behaviors, then they will come to believe the right things at which point they will belong to the Church.

In each group belonging to the Church is contingent upon having both right belief and action first.

The struggle is that Orthodoxy and the Orthopraxy camps are both correct and yet both missing the mark. Studies in psychology, sociology and anthropology (not to mention theology and philosophy) show that humans crave and need the safety of belonging. In fact humans will believe or do some very awful things in order to acquire the security that comes with belonging.

And so, this is in part why the Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy camps will always come up short. Each side has is bass ackwards. If we are interested in midwifing the kingdom of God, the repairing of the light, the restoration and regeneration of the world, and the flourishing of all, then we must BEGIN with belonging.

Beginning with belonging is not orthodoxy or othopraxy but orthocardia - having a right heart.

When we signal and show that we belong to one another, that we are safe with each other, that we care for and about one another, then we can talk about what should come next (belief or action). Perhaps more profound is that we will discover how belief and actions are too interrelated to separate out, but that is for another time.

As the world and church continue to fight about what is the right way to live or the right things to think, we will continue to grow more aggrieved and lost. We will find that the more extreme viewpoints will get greater influence. The more we build churches on “what we believe” or “how to become a member” the more we will continue to fail to meet the deep need of humanity. It is not until we abandon the need for litmus tests of word and action that we will see the right heart of Christ beating in the world.

The Last Sound and Romans 12

The Last Sound is a beautiful podcast episode exploring sound and nature. It is worth listening to for so many levels and I hope you would take time to listen.

One of the segments in the story speaks of how is it possible for so many different animals and insects to communicate in nature. Over time, life has discovered a sort of frequency or range that different animals and insects us in order to communicate. This allows for crickets to be able to be heard even as bears roar loudly over them. Or for birds to hear one another through the symphony of other bird songs. Every animal communicates in a bound range so they can be heard and they can hear others.

Every animal respects the boundaries of the frequencies except one. Human beings.

Humans run amok over the sound board that is nature. We know that noise pollution is something we speak about, however we seem to make little efforts to address this pollution (other than complain that it is too loud). We complain about all the noise on the news or internet. We try to discern the signals from the noise but we all assume that noise is part of life. We tolerate noise that runs over all the frequencies of communication and in some cases we believe that overcoming all the noise makes you a good communicator.

If you are able to speak the loudest or with the most incendiary comments, if you are getting clicks and likes and ratings, then you must be a good communicator. When really you could be a communication pollutant.

There is a little line in Romans 12 where Paul writes, “Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.”

It is common to learn that communication is about controlling the narrative or dominating the airwaves. It is about getting your message to “cut through” and “penetrate the market.” It is about being louder. It is about being bold and definitive. It is not about harmony. It is not about respecting the frequency range of another person, but about speaking over them. Be it “mansplaning” or “cancel culture” we have taken the gift of communication and turned it into a megaphone that overtakes the chorus of voices.

I do not know much about music, but I know harmony means that you do not always sing the melody. That there are other notes that are sung, but your voice is still heard. The melody and harmonies complement one another and make the other richer and fuller.

Christians are called to live in harmony (not unison). We do not demand others to join in the song we are singing and expect them to sing the way we sing. We are the ones asked to moderate our voices to harmonize with those around us.

When life is too noisy people flee and go on vacation or step away from a place as a way to find that peace we long for. Could it be that many people are leaving Christianity (and organized religion on the whole) because it is too noisy, loud and not teaching harmony?

Consuming our Neighbors

The following story is inspired by Tim Vivian’s translation of an ancient story from the desert wisdom.

A widow had a son who she could not keep fed. The son would eat pounds of bread each day. He hunger was so insatiable that the son would even turn to his excrement. She was fearful that her son would eat through all that she was left with but also was fearful that if she did not feed her son he would die. The widow took the boy to a holy man, Abba Macarius, who, it was said, could heal the boy. When Macarius heard how much the boy was fed each day, he grew angry.

He said, “Do you know why your son was so hungry? When his father died you were left with a large inheritance, more than you needed to live your days. You have not shared your abundance with those in need. Scripture teaches that we will be judged and treated the way we judge and treat others. Your son’s hunger is the result of your stinginess towards others. Cut in half what you feed him and then give the other half to the poor, powerless and infirm who live near you. Only then will your son’s hunger will subside.”

The widow had more than she new what to do with so she gave it to her son in excess. In doing so, her son was eating more than the bread but eating away at the lifeline that the poor and powerless could have for survival. Macarius’ teaching is as old as wisdom: when we practice generosity we discover that we have more than we need and stinginess corrodes the community. When we are generous we do not “run out”. However, if we remain stingy and focus only on our own desires then we will in fact consume all that we have, including our neighbors.

In the debates of what should or what should we not give to people who are un/under-employed, this story rings in my ears. If we believe that our abundance cannot be given away to others in need, because we will run out of the abundance we have inherited or that our gift will be squandered, then we will in fact run out of our inheritance. However, if we were generous with our inheritance with those in need we may discover that there will be more than enough.