On CREEDS & DOGMA

Creeds are central to every culture -- whether spoken or unspoken, published or internalized, -- creeds are the distillation of beliefs -- not "all" the beliefs of a group, but usually the CORE (essential) beliefs.

Most of the time we think creeds belong only to the realm of "religion," but that's not true, all cultures have creeds -- even business cultures have creeds. Creeds are based on rock-solid beliefs at the core of a culture -- those beliefs make up the culture's dogma -- one dictionary defines dogma as "...a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true." (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=dogma)

When one doesn't like someone else's "dogma" they cry, "Fundamentalist!" "Exclusionist!" But mightn't anyone who believes something is truly the truth -- beyond any shadow of a doubt -- (incontrovertibly) -- also be labeled a "Fundamentalist" or an "Exclusionist?"

We often hear people say dogma is harsh and "unloving," or about how "only close-minded people hold to dogma." But the fact is, we all hold to some things as being incontrovertibly true. We are all dogmatic at some point - maybe at many points.

One young woman told me the other day, "I hate dogma because it hurts people." Yes, I agreed, it sure can, but does her reaction against dogma point out a dogma of her own?

If a person has a "deeply held belief" about something as being universally true for everyone, and not merely a matter of personal perception, how should they think about it -- are dogmas and creeds avoidable -- or are they -- in the end -- inescapable?

If that question is pressed the response is sometime a reluctant consideration that dogma is inescapable, but it is usually followed with an immediate caveat, "Maybe it is inescapable, but at least "MY" dogma is better (kinder, truer, wiser, etc.) than "THEIR" dogma." -- which opens up the "US vs THEM" discussion.

Nearly everyone feels justified in their own dogma and creed -- their own beliefs and persuasions -- and that "mine" are more acceptable to me than "those other" people's ideas -- and why wouldn't they feel that way? No real harm in that . . . unless you want to hurt "the others" for not accepting "your truths," or feel that "the other" person's beliefs are dangerous.

I am trying to point out a demonstrable phenomenon of culture, I mean, personal beliefs ...which are linked inexorably to the beliefs of a group. No one stands alone. We are all part of some group, and we experience these dynamics in every group -- some people call these beliefs "CONVICTIONS," i.e. "things I have come to believe as true and important, and believe them -- deeply."

I see creeds published all around me. One, of late, has been staked out on lawns around the city. You may have seen it.

"WE BELIEVE..."

This is a credo - a a simple credal statement of like-minded people who hold to similar beliefs. Further, if one does not hold to this creed they might be suspected as not being a "true-believer," not really part of the core membership of that group. No one has to sign a membership card to be part of this ubiquitous group, all one needs to do is to answer whether they believe the affirmations stated on the sign, or not.

My own sense about these yard signs is NOT that these are bad affirmation, per se, but that whoever created this sign allowed their beliefs to be poorly worded. “Science is TRUE?” What is that suppose to mean? Science is a METHODOLOGY to find out what is true and what is not true. Science itself could never be “TRUE,” it can only be accurate or not so accurate. It’s not as if scientific statements are beyond revision. They are being revised all the time. So science can only ever be ONE of several methods of pursuing knowledge.

That’s just one of my complaints about the wording of this populist creed. I just think they could have done a much better job of stating their convictions, but that's just me.

The fact is, they expressed their passionate ideas, and a group of people rally around those statements. Which is my whole point.

Now I'm in trouble for criticizing their structure — but — I am not saying anything particular about their propositions.

Anyway, my purpose here is not to debate the rightness or wrongness of any creed, but to point out that they already exist all around us, and that creeds are POWERFUL. Creeds are the distillations of deeply held views, feelings, and beliefs -- and they are MIGHTY!!! Many (maybe not a creeds), are based on dogmatic - incontrovertible - ideas, but I cannot think of one creed that isn’t.

In my view -- Dogma, Creeds, Convictions are unavoidable - the only thing possible is to decide which creed(s) one will live by.

In addition, can one live by more than one creed?

Can one hold to the Christian creeds and also buy into the creeds of their governments, their social groups, and so on? Can't one be a member of different groups -- with perhaps -- conflicting creeds?

Note the Nicene Creed -- (which you can google) -- this is one of the oldest formulations of Christian belief, and yet, some Christians today wrestle with its emphatic nature. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed

If one disagrees with the Nicene Creed can one call themselves a "true" Christian?

This is a very real question in Western Christianity these days. What kind of Christianity would exist if it departed from the Nicene Creed? That -- is something for contemporary Christians of all stripes to reflect on. How important is the Nicene Creed?

So here is one of the central questions for any group -- "Can a person disagree with the core-belief statements of a group (the convictions of the group they espouse and still be a respected member of that group?, and if so, how does this affect their relationship with those who embrace EVERY point of the group's creed?"

This is a curious question, and we will encounter it intuitively (by default) if not by intentional consideration.

So - what are the core beliefs of the group(s) YOU belong to?

And, does the way "you" see things affect "your" own relationship with the groups with which you feel greatest affinity?

Does “your group" give you the freedom to disagree with their creeds -- and still be part of its inner workings -- or are you moved to the outer rings of the group -- set apart from the “true-believers?" Ostracized.