How would religion be different if...

Gawdzilla · 26th March 2012, 04:49 PM

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

AvalonXQ · 26th March 2012, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership?

Or is that not what you're talking about?

Gawdzilla · 26th March 2012, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership?

Or is that not what you're talking about?

Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church.

Piscivore · 26th March 2012, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

A lot like Buddhism or Shinto, probably.

dlorde · 26th March 2012, 05:07 PM

It would probably be more like congregationalist religions such as AvalonXQ's...

Gawdzilla · 26th March 2012, 05:20 PM

But it wouldn't dominate society so much?

Bram Kaandorp · 26th March 2012, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

But it wouldn't dominate society so much?

I think it would, chiefly because the highest authority would be a local who knows everyone. If that authority has most people in his/her grasp, then being subversive is much harder than when reporting of subversiveness has to go through some bureaucratic governing body.

Then again, I don't have the benefit (read misfortune) of experiencing such a situation, so I don't know exactly how that would work.

The main thing is that if the highest rank is a local one, then it's much easier for that person to get too infatuated with that power than when he's just the local branch of a bigger governing body.

Gawdzilla · 26th March 2012, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Bram Kaandorp

I think it would, chiefly because the highest authority would be a local who knows everyone. If that authority has most people in his/her grasp, then being subversive is much harder than when reporting of subversiveness has to go through some bureaucratic governing body.

Then again, I don't have the benefit (read misfortune) of experiencing such a situation, so I don't know exactly how that would work.

The main thing is that if the highest rank is a local one, then it's much easier for that person to get too infatuated with that power than when he's just the local branch of a bigger governing body.

I lean the other way, one man, not "The Power of Rome" would be easier to challenge.

AvalonXQ · 26th March 2012, 06:17 PM

I've been a member of congregationalist churches all my life. While they certainly have their problems, the individuals who occupy the eldership (that is, the men who lead the church) are intentionally selected as older father figures.

The positions don't pay anything; to the contrary, in money as well as time the elders are often some of the more significant benefactors (although this is not always the case; I have known elders at all income levels).

The fact is that, at least in the case of the churches I've been a member with, the primary practical purpose of the church is threefold:
First, it provides local emotional support, an "extended family" atmosphere, for the regular members.
Second, it administers significant charitable resources, particularly money and food.
Third, it funds and supports missionary efforts.

The primary power of the eldership, other than some general ability to exalt or chasten people from a social perspective, is to act as mediators and counselors when Christians have conflicts with each other, or personal emotional issues. That ability, the sort of wisdom and respect that we expect of our older parents and grandparents, is what they are primarily selected for, and what they spend most of their time doing outside of making day-to-day policy decisions like how often to vacuum the auditorium and which hymnal to use.

Does the role have power? Absolutely. Can it be abused? Absolutely. I've seen it. But the neat thing about a voluntary church system like what we have in the States is that if the power is being abused, people will leave. That doesn't just depopulate the church; it also defunds it. It's an excellent safety valve against a system that is otherwise entirely authoritarian in structure.

EDIT: One useful clarification -- there is no such thing as a church with only one elder. There must always be a plurality; that is a basic rule. And the person up there preaching every Sunday is a paid minister, an employee of the church who has no spiritual authority over its membership (although in practice the pulpit provides him at least some influence). So the leadership structure isn't precisely what most people expect.

joolz · 26th March 2012, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

Church of Scotland. They don't have archbishops in fancy dress etc like the Church of England and no pope sitting on millions while members starve, like the RCs. All the ministers are equal and they have an annual assembly to choose one to be the Moderator for the following year.

Quote:

The Moderator of the General Assembly serves for the year as the public representative of the Church—but beyond that enjoys no special powers or privileges and is in no sense the leader or official spokesperson of the Kirk.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Scotland

Whilst I am anti-religion, and becoming more so thanks to JREF, I feel that if people must have religion, then the CofS is an example of one of the better ones. People aren't in it for the money or the glory. I've never heard of any child abuse, although a few ministers have run off with one of the congregation

. With normal people becoming moderator, and only for a year, there's no incentive to be power crazy like the pope. They don't breath brimstone and they don't make maniacal proclamations of hatred like a lot of USA woo believers.

Don't ask me about their woo, I think it's the usual stuff, but my Uncle was moderator a few years ago and of all the religious people I have ever met, he is the one I respect most. He is a kind and loving man and epitomises everything that a christian should be. But don't tell him I said that

theprestige · 26th March 2012, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

But it wouldn't dominate society so much?

Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants. They come in all shapes and sizes, each congregation is a law until itself, and there's almost no vertical org structure at all. And yet... their voices are heard everywhere.

Indeed, I'd say that the RCC is actually the anomaly, as religious factions go. Most religions manage to dominate society to a much greater extent with a mere fraction of the megalithicity.

Sun Countess · 26th March 2012, 09:17 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

I've been a member of congregationalist churches all my life. While they certainly have their problems, the individuals who occupy the eldership (that is, the men who lead the church) are intentionally selected as older father figures.

What, no women? I think that could certainly be classified as a problem.

Quote:

The primary power of the eldership, other than some general ability to exalt or chasten people from a social perspective, is to act as mediators and counselors when Christians have conflicts with each other, or personal emotional issues. That ability, the sort of wisdom and respect that we expect of our older parents and grandparents, is what they are primarily selected for, and what they spend most of their time doing outside of making day-to-day policy decisions like how often to vacuum the auditorium and which hymnal to use.

Why did you say parents and grandparents here, when you really mean fathers and grandfathers?

Quote:

Does the role have power? Absolutely. Can it be abused? Absolutely. I've seen it.

I would argue that one major abuse of power is keeping women out of leadership positions. Of course, that's a major failing of most of the major religions. They really just don't like women.

kerikiwi · 26th March 2012, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

... the primary practical purpose of the church is threefold:
First, it provides local emotional support, an "extended family" atmosphere, for the regular members.
Second, it administers significant charitable resources, particularly money and food.
Third, it funds and supports missionary efforts.

What, no worship of supernatural entities?

AvalonXQ · 26th March 2012, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by Sun Countess

Why did you say parents and grandparents here, when you really mean fathers and grandfathers?

Because I meant parents and grandparents. Anyone who thinks mothers and grandmothers have no pull or respect in the church, has never been part of the church.

AvalonXQ · 26th March 2012, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by kerikiwi

What, no worship of supernatural entities?

Nope, none at all. Well, except Yog-Sothoth, but he's more extranatural than supernatural.

JJM 777 · 26th March 2012, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

It would be a bit like Pentecostalism. Baptism. Whatever.

AvalonXQ · 26th March 2012, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants.

Now, be careful. Many of these groups do have national leaderships that make policy decisions, as well as a centralized certification for clergy that often extends to clergy being assigned to churches as needed. So I'd say there's substantial hierarchy above the local level in many cases.

Sun Countess · 26th March 2012, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Because I meant parents and grandparents. Anyone who thinks mothers and grandmothers have no pull or respect in the church, has never been part of the church.

So if you have female elders/leaders, why did you specify men in your earlier post?

Gawdzilla · 27th March 2012, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants. They come in all shapes and sizes, each congregation is a law until itself, and there's almost no vertical org structure at all. And yet... their voices are heard everywhere.

Clearly? I was born in the South.

Quote:

Indeed, I'd say that the RCC is actually the anomaly, as religious factions go. Most religions manage to dominate society to a much greater extent with a mere fraction of the megalithicity.

Wow, the largest church hierarchy in the world is the anomaly. Buh-bye.

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

Clearly? I was born in the South.

And I was born in Portugal. Doesn't mean I know much about it, though.

But if you are familiar with the highly-influential-yet-not-particularly-hierarchical denominations that pervade much of the US, then I'm confused as to why you think a lack of hierarchy would result in a lack of influence.

Quote:

Wow, the largest church hierarchy in the world is the anomaly. Buh-bye.

Well, the RCC is fairly unique in having such a megalithic hierarchy. The fact--which you acknowledge--that it's the largest church hierarchy in the world certainly makes it an outlier.

Most major religions seem to have achieved substantial influence with only a fraction of the hierarchical infrastructure the RCC has established. The megalithic org structure of the RCC doesn't seem to me to be typical of religious establishments. The only ones I can think of that even come close is the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the CoE. If it's not typical, I would say it's anomalous. Why was it so important to you to reject that possibility without even considering it?

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Now, be careful. Many of these groups do have national leaderships that make policy decisions, as well as a centralized certification for clergy that often extends to clergy being assigned to churches as needed. So I'd say there's substantial hierarchy above the local level in many cases.

And many of these groups do not have national leaderships, etc. There's certainly no overarching hierarchical structure that encompasses all Baptists, for example--quite the opposite! Likewise for Evangelicals, who may not even be a homogenous Christian subculture so much as a convenient byword. And non-denominational Protestants, almost by definition, aren't going to have much--if any--hierarchy outside their local congregation*.

--
* Take the churches I grew up in, for example. Their hierarchies had maybe three tiers at most: congregants, leaders (pastors, sunday school teachers, etc.), board of directors. Some of them tended more towards a "strong leader" form of governance, others towards a "strong board" form of governance.

None of them recognized any higher religious authority than themselves. Indeed, the reason I grew up in a succession of churches is that even the individual congregants didn't see themselves as being subject to a particular hierarchy--each was their own religious authority, choosing for themselves which church they would attend from time to time.

At least one of the churches I attended didn't even look for leaders that had been recognized by any outside agency. At any given time, the majority of the pastoral staff had never been to seminary or obtained any kind of relevant accreditation. The board itself was the only arbiter of qualifications.

On all three continents where I've spent any significant amount of time, churches like this have been both commonplace and influential. So, to answer the OP, I don't think the anomalous megalith that is the RCC is as much a factor in religious influence as he might expect.

Squeegee Beckenheim · 27th March 2012, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?

Like Islam.

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

But it wouldn't dominate society so much?

How much influence does Islam have on people?

Baloney · 27th March 2012, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Like Islam.

Not so fast there, buddy!

Supreme Leader of Iran

Humes fork · 27th March 2012, 11:49 AM

It would be a lot more diverse, as it would not be possible to declare a common dogma at a larger level. For example, followers of religion X would agree on a few core points, but not much beyond that.

Gawdzilla · 27th March 2012, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

And I was born in Portugal. Doesn't mean I know much about it, though.

But if you are familiar with the highly-influential-yet-not-particularly-hierarchical denominations that pervade much of the US, then I'm confused as to why you think a lack of hierarchy would result in a lack of influence.

Clearly you're not comparing the Southern Baptists to the Roman Catholic Church. One of those organizations has a heck of a lot more power than the other.

(I can be counter-pompous as long as you wish to play that game.)

epeos76 · 27th March 2012, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

A lot like Buddhism or Shinto, probably.

Buddhism covers a lot of ground, but some of the the popular flavors have a notable hierarchy, e.g. the Dalai Lama's establishment.

Marduk · 27th March 2012, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership?

so no Jesus or God then
interesting thanks

Mark6 · 27th March 2012, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church.

A religion in which there is no higher rank than a village priest is by definition NOT megalithic. And most religions in history have been like this -- Catholic church is an exception, not the rule.

Basically you are asking "What water would be like if it were dry?"

Bram Kaandorp · 27th March 2012, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Humes fork

It would be a lot more diverse, as it would not be possible to declare a common dogma at a larger level. For example, followers of religion X would agree on a few core points, but not much beyond that.

Conversely, different villages might develop more tension because of huge differences in their religions.

AvalonXQ · 27th March 2012, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Marduk

so no Jesus or God then
interesting thanks

Nope, other than Yog-Sothoth.

He is the Key, and the Gate.

AvalonXQ · 27th March 2012, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by Mark6

Basically you are asking "What water would be like if it were dry?"

No, it's really close to, "I wonder what mammals would be like if they were land-dwelling, rather than aquatic like the blue whale."

Squeegee Beckenheim · 27th March 2012, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Not so fast there, buddy!

Supreme Leader of Iran

That's an exception. In general, Muslims have no higher authorities than Imams. And, even then, they're not really considered to be authorities in the sense that they can dictate other Muslims' behaviours, they're just people who are more knowledgeable about Islam and so can speak with authority about the interpretation of it. Muslims, in general, are advised that they have a personal relationship with Allah and that they should make up their own minds about how to behave, and if they are told to behave in a way that seems wrong to them, that they should do what they think is right, not what anybody else has told them.

It's about as leaderless as a religion gets.

Mark6 · 27th March 2012, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

No, it's really close to, "I wonder what mammals would be like if they were land-dwelling, rather than aquatic like the blue whale."

Well, OP did say he was looking specifically at the blue whale:

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church.

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Gawdzilla

Clearly you're not comparing the Southern Baptists to the Roman Catholic Church. One of those organizations has a heck of a lot more power than the other.

No doubt. But the Protestant churches in general (including the Southern Baptists) are pretty influential in their own right, even though none of their myriad factions enjoys even a fraction of the hierarchical establishment of the RCC.

And other posters have given numerous other examples of religions that are highly influential in society, without the kind of hierarchy the RCC enjoys.

Maybe I would understand you better if you defined some terms. For example, what exactly do you mean by "[religion] wouldn't dominate society so much"?

To me, it seems like a lot of religions are extremely influential in society, even though their hierarchies are almost flat, compared to the RCC org structure.

Do you disagree?

Quote:

(I can be counter-pompous as long as you wish to play that game.)

(I wasn't even aware that was a game that was being played. I certainly have no wish to play it. If you are unsure, please believe me when I tell you all I'm interested in is presenting and considering arguments and counter-arguments. I hope this is mutually agreeable.)

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Mark6

Well, OP did say he was looking specifically at the blue whale:

Right. But he's looking at the RCC specifically in the context of the question: does megalithic hierarchy lead to substantial social influence?

Since a number of counter-examples have been given, we may reasonably suspect that megalithic hierarchies are possibly incidental to religious influence on society.

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Not so fast there, buddy!

Supreme Leader of Iran

Where does he fit into the church hierarchy of Islam, though? Does he carry any more weight among worshippers than their village imam?

AvalonXQ · 27th March 2012, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by Mark6

Well, OP did say he was looking specifically at the blue whale:

That's true. I guess the question becomes, why does he think that a congregationalist RCC would be fundamentally different from all of these other congregationalist Christian groups?

Or to put it another way, if you want to start with a whale and figure out what it would be like if it lived on land, why not look at existing land mammals?

Humes fork · 27th March 2012, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Bram Kaandorp

Conversely, different villages might develop more tension because of huge differences in their religions.

Exactly.

theprestige · 27th March 2012, 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by Bram Kaandorp

Conversely, different villages might develop more tension because of huge differences in their religions.

Is this what we observe, in the many real-world societies past and present, where non-hierarchical religions hold sway at the local level?

Bram Kaandorp · 27th March 2012, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Is this what we observe, in the many real-world societies past and present, where non-hierarchical religions hold sway at the local level?

I really don't know. I was just expanding on a theme.

Then again, just look at Ireland to see what the tension might be.

26th March 2012, 04:49 PM	#1
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	How would religion be different if... ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk?
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

26th March 2012, 04:50 PM	#2
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk? Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership? Or is that not what you're talking about?
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

26th March 2012, 04:59 PM	#3
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership? Or is that not what you're talking about? Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church.
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

26th March 2012, 05:00 PM	#4
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk? A lot like Buddhism or Shinto, probably.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

26th March 2012, 05:07 PM	#5
dlorde Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,646	It would probably be more like congregationalist religions such as AvalonXQ's...
dlorde Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,646	__________________ Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...

26th March 2012, 05:20 PM	#6
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	But it wouldn't dominate society so much?
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

26th March 2012, 05:51 PM	#7
Bram Kaandorp Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Netherlands Posts: 2,240	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla But it wouldn't dominate society so much? I think it would, chiefly because the highest authority would be a local who knows everyone. If that authority has most people in his/her grasp, then being subversive is much harder than when reporting of subversiveness has to go through some bureaucratic governing body. Then again, I don't have the benefit (read misfortune) of experiencing such a situation, so I don't know exactly how that would work. The main thing is that if the highest rank is a local one, then it's much easier for that person to get too infatuated with that power than when he's just the local branch of a bigger governing body.
	__________________ If autism is a "living death", does that make me a zombie? If so, that'd be great. Just don't get your brain in my general vicinity.

26th March 2012, 05:55 PM	#8
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	Originally Posted by Bram Kaandorp I think it would, chiefly because the highest authority would be a local who knows everyone. If that authority has most people in his/her grasp, then being subversive is much harder than when reporting of subversiveness has to go through some bureaucratic governing body. Then again, I don't have the benefit (read misfortune) of experiencing such a situation, so I don't know exactly how that would work. The main thing is that if the highest rank is a local one, then it's much easier for that person to get too infatuated with that power than when he's just the local branch of a bigger governing body. I lean the other way, one man, not "The Power of Rome" would be easier to challenge.
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

26th March 2012, 06:17 PM	#9
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	I've been a member of congregationalist churches all my life. While they certainly have their problems, the individuals who occupy the eldership (that is, the men who lead the church) are intentionally selected as older father figures. The positions don't pay anything; to the contrary, in money as well as time the elders are often some of the more significant benefactors (although this is not always the case; I have known elders at all income levels). The fact is that, at least in the case of the churches I've been a member with, the primary practical purpose of the church is threefold: First, it provides local emotional support, an "extended family" atmosphere, for the regular members. Second, it administers significant charitable resources, particularly money and food. Third, it funds and supports missionary efforts. The primary power of the eldership, other than some general ability to exalt or chasten people from a social perspective, is to act as mediators and counselors when Christians have conflicts with each other, or personal emotional issues. That ability, the sort of wisdom and respect that we expect of our older parents and grandparents, is what they are primarily selected for, and what they spend most of their time doing outside of making day-to-day policy decisions like how often to vacuum the auditorium and which hymnal to use. Does the role have power? Absolutely. Can it be abused? Absolutely. I've seen it. But the neat thing about a voluntary church system like what we have in the States is that if the power is being abused, people will leave. That doesn't just depopulate the church; it also defunds it. It's an excellent safety valve against a system that is otherwise entirely authoritarian in structure. EDIT: One useful clarification -- there is no such thing as a church with only one elder. There must always be a plurality; that is a basic rule. And the person up there preaching every Sunday is a paid minister, an employee of the church who has no spiritual authority over its membership (although in practice the pulpit provides him at least some influence). So the leadership structure isn't precisely what most people expect.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Last edited by AvalonXQ; 26th March 2012 at 06:20 PM.

26th March 2012, 06:41 PM	#10
joolz Medusa Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Scotland, Yurp Posts: 1,618	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk? Church of Scotland. They don't have archbishops in fancy dress etc like the Church of England and no pope sitting on millions while members starve, like the RCs. All the ministers are equal and they have an annual assembly to choose one to be the Moderator for the following year. Quote: The Moderator of the General Assembly serves for the year as the public representative of the Church—but beyond that enjoys no special powers or privileges and is in no sense the leader or official spokesperson of the Kirk. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Scotland Whilst I am anti-religion, and becoming more so thanks to JREF, I feel that if people must have religion, then the CofS is an example of one of the better ones. People aren't in it for the money or the glory. I've never heard of any child abuse, although a few ministers have run off with one of the congregation . With normal people becoming moderator, and only for a year, there's no incentive to be power crazy like the pope. They don't breath brimstone and they don't make maniacal proclamations of hatred like a lot of USA woo believers. Don't ask me about their woo, I think it's the usual stuff, but my Uncle was moderator a few years ago and of all the religious people I have ever met, he is the one I respect most. He is a kind and loving man and epitomises everything that a christian should be. But don't tell him I said that
	__________________ The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking

26th March 2012, 06:59 PM	#11
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla But it wouldn't dominate society so much? Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants. They come in all shapes and sizes, each congregation is a law until itself, and there's almost no vertical org structure at all. And yet... their voices are heard everywhere. Indeed, I'd say that the RCC is actually the anomaly, as religious factions go. Most religions manage to dominate society to a much greater extent with a mere fraction of the megalithicity.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Last edited by theprestige; 26th March 2012 at 07:01 PM.

26th March 2012, 09:17 PM	#12
Sun Countess Appearance of intelligence Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Posts: 3,176	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ I've been a member of congregationalist churches all my life. While they certainly have their problems, the individuals who occupy the eldership (that is, the men who lead the church) are intentionally selected as older father figures. What, no women? I think that could certainly be classified as a problem. Quote: The primary power of the eldership, other than some general ability to exalt or chasten people from a social perspective, is to act as mediators and counselors when Christians have conflicts with each other, or personal emotional issues. That ability, the sort of wisdom and respect that we expect of our older parents and grandparents, is what they are primarily selected for, and what they spend most of their time doing outside of making day-to-day policy decisions like how often to vacuum the auditorium and which hymnal to use. Why did you say parents and grandparents here, when you really mean fathers and grandfathers? Quote: Does the role have power? Absolutely. Can it be abused? Absolutely. I've seen it. I would argue that one major abuse of power is keeping women out of leadership positions. Of course, that's a major failing of most of the major religions. They really just don't like women.

26th March 2012, 09:27 PM	#13
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ ... the primary practical purpose of the church is threefold: First, it provides local emotional support, an "extended family" atmosphere, for the regular members. Second, it administers significant charitable resources, particularly money and food. Third, it funds and supports missionary efforts. What, no worship of supernatural entities?

26th March 2012, 09:37 PM	#14
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Sun Countess Why did you say parents and grandparents here, when you really mean fathers and grandfathers? Because I meant parents and grandparents. Anyone who thinks mothers and grandmothers have no pull or respect in the church, has never been part of the church.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

26th March 2012, 09:38 PM	#15
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by kerikiwi What, no worship of supernatural entities? Nope, none at all. Well, except Yog-Sothoth, but he's more extranatural than supernatural.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

26th March 2012, 09:39 PM	#16
JJM 777 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Finland Posts: 3,175	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk? It would be a bit like Pentecostalism. Baptism. Whatever.

26th March 2012, 09:43 PM	#17
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by theprestige Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants. Now, be careful. Many of these groups do have national leaderships that make policy decisions, as well as a centralized certification for clergy that often extends to clergy being assigned to churches as needed. So I'd say there's substantial hierarchy above the local level in many cases.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

26th March 2012, 09:58 PM	#18
Sun Countess Appearance of intelligence Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Posts: 3,176	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Because I meant parents and grandparents. Anyone who thinks mothers and grandmothers have no pull or respect in the church, has never been part of the church. So if you have female elders/leaders, why did you specify men in your earlier post?

27th March 2012, 08:40 AM	#19
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	Originally Posted by theprestige Clearly you've never heard of Baptists, Evangelicals, and non-denominational Protestants. They come in all shapes and sizes, each congregation is a law until itself, and there's almost no vertical org structure at all. And yet... their voices are heard everywhere. Clearly? I was born in the South. Quote: Indeed, I'd say that the RCC is actually the anomaly, as religious factions go. Most religions manage to dominate society to a much greater extent with a mere fraction of the megalithicity. Wow, the largest church hierarchy in the world is the anomaly. Buh-bye.
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

27th March 2012, 10:30 AM	#20
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Clearly? I was born in the South. And I was born in Portugal. Doesn't mean I know much about it, though. But if you are familiar with the highly-influential-yet-not-particularly-hierarchical denominations that pervade much of the US, then I'm confused as to why you think a lack of hierarchy would result in a lack of influence. Quote: Wow, the largest church hierarchy in the world is the anomaly. Buh-bye. Well, the RCC is fairly unique in having such a megalithic hierarchy. The fact--which you acknowledge--that it's the largest church hierarchy in the world certainly makes it an outlier. Most major religions seem to have achieved substantial influence with only a fraction of the hierarchical infrastructure the RCC has established. The megalithic org structure of the RCC doesn't seem to me to be typical of religious establishments. The only ones I can think of that even come close is the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the CoE. If it's not typical, I would say it's anomalous. Why was it so important to you to reject that possibility without even considering it?
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569

27th March 2012, 10:41 AM	#21
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Now, be careful. Many of these groups do have national leaderships that make policy decisions, as well as a centralized certification for clergy that often extends to clergy being assigned to churches as needed. So I'd say there's substantial hierarchy above the local level in many cases. And many of these groups do not have national leaderships, etc. There's certainly no overarching hierarchical structure that encompasses all Baptists, for example--quite the opposite! Likewise for Evangelicals, who may not even be a homogenous Christian subculture so much as a convenient byword. And non-denominational Protestants, almost by definition, aren't going to have much--if any--hierarchy outside their local congregation. -- Take the churches I grew up in, for example. Their hierarchies had maybe three tiers at most: congregants, leaders (pastors, sunday school teachers, etc.), board of directors. Some of them tended more towards a "strong leader" form of governance, others towards a "strong board" form of governance. None of them recognized any higher religious authority than themselves. Indeed, the reason I grew up in a succession of churches is that even the individual congregants didn't see themselves as being subject to a particular hierarchy--each was their own religious authority, choosing for themselves which church they would attend from time to time. At least one of the churches I attended didn't even look for leaders that had been recognized by any outside agency. At any given time, the majority of the pastoral staff had never been to seminary or obtained any kind of relevant accreditation. The board itself was the only arbiter of qualifications. On all three continents where I've spent any significant amount of time, churches like this have been both commonplace and influential. So, to answer the OP, I don't think the anomalous megalith that is the RCC is as much a factor in religious influence as he might expect.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569

27th March 2012, 11:11 AM	#22
Squeegee Beckenheim Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 4,250	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla ...nobody was allowed to be of higher rank than the village priest or monk? Like Islam. Originally Posted by Gawdzilla But it wouldn't dominate society so much? How much influence does Islam have on people?
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

27th March 2012, 11:36 AM	#23
Baloney Muse Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: America! (F, yeah!) Posts: 666	Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim Like Islam. Not so fast there, buddy! Supreme Leader of Iran
	__________________ _{When I think about woo, I detect myself.}

27th March 2012, 11:49 AM	#24
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,350	It would be a lot more diverse, as it would not be possible to declare a common dogma at a larger level. For example, followers of religion X would agree on a few core points, but not much beyond that.
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

27th March 2012, 11:52 AM	#25
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,363	Originally Posted by theprestige And I was born in Portugal. Doesn't mean I know much about it, though. But if you are familiar with the highly-influential-yet-not-particularly-hierarchical denominations that pervade much of the US, then I'm confused as to why you think a lack of hierarchy would result in a lack of influence. Clearly you're not comparing the Southern Baptists to the Roman Catholic Church. One of those organizations has a heck of a lot more power than the other. (I can be counter-pompous as long as you wish to play that game.)
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

27th March 2012, 12:06 PM	#26
epeos76 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 300	Originally Posted by Piscivore A lot like Buddhism or Shinto, probably. Buddhism covers a lot of ground, but some of the the popular flavors have a notable hierarchy, e.g. the Dalai Lama's establishment.
epeos76 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 300

27th March 2012, 12:13 PM	#27
Marduk Banned Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Newbury, Berkshire Posts: 10,242	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Are you aware that there are congregationalist religions (including mine), where there is no higher rank than the local church leadership? so no Jesus or God then interesting thanks

27th March 2012, 12:14 PM	#28
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,173	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church. A religion in which there is no higher rank than a village priest is by definition NOT megalithic. And most religions in history have been like this -- Catholic church is an exception, not the rule. Basically you are asking "What water would be like if it were dry?"
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,173	__________________ Gamemaster: "A horde of rotting zombies is shambling toward you. The sign over the door says 'Accounting'"

27th March 2012, 12:34 PM	#29
Bram Kaandorp Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Netherlands Posts: 2,240	Originally Posted by Humes fork It would be a lot more diverse, as it would not be possible to declare a common dogma at a larger level. For example, followers of religion X would agree on a few core points, but not much beyond that. Conversely, different villages might develop more tension because of huge differences in their religions.
	__________________ If autism is a "living death", does that make me a zombie? If so, that'd be great. Just don't get your brain in my general vicinity.

27th March 2012, 12:46 PM	#30
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Marduk so no Jesus or God then interesting thanks Nope, other than Yog-Sothoth. He is the Key, and the Gate.
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

27th March 2012, 12:49 PM	#31
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853	Originally Posted by Mark6 Basically you are asking "What water would be like if it were dry?" No, it's really close to, "I wonder what mammals would be like if they were land-dwelling, rather than aquatic like the blue whale."
AvalonXQ Guest Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 11,853

27th March 2012, 12:58 PM	#32
Squeegee Beckenheim Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 4,250	Originally Posted by Baloney Not so fast there, buddy! Supreme Leader of Iran That's an exception. In general, Muslims have no higher authorities than Imams. And, even then, they're not really considered to be authorities in the sense that they can dictate other Muslims' behaviours, they're just people who are more knowledgeable about Islam and so can speak with authority about the interpretation of it. Muslims, in general, are advised that they have a personal relationship with Allah and that they should make up their own minds about how to behave, and if they are told to behave in a way that seems wrong to them, that they should do what they think is right, not what anybody else has told them. It's about as leaderless as a religion gets.
	__________________ I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

27th March 2012, 01:06 PM	#33
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,173	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ No, it's really close to, "I wonder what mammals would be like if they were land-dwelling, rather than aquatic like the blue whale." Well, OP did say he was looking specifically at the blue whale: Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Not really, I was looking at the megalithic structures like the Roman Catholic church.
Mark6 Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 4,173	__________________ Gamemaster: "A horde of rotting zombies is shambling toward you. The sign over the door says 'Accounting'"

27th March 2012, 01:12 PM	#34
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Originally Posted by Gawdzilla Clearly you're not comparing the Southern Baptists to the Roman Catholic Church. One of those organizations has a heck of a lot more power than the other. No doubt. But the Protestant churches in general (including the Southern Baptists) are pretty influential in their own right, even though none of their myriad factions enjoys even a fraction of the hierarchical establishment of the RCC. And other posters have given numerous other examples of religions that are highly influential in society, without the kind of hierarchy the RCC enjoys. Maybe I would understand you better if you defined some terms. For example, what exactly do you mean by "[religion] wouldn't dominate society so much"? To me, it seems like a lot of religions are extremely influential in society, even though their hierarchies are almost flat, compared to the RCC org structure. Do you disagree? Quote: (I can be counter-pompous as long as you wish to play that game.) (I wasn't even aware that was a game that was being played. I certainly have no wish to play it. If you are unsure, please believe me when I tell you all I'm interested in is presenting and considering arguments and counter-arguments. I hope this is mutually agreeable.)
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569

27th March 2012, 01:14 PM	#35
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569	Originally Posted by Mark6 Well, OP did say he was looking specifically at the blue whale: Right. But he's looking at the RCC specifically in the context of the question: does megalithic hierarchy lead to substantial social influence? Since a number of counter-examples have been given, we may reasonably suspect that megalithic hierarchies are possibly incidental to religious influence on society.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,569