Orthodoxy

Orthodoxy is the mortal enemy of inquiry. Inquiry is an important element of all human progress. 

Human beings in newly formed groups tend toward orthodoxy, an enforced conformity, based on religious tenets, conventions or ideals. Orthodoxy is a tool, often seized upon by leaders in groups, to create group cohesion by establishing a rigid inside-outside boundary. Concrete manifestations of orthodoxy are dietary prescriptions, behavioral prescriptions and formalized rituals. For instance: The cow is sacred; WE don't eat cow. Another example: The god likes bowing; WE kneel down on the floor and bow to where the god lives. A more subtle example: Speaking loudly is scary; WE never raise our voices.

One alternative to using orthodoxy in establishing group cohesion for a common cause is using the group's awareness of its own process, or manner of being,  to establish group cohesion. Another alternative is brutal or subtle enforcement of conformity, or single-mindedness. 

The determinant of which method of establishing group cohesion is used a particular group is the leadership of the group. Religious leaders nearly unanimously utilize orthodoxy in some form to pull together a congregation. Some orthodoxy is presented as anti-orthodoxy or reform, but it is really orthodoxy-lite, a kinder, gentler orthodoxy, with basis in similar rituals, texts and/or belief systems.

Among atheists, agnostics and other secular humanists, I hear as much loathing of orthodoxy as of dogma. Perhaps this lies at the root of the difficulty which free-thinkers have in establishing cohesive and effective communities. Few people are exposed to the theory of group process outside therapeutic or corporate development circles. We live in societies still based on hierarchical patriarchy, which is itself an outgrowth of the tendency toward orthodoxy. It is easy to revert to orthodoxy unintentionally in groups without great vigilance.

As a retired psychiatric nurse, I am familiar with utilizing group process to build group cohesion and develop group culture. It is a time-consuming process, which requires commitment and regularity of communication as an assembled group. In other words, it requires community and a skilled leadership which trusts in the development of the community's own process.

As an individual member and a group leader, I have participated in many groups in the past forty years. I have assembled groups for specific forms of support and community. I have also led therapeutic groups for people with a wide range of needs. I have never found orthodoxy necessary or helpful in participating in or leading a group. In fact, groups I have experienced which have courted orthodoxy, though longer lasting and more profitable for the leadership, have been dissatisfying to me as a humanist and free-thinker.

It takes courage on the part of a leadership to trust in a group's potential without having to create a rigid list of prescriptions for actual behaviors and personal styles. It also takes a great deal of creativity and limit-setting within the group's process to make sure things get done. This requires skill, experimentation and scientific evaluation of what works and what doesn't. It requires making mistakes, having disagreements and debate.

The first step to forming any healthy group or community is the informed commitment of all its members. Members must know what the group's function is. They must know what their roles are. They must trust that the leadership is flexible, accountable and honest. Setting up this framework is the responsibility of the leadership in consultation with the group. Leadership must bear the burden of modeling vulnerable creativity, while also bearing the responsibility of gate-keeper and limit-setter, within parameters agreed upon by members of the group as they enter it. These parameters are usually based simply in non-violence, civility and common sense. 

In work groups, helpful tools are clear job descriptions, clear lines of authority, transparent methods of promotion and compensation. In social action groups, establishment of teams or committees which take responsibility for mission crafting, action planning, fund-raising, etc..Leadership usually bears the burden of devising these methodologies for the group, based on group surveys, leadership experience and leadership skill development through ongoing education/research. Orthodox leadership retreats behind dogma or rigid ideology. Process-oriented leadership thrives on the new and the challenging.

As an individual humanist, I have seen  great examples of the development of vibrant free-thinking communities of atheists, agnostics and believers. These groups have been small and locally based. Some have been focused on a particular social phenomenon or issue. All have been acutely attentive to their process and the individual needs of their membership. None have reverted to orthodoxy to suppress expressive individuality or creative skepticism.