How much does our psychology influence the faith approach we follow, appreciate, and even need? There is regularly a lot of dialogue in the blogosphere about the holiness and horror of both the sin/wrath-focused church and the therapeutic church. Morgan Guyton recently published a couple of excellent posts on fundamentalism and his thoughts on the drive to the (highly disturbing) Christian domestic discipline movement (AKA wife spanking--yes, seriously). These posts spurred me to write about some thoughts I've had about the dichotomy between the sin and therapeutic churches.
One of the things I often hear from major proponents of sin-focused approaches is that we all need to be reminded of our problems, our weaknesses, and that God is in charge. In accordance, the argument for and against the therapeutic churches is that they make us feel too good about ourselves and make us forget about our failings.
This also reminds me of some of the applications of the 12 step approach (not all implementations are the same). Interestingly, there is a decent amount of narcissistic traits in people with substance misuse problems (this is a broad generalization, of course). I think the people who do best in 12 step programs often have this tendency, which is why it makes sense that they need to be reminded of their limitations. Can the same be said for the sin-focused churches? I think so. Some of the loudest voices of this approach (cough, Mark Driscoll, cough) ooze narcissism, so I can see how they benefit from being reminded of their finitude. And just like a good narcissist, they assume everyone is like them and needs the same approach.
Except I've met very few people who aren't aware of their limitations. Those who seem to be needing reminders fall into the undermentioned category. Almost every person I've worked with in my clinical work is acutely aware of his/her problems. Especially when we start getting into levels of higher anxiety, the last thing people need is to be reminded of what's wrong with them. Believe me, as someone with a strong level of perfectionism, I condemn myself plenty.
Continuing this message in the spiritual life does nothing to bring us closer to God. Rather, it reinforces psychological pathology, reinforcing a process of psychic self-flagellation. The therapeutic church approach, reminding people of the unconditional love and grace of God, compensates for the self-condemnation pattern many people experience regularly.
So perhaps both approaches are needed based on particular individuals and psychological processes. After all, God does meet us where we're at, right?
Does that mean I could actually recommend Driscoll and crew to the narcissists? I would have a hard time doing so because of his self-righteous condemnation of others rather than just himself (actually, I don't think I've ever heard him criticize himself, just like a good narcissist). Unfortunately, this becomes a pattern of many sin churches--the people condemn themselves, then become self-congratulatory for doing so and turns the condemnation on others, reinforcing the narcissistic tendencies.
Interestingly, a healthy therapeutic church (yes, there definitely are extreme, unhealthy ones who disregard any semblance of growth and change) could be very good medicine for narcissistic traits. In psychology, a popular explanation of the etiology of narcissism is called the narcissistic injury, which argues that these individuals in fact have an incredibly low self-esteem and sense of self-efficacy. Building up authentic self-regard is actually the "cure" for narcissism in this case. Internalizing God's unconditional love and grace is a core goal of therapeutic churches. And it's a beautiful spiritual and psychological cure to many ills...
Showing posts with label Perfection. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perfection. Show all posts
Monday, September 16, 2013
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
The Pursuit of Holiness is Pharasaical Self-Righteous Perfectionism @christianaudio @caReviewers
I recently received a complimentary copy of Jerry Bridges' audiobook version of The Pursuit of Holiness in order to review it (without any expectation of a positive review, as will be obvious here :) ). I had several theological problems with this book that bleed over to the larger issues of some of holiness movements. Let's go through these by way of some of Bridges' central points:
Factual certainty is central to faith. This, I think, is one of the most damaging elements of this book. At the same time, it was one of the most helpful to me, as it elucidated why so many people are obsessed with sin and the purging of sin: It helps certainty of salvation (more on this later).
Bridges states, "Faith must always be based in fact." I'm not sure where he gets this idea, as it's not biblical or humanly defined. Hebrews 10:1 defines faith as being certain, but based on what we hope for and cannot see. As emphasized by the positivist and empiricist movements, fact is really based on what can be observed by humans. That does not meant there is no fact of God. It means that there does not have to be proof in order to have faith. In fact, faith is more powerful without fact.
Secular definitions also define faith as not being based in fact. Wikipedia's first sentence in the article on faith states, "Faith is the confident belief or trust in a person, idea, or thing that is not based on proof." Other definitions of faith have more to do with the general idea of belief or trust, not necessarily rooted in fact.
This blog is devoted to people's struggles with faith, usually based on their reliance on facts that end up being unsupportable or not as they originally thought. Just because the facts disappear does not mean God or our faith have to disappear.
Reason must contain and control desire. Bridges rightly explains that our desires can be impure and lead us down some terrible roads. Therefore, he argues that we must always use our reason to contain our sinful desires. Reason is a very good thing, but it can also lead us astray. As a psychologist, I frequently see the reason-based defense of rationalization used to dissociate someone from their emotions and therefore move them away from truth.
Ransomed Heart Ministries is based on the premise that once we give our lives to Christ, he gives us a new, good heart. Heck, even the more conservative and sinlessness-driven John Piper's ministry is called Desiring God. We must listen to our desires. Yes, they may mislead us, but if we pay good attention to them, we will hear God speaking to us. Frankly, God speaks to us more through our emotions than through our intellect.
Holy is defined by sinlessness. Bridges states that holiness is "separation from impurity and moral evil." This is one of the biggest and most dangerous bad definitions in Christianity. A few months ago, I talked about how holy and sinlessness are not one in the same. Holiness can include sinlessness, but it is not defined by it. Rather, a better definition of holy is sacred, meaning set apart. Avoiding sin is one way to be set apart, but holiness is a lot more than that.
Granted, Bridges later says that holiness is in a broader sense "obedience to the will of God in whatever God directs," but by the content of his book, he clearly focuses on God's will being that we lead sinless lives.
One of the reasons this perspective can be dangerous is that it can lead us to assume that God dislikes us. Jonathan Brinks recently posted an article related to a video by Skye Jethani, exploring how God views us in the midst of sin. The answer: God loves us. When we forget that, our relationship with God becomes strained because we no longer trust him. But usually that's not our fault, but rather the fault of the Church.
Sinlessness is the evidence of salvation. Bridges states partway through his book, "The only evidence of salvation we have is a holy life." Based on his definition of holy, this would mean sinless. Besides the fact that no person will ever be sinless on earth (Bridges notes this), this idea is simply not biblical. He argues that the Holy Spirit helps us become sinless.
Yet in Galatians 5:22-23, Paul states the fruit of the spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control." Do these correlate with sinlessness? Some do. But these indicate something much more than the absence of sin. They emphasize the presence of love. Frankly, most of these emphasize desire and emotion and not reason, contrary to Bridges earlier point about reason trumping emotion.
Finally, this brings us back to the idea of the role and motivation of factual certainty. It seems this whole book (and I would argue much of people's obsessions with sin) is focused on the need to be confident in their own salvation. This is definitely an understandable concern: We don't want to wonder if we'll be in Heaven. We want proof. So we look for it in various ways.
One of the ways is emphasizing a "pure," sinless life. Like the Pharisees, we can become self-righteous if we lead sinless lives, being certain of our salvation. But just like the Pharisees, it is at this time that we are the farthest from God, missing the true hope of salvation in a relationship with Christ.
Factual certainty is central to faith. This, I think, is one of the most damaging elements of this book. At the same time, it was one of the most helpful to me, as it elucidated why so many people are obsessed with sin and the purging of sin: It helps certainty of salvation (more on this later).
Bridges states, "Faith must always be based in fact." I'm not sure where he gets this idea, as it's not biblical or humanly defined. Hebrews 10:1 defines faith as being certain, but based on what we hope for and cannot see. As emphasized by the positivist and empiricist movements, fact is really based on what can be observed by humans. That does not meant there is no fact of God. It means that there does not have to be proof in order to have faith. In fact, faith is more powerful without fact.
Secular definitions also define faith as not being based in fact. Wikipedia's first sentence in the article on faith states, "Faith is the confident belief or trust in a person, idea, or thing that is not based on proof." Other definitions of faith have more to do with the general idea of belief or trust, not necessarily rooted in fact.
This blog is devoted to people's struggles with faith, usually based on their reliance on facts that end up being unsupportable or not as they originally thought. Just because the facts disappear does not mean God or our faith have to disappear.
Reason must contain and control desire. Bridges rightly explains that our desires can be impure and lead us down some terrible roads. Therefore, he argues that we must always use our reason to contain our sinful desires. Reason is a very good thing, but it can also lead us astray. As a psychologist, I frequently see the reason-based defense of rationalization used to dissociate someone from their emotions and therefore move them away from truth.
Ransomed Heart Ministries is based on the premise that once we give our lives to Christ, he gives us a new, good heart. Heck, even the more conservative and sinlessness-driven John Piper's ministry is called Desiring God. We must listen to our desires. Yes, they may mislead us, but if we pay good attention to them, we will hear God speaking to us. Frankly, God speaks to us more through our emotions than through our intellect.
Holy is defined by sinlessness. Bridges states that holiness is "separation from impurity and moral evil." This is one of the biggest and most dangerous bad definitions in Christianity. A few months ago, I talked about how holy and sinlessness are not one in the same. Holiness can include sinlessness, but it is not defined by it. Rather, a better definition of holy is sacred, meaning set apart. Avoiding sin is one way to be set apart, but holiness is a lot more than that.
Granted, Bridges later says that holiness is in a broader sense "obedience to the will of God in whatever God directs," but by the content of his book, he clearly focuses on God's will being that we lead sinless lives.
One of the reasons this perspective can be dangerous is that it can lead us to assume that God dislikes us. Jonathan Brinks recently posted an article related to a video by Skye Jethani, exploring how God views us in the midst of sin. The answer: God loves us. When we forget that, our relationship with God becomes strained because we no longer trust him. But usually that's not our fault, but rather the fault of the Church.
Sinlessness is the evidence of salvation. Bridges states partway through his book, "The only evidence of salvation we have is a holy life." Based on his definition of holy, this would mean sinless. Besides the fact that no person will ever be sinless on earth (Bridges notes this), this idea is simply not biblical. He argues that the Holy Spirit helps us become sinless.
Yet in Galatians 5:22-23, Paul states the fruit of the spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control." Do these correlate with sinlessness? Some do. But these indicate something much more than the absence of sin. They emphasize the presence of love. Frankly, most of these emphasize desire and emotion and not reason, contrary to Bridges earlier point about reason trumping emotion.
Finally, this brings us back to the idea of the role and motivation of factual certainty. It seems this whole book (and I would argue much of people's obsessions with sin) is focused on the need to be confident in their own salvation. This is definitely an understandable concern: We don't want to wonder if we'll be in Heaven. We want proof. So we look for it in various ways.
One of the ways is emphasizing a "pure," sinless life. Like the Pharisees, we can become self-righteous if we lead sinless lives, being certain of our salvation. But just like the Pharisees, it is at this time that we are the farthest from God, missing the true hope of salvation in a relationship with Christ.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Perfect Parenting
This is a very interesting article on parenting and how there is no such thing as a "perfect parent." Particularly in Christianity, we do often place a lot of weight on parents, assuming if you're good enough of a parent, you'll have good kids, so if your kids have problems, then you suck as a parent.
As a therapist on a child inpatient psychiatric unit, I see many parents who place this judgment on themselves (and many of them are not Christians). They also ask what they can do differently.
While many parents could do significantly different things and definitely contribute to kids' issues (in fact, many kids don't have a problem--their families do), there is a significant number of situations where there is no clear answer. No one has necessarily done anything wrong. The child just has serious problems.
It seems these are some of the most difficult situations, both for the family and for me, as the therapist. If it's someone's fault, at least there's a solution and therefore hope. If no one is at fault, hope becomes much more difficult to find. And hope is critically important to life.
I'm not a determinist overall, but some things are determined. The thing is we cannot always determine what is predetermined by genetics, God, or our situation (or all three). What I can say is that even when we do everything right, everything does not always work out perfectly. And that can be more distressing than if we have made a mistake.
As a therapist on a child inpatient psychiatric unit, I see many parents who place this judgment on themselves (and many of them are not Christians). They also ask what they can do differently.
While many parents could do significantly different things and definitely contribute to kids' issues (in fact, many kids don't have a problem--their families do), there is a significant number of situations where there is no clear answer. No one has necessarily done anything wrong. The child just has serious problems.
It seems these are some of the most difficult situations, both for the family and for me, as the therapist. If it's someone's fault, at least there's a solution and therefore hope. If no one is at fault, hope becomes much more difficult to find. And hope is critically important to life.
I'm not a determinist overall, but some things are determined. The thing is we cannot always determine what is predetermined by genetics, God, or our situation (or all three). What I can say is that even when we do everything right, everything does not always work out perfectly. And that can be more distressing than if we have made a mistake.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Fighting & Surrendering, Part 3
For another day in this series, I want to use another Ransomed Heart devotional that addresses this topic. One of the core values this ministry has is that we are part of a story, a journey. That journey can be scary because of the unknown.
We can take control out of God's hands and try to plan everything in our lives to the nth degree. I do this a lot. I do believe in planning, but anxiety creeps in when I stress a lot that something will go wrong. That's the piece that I need to surrender to God.
Life is scary. The future is unknown. No matter how hard we try, we cannot control everything in our futures. Reading devotionals like the one below have helped me remember to calm down and enjoy the ride. Also, meditating on particular verses has helped me recenter my focus:
We can take control out of God's hands and try to plan everything in our lives to the nth degree. I do this a lot. I do believe in planning, but anxiety creeps in when I stress a lot that something will go wrong. That's the piece that I need to surrender to God.
Life is scary. The future is unknown. No matter how hard we try, we cannot control everything in our futures. Reading devotionals like the one below have helped me remember to calm down and enjoy the ride. Also, meditating on particular verses has helped me recenter my focus:
- Jeremiah 29:11: "'For I know the plans I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.'"
- Romans 8:28: "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, have been called according to his purpose."
- Psalm 46:10 : "Be still, and know that I am God"
I Will Go Before You
08/10/2008
08/10/2008
I will go before you
and will level the mountains;
I will break down gates of bronze
and cut through bars of iron.
I will give you the treasures of darkness, riches stored in secret places, so that you may know that I am the Lord, the God of Israel, who summons you by name. (Isa. 45:2–3)
God’s imagery of going before us lets us know that he desires us to go on a journey. This is not so frightening. Most of us are aware that the Christian life requires a pilgrimage of some sort. We know we are sojourners. What we have sometimes not given much thought to is what kind of a journey we are to be taking.
Not realizing it is a journey of the heart that is called for, we make a crucial mistake. We come to a place in our spiritual life where we hear God calling us. We know he is calling us to give up the less-wild lovers that have become so much a part of our identity, embrace our nakedness, and trust in his goodness.
As we stand at this intersection of God’s calling, we look down two highways that appear to travel in very different directions. The first highway quickly takes a turn and disappears from our view. We cannot see clearly where it leads, but there are ominous clouds in the near distance. Standing still long enough to look down this road makes us aware of an anxiety inside, an anxiety that threatens to crystallize into unhealed pain and forgotten disappointment. We check our valise and find no up-to-date road map but only the torn and smudged parchment containing the scribbled anecdotes and travelers’ warnings by a few who have traveled the way of the heart before us. They encourage us to follow them, but their rambling journals give no real answers to our queries on how to navigate the highway.
(The Sacred Romance , 127–28)
To subscribe to this email, create a profile at www.ransomedheart.com/
See also the Ransomed Heart Podcast at www.ransomedheart.com/podcast
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Fighting & Surrendering, Part 2
Continuing from yesterday's post, I wanted to mention another way fighting may manifest in our lives, again taking an example from my own life.
I have realized that I feel the need to always be productive. This tendency of mine recently caught my attention with the fervor over the Olympics. I was trying to understand it (I still am). I watched some of it with my family, as they had it on, but I didn't watch the opening ceremonies because I didn't know the Olympics had even started. Some of my family was shocked I didn't know who Michael Phelps was. I don't get the draw to sports. I've never been a person who has been into sports. I prefer the arts.
As I was watching the Olympics, I was trying to justify my disinterest, and the first argument that came to mind is that at least the arts are functional. They move us, they reveal God's love and beauty in the world, they are means of expression. I don't see any of that in sports (maybe it's there and it's not my means :) ).
Again, coincidentally enough, I got the devotional below the same day. It reminded me that life does not always have to be functional. It can simply be beautiful. Life can simply be because life itself is beautiful.
Yet I fight against this idea every day, trying to find another way to be functional in every second of my day. Why? If I'm functional, I get more done, allowing me to have a better chance at being perfect, and therefore believing I am acceptable. Slowing down and simply accepting God, God's beauty, and myself is remarkably relaxing and connects me to God more. It's hard to do, but I'm trying to do it. Have you ever had this experience of trying to make everything functional?
I have realized that I feel the need to always be productive. This tendency of mine recently caught my attention with the fervor over the Olympics. I was trying to understand it (I still am). I watched some of it with my family, as they had it on, but I didn't watch the opening ceremonies because I didn't know the Olympics had even started. Some of my family was shocked I didn't know who Michael Phelps was. I don't get the draw to sports. I've never been a person who has been into sports. I prefer the arts.
As I was watching the Olympics, I was trying to justify my disinterest, and the first argument that came to mind is that at least the arts are functional. They move us, they reveal God's love and beauty in the world, they are means of expression. I don't see any of that in sports (maybe it's there and it's not my means :) ).
Again, coincidentally enough, I got the devotional below the same day. It reminded me that life does not always have to be functional. It can simply be beautiful. Life can simply be because life itself is beautiful.
Yet I fight against this idea every day, trying to find another way to be functional in every second of my day. Why? If I'm functional, I get more done, allowing me to have a better chance at being perfect, and therefore believing I am acceptable. Slowing down and simply accepting God, God's beauty, and myself is remarkably relaxing and connects me to God more. It's hard to do, but I'm trying to do it. Have you ever had this experience of trying to make everything functional?
Beauty Is Absolutely Essential
08/09/2008
08/09/2008
I (John) just let out a deep sigh. That we even need to explain how beauty is so absolutely essential to God only shows how dull we have grown to him, to the world in which we live, and to Eve. Far too many years of our own spiritual lives were lived with barely a nod to beauty, to the central role that beauty plays in the life of God, and in our own lives. How could we have missed this?
Beauty is essential to God. No—that’s not putting it strongly enough. Beauty is the essence of God.
The first way we know this is through nature, the world God has given us. Scripture says that the created world is filled with the glory of God (Isa. 6:3). In what way? Primarily through its beauty. We had a wet spring here in Colorado, and the wildflowers are coming up everywhere—lupine and wild iris and Shasta daisy and a dozen others. The aspens have their heart-shaped leaves again, trembling in the slightest breeze. Massive thunderclouds are rolling in, bringing with them the glorious sunsets they magnify. The earth in summer is brimming with beauty, beauty of such magnificence and variety and unembarrassed lavishness, ripe beauty, lush beauty, beauty given to us with such generosity and abundance it is almost scandalous.
Nature is not primarily functional. It is primarily beautiful. Stop for a moment and let that sink in. We’re so used to evaluating everything (and everyone) by their usefulness, this thought will take a minute or two to dawn on us. Nature is not primarily functional. It is primarily beautiful. Which is to say, beauty is in and of itself a great and glorious good, something we need in large and daily doses (for our God has seen fit to arrange for this). Nature at the height of its glory shouts, Beauty is essential! revealing that Beauty is the essence of God. The whole world is full of his glory.
(Captivating , 23–24)
To subscribe to this email, create a profile at www.ransomedheart.com/
See also the Ransomed Heart Podcast at www.ransomedheart.com/podcast
Monday, August 11, 2008
Fighting & Surrendering, Part 1
Despite being on a sort of summer vacation (although still working), I've realized that I've been feeling rather anxious a lot. This weekend, I suspected that this might be due to feeling like I'm fighting all the time--not interpersonal fighting, but fighting to do everything right and get everything done and and and... Anyone ever feel like that?
In seeming confirmation of this suspicion, I received this devotional. It concludes with the point that we often are fighting all the time, suggesting that we are likely fighting against God, and we need to surrender. I think that is often true. We can fight against God when we try to do it our way, and surrendering is the only way to get true freedom.
However, how do we know if we are truly fighting against God? What about fighting against the world, evil, or even ourselves?
We can surrender ourselves to God and still fight and get exhausted from those fights. I would think Martin Luther King, Jr., surrendered his life, but he was a fighter, not against God, but against the world and evil. Mother Teresa fought for the things she believed in and surrendered her life for. She had some clear struggles of faith. Was she fighting with God? Not necessarily, but possibly with herself. Martin Luther, too, struggled with his faith, and I would argue he, too, was fighting against himself, not God.
My fighting usually relates to perfectionism. I beat myself up when I make a mistake. I have to get things right and constantly do and do and do (can anyone relate?). One could make a legitimate argument that I need to surrender these things to God. Well, one response could be easier said than done. At the same time, my experience of these fights do not seem to be as much related to surrendering these activities to God (I don't have huge confidence in my ability to do them without God's help), but to fighting against a belief I have about myself.
Perfectionism is not always about doing it yourself. For me, I think it relates more to having to be perfect in order to be valuable and simply "okay." Interestingly and coincidentally (are there coincidences), there was a good post today examining the difference between perfection and wholeness.
I recently listened to Ransomed Heart's The Good Heart again. I highly recommend it to everyone. In listening, I realized that while I believed that Christ transforms our hearts and makes our hearts good once we accept Him, I have not fully accepted that belief and integrated it into my life. I act like I have an evil heart, therefore I must act with as much perfection as possible in order to show that I'm not all that bad. It's a failing model that never achieves its goal, or at least the goal doesn't last long, if achieved.
In this case, it doesn't seem to be as much about fighting with God as fighting with myself about my views of myself... Has anyone else experienced this same thing? How do you handle it?
In seeming confirmation of this suspicion, I received this devotional. It concludes with the point that we often are fighting all the time, suggesting that we are likely fighting against God, and we need to surrender. I think that is often true. We can fight against God when we try to do it our way, and surrendering is the only way to get true freedom.
However, how do we know if we are truly fighting against God? What about fighting against the world, evil, or even ourselves?
We can surrender ourselves to God and still fight and get exhausted from those fights. I would think Martin Luther King, Jr., surrendered his life, but he was a fighter, not against God, but against the world and evil. Mother Teresa fought for the things she believed in and surrendered her life for. She had some clear struggles of faith. Was she fighting with God? Not necessarily, but possibly with herself. Martin Luther, too, struggled with his faith, and I would argue he, too, was fighting against himself, not God.
My fighting usually relates to perfectionism. I beat myself up when I make a mistake. I have to get things right and constantly do and do and do (can anyone relate?). One could make a legitimate argument that I need to surrender these things to God. Well, one response could be easier said than done. At the same time, my experience of these fights do not seem to be as much related to surrendering these activities to God (I don't have huge confidence in my ability to do them without God's help), but to fighting against a belief I have about myself.
Perfectionism is not always about doing it yourself. For me, I think it relates more to having to be perfect in order to be valuable and simply "okay." Interestingly and coincidentally (are there coincidences), there was a good post today examining the difference between perfection and wholeness.
I recently listened to Ransomed Heart's The Good Heart again. I highly recommend it to everyone. In listening, I realized that while I believed that Christ transforms our hearts and makes our hearts good once we accept Him, I have not fully accepted that belief and integrated it into my life. I act like I have an evil heart, therefore I must act with as much perfection as possible in order to show that I'm not all that bad. It's a failing model that never achieves its goal, or at least the goal doesn't last long, if achieved.
In this case, it doesn't seem to be as much about fighting with God as fighting with myself about my views of myself... Has anyone else experienced this same thing? How do you handle it?
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Symptoms
Yesterday, I talked about my frustrations with the symptom focus of the new hands-free law in California. Today, I want to expand the need to not focus on symptoms.
So one of my struggles in my field (psychology), particularly with the more medicalized aspects, is the over focus on symptomatology rather than the root of the problem (or strengths, gasp). I have found psychiatry (the medical part of the field) tends to focus only on the treatment of symptoms, with little concern for the persistent presence of the actual disorder (slight hyperbole and separating symptoms from disorder is difficult and another discussion). My hyperbolic bias would be to ignore the symptoms and treat the underlying problem. Qualifying this, symptoms must be addressed. Anyone who has had a urinary tract infection would probably be excited that antibacterial pills are treating the underlying problem, but also want something to treat the pain now. The problem is that in the medical field, the symptoms are the primary focus.
The same is true in the Church. We look at people's behaviors and just want them changed. When someone looks holier, then they must have had some powerful influence from the Holy Spirit. And if someone is struggling with some behaviors, then they need to get closer to God. While I would agree there are correlations between relationship with God and behavioral holiness, this is not a 1:1 ratio. We struggle through life and various circumstances, no matter how close we are to God.
We need to qualify the holiness movement with remembering Jesus' words about the inside and outside of the cup. It's a lot more important to have the inside clean than the outside. It's more important to have a sinful-looking person who is close to God than a holy-looking person who doesn't know God from a doorknob.
This is hard to do because a person's relationship with God, the mind, and the existence of a medical problem without symptoms cannot be measured. So we focus on what we can point to, which can be helpful. We have major problems, though, when we reify the symptoms as the problems themselves.
So one of my struggles in my field (psychology), particularly with the more medicalized aspects, is the over focus on symptomatology rather than the root of the problem (or strengths, gasp). I have found psychiatry (the medical part of the field) tends to focus only on the treatment of symptoms, with little concern for the persistent presence of the actual disorder (slight hyperbole and separating symptoms from disorder is difficult and another discussion). My hyperbolic bias would be to ignore the symptoms and treat the underlying problem. Qualifying this, symptoms must be addressed. Anyone who has had a urinary tract infection would probably be excited that antibacterial pills are treating the underlying problem, but also want something to treat the pain now. The problem is that in the medical field, the symptoms are the primary focus.
The same is true in the Church. We look at people's behaviors and just want them changed. When someone looks holier, then they must have had some powerful influence from the Holy Spirit. And if someone is struggling with some behaviors, then they need to get closer to God. While I would agree there are correlations between relationship with God and behavioral holiness, this is not a 1:1 ratio. We struggle through life and various circumstances, no matter how close we are to God.
We need to qualify the holiness movement with remembering Jesus' words about the inside and outside of the cup. It's a lot more important to have the inside clean than the outside. It's more important to have a sinful-looking person who is close to God than a holy-looking person who doesn't know God from a doorknob.
This is hard to do because a person's relationship with God, the mind, and the existence of a medical problem without symptoms cannot be measured. So we focus on what we can point to, which can be helpful. We have major problems, though, when we reify the symptoms as the problems themselves.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Professional v. Perfect
Related to my post on thing being no big deal, there is a lot of thought connecting perfection with professionalism, particularly in the Church. One of the things I appreciate about many emerging churches is the attempt to separate those two. Professionalism does not mean perfection. Things do not have to go just right and look wonderful in order to be professional. In fact, I think the most professional people are those who can deal with unknown while maintaining a clear sense of and direction toward purpose.
There is a certain amount of quality that goes along with professionalism, and that varies by industry. I think professionalism relates more to using resources wisely and to the best of people's abilities. Too much focus on perfection, though, makes us forget about our true purposes. I see that happen a lot. I'd rather forgo perfection, even professionalism, to maintain a clear sense of purpose, meaning, and good intentions in what I do.
Related to the Church, Sunday morning gatherings should be focused more on connecting with people and providing ministry than putting on a good show. This isn't anything new; many people have said it. However, many people also say they agree with this statement, but continue focusing on superficiality in the name of professionalism. Professionalism while sacrificing ministry is not worth it. Thoughts?
There is a certain amount of quality that goes along with professionalism, and that varies by industry. I think professionalism relates more to using resources wisely and to the best of people's abilities. Too much focus on perfection, though, makes us forget about our true purposes. I see that happen a lot. I'd rather forgo perfection, even professionalism, to maintain a clear sense of purpose, meaning, and good intentions in what I do.
Related to the Church, Sunday morning gatherings should be focused more on connecting with people and providing ministry than putting on a good show. This isn't anything new; many people have said it. However, many people also say they agree with this statement, but continue focusing on superficiality in the name of professionalism. Professionalism while sacrificing ministry is not worth it. Thoughts?
Sunday, June 29, 2008
No Big Deal
Okay, I have an confession to make. When I mentioned I was looking at different web browsers and social networking sites, it wasn't that simple. I kept feeling a lot of anxiety about having to make a decision about what I would use... because evidently it would be the final decision about what application or site to use, all of which are free.
I do this a lot, does anyone else? I go into something, believing I have to make it perfect. That makes it really hard to enjoy or explore. Particularly because most of the decisions we make are not final ones (there are of course notable exceptions, like having a child). Things like a web browser. So I try it for a while, and if I don't like it, I can switch. No big deal. I can try a social networking or bookmarking site. If I don't like it, I can stop. No big deal.
Approaching everything like this seems to take the power out of God's hands. We have to have control over everything. Even our experiences. And we don't even realize we're doing it. If you find yourself doing this also, try to remind yourself that it's not a big deal. Mistakes happen. If you see me doing it, you can remind me of it, too! :)
And frankly, even with critically important decisions, we still need to acknowledge, accept, and embrace the unknown. Brad Paisley's Make a Mistake was something I listened to a lot to remind myself that mistakes are okay, even good and even in big decisions.
I do this a lot, does anyone else? I go into something, believing I have to make it perfect. That makes it really hard to enjoy or explore. Particularly because most of the decisions we make are not final ones (there are of course notable exceptions, like having a child). Things like a web browser. So I try it for a while, and if I don't like it, I can switch. No big deal. I can try a social networking or bookmarking site. If I don't like it, I can stop. No big deal.
Approaching everything like this seems to take the power out of God's hands. We have to have control over everything. Even our experiences. And we don't even realize we're doing it. If you find yourself doing this also, try to remind yourself that it's not a big deal. Mistakes happen. If you see me doing it, you can remind me of it, too! :)
And frankly, even with critically important decisions, we still need to acknowledge, accept, and embrace the unknown. Brad Paisley's Make a Mistake was something I listened to a lot to remind myself that mistakes are okay, even good and even in big decisions.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Following, Not Perfection
Christianity Today featured an interesting article today, exploring a new diagram for sharing the Gospel.
Now I'm not a big fan of diagram evangelism. It often seems too formulaic. However, Mr. Choung, the creator of this diagram, makes an excellent point that I think helps make this diagram successful. On page 3 of the article, he states:
Jesus' invitations into the kingdom seem to be summed up in a couple of words: "Follow me." Jesus didn't always require people to see the depths of their sin before they started a journey with him. They just needed to be willing to change.How true is that?! I've never thought of it in those terms, but that's probably part of my problem with the over-focus on sin that often occurs. Just like I had talked about in my message at The Gathering a few weeks ago, change is a process, which includes a time of being unaware of what needs to be changed. That includes aspects of our spirituality.
So why do we expect others to instantly see all of the ways they need to change just because we gave a nice speech on sin and salvation? It's not that simple, and God Himself didn't even do it that way. Being willing to change, on the other hand, is very different. That includes a lifelong process and journey. That's what Christianity is really about...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)