What we fail to realize is that we, too, are idealists who operate according to a set of ideas.
The difference is that, as Christians, the ideas and ideology we believe are not ours but those of a Holy God.
Generally, idealism is the act or practice of envisioning things in an ideal or often impractical form. Idealism holds that reality essentially exists as spirit or consciousness, and that whatever exists is known only in mental dimensions through and/or as ideas. Idealists adhere and act according to their own perceived ideals; in matters of question, idealists tend to default to their own believed ideals rather than reality.
Idealists tend to pick and choose the ideas and ideals in which they believe, and then they live and act according to these ideas, regardless of who or what they encounter. Ideas of judgement, priority and hierarchy all have tendencies extended from idealism; as Christians, we are not absolved from this extension, but this is where we should part ways with true idealism. Idealists hold their position no matter the situation or consequence because, for them (Idealists), it is the idea that matters.
There are many forms of idealism, but, for this post, I will focus only on epistemological idealism. Epistemological idealism holds that in the knowledge process, the mind has the only ability to understand and grasp objects as they really are (Those things that are true.). Ideas of truth are rooted in spirit and consciousness, and ideas of matter are suspect and not trusted.
There are tendencies in Christian culture that are similar to those found in epistemological idealism. The idea that the mind is paramount in the spiritual growth of faith could be considered a form of epistemological idealism. While most would not outwardly endorse this position (epistemological idealism), actions reveal tendencies that are manifestations of this position.
The belief that some can possess the mind of Christ and be spiritually at a higher level than others; the overt emphasis on the cognitive. The tendency to promote grace as a spiritual panacea absolving one from personal responsibility. Traditions that have become part of faith and worship. There are elements of power, popularity and relevance that take precedent over humility and servant-hood. The church, in some instances, has evolved to an entity to defend instead of a body which serves. Each is not overtly evil or wrong, but each is an idea that, if pushed to the extreme position and considered in absolutes, could be detrimental.
These tendencies are not confined to anyone or anything; they are examples of extreme positions that connect, in ways, to idealism. German idealism had a huge impact on higher education in the late 20th century, and its influence was so deep and interwoven that some of our default positions in thought are actual extensions from the influence of German idealism.
An extreme approach tends to produce hierarchical forms of action that position one over others. I believe one of the most treacherous of all extremist approaches is the practice of the monopolization of ideas. A church, by its nature, is a bit ego-centric as an organization; it is the commonalities of a particular church that initially attract us to the church. But, after those initial attractions, it is Christ that unites Christians, in all their differences, into one body. It is the body of Christ (the church) that is different than all other bodies; it is the church that takes everyone as they are, with all their differences and idiosyncrasies, and conforms them into one body, a body of that unites in Christ. It is Christ that is our common uniting agent, and it is Christ who holds us as one. Paul reminds us of our difference in Romans 12:4,
"For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function..."
And, the church is a body of different members by design; it is in the church where all members are of equal importance, even in their difference. Paul, again, points this out to us,
"For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. (1 Corinthians 12:14-16)"
This is the major difference between the body of Christ and all other bodies or organizations. In regard to differences, I am not referring to theological or denominational differences as those are doctrinal, but I am referring to ideas of preference presented as if theological (all must agree) or heretical (all must reject).
Jesus gave clear instructions against these tendencies by presenting ideas such as "the first shall be last" and "love your neighbor as yourself." These two commands intentionally position the follower in positions of the least so as to avoid the temptation of positioning to the ideal or formidable position (the most).
Does our calling as Believers in Christ call us to a particular position? Can a Christian be a idealist? Can an idealist be a true Christian?
I will explore these questions as I explore the interaction of idealism and Christianity in the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment