Neckties and Orthodoxy

Years ago, an older Christian told me I perplexed him. “You’re liberal on neckties (I declined to wear them) but conservative on scripture,” he said. He probably capitalized “Scripture” to himself when he said it. At that church, traditions mattered more than they probably should.

Neckties and orthodoxy are light years apart in spiritual importance. Unfortunately, in those days they often came as a package deal.

At the time, I didn’t think of myself as either a conservative or liberal Christian. I was just trying to apply the Bible to my conduct across the board, and that came out however it came out. But my friend was looking to plug me into a category he understood. Maybe that would have simplified things for him. Unfortunately, the line between summarizing and over-simplifying is razor thin and easily crossed.

Obscuring Distinctions

The problem with ideological categories and identity groups is not so much that they are divisive, though they are, and Paul certainly talks about that. More often, it’s that they are not divisive enough. Any category broad enough to hold large numbers of people — whether theological, political, racial or sexual — is broad enough to obscure distinctions as critical as the commonalities it purports to encompass.

The same is true of systematic theology. All systems are works in progress, and only as valid as they map honestly to the teaching of scripture. My leanings are dispensational, but I try not to identify myself as a dispensationalist. The name comes with a whole lot of baggage that might not apply to me, and predisposes people to waste all kinds of time fighting with other men’s arguments I’m not advancing. I have no interest in defending positions I don’t agree with just because they are well-known features of some system with which I am unfortunately identified. It’s easier to start a conversation with “What do you think of this passage?” and go from there.

The moment anyone plugs us into an ideological category or identity group, Christians ought to think twice. It’s usually a trap. Identifying as politically conservative may seem like useful shorthand and would not be broadly inaccurate, but it puts me in the lifeboat with people like Ben Shapiro, David French, Nikki Haley and the late John McCain. I disagree with the objectives, methods and thought processes of these folks as much or more as I can find areas of agreement with them. As an identity, “conservative” is simply too broad and ill-defined to serve as a useful label.

Aging Badly

Ideological categories and identity groups also have a way of aging badly.

Red, yellow, black and white were adequate categories in Sunday School, until I realized 90% of the people in the real world are various shades of pink and brown. An Arab is not an Indian is not a Columbian, though the skin tones of some individuals could fool you. Likewise, the distinction between Right and Left worked perfectly well until Klaus Schwab started paying off politicians from both sides of the aisle. A right-wing globalist is every bit as evil as a left-wing globalist, and degrees more subtle and dangerous. The word “neocon” seemed fine in the eighties, as did the word “libertarian”. Now, I use “neocon” as a synonym for “warmonger”, and libertarians have exposed themselves as hopelessly out of touch with reality.

Few modern adherents of any “ism” know much about their own roots. Find me a budding Marxist who knows how Karl Marx’s ideology has played out in the world over the last century. They don’t exist. Nobody who understands what Marx wrote or how he lived is actually Marxist.

This is true in the religious world as well. I know Protestants who are painfully conciliatory, Presbyterians who couldn’t care less about the presbytery, Lutherans who have no attachment to Luther and Calvinists who haven’t read a word of Calvin … and don’t even get me started on Catholics! And the idea that there is any kind of broad coalition between gays, lesbians and trans people, let alone the endless self-defined subgroups in the so-called LGBT alliance, seems beyond absurd when you become familiar with the tensions and rivalries between the various groups.

Beliefs and alliances change over time, but the names stay the same, causing endless confusion.

What’s a Christian to Do?

So, what’s a Christian to do? There’s a fine question. I would say start by recognizing that people are remarkably un-self-aware and easily habituated to a sort of compulsive categorization that is suboptimal at best. Be careful about lumping people into broad groups based on their own self-identification. They are often wrong in their assessments, or use words in ways you don’t. The difference between a Pride marcher and a committed Christian struggling with inappropriate desire he has never acted on is night and day (or light and darkness), but both may refer to themselves as “gay” when you first meet them. One is boasting, the other is confessing. Any category that lumps them together blurs the line between life and death.

Secondly, reject self-categorization. Broad categories are like omnibus bills: one important area of agreement with ten tons of barnacles attached. Scraping off barnacles is a time consuming task best avoided. Let people get to know you for who you are rather than offering them a label to make it easier for them to process. Resist “isms”.

Finally, treat issues as issues. Don’t let them become the excuse to join a side. You may not like the guys standing next to you. You may not even recognize them.