08-12-2019, 08:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-09-2021, 09:57 PM by jaybreak.
Edit Reason: pluralizationing of a word that needed pluralizationing
)
There's a peculiar affliction to note when hanging around evangelical circles for too long, and it's the constant self-effacement and hyper-regret over what has been done well in the past, or over what kind of person they are at the present moment. At its most acute, the posture of humility can get really tiresome, where its only benefit is its predictability. This sickness seems to occur more in the men of the church or group: men are always apologizing or needing to make known how they are flipping some misstep in the past for the better. Taking one's self not so seriously is one thing; I am not talking of that sort of humility, which is a more proper role to take. This isn't the place to speculate as to why its the men, but there are definite reasons that we can point to. For all the faults of feminism creeping into modern churches, women at least have the sense to move on from guilt when it passes over them.
Some of the motivations may be psychological: people might not expect too much of us if we're not making claims to moral greatness. But, there's no reason to think this cycle of near endless self-abasement is any pleasing at all to God. It marks Him out to be the stern taskmaster, to whom we would need to apologize for ruining the potatoes at the volunteer dinner last night. The head of a feudal household, the kind of leader that God positions Himself out to be, would honestly get annoyed at such needless sentiment. It makes for decent drama in a sermon or video, but it really holds up the line as far as taking action on your particular mission is concerned. It's as though they are stuck on the first stages of a new kind of relationship and can't just get on with the task at hand.
If we consider the humility that God requires of us, the type of Shakespearean, sorrowful chest-beating we see in these patients is nothing of the sort. In fact, it's just the opposite. Putting the focus on the self, whether to aggrandize or denounce, for an inordinate length of time (a length of time to cause some uncomfortable shifting the seats of whomever is listening and enduring), is still putting a focus on the self. If we're really putting our mission first, people shouldn't think of us as particularly good or bad, other than a general sense of "he's not a bad guy to be around"--they really shouldn't be thinking of us at all. We'd already be getting our reward if that were the case.
The self-effacement is a reconciling cover for the great evangelical sin: not being liked by those outside the church. The beast bares its belly as an offering of friendship. Being inoffensive to the sentiment of 20th/21st century Westerners is one of the driving forces to expand the business goals of the church, however cloaked in Biblical language and pretenses towards God and divine things it is. Real "soul baring" would most likely occur in smaller contexts: one on one with people who might already know the preacher's orientations toward life. We marvel at the talent and motivation of preachers and their ability to draw others in and befriend them, as though those things are relevant. They aren't; the divine calling to do so is the defining factor. A preacher's response to that calling, in the correct context of putting ourselves alongside him in willful covenant, is a more proper thing on which we can focus.
Some of the motivations may be psychological: people might not expect too much of us if we're not making claims to moral greatness. But, there's no reason to think this cycle of near endless self-abasement is any pleasing at all to God. It marks Him out to be the stern taskmaster, to whom we would need to apologize for ruining the potatoes at the volunteer dinner last night. The head of a feudal household, the kind of leader that God positions Himself out to be, would honestly get annoyed at such needless sentiment. It makes for decent drama in a sermon or video, but it really holds up the line as far as taking action on your particular mission is concerned. It's as though they are stuck on the first stages of a new kind of relationship and can't just get on with the task at hand.
If we consider the humility that God requires of us, the type of Shakespearean, sorrowful chest-beating we see in these patients is nothing of the sort. In fact, it's just the opposite. Putting the focus on the self, whether to aggrandize or denounce, for an inordinate length of time (a length of time to cause some uncomfortable shifting the seats of whomever is listening and enduring), is still putting a focus on the self. If we're really putting our mission first, people shouldn't think of us as particularly good or bad, other than a general sense of "he's not a bad guy to be around"--they really shouldn't be thinking of us at all. We'd already be getting our reward if that were the case.
The self-effacement is a reconciling cover for the great evangelical sin: not being liked by those outside the church. The beast bares its belly as an offering of friendship. Being inoffensive to the sentiment of 20th/21st century Westerners is one of the driving forces to expand the business goals of the church, however cloaked in Biblical language and pretenses towards God and divine things it is. Real "soul baring" would most likely occur in smaller contexts: one on one with people who might already know the preacher's orientations toward life. We marvel at the talent and motivation of preachers and their ability to draw others in and befriend them, as though those things are relevant. They aren't; the divine calling to do so is the defining factor. A preacher's response to that calling, in the correct context of putting ourselves alongside him in willful covenant, is a more proper thing on which we can focus.