So I have noticed (Me being an observer, thinker and analyser) that those of my friends, or those that i simply know about, that are of the postmodern/emergent persuasion (what ever that means?) have an almost smothering emphasis on a hermeneutic of humilty. What i mean is that life is not simple, perspectives and the sociological environment have a huge impact on what one does and believes, sees or thinks. For example for one to say that the issue of say... homosexuality is just wrong, and the answer is simple, would be an overt act of arogance. The word arrogance seems to be the vice to the virtue, to the point that arrogance is almost the greatest sin, and openmindedness is the highest virtue.
Now obviously I really resonate with this way of thinking. However as I have observed this way of thinking has not been characteristicly a life virtue but only a conversational or verbal one. From my perspective a glaring example of this is at sporting events. Go to any MVNU basketball game and sit with out fans and you will notice a complete change of character. Listen to the attitudes towards the referees, and observee the things said to and about them. Suddenly there is no such thing as a hermeneutic of humility, but instead there is a clear, absolute, objective, and final decision on every play, and the fans of course can see and know exactly what it is. But for some reason the referees suddenly become incapable of seeing and knowing what is so obviously true. Therefore the referees are obviously ignorant and are obviously maliciously biased.
But the thing is the referees job is inherantly subjective, and they inherantely have the more accurate persepective.
I guess that I just dont know what to think when I or others are attacked for our supposed arrogance and narrow mindedness, but then when real life situations come, suddenly things change dramatically.
So what is wrong with this picture????
Which one is better to have hermeneutic of humility that is lived out in actions, and example but at times seems absent in intellectual conversation..................or to have a hermeneutic of humility that is blatently present in conversation, but seems to be absent in ones life???????????
6 comments:
Interesting points Steb...I think it is always difficult to live out a hermeneutic of humility completely (at least for me).
My question is regarding your pitting arrogance and openmindedness as the polar opposites when it comes to this hermeneutic of humility. I agree that oftentimes it does seem like openmindedness is the highest virtue while arrogance is the vice, but I think this misunderstands the hermeneutic of humility. I would say instead your conceptualization is more reflective of the hermeneutic of tolerance, not the hermeneutic of humility. With a hermeneutic of humility I have deep convictions that shape my life, but I also realize that I only understand things partially and have biases that impact me. This doesn't mean that I embrace some willy nilly openmindedness to all, but that I listen to others and their positions carefully and attempt to understand them. This then helps me clarify my own position, revise my position, or abandon my position, if necessary. I find this different from tolerance which regards all positions as equal and we just need to be open to them. Humility requires that I understand that I don't own a complete understanding of truth and therefore must listen to how others may contribute to my understanding (there is more to it than this, but this is already a huge comment).
Interesting (and perceptive) observation.
I do agree that "actions speak louder than words."
And I definitely appreciate Ron's clarification. A lot.
Interesting post...
As a pastor, I can completely relate to "parable" of the fans knowing more than the referee. My favorite times come when, after delivering a sermon I spent hours researching, studying, and writing, I am told how completely wrong I am by someone whose Sunday School teacher in 1952 had a diffrent opinion...
My point being, we all choose our "authority figures" in life. We each decide whose opinion we will value and whose opinion doesn't count. In the emergent movement, I think we often times run the danger of dismissing the opinions of anyone who portrays "certainty" only because they are "certain." We can ignore their point of view (which may have a ton of value) precisely because we feel they are being arrogant. We think we are shying away from anything that smells like "authority" but in actuallity we are just embracing a diffrent authority without even being aware of it.
In regards to humility and arogance, I guess I struggle the most with those who, as ron pointed out, equate humility with tolerance. Once we decide that all views are equally valid, we have to forever discard any certainty in our own beliefs. And without certainth, faith is impossible (Heb. 11:1).
Ron... Yes I think that is a better conceptualization of the concept. The hermeneutic of humility being the virtue to be sought after, while arogance and tolerance are the vices.
OH how hard it is to live a life deeply characterized by ones convictions, and yet have an understanding of my limited understanding or perspective, and of the profound need for the other.
Thank you for that clarification.
Heathe.... Also an interesting critique. I to have noticed that certain men of faith that have taken a firm stand on their beliefs, (Piper, Kennedy, Jerimiah, Mcaurthur, Dobson.......) are easily dismissed, or even belittled, simply because as you put it they have a sense of certainty about something. While that may be an issue to discuss, I can't get away from the impact these men have had on shaping who I am as a follower of Christ, nor can I escape the "certainty" of their love for Christ and others, nor their wisdom and understanding that they have accumulated for a heck of a lot longer than any of us have.....just a thought. And thank you for your..............
Ya, I am addicted to the three little dots...
(I assume that's what you were refering to at the end of your comment) :)
Post a Comment