Monday, May 10, 2010

The True Christian

I find that the true Christian is unconventional. I do not mean that he is often unconventional, or that that his most distinguishing characteristic is unconventionality. I mean that he is a person void of convention. He is not even conventional in his conventionality. Now I must qualify what I mean by "true". For I do not think that either the mark or the mode of a "true" Christian is unconventionality, but that the sincere, genuine, fully functioning, completely sanctified Christian is unconventional. And by "conventional", I mean that he is himself in each and every situation that he finds himself in. He has no clique, albeit a community, which is entirely different. He has no clique because he is not afraid of being disliked, and has no desire to conform, and yet is consistently aware that "non-conformity" is a form of conformity, and that conformity itself is not the virtue in question: neither is non-conformity, but to the extent that conformity and nonconformity can be considered virtues, they are virtues if they conform to truth, and no person conformed to truth can succumb to the pressure of fitting into social norms. The conformist to truth is also a conformist to unity, and thus promotes it within himself and within society. He is a soul-undivided, utterly authentic, and contagious to all other authenticity seekers. Because he is okay with himself, others sense that he is okay with them, or they want to rid themselves of him because they have no power over him, and since they are not okay with themselves, they need this power.
I must finish with two qualifications of separate points just made. One, I promote neither acquiescence nor anarchy. The conformist to truth, a.k.a. the true Christian, stands up for what is right and against what is wrong, but he lives within the order he has known and understands since childhood. He must in conscience stop something that happens within the order is bad, not primarily because it creates disorder within the order, but because it was bad before the order existed, and will be bad upon the order's dissolution, and if the order prevent him from promoting something good which he must promote, he must promote it within the order and accept the order's consequence. So he is a non-conformist to the order but a conformist to truth, which compels him to conform to the order unless the order becomes non-conformed to truth, and still there is a way to refuse, without rebelling. For instance, say eating peas is wrong. Your mother, your authority, thus your order requires you to eat peas. The wrong reaction is to simply eat the peas, well as to deny your mother's right to authority. You refuse to eat the peas, receive your spanking, and go to bed a member of the order and a non-eater of peas. Or say you must eat peas, but your mother never makes them, and forbids them in your household. Likewise, you go buy peas, cook them, eat them, and take a spanking a pea eater.
The second qualification is more of a clarification and it deals with the question "What is truth?" How do I know in the first place that I mustn't eat peas (or must). And it is clear that I am assuming truth to have a thesis/antithesis quality. All I can say for now is that this is not a metaphysical or epistemological enterprise and that the first statement of the current post should be pretty revelatory of my basic assumptions about truth. To put it more bluntly. I am a Christian. I am assuming that the Nicene Creed is true, and I am assuming a classical Christian view of the necessity of antithesis. In as much as this enterprise concerns conformity as it relates to the Christian,(of which there is entirely to much confusion over lately)I want to call Christians out of conformity to the world all together, especially if it is pious because conformity to piety is the most deceptive of all. And lastly I am not suggesting that the true Christian can not be pegged. Anyone can be pegged. Pegging is the advantage of the subject, and he can be mistaken, but he cannot be prevented from opining, and thus pegging. If anything, the true Christian has no doubts about his pegging. He believes he is what God says he is, and lives joyfully in that. It is the church that will be difficult for the world to peg. Because the church is not a clique, it is a community. And as a community, it includes everybody, and everyone relates to everyone, exactly as they are. The former rule of subjective pegging applies. A church can be pegged as well as any individual, but not in truth. Because once one knows that the truth is that there is one body and many members of which Christ is the head, then one knows that any other peg is a mistake, and one can live in a distinct, truly non-conformist community; non-conformist in the sense of the main difference being a conformity to the truth instead of the world. In that sense, the church really is only more difficult to peg by reason that it is more complex than the individual, so we are back to where we started. The way out of this "paradoxicism" is a matter of the will. It is to truly not care what others think, only to take God at His Word and do what He says. This is a great mystery; non-conformity that cannot display non-conformity, but surely it can be practiced.

No comments: