“If he does really think that there is no distinction between virtue and vice, why, sir, when he leaves our houses let us count our spoons.” — Samuel Johnson
* * *
Every election cycle the topic of “faith” comes up. What do the candidates believe? The underlying assumption is that faith matters to one’s outlook, approach, and values. What do you fall back on during times of crisis? What principles inform the big decisions?
So far so good.
The problem comes when that sentiment butts into another one that’s equally popular and prevalent. It goes like this:
- “My faith is very personal.”
- “My faith is between me and God.”
- “My faith is none of your business.”
So on the one hand we believe faith informs conduct, inspires good deeds, and strengthens us to face life’s challenges. On the other hand, what I believe is none of your business.
Result: Big fat contradiction.
The truth is — the one we apparently hate to admit — is that real faith can’t be personal. Real faith shapes our lives, our manners, our behavior, our values. Real faith is ultimately very, very public.
Unless of course the faith in question is bogus. Which, in my opinion, is why people get so defensive when you grill them about their beliefs.
Of course, beliefs are “personal” in the sense they are arrived at, adhered to, and embraced differently. But, however different our beliefs, they cannot NOT affect us personally. Or as Samuel Johnson humorously stated, If someone really believes there’s no difference between virtue and vice, what’s stopping him from stealing your silverware? Or your daughter? Or your 401 K?
What one believes cannot be detached from how one lives, acts, makes love, makes war, or makes policy. Your faith might be personal, but it will inevitably affect your person. Unless of course, that faith is feigned, a photo op, or a plank to placate your constituency. In which case, that too will eventually become public.
So, yeah: Your faith is “personal” in that you are free to pick and choose what you want to believe. Choosing the personal implications and effects of your beliefs is another story.
Agreed.
I also think some of the defensiveness stems from an inability to articulate reasons for their belief, or an unwillingness to be non-PC.
This is something that many have forgotten, especially Christians (or maybe “Christians”?) in America.
I once heard a pastor put it this way: The indicative precedes the imperative. Who you _are_ is what drives what you _do_.
Thanks for this reminder, Mike. God bless.
Amen, amen, and amen!
And thanks, J.J., for that great thought also.
So true.
Yeah, but what a lot of people mean by “personal faith” is that they aren’t going to beat people about the head with it. Also, if faith isn’t personal, it’s completely meaningless–a family tradition or a state religion. It all comes in how you define terms, I guess. And as my teenage daughter told me the other day, it would be impossible for your actions to completely match your beliefs, because then you would be perfect (or at least a robot). I guess your article went over my head because I’m not sure what you’re saying.
“…if faith isn’t personal, it’s completely meaningless.” Likewise, beliefs that never show themselves or effect how we live are also meaningless. Sure, “it would be impossible for your actions to completely match your beliefs.” In the same turn, it would be impossible for your beliefs to not completely shape your actions.
“Likewise, beliefs that never show themselves or effect how we live are also meaningless.” Yes, but that’s my point, too. That’s why I’m not sure I completely understood your article. Maybe my brain is foggy today.
“In the same turn, it would be impossible for your beliefs to not completely shape your actions.” What does this mean exactly? What about the spirit being willing, but the flesh being weak? I don’t think losing my temper and throwing something across the room has been shaped by beliefs, but I do it sometimes. Even the most sanctimonious people do.
I’ve been known to have an IQ that rises and falls between 85 and 140. Assume its 85 today and try to explain to me what you’re really saying.
Jill, the point of this post is to poke fun at the notion, so common in today’s society, that faith is largely subjective, internal, and has little real implications on our lives. It’s fluffy relativistic mush that shouldn’t compel us to make converts, challenge false doctrine, vote a certain way, or persuade others to do any of the above. In my mind, the person who gets defensive about their personal beliefs is either someone who isn’t sure what they really believe, isn’t confident about what they say they believe, and/or isn’t sold out to the beliefs they do profess. Does that help? Perhaps you’re not drinking enough water today. You know, water and fresh air can get those brain juices bubbling. ; – )
Ha, ha, went for a hike. I see what you’re saying. I can’t disagree with it. Thanks. 🙂
I’ve been thinking on this for a couple hours; I’m torn between two ideas.
Your prime idea seems to be that it is impossible for public people (i.e. politicians, celebrities, athletes) to not be affected in any way by their faith. This would seem to contradict your and Colson’s positions on Mitt Romney and why Evangelicals should be comfortable voting for him. After all, if our beliefs determine our behaviour and voters aren’t comfortable with a man’s beliefs that’s a fine reason to not elect him to office.
Your secondary idea, as I am inferring it, is that true faith cannot be segmented and sectioned off from a person’s whole being. The basic “Christianity isn’t just a Sunday thing”.
Now, I would say that I do agree with both of those conclusions; faith is not compartmentalisable (!new word!) and active faith is a prime driver of action.
But as a somewhat analytical and emotionally guarded person I would say that for me and, I presume, others like me, the intimacy of faith and the mystic practice of interaction with God is not something I will talk about readily under most circumstances. People know I’m a Christian and devout. But I do not intend to go into detail about the intimate practice of my relationship with God. I would no more do that than I would discuss the intimacies of my marriage. And people know I’m married too.
Katherine, re Romney: There’s nothing a Mormon believes that, I think, would negatively cross my own values. Theology is another story. Mormons are rather socially conservative. National security, the economy, and social issues would probably land evangelicals and Mormons on the same page. My brother and his wife are Mormons. They are fine people. I wouldn’t mind having a neighborhood full of Mormons. As long as we don’t talk about the nature of god(s), the Laws and Ordinances of the Mormon Gospel, the eternality of matter, and Jesus being the step-brother of Lucifer, we’re cool. But outside of theological concerns, I’m not sure a Mormon in the White House would be that different from a Christian. It’s utilitarian, I know. But as long as he gets the economy going and keeps us safe, I’m not sure I care what planet he thinks he’ll eventually govern.
My sentimen’s exactly. I won’t add anymore to that because it was said perfectly. Too many Christians sit around (to the exclusion of those who prefer to keep their intimate details of their personal relationship with God, private) insinuating in their gloating about how special they are to God, divulging every detail about God’s blessing in their lives, that it gets revolting after so much of that. There is a lot more to life that God has given for us to enjoy. I love God and love people, but debating to show how others how much more spiritual I am, because of my public show of affection and faithfulness for God, to everyone, is nothing more than ugly pride (which is in fact a sin) and self exaltation, candy coated with humility, especially, because most of the time, the people who practice this behavior are passive aggressively, provoking a kind of resentment in others fueling debates that turn bitter and angry. God, the God I worship has nothing to do with that at all. Plain and simple. We are to lve one another without conditions, just as we are. The scripture says it best. It doesn’t say love your neighbor, ONLY if he kisses God and tells and is willing to be public about it. The word just says LOVE one another, yet some churches take shunning people to extremes, based on how spiritual they grade others to be, which is heinous in God’s eyes. At it’s worst, this Extemists view and practices associated with it, are no different than the extremist behaviors of the terrorist extremists that many so fear. Just trust in God based on the word and don’t take God’s right to judge from Him and play God. That’s all I can say. I don’t indulge men or women sitting around tables exalting their spiritual intimacies with God, my heart and my prayers go to the Mother Theresa and the people who are out there blessing others with the love Jesus showed to the multituds. Do what Jesus did and you will be fine and you are doing whatHe demonstrated. I don’t listen to people who add dogma and add in their own two cents. Sorry, but that is how it is and there are already millions of people out there tired of that brand of regions dogma. It is why more church pews are getting emptier, so please, stop judging people. It is ugly and nobody is cloacked in righteousness, except God the father. God bless and have a great day!
Every candidate claims to be a Christian because they know there is just enough Christianity, or something close, left in our society that no one will vote for a “non-Christian.” Thanks for the article. While we don’t want to judge someone’s claim to faith we must also be careful we not be gullible and start jumping up and down shouting, “Hey, look, one of us.”
This is called civil religion. It’s the unofficial “faith” of almost every president we’ve had…anything beyond that is too, ahem, personal (except for a few notables).
Well put, as usual, Mike.
P.S. I don’t vote on who is a Christian. I vote on who SERVER the people ethically, by honoring them with dignity and respect. Sadly, many non-Christians do a better job at that than some Christians. We don’t need three ring circus debates, we need people who REALLY care..