Help Me Out Here (No, Really!)
For nearly a year, I’ve been inviting those in my faith community to (re)examine where we root our identity and what it looks like if we miss-place it in something that isn’t meant to uphold that weight. Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything demonstrates that one of the ways to chase truth and avoid resistance to it is to converse around the things that make us feel vulnerable (or are seen as no-go areas). [1] So, I’m asking for your shaping perspective on these thoughts in hopes I can frame my own thinking well and invite others into a fresh perspective.
We are all seeking affirmation of our identity; we also latch quickly on to those things that affirm what we already think we know, especially regarding how we define and locate ourselves.[2] [3] Moreover, what we project shapes who we become—how we want others to perceive us changes how we perceive ourselves and behave.[4] In an increasingly divided world where emotions overrule facts, rooting our identity in something true and permanent is even more essential if we are to flourish (and see others do the same).[5]
So, in a world where many of those in my community seem to be discipled more by the algorithms of social media and echo chambers of small communities and shared media perspectives than other sources, I have tried to invite us into a critical examination of where we place our identities and why. Here’s what I’ve shared, using the inset images along the way:
We seem these days naturally to root identity in ideology—our particular worldview—with the smaller ideologies we embrace framing that. From there, we determine who is “in” or “out” of community with us—those who share our ideology(ies) are “in,” and others are “out.” This community with whom we are “in” (part of Duffy’s echo chambers[6]) helps us have a sense of purpose, which often involves advocating for our shared ideology. That chain of ideology, community, and purpose then shapes our understanding of God and how we function in relationship with him.
There are a couple of problems here. One is that by rooting our sense of self in our ideology when someone questions us in the space of our “isms” (conservatism, liberalism, egalitarianism, nationalism, populism, and so on), it feels like an attack on the core of who we think we are. I think Duffy would say this is where an emotional response reinforces our system of delusion,[7] framing our sense of reality and reaction to information.[8] The more significant issue is that this is backward from our design as people in community.
As a follower of Christ, we must root our identity in Jesus, having 
every part of our lives shaped into something Christo- and cruci- form. Jesus declares our purpose, which includes the fulfillment as image-bearers of God, pursuing the thriving of the world as we know God and are fully known by him. [9] [10] It’s actually here that we are positioned to live a life of purpose and adventure—one could argue it is Jesus and his Spirit who invite us into a true hero’s journey.[11] Jesus also gives definition to community for us—one where we are all invited to belong to him and each other and where we are known more by being for each other than against some thing.[12] Finally, we toggle into ideologies that are not central to our identity but are elements of how we articulate what we think it looks like to faithfully live as those rooted in Jesus, given purpose by him, and living in community with others. Here, an ideological difference is something to hold in tension and relationship more than a personal attack.
I would like to think this will help us avoid the stuff of delusion and enter into a posture where we aren’t restricted by differences, but freed to invite a different kind of connection and relationship. I am hopeful about it, but you all likely see the flaws and challenges in this line of thinking far better than I can because it’s so tied to my incomplete view of the world we live in. Where does this fall short or perpetuate the kinds of conversations that contribute to an ecosystem of delusions? How can your perspective help me lead myself and my community out of delusion into truth?
—
[1] Duffy, Bobby. Why We’re Nearly Wrong About Everything: A Theory of Human Misunderstanding. (New York: Basic Books, 2018), 71.
[2] Walker, Simon P. Leading out of Who You Are: Discovering the Secret of Undefended Leadership (The Undefeated Leader Trilogy, bk 1). Carlisle: Piquant Editions Limited, 2007.
[3] Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
[4] Poole, Eve. Leadersmithing: Revealing the Trade Secrets of Leadership (New York: Bloomsbury Business Press, 2017), 106. Kindle.
[5] Middleton, J. Richard. The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1. Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2005.
[6] Duffy, 14.
[7] Duffy, 148.
[8] Duffy, 169.
[9] Middleton.
[10] Benner, David G. The Gift of Being Yourself: The Sacred Call to Self-Discovery, expanded ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2015.
[11] Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Third edition. Novato, CA: New World
Library, 2008.
[12] Cf. John 13, especially vv. 34-35.
About the Author
Jeremiah Gómez
I get to be Sarah's husband and Jubilee's and Zechariah's dad. I also get to serve as lead pastor at Trinity Church, a dynamic church in the Midwest where we're diligently seeking to Love God, love others, live sent, and be transformed together in community. I love the privilege of working across differences, championing healing and reconciliation in many forms.8 responses to “Help Me Out Here (No, Really!)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Jeremiah, I love the post. I mostly agree. I wonder if some of the words may be out of order. What would it look like to switch ideology to second. I can give some theological language to the idea.
Then when done poorly, we begin with our community. These are our in group. For some of us this is our church. We begin with ecclesiology. When we begin with everybody the language of my church is tradition – how do I remember my church. When we understand the church as we remember it we move to purpose.
Purpose or missiology tells us the mission and vision of the church. When it’s done poorly the mission serves my vision of the church – to keep it the same.
Ideology can be connected to soteriology our understanding of salvation. When done poorly, I can make my ideology to serve me and my vision of the church.
Then, if there is any run left for Jesus maybe he can serve on a committee.
What if we started with Jesus, we begin with Christology. We begin with an understanding of who he is.
Then our ideology, our soteriology, informs me that my salvation comes from Jesus, life, death, and resurrection.
Then my missiology, my purpose, is derived from understanding Jesus and his life, death, and resurrection. Our purpose becomes Jesus’ purpose.
Finally, we come to community, our ecclesiology is informed by our understanding of Jesus, his life, and desires for us. The in group no longer exists as an in group but exists for the sake of the world.
What do you think of that?
Robert –
Thanks for your thoughtful interaction here!
I’ll have to sit with your adjustments–they do a great job of highlighting helpful distinctions that I need to work with (I was likely lumping Christology and soteriology as one “segment”), and offer some really helpful refinements.
I have actually used some of your language in conversations with others. Namely, that our Christology leads to our Missiology (purpose), leads to our Ecclesiology (community) (going off of Christopher J. H. Wright’s “It is not so much the case that God has a mission for his church in the world, as that God has a church for his mission in the world.”[1], so the Church is subordinate to mission and not the other way around), leads to our ideology. If soteriology and ideology are the same thing or concomitant, then I do see reason to re-order or frame differently.
Anecdotally, I have observed more people using ideology (without the soteriological implication) as their driver for community (going “up” the chain), than the other way around. It’s entirely possible, though, that I’m conflating or mis-reading the two. It sounds like we both agree that the Christ-anchored approach is to be for the sake of others rather than drawing distinctives of in and out groupings.
[1] Wright, Christopher. The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s Mission (Biblical Theology for Life), (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic), loc 155. Kindle Edition.
Jeremiah, I like your model for identity. As Christians we can be “rooted and built up”[1] in Christ, putting on the “new self”[2] for security and growth in our identity.
In my secular work setting, there are many people who have no faith or Christianity isn’t very important to them. I am there to build community and the starting point is so different for each person in the group. How do I encourage an identity in our likeness to God in those who do not believe? We will have different purpose in community and different ideologies. How do we grow together despite these differences? How would you say your model has a place for non-believers in the community? I have always existed in the secular or non- Christian places as a faith leader and am always looking on how to build belonging and real, growing community with people who believe and live differently than one with an identity in Christ. My desire is for them to find that identity in their creator, but maybe some people going in different directions can lead others there. For instance, someone joins a community, finds purpose and then realizes their worth in Christ.
[1]Colossians 2:7
[2]Colossians 3:10
Thank you, Jess!
You’ve hit on a place of tension for me that I’ve been struggling with here. Part of it is I don’t know that we can fully live into/embrace this flow outside of Christ and his renewing of our minds… and at the same time we often need to belong before belief comes. I wonder if from a body of Christ perspective, Jesus people need to function in this way to hold space for others–regardless of their ideological entrenchments–to really belong and find invitation to a new and living way. This also means Christ followers need to go first in belonging to each other, including with those who don’t share in their perspective or faith (rather than just making “them” change something to “join us”).
When I’m interacting in secular spaces toward renewal, reconciliation, and flourishing (which I do a lot), I know the “why” for me being in the space is the person and way of Jesus. While I’m consciously serving and leading from there, it’s not explicit to those around me. Is it enough for me to function in that place that way, somewhat “subversively”?
As I interact with friends who are not Christ followers about this, I usually say something like, “Here’s how I would share this within my faith community… and I think there’s need for (and invitation to) find identity in something more substantial than our ideology.” I haven’t yet had anyone give hard push on that approach (or advocate for an ideology-first perspective). I’ve had some great conversations of what that can look like.
What’s your sense of the best path forward here?
I’ll let Robert’s comments stand alone rather than combine with his. How could I possibly follow putting Jesus on a committee?
Like Robert, I’m tempted to tinker a bit with the order, but only on the second diagram. There is plenty of evidence today—at least for those of us in the US—where people start with their political views before picking a church.[1] This supports Ideology to Community. I don’t mind ideology to community in the second diagram, particularly where there is choice in which community to join. I can recall a time living in a small town where we gave up on ideology and walked to the closest brick building with a steeple.
For the overview, when we start with the theology of Jerry Maguire—“You complete me”–there is absolutely no way that the community can bear that expectation. When Jesus is the source of our perfection (rather than the perfect committee member!), then we can seek relationships with a healthier expectation.
[1] Aaron Earls, “Churchgoers Increasingly Prefer a Congregation That Shares Their Politics,” Lifeway Research, November 1, 2022. https://research.lifeway.com/2022/11/01/churchgoers-increasingly-prefer-a-congregation-that-shares-their-politics/.
Bob Smietana, “Shopping for a New Church? Your Politics May Determine Which Pew Fits,” RNS (blog), December 12, 2022. https://religionnews.com/2022/12/12/shopping-for-a-new-church-your-politics-may-determine-which-pew-fits/.
Thank you, Rich –
Like the others, you’re giving me some really helpful thoughts to sit with.
Your comment about setting ideology aside reminded me of the Eugene Peterson invitation to “Go to the nearest small church and commit yourself to being there for six months” instead of finding the “perfect” place that checks all of our boxes.
There seem to be so many ways to rally to a fracture of community in an ideoliogical niche, and I think there is a sacred invitation for the Church to find a way to model unity in a diversity of perspectives. I don’t know how that can happen if the people of Jesus don’t root their identity in him first and let everything else be subordinate to him.
Hey Jeremiah,
Being Christocentric is the only viable solution I have found to bringing unity to the 40-50 nationalities and variety of denominations that make up my context. We maintain the centrality of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection as the unifying force and I’d like to say that we’re curious about each others’ denominational differences, rather than judgmental. The reality is that we’re all human and, while many people get it and love it, my experience is that some will always reveal (by their behavior) that while it is good news that we can be transformed into the likeness of Jesus, it’s even better news that others can become like them. 🙂
As a leader in this environment, I simply have to disappoint some people sometimes by making the decision that I believe is best for us and honors Christ the most, which means that not everyone gets their way. So, my reminder to you, when the time comes to make the decisions, is to expect sabotage 😀 Great, huh?
Play aside, I am confident that your wise, Spirit-led, and Jesus-honoring mindset will guide the work of your mind and hands, seeing you through!
Jeremiah,
I really appreciated how you linked Duffy’s insights on delusion with the importance of a Christ-centered identity, which provides a strong foundation for navigating differing perspectives. It seems that if we all asked ourselves the simple questions, “What Would Jesus Do?” or “What Does Jesus Want from Me?” we might find it easier to distinguish between our biases and the truth.