Idealogue or Contextualizer?

First, allow me to direct you to a series of three essays written by Andy Bryan and posted on his blog "Enter the Rainbow." It is this series of essays that got me thinking about the topic I'm writing about today. He discusses in his essays the idea of idealogues and contextualizers. I am not sure if this is a well known concept or his own idea, but if you want to read more about it, go to the three links listed below. In these links, Andy illustrates his thoughts using the debate within the church regarding homosexualtiy.

Can We Talk? – Part 1: Ideology and Context
Can We Talk: Part 2 - Connie and Id
Can We Talk? - Part 3: A Via Media

Now, please prepare yourself for me to commit literary murder. In the words of Inigo Montoya in the movie The Princess Bride, “Let me 'splain. [pause] No, there is too much. Let me sum up.” To summarize some of Andy’s hard work, he discusses how he believes that a debate can reach a stalemate when idealogues and contextualizer are trying to debate a topic. An ideologue has a belief in the TRUTH – in capital letters because his truth is immutable, unchangeable, and cannot be argued. A contextualizer sees everything in context – he will focus on the particular circumstances of a situation. When these two people debate, the idealogue’s goal is to explain the TRUTH to the other person. The contextualizer’s goal is to try to understand the perspective of the situation. These two people will never reach an agreement, because they are having two different conversations. The cotextualizer isn’t trying to debate the idealogue’s TRUTH, and the ideologue doesn’t care if the contextualizer understands his perspective or not. To paraphrase, it’s a lose-lose situation.

Andy believes that the only way these two people will reach agreement is that if the ideologue realizes that his TRUTH is somewhat based on his perspective and if the contextualizer admits that he does have some TRUTHS of his own.

So, are you an ideologue or a contextualizer? Or do you admit that you are a mixture of both? How important is context in your decisions? Do you have any TRUTHS?

What am I? Context does play an important role in my decisions, but I do have some truths? What are they? I’m not sure that I could list them all, but maybe five? Let’s see:

1. God exists. He is active in the world, and part of that “activity” was to send his son for the forgiveness of sins.
2. The world does not revolve around me. It does not revolve around you, either, and we should act like we know that.
3. Telling the truth is often admirable, but in some cases completely unnecessary (does that truth count as a statement of context???).
4. Personal responsibility is important.
5. Courtesy is necessary and is consistent with the way God wants us to treat each other. Bobby Knight deserved what he got (OK, that’s judgemental, and I don’t really know the circumstances, but…see, I am a contextualizer).
   

OK, bigger question. Which was Jesus? Was he an idealogue or a contextualizer? I think he was both. He pointed out that the Jews were relying too much on the letter of the law (being idealogues without any regard to context). He did not rely only on the Letter of the Law or on TRUTHS. But he did have TRUTHS. And the most important one was this, from Matthew 22: Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Real church sign seen in London, Ontario. I found it on Church Sign Generator.