Over the years it has struck me that our attitude toward theological disagreement is tied to how psychologically tolerant we might be of ambiguity.<\/p>\n
Just so I\u2019m clear and nip in the bud a misunderstanding, I am not talking about tolerating the views of others<\/em>.<\/p>\n I am talking about one\u2019s own inner disposition, whether one can psychologically tolerate what one perceives as ambiguity<\/em> in matters of faith, allow that ambiguity to remain, and accept it as part of the journey of faith<\/em>,\u00a0rather than feel the psychological pressure of quickly moving toward\u00a0a resolution.<\/p>\n What made me connect some dots about this\u00a0was reading\u00a0Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning<\/a> In case you\u2019re not familiar with Fowler\u2019s book, he traces 7 stages of faith development that correspond to human developmental stages from birth through mid-life crisis and beyond.<\/p>\n Here are Fowler\u2019s Stages of Faith<\/a>.<\/p>\n Fowler isn\u2019t saying that stages in faith development move at the same pace as our overall psychological development\u2014you can\u00a0be in stage 5 in\u00a0your thirties and stage 4 in your fifties.<\/p>\n These aren\u2019t rigid categories, but more groupings of traits that hold well for psychological\u00a0development\u00a0in general and can be transposed to the matter of faith.<\/p>\n With those caveats\u00a0in mind, perhaps we can say that an intolerance for\u00a0ambiguity\u00a0is an important factor for why theological conflicts arise and how they are handled once they do.<\/p>\n Perhaps the kinds of heated, and even vicious, conflicts we come across on the world wide interwebs is more a function of a\u00a0psychological inability to tolerate\u00a0theological ambiguity than a sign of theological \u201ccourage.\u201d<\/p>\n Maybe \u201cstanding one\u2019s ground\u201d theologically is not so much a mark of mature and unwavering fidelity to the true\u00a0faith as it is\u00a0an indicator of the psychological need to see the world in terms\u00a0of a \u201cmythic-literal\u201d(stage 2) or \u201csynthetic-conventional\u201d (stage 3) faith.<\/p>\n Maybe seeing the world in unambiguous\u00a0\u201cus vs. them,\u201d \u201cblack and white,\u201d \u201cright or wrong\u201d categories should not\u00a0be seen as\u00a0a qualification for\u00a0faithful Christian leadership but a disqualification.<\/p>\n And so my mind\u2019s eye goes to Christian leaders I know or have come across who exhibit an intolerance for ambiguity and the avoidance or suppression of potential challenges to theological clarity\u00a0and certainty<\/a>.<\/p>\n My intention here is not to sound belittling. But I find Fowler\u2019s stages very useful as I think through my own journey of faith. I think he gives us a lot to ponder.<\/p>\n [Please be patient as your comment is in moderation. Comments are normally posted within 6 hours but may take as long as 24. If you\u2019re annoying, I will be intolerant toward you.]<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0060628669\")
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n