Maybe labels aren’t the problem…
Are labels themselves the problem or is it our tendency to use them to define us - and justify our actions to both ourselves and others - rather than as an aide to understanding?
Conversation necessitates agreed upon definitions, which in a sense are just ‘labels’ by another name. Without them, meaningful discourse is next to impossible. Spend any length of time on social media and that lesson will be obvious. So perhaps it’s our intended use of the labels that warrants reconsideration more so than the concept of labels itself. Maybe, just maybe, all labels should have the implied limitation: in so far as conscience allows.
For example…
My political label is conservative. As my voting record, candidate preference, and ideological outlook reflect, that is a fair definition of my politics. But my ‘conservatism’ must bow to the supremacy of Christ. So the label is then valid only in so far as conscience allows. When conservatism attempts supremacy over Christ; my ultimate, truest identity, remains is in Christ.
My racial/ethnic identity is caucasian. As my physical appearance, parentage, and DNA reflect, that is a fair definition of my race. But my ‘whiteness’ must bow to the supremacy of Christ. So the label is then valid only so far as conscience allows. When race attempts supremacy over Christ; my ultimate, truest identity, remains is in Christ.
My professions are academic and psychologist. As my transcripts, experience, and employment reflect, those are a fair definition of my professions. But my profession must bow to the supremacy of Christ. So the label is then valid only so far as conscience allows. When ‘psychologist’ or ‘academic’ attempts supremacy over Christ; my ultimate, truest identity, remains is in Christ.
Maybe labels aren’t the problem…but our inability to prioritize identity is.
Comments
Post a Comment