Orthodoxy

No, I'm not really going to talk about orthodoxy, as in "theological orthodoxy." I'm going to talk about the root word/concept.

"Orthodoxy" is rooted in two Greek terms. The first is ... wait for it ... "ortho". (Surely you saw that coming.) It means "straight" or "right" or "correct". The second is (quite obviously) "dox", meaning a belief or opinion. Thus, "orthodoxy" is simply intended to convey a "right belief". That, of course, is why it is most commonly thought of in terms of religion, but you can also see how "right belief" would occur in lots of places. You can have political, social, economic, scientific, and even artistic orthodoxy. Orthodoxy, then, is simply thinking rightly about things.

Here's the problem. For most of us, thinking is not our thing. Feeling ... now that we can do. So it felt right to one person I was talking to that told me they were in favor of gay marriage because "I can't imagine how I'd feel if someone told me I couldn't marry the person I loved." Careful ... careful ... do not think that through. Because if you actually follow that "line of thinking", it will get you into all sorts of trouble. "Hey, man, do you love your mother?" Don't go there! So, instead of thinking rightly (orthodoxy), we let almost any source we can find do it for us. What we "know to be true" is often only true because we read it on a billboard (or, more likely, lots of billboards) or saw it on the Internet or read it on our favorite social media outlet. It was in the news; must be true. It must. And what do we end up with?

"Buy this car/cologne/hair piece and you will get all the women you want." You know it's true because you've seen the product and isn't there always a pretty young thing hanging around it ... whatever it is? From becoming a popular person by using this popular weight loss program to becoming an effective parent by taking your kids to Chuck E. Cheese, you know you can do it because "the TV told me so."

Our political system has all sorts of conflict, but one thing no one doubts is the principle of "Separation of Church and State." It's in the Constitution ... right? Go ahead. Look it up. I'll wait. Because it's not. The closest you will find is that the government cannot pass laws to establish a particular religion as a State religion. So how does that translate to "We will have no religion at all in the public square in general and in anything related to government in particular"? Can you say "Non sequitur"? But we all know it is the case. Why? Because we've rightly followed the thinking or the text? No. Because we've been told it so many times that no one asks the question anymore. Because the concept itself is ludicrous. Look, if religion is a system -- a way of thinking and operating, a lifestyle -- on what planet can you expect to follow a religion -- any religion -- that you can turn off when you walk into a government building or do a government task? It is not reasonable. It is not ... orthodoxy.

Most of our society has bought this one hook, line, and sinker. "There really are people who are born one gender but really really are another gender ... and none of your 'binary gender' garbage." Let's not get analytical here. Let's not consider science or biology or any of those things. Let's certainly not consider the Bible. (Haven't we, after all, already established the Separation of Church and Mind?) No one is born black but is really white on the inside. No one is born an American in the 21st century but is really Napoleon inside. But anyone can be born male (or female) and be ... anywhere on a continuum of gender between supermale and superfemale and anywhere in between. We know this because we've been told it so many times in the last few years that no thinking person could doubt it. Except I'm not convinced it's the thinking people that are so convinced. It's not orthodoxy.

Okay, look, how about one for Christians? Do we not all know that "Jesus died to save us because we're so lovable and so worth Him saving"? How do we know that? Well, our favorite verse says, "God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son so whoever believes can have eternal life." (Note: I'm not giving you the reference ... primarily because I didn't actually quote a verse.) Never mind that this isn't what the verse actually says. Never mind that it actually flies in the face of what the Bible says. Whatever you do, do not think that through because it will certainly paint us all in a bad light if we buy into that "all have sinned" line of thinking and end up with a "we certainly deserve hell" belief system. Except for the fact that the Bible teaches that we are sinners deserving God's wrath and that the fact that it's true only makes God's grace and mercy that much bigger, I can't think of a single reason to deny how wonderful we are. No! Since the Bible does teach we are sinners, it is not orthodoxy -- right thinking -- to declare otherwise.

One of the most offensive components of Christianity is its exclusiveness. One of the most common messages pounded into our heads on the subject is that it is too exclusive and, as such, wrong. "Hey!" they shout, "Even the Roman Catholics disagree. You must be wrong." In the Second Vatican Council the Roman Catholic Church declared the concept known as the "anonymous Christian". In this concept, the position is that you don't actually have to know Jesus to be a Christian. "Those also can attain to everlasting salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the gospel of Christ or his Church, yet sincerely seek God and, moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do his will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience." The Roman Catholic Catechism reads, "Those who through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation." Sounds nice. Not biblical, but sounds nice. It is not orthodoxy.

We are subjected, day after day, all around us, to lies. I mean, that makes sense, right? Satan is "the god of this world" (2 Cor 4:4) and "the father of lies" (John 8:44). We have deceitful hearts (Jer 17:9). Why would we expect something else? The question, then, is not whether or not we are subjected to -- inundated with -- lies; the question is whether or not we're going to just buy them without examination. The question is if we are willing to think rightly. To think at all.