Why I Freed Myself From Labels

Within the past year, I have decided to free myself from all labels, and I invite you to do the same! (OK, not entirely true...I still identify myself a s a man...that label gets to stay)

Maybe at one time, a label was a way of self-identification that stood for a particular ideology, but as time has passed, the lines have blurred, and labels are now stereotypes rather than a means to self-identify with a particular ideology.

True, some labels should remain.  Job titles can stay.  A doctor is a doctor (though that doctor should qualify the label with the type of medicine practiced - pediatrician, psychiatrist, surgeon, etc.). A construction worker is a construction worker, a computer programmer is a computer programmer - All of these labels are facts, though qualification would be helpful in each case.  Gender titles can stay (A man is a man, a woman is a woman - sure, there are surgeries out there to change that, but in the majority of cases, you are one or the other).  I should qualify gender.  Gender titles can stay as long as they are mere factual descriptions and not meant in a way to demean someone or exaggerate oneself.  Age titles can stay (a child is a child - that's a fact...an adult is an adult - that's a fact).  Again, age titles should follow the same premise as gender titles.

Labels start to get misconstrued when we get into issues of religion and politics.  I'll use myself as an example.  First, I'll discuss religion (I'm a pastor, after all, and that IS my job).  I am a United Methodist.  Being United Methodist makes me a Christian.  So, which am I?  I guess it depends on who is asking the question.  I would hope that if one knew I am a United Methodist, that person would know I'm a Christian.  But, sadly, that is not the case.  There are many United Methodists (and Baptists, and Catholics, and Presbyterians - If I left out your denomination, fill it in here) who do not act like Christians.  I would even venture that some United Methodists (or other denominational members) ARE not Christian.  That is most likely a minority, but I'm sure it exists.  They may attend church, participate in its ministries, but do not have the faith.  I'm not speaking of the doubts we all have from time to time, but rather a denial of the faith.

Even the term "denomination" is problematic.  There are many non-denominational churches in existence today.  But, if the definition of a denomination is a group of Christian worshippers who share common theologies and world views, then each non-denominational community would in fact be a denomination (or maybe more correctly "denomination-like").

In our denominations, it would be hard to find a solid majority who share the same theology and world views.  For example, the Catholic church is fundamentally Pro-Life.  I know for a fact that there are practicing and faithful Catholics who are Pro-Choice.  Does that make that person "less Catholic?"  To others, that person may not be true to the Catholic doctrine, but to the person, he/she finds that faith to be his/her identity.  Due to this issue and others like it, maybe in our identification we should say "I attend a (insert denomination here) church," rather than saying "I am a/an (insert denomination here)."

With all of this in mind, I've chosen to rid myself of all political and ideological labels.  By saying "I'm a Democrat," or "I'm a Republican," or "I'm an Independent," a person (in American politics) is stating more than their voting habits.  Sadly, the "more" is usually unintended because of stereotypes associated with each party.  For example, I am a Pro-Life (though I'm sure there are situations where I could be convinced to be Pro-Choice, but that is the exception rather than the rule), Anti-Death Penalty, Pacifist, Christian who loves NPR, The Colbert Report (when I have time to watch it), and secular music.  I am for social justice, but I also believe that those who are not hampered by a condition they cannot control (including illness, discrimination, unemployment in an economically "dead" area, etc.) should take personal responsibility for their lives.  For those who are unable due to unavoidable reasons, I am the first to say we owe a duty of care to those people.  I believe we should spend liberally on education, and conservatively on defense.  I believe that while I may not like various foreign governments, it is not our place to actively work to overthrow them.  Of course, we owe some sort of duty of care to oppressed citizens of those nations, but our care ends before we determine their "new" government.  I believe in ecological conservation, but I believe that "progress" will use natural resources.  Rather than exploiting our natural resources, we should treat them with care.  I believe we are the UNITED States of America.  That doesn't mean we all need to agree, in many situations we need to agree to disagree.  You don't have to vote the way I do to be equally valued.  Does all of this make me Democrat? The Democratic officials would find problems with some of my beliefs.  Does this make me
Republican? They too would have issues with my beliefs.  Many would impose the "Independent" label on me, but yet I find that problematic in that it sounds too indecisive.

All in all, this is to say that the stereotypes of modern labels have become misconstrued and too narrow.  Most of all, I shun the use of "Liberal" and "Conservative."  What do they mean, especially when they come to religion?  Again, using myself as an example...I believe that I (try to) follow Jesus the best I can in the way He taught.  I am, however, not a Biblical Literalist (usually associated with the stereotype of "Conservatives").  I believe the Bible to be 100 per cent true.  But to be true, each detail does not have to be literal.  Yes, there are literal passages...and if I guessed a percentage, probably 80 per cent or more passages in the Bible are literal.  But, the Bible is also Theological.  Some statements are made to prove a theological concept about the character of God and not to give a historical account (stereotypically a "Liberal" stand).  Does that make me a "Liberal?" Does that make me "Conservative?"

As far as labels go, I don't care what label I "should" wear.  Labels mean nothing to me anymore.  What was once probably a way of identifying oneself with pride has become a way to align with an "all or nothing" ideology.  In some cases "all or nothing" is the way to go.  In the face of evil, it is our duty to be completely against it.  In more "grey" situations, it is not so easy.  That is where the beauty of civil debate, cooperation, and compromise come into play.

So, what labels describe me?  I don't know...and I quit searching for an answer.