We are today interested in clarifying thoughts about models and integrity. Scripture is rather stern about concepts of modeling and acting with integrity. The emphasis here will be a shift in context for the theme. One of the prevalent values, never deviating from its norm in Scripture, is that a person should follow a course of biblical righteousness, which includes the model (example setting) attitude and mental persuasion to that culture. To seek righteousness is not simply to practice doing the right in truth in oneself and with others, but the offering of clear and instructed conscience for belief and conduct. There is a consistency so that the individual is found in character – in what may be identified as a spiritual orientation. There is a created pattern of proper conduct repetition, integrity (genuineness), even a context that builds trust, not only from another person, but the accrual of peace in oneself. This provides consistency that attenuates sin guilt, or moral weakness, or personal inferiority in status with God, and with the people whose opinions are of value in forming an affirmative mental image of the person. It presumes the person virtually free of hypocrisy, deviousness, and by redemptive nature living righteously (right).
There are large and small evidences by which one can evaluate the integrity that identifies the Christian. Scripture is first source. Prayer is another. Integrity of the Christian relates to some prayer in his/her life. There are other signs for evaluation – as in response to the Church ordinances. What is my understanding and treatment of Church ordinances (Communion, or Baptism)? For some in the Church there are others such as keeping relevant commandments and guidelines, the cultivation of the Fruit of the Holy Spirit, service to others, humility, and so the list grows. The implications of the Mosaic Law in the Christian context, such as the habits of language, the place of family, and life patterns relate to Christian integrity. For example, one may realize, from self-evaluation (meaningful in the ordinances), that the person is embellishing a conversation. He knew there were forty persons there, but he reports an estimate that there were, perhaps, a couple hundred. Integrity is sacrificed for impression. The yea is not exactly yea, – nor is nay exactly nay. One should have truth-coordination for and between what is said and done.
I was introduced to a minister, and we began conversation. I discovered that he was serving a church which had continued from the era of the American Revolution. He elaborated on the stone and features of the structure, giving the impression of success in a full and sizeable Church. I knew the sanctuary was unchanged in the structure and heritage. We continued conversation. Near the end I noted that when I was a student in his town decades earlier that I had spoken on several occasions in the tiny church that would seat, perhaps, fifty persons. The tone of the conversation immediately changed. We both went on to other things. I never saw him again. The illusion of impression was not positive with either of us.
It is helpful if a person sees self as three persons, self as the person is, self-above, and self-below. When he or she finds overstating, the person asks self-above if this is appropriate to the person he or she wants to be. The individual hears a firm, sometimes gentle: No. When following a clever, but devious line, one looks to self-below and may proceed – unless looking above hears self say: No. One can fall into the habit of embellishing even a small fact into a larger one, and later deplore the practice. It takes effort to change self for straight conduct. One need not falsify to make impression, to be a better person. We can create private ways for evaluation that will provide self-satisfaction. In doing so, we form persons who move upward and forward in meaning and value to others. As a young Christian I taught myself how to escape that attitude I had developed that upped my own stock which implied reducing someone or something else in the context – usually without knowing what I was doing. It was liberation I discovered that we do not have to remember what we said when we tell the truth. If I do not want to join in this event, I withdraw or remain silent to protect something I feel may be more important than to be found in conflict. Not all contexts require participation even if there is an inner desire to jump in. I would wait for invitation, and from that search for truth. Emotions both hurt and advance truth. We need to remember, whether in silence or in any other response we are taken as models of something by others. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020