Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
The Humpty Dumpty Synderome

The Humpty Dumpty Synderome

Last updated on: July 6, 2019 at 7:51 am by Roger E. Olson

The Humpty Dumpty Synderome 2019-07-06T07:51:55-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The Humpty Dumpty Syndrome

Image result for Humpty Dumpty Wiki Commons

In recent discussion here—going back to my post about the problems I see in unlimited pluralism—some people have disagreed with my opinion, expressed in my previous post “On Taking Satanists Seriously,” that I/we should not take their speech acts, performative utterances, self-chosen labels, seriously insofar as they claim that we should not take them seriously.

Here I want to give some examples from my own life experiences of the dilemma and conundrum I have faced with regard to this issue.

What do these real stories illustrate? I have sometimes heard or read people saying things that make no sense given what else they say and given the generally accepted understanding of the words they are using. In fact, this seems to be increasing as a problem in academic and other circles.

I am reminded of Lewis Carroll’s “Humpty Dumpty” character who said “in a rather scornful tone”: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

Many years ago, at the height of the interest in Latin American Liberation Theology, I took a class to hear a leading liberation theologian speak. He began his address this way: “I am not a communist, but I am a Marxist and I am a Marxist because I am a Christian.” In my humble opinion, once someone says he is a Marxist no denial later makes any sense. “I am a Marxist” means something and he cannot change is meaning willy-nilly. Now, of course, someone is free to say “I agree with Marx on some things” and not be considered a “Marxist.” But a “Marxist” is someone who agrees with Marx’s philosophy which is inextricably linked with “communism.”

Perhaps the liberation theologian would say, if pressed, that he was just trying to get attention, but he should not have been surprised if listeners did not believe him about not being a communist.

Not very long ago I went to hear a very well-known and influential Christian theologian speak about German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher. In the middle of his talk he said “Schleiermacher was not a liberal theologian.” He didn’t explain why. He just threw that claim out there to a group of highly educated people and apparently expected us (mostly theologians and church historians) to take his statement seriously. I was one who could not. In fact, for me, anyway, it cast a shadow over everything else he said about Schleiermacher.

Every student of modern theology knows that Schleiermacher was the father of liberal Protestant theology.

I once went to hear a self-identified “Christian atheist” speak. He is a well-known theologian who became famous for promoting the “gospel” of Christian atheism. His first words at the podium were these “Jesus was an atheist and we should all become atheists with Jesus.” I think listeners would be perfectly justified in not taking anything else he said seriously.

*Sidebar: The opinions expressed here are my own (or those of the guest writer); I do not speak for any other person, group or organization; nor do I imply that the opinions expressed here reflect those of any other person, group or organization unless I say so specifically. Before commenting read the entire post and the “Note to commenters” at its end.*

All of these exclamations and claims are examples of what I call the “Humpty Dumpty Syndrome.” It is extremely common in academic circles. The essence of it is to get attention (and sometimes mastery) by saying something nonsensical and possibly even offensive using words in such radically unusual ways that, for me, anyway, make it impossible to take the speaker (or writer) seriously. I’m sure it is not limited to academic circles.

Another example: Several years ago I had lunch with a leading “emerging church” pastor, author, and speaker. Over lunch he said to those of us eating and talking with him “Preaching is a violent act.” I almost laughed in his face; I had trouble controlling myself. I asked if he preached and he affirmed that, yes, in some sense he preached. In fact, I pointed out to him that he had just preached in the university’s chapel before lunch! His response? “Well, not all preaching is violent.” But I know that he was famous for saying “Preaching is a violent act.” How many of his listeners and readers had the opportunity to challenge him to explain? And how should/could I take anything seriously that he says about preaching that is inconsistent with the plain claim “Preaching is a violent act” when he was famous for saying it without qualification?

Many people are using the word “violence” to describe clearly non-violent attitudes and acts. They are emptying “violent” and “violence” of any understandable meaning; it is becoming consistent with anything and everything—that is considered (by them) offensive, harmful in some way. It is, as Lewis Carroll said (through the “mouth” of Humpty Dumpty) a way of gaining mastery.

My point is that people who use words in radically unconventional ways should not expect listeners or readers to take them seriously. All the qualifying in the world will not undo “Hail Satan!” Satan is universally regarded as a symbol of evil (except perhaps by some Satanists) and the proclamation “Hail Satan!” combined with a denial of believing in and worshiping the Satan of everyone’s understanding (except a few Satanists) is disingenuous. Just as proclaiming “God loves everyone, even the reprobate predestined by God to hell” is disingenuous. It is using “love” in such an unconventional way that saying it of God in that theological context empties it of all meaning. It is obviously a coy ploy to try to get listeners and readers to think kindly of the Calvinist God.

If a person proclaims “Heil Hitler!” and then says “But I’m not a neo-Nazi” I am justified in not taking that denial seriously. Suppose he says, when challenged, “I’m only trying to get attention; I don’t really admire Hitler” or “I only said ‘Heil Hitler!’ because I think Hitler did some good things for Germany. I, for one, would not believe him. I would think he was being disingenuous. I would believe he is a neo-Nazi and ignore his disclaimer.

The same goes for some people I know who claim to be “Christians” but qualify “Christian” to death by not believing in anything historically-theologically connected with Christianity. Was Thomas Jefferson a Christian? Most definitely not—whatever he may have claimed to be. I admire that he finally said that he was a “sect of one.” There, that was truth.

I have to add one more example of the Humpty Dumpty Syndrome before I quit. Some years ago I had dinner at a professional society meeting with a theology professor of a Unitarian seminary. I knew him to be Unitarian. At one point in our conversation he said to me “I am an evangelical.” No amount of qualifying after that would make me take him seriously on that subject.

I simply don’t believe anyone here who would take seriously a person’s disclaimer that, in spite of being a white supremacist, she is not a racist. Calling yourself a white supremacist overrides any claim to not being a racist.

The Humpty Dumpty Syndrome is pernicious and very wide spread in today’s American culture (and elsewhere I assume). I see and hear it in advertising all the time. Now I see and hear it in many professional societies. It is pervasive in contemporary academic life. It ought to bother everyone as much as it bothers me.

*Note to commenters: This blog is not a discussion board; please respond with a question or comment only to me. If you do not share my evangelical Christian perspective (very broadly defined), feel free to ask a question for clarification, but know that this is not a space for debating incommensurate perspectives/worldviews. In any case, know that there is no guarantee that your question or comment will be posted by the moderator or answered by the writer. If you hope for your question or comment to appear here and be answered or responded to, make sure it is civil, respectful, and “on topic.” Do not comment if you have not read the entire post and do not misrepresent what it says. Keep any comment (including questions) to minimal length; do not post essays, sermons or testimonies here. Do not post links to internet sites here. This is a space for expressions of the blogger’s (or guest writers’) opinions and constructive dialogue among evangelical Christians (very broadly defined).

Uncategorized

Previous Post

July 3, 2019

On Taking Satanists Seriously

Next Post

July 9, 2019 Where Is America Going?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I wanted a vineyard so badly that my wife arranged the owner's death through false witnesses. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

David Ahab Jezebel Naboth