Uriah Heep is one of the more memorable characters from Charles Dicken's novel, David Copperfield; his famous character flaw was to proclaim how humble he was to everyone he met. Although it was meant as a joke by the author, it is a great example of a profound misunderstanding of the concept of humility, which seems to have pervaded the Western mindset; which is, the act of being humble means to downplay all of your strengths, while reminding everyone of your weaknesses. According to this definition, Heep was actually proud of his humility, therefore nullifying any hint of true humility.
This understanding of the word humble or humility is also found in the Caltholic church. Recently, I had a conversation with an ex-monk who, in the tradition of Uriah Heep, told me that he would never claim to be a humble man because it would be an act of pride, instead he would revel in his weaknesses in order to remind himself that he is actually nothing before God and therefore worthy to be called a child of God. History backs up his understanding and mindset; the mystics of the Catholic Church fill much of their writings with proclamations dedicated to how lowly they were; "I am, but a worm", cried Luther from his monastery cell.
Protestants, are not immune from false humility either; apparently, Luther brought the idea with him. Calvin, with his doctrine of total depravity seems to have actually outdone medieval mystics and even the desert fathers - and that is not an easy task! After attending several Protestant Bible studies in the recent past, I have noticed that the idea is alive and well, today. On one memorable occasion, I was listening to a minister who was visiting the Bible study and as soon as he found an example of victory in the Bible, instead of celebrating the freedom found in the Christian life, he turned an opportunity to talk about how God has worked in his life into a time to emphasize his weaknesses. Then a strange thing happened, everyone in the room started talking about their own weaknesses and how they were turning them over to God. Now, I understand that we are incomplete without God, but are we as bad as Monty Python suggests "Oh great and powerful, master of the universe; OH awesome, and spectacular being of utter magnanimity; I am so weak and lowly; yes, obsequious!!
Indeed, I think we have left the path of truth when it comes to the true definition of being humble. It is troubling because it is definitely a prerequisite to a saving relationship with Christ and must be apart of a person's character if they are going to follow Christ's commandment on Earth - to love one another. So, how can it be so important, yet unrecognizable within ourselves at best, or at worse, unattainable? After thinking deeply about this subject, I have concluded that we have replaced true humility with false humility. The fact is, every time we replace a sober acknowledgment of our strengths with a slogging through the mire of our weaknesses we are still being prideful - we are repeating Uriah's character flaw, by way of inserting a clever, yet transparent twist - instead of focusing on our strengths we revel in our weaknesses. We certainly expect the same behavior from the people we worship in Hollywood and in the sports arena. Michael Jordon was the best basketball player of his time; Tiger Woods is the best golfer of his day, yet both would be ostracized if they even hinted at this truth.
I believe one of the reasons our society today demands false humility is because we mistake the action of being humble with being humiliated. In fact, the only time a famous, beloved person in our society can be vulnerable is when they have been humiliated by the press or their own negative behavior made public. If false humility is the downplay of strengths and an empathize on weakness, which involves no real vulnerability; true humility is a sober understanding of our strengths and weaknesses, which involves vulnerability. C.S. Lewis once said that he hesitated to claim the word Christian because it had taken on such a negative connotation, he could barely relate to it as a follower of Christ. I feel the same way about the word humility - I think I will substitute the word vulnerable for humility because it seems to capture more of the truth without the baggage.
Peace
This understanding of the word humble or humility is also found in the Caltholic church. Recently, I had a conversation with an ex-monk who, in the tradition of Uriah Heep, told me that he would never claim to be a humble man because it would be an act of pride, instead he would revel in his weaknesses in order to remind himself that he is actually nothing before God and therefore worthy to be called a child of God. History backs up his understanding and mindset; the mystics of the Catholic Church fill much of their writings with proclamations dedicated to how lowly they were; "I am, but a worm", cried Luther from his monastery cell.
Protestants, are not immune from false humility either; apparently, Luther brought the idea with him. Calvin, with his doctrine of total depravity seems to have actually outdone medieval mystics and even the desert fathers - and that is not an easy task! After attending several Protestant Bible studies in the recent past, I have noticed that the idea is alive and well, today. On one memorable occasion, I was listening to a minister who was visiting the Bible study and as soon as he found an example of victory in the Bible, instead of celebrating the freedom found in the Christian life, he turned an opportunity to talk about how God has worked in his life into a time to emphasize his weaknesses. Then a strange thing happened, everyone in the room started talking about their own weaknesses and how they were turning them over to God. Now, I understand that we are incomplete without God, but are we as bad as Monty Python suggests "Oh great and powerful, master of the universe; OH awesome, and spectacular being of utter magnanimity; I am so weak and lowly; yes, obsequious!!
Indeed, I think we have left the path of truth when it comes to the true definition of being humble. It is troubling because it is definitely a prerequisite to a saving relationship with Christ and must be apart of a person's character if they are going to follow Christ's commandment on Earth - to love one another. So, how can it be so important, yet unrecognizable within ourselves at best, or at worse, unattainable? After thinking deeply about this subject, I have concluded that we have replaced true humility with false humility. The fact is, every time we replace a sober acknowledgment of our strengths with a slogging through the mire of our weaknesses we are still being prideful - we are repeating Uriah's character flaw, by way of inserting a clever, yet transparent twist - instead of focusing on our strengths we revel in our weaknesses. We certainly expect the same behavior from the people we worship in Hollywood and in the sports arena. Michael Jordon was the best basketball player of his time; Tiger Woods is the best golfer of his day, yet both would be ostracized if they even hinted at this truth.
I believe one of the reasons our society today demands false humility is because we mistake the action of being humble with being humiliated. In fact, the only time a famous, beloved person in our society can be vulnerable is when they have been humiliated by the press or their own negative behavior made public. If false humility is the downplay of strengths and an empathize on weakness, which involves no real vulnerability; true humility is a sober understanding of our strengths and weaknesses, which involves vulnerability. C.S. Lewis once said that he hesitated to claim the word Christian because it had taken on such a negative connotation, he could barely relate to it as a follower of Christ. I feel the same way about the word humility - I think I will substitute the word vulnerable for humility because it seems to capture more of the truth without the baggage.
Peace
