Integrity of Personality

As a result of miscommunicated intention between myself and a friend at a party, I've begun to contemplate a theory I have about something I call integrity of personality. Following up beliefs I hold to be true about purity, I have endeavored to answer the question of what makes a person a genuinely kind person. We cannot assume that mere kind deeds make a person kind, because we don't know their intentions, so therefore I ruled out deeds altogether. This may seem rather too quick, but since we seldom know the true intentions and motivations behind the actions of others it would seem that eliminating the most unpredictable variable would be a prudent action.

I do not wish to flesh out this theory of integrity of personality. It would take many blog entries to do so, and without solid evidence it will always remain a theory that can be observed but not proven. Instead, I have opted to give the interested reader a taste of what the implications would be if this theory were correct. As an aloof Christian, I have become disenfranchised with many superstitious beliefs about what it means to be a kind person. Fundamentalism amongst the charismatic circles of the Christian religion would have an individual believing that outside of God there is no such thing as kindness. They would also have an individual believe that righteousness in deed is essential to being a kind person. When I refer to righteousness I am in fact referring to sexual purity. Often times the definition of righteousness and purity are blurred by the belief that righteousness is obtained through purity. While commonly ignored, this de facto belief denies the basic tenet that there are none who are good except God. If all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God as it says in Romans 3:23, then no amount of purity will save your soul more than sexual ambiguity will. I do not deny that once we have been given new life in Christ that we are called to live differently from the rest of the world, but amongst the fundamentalists this had devolved into works-based righteousness which is in direct conflict with Paul's words to Timothy in the second letter. (2 Timothy 1:9)

Therefore, the implications of the theory behind integrity of personality is this: it doesn't matter if you're the most chaste and sober individual if you are not a kind person. However, if a person is otherwise morally ambiguous and still a kind person then they are demonstrating integrity of personality. Contrary to the opinion of the charismatic fundamentalists, there can be such a thing as kindness of personality without chastity. Feminists should rejoice, since the implications of this are a major undercut to the patriarchal narrative that plagues Christian tradition.

Thoughts, comments, questions, and the like are appreciated as always.

Hoc est verum,
James