In my last article I put as a footnote: « When we talk about self-acceptance we lose all concept of sin. » This may have come as a shock to some: isn’t it just said that God accepts us as we are? God’s grace is unconditional, isn’t it? To answer these questions, we need, once again, to reflect on how we think and how our culture has influenced us.

Tout commence avec… Rousseau

In my article on true freedom (the free man?), I touched briefly on the thought of the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. In a way, we could say that Rousseau is the father of post-modernism, because many of the philosophical concepts of our time come from him. One of his principles is precisely that of the expression of one’s « true self ». For Rousseau, since man is naturally good, he should not confine his desires and instincts, but rather embrace them. Sounds pretty familiar, doesn’t it? In our society, in reaction to the hypocrisy of so many people, post-modernists have decided to live a hypocrisy-free life where everyone accepts themselves as they are.

At first glance, this philosophy, like most non-Christian philosophies, may seem very appealing! We can finally live our true personality and know others for who they really are. Unfortunately, this way of looking at things is utopian and doesn’t take sufficient account of the fact that man is fallen, i.e. that he is evil. A society where everyone does what they want ends up in chaos, and « whenever chaos has occurred, even for a small period, it has led to the imposition of arbitrary control »¹. It’s precisely for this reason that we have to be very careful when talking about self-acceptance. A personal example may help you understand how this affects us in concrete terms. I recently went to a wedding where I chatted with someone who told me: « I’ve decided to live my life without hypocrisy, for a few years now I’ve decided to accept myself as I was ». Talking with her, I quickly realized that the whole discussion revolved around this person and that nobody could stand her because she had chosen to consider her flaws as good things to put forward. For example, she refused to give up her hypocrisy so she could be « natural », and so on. In Rousseau’s case, his « natural » impulses led him to abandon his children. I don’t know enough about this lady I met at this wedding, but it wouldn’t be surprising if she had also left her spouse and children to be more « natural ».

When we realize that man has desires that are evil, we understand that self-acceptance, as advocated in our society, is not the solution.

And what about God?

That said, we mustn’t minimize the good things that this post-modern philosophy has brought to all this. This desire to live a life without hypocrisy and to accept others despite their differences is indeed something biblical. As Christians, we look forward to the day when we are purified of our evil desires and all our desires are good. Then we’ll be able to live this self-expression, because all our evil desires will be removed. However, the question remains: what should we do while waiting for that glorious day when Christ will transform us into his image?

Christian self-acceptance is the acceptance of how God created us and how we should be. In this case, we don’t fully accept ourselves in our current state. We are called not to accept our sinful desires (envy, jealousy, etc.) and our sinful situation. When it comes to our physical condition, the issue is a little more complicated: God calls us to fight against the harmful effects of sin (sickness, missing limbs, etc.) while accepting His direction when things are too big for us (deaths and incurable diseases in particular). In the case of a paraplegic, for example, there is both the acceptance that we can do nothing in our own strength to change this condition, and the non-satisfaction of this condition because God will resurrect us in a body free of disease and suffering – in short, in a fully functional body!

The boundary between Christianity and post-modernism may seem fine, but it remains crucial to a good life of faith. I’m called to accept myself as God created me: I’m a very introverted person, who spends a lot of time over-thinking things. At the same time, I’m not called to withdraw completely into myself and avoid talking to strangers, as I sometimes do. If we don’t understand this, we’ll minimize our sins by saying we have to accept them. This post-modern stance can lead to despair, since it doesn’t provide the capacity for real growth (if there’s only self-acceptance, what’s there to change?). Christianity alone allows for healthy acceptance while pushing us to progress. May we look at each other with the eyes of God: eyes full of love and compassion, but also full of justice and holiness.

The cross as a response to God’s justice and love

The dynamics of Jesus’ death demonstrate this. God’s forgiveness does not mean that God simply decided to « turn a blind eye » to our sins – that would have been unfair. To demonstrate his justice, God really wanted to judge us for our sins, i.e. for what we did and for what we failed to do. But at the same time, God wanted to show his grace and forgiveness. Jesus’ death on the cross is the price of our rebellion against God. Through this death, our debt is paid and justice is done. By taking away our sins, Jesus makes us right in God’s eyes. Jesus’ resurrection enables us to grow up and abandon our evil ways.

As Christians, we are called to reflect this justice and grace of God. Justice is found in truly condemning what is wrong. At the same time, God’s grace calls us to be patient, compassionate and caring. If we try to live one without the other we will either be brittle (seeking at all costs for everything to be perfect) or useless (suggesting that there are never any problems). Holding justice and grace together isn’t easy, but it’s our calling as sons of God, being fashioned in his image.

1. SCHAEFFER Francis, The Great Evangelical disaster, Crossway Books, Illinois, 1984, p. 21. ↩︎