Spiritual Pollution, Part 12: Purity Logic Case #4, Doctrine

Our fourth and final example of how purity logic complicates church life is the metaphor of “Doctrinal Purity.”

Growing up in the Churches of Christ, the “Doctrinal Purity” metaphor structured a lot of our conversations about doctrine. And there is a price to be paid for using that metaphor. Specifically, working with the purity structure, unorthodox views were metaphorically understood to be pollutants to the faith. Thus, disgust psychology was harnessed to monitor and maintain the borders of orthodoxy. As such, “Doctrinal Purity” became a very powerful sociomoral regulatory mechanism.

Let me illustrate. Any doctrinal deviations from the “pure faith” would, according to the metaphorical structure of “doctrinal purity,” be experienced as pollutants. And given the logic of purity, where dose insensitivity is a factor, there are no such things as minor pollutants. As quoted in Rozin and Fallon (1987): “A teaspoon of sewage will spoil a barrel of wine, but a teaspoon of wine will do nothing for a barrel of sewage” (p. 32). Thus, even minor doctrinal disagreements evoked major emotional reactions. Any contamination results in the entire “barrel of wine” being polluted by the “sewage” of false doctrine. Thus, doctrinal disputes became zero-sum encounters.

Basically, as hinted at in the last post, when “Doctrinal Purity” structures doctrinal debate a big truth gets lost. Specifically, there are “greatest” commandments, “weightier” matters of the law, and things of “first” importance. Purity metaphors, due to their “logic,” make all issues, even the most trivial, equally central and vital. And that is a recipe for conflict and division.