Stirrings of Elitism and Grace

It is perhaps not too surprising that these feelings of superiority surface now. It is exam season, and thus a convenient time to feel superior. It builds confidence, enhances the exercise of potential, and generally produces good results. Security in oneself can be a powerful thing. Sadly, it brings a clear downside with it. It is generally distasteful and makes a person unlikeable. And it can be quite miserable looking into a mirror in the morning and not liking what one sees. Worse still, guys can't exactly put on make-up.

Whether or not one can back up that sense of superiority is really quite irrelevant. Changing any form of self-belief is extraordinarily difficult, and must come from within. Nobody ever managed to convince another that their beliefs were wrong by argument. The other side has to be open first.

The critical question is whether fostering a superiority complex is optimal. It has a downside after all. Here is where things get a little interesting.

For a moment, let us assume that an elitist mentality is backed by the requisite ability. Generally, the foundation is actually self-fulfilling. A study on grade school children found that performance improved simply by telling them they were better. What a wonderful force self-belief is.

Assuming the pedigree, should elitism be the proper development? In a nutshell, no.

If you've ever read a wuxia novel, the most powerful fighter is always either a) that annoying old man hiding somewhere that doesn't really care if he is the best, b) that even more annoying old man who tries his best to hide how good he is because he knows he's the best and is secure in it, so he lets some foolish thugs rob him anyway, c) that strange fellow who's convinced there's someone better than him and so keeps working on his own skill.
The common denominator isn't in what their attitude is, but in what it is not. There are many alternatives to building that sort of earth-shattering ability, but one definite way not to. And the road to perdition is to lord it over everyone else. In short, elitism is self-destructive in the long run. Yes, all this from a kid fostered in the most elitist programme known to mankind, the MOE's GEP. Wonder of wonders.

Jesus tells His disciples that the one who wishes to be greatest among his brethren ought to serve them, not lord it over them like the rulers in the world.

A few important things are worth noting here.

First, there is no purpose in telling someone how to be great if they have no capacity for it. Explaining to a mouse how to fly is either foolishness or insanity. So we know Jesus thought the disciples were capable of becoming great. And so they did. So why tell them how to get to the top?

This is the second point. How you get to the top has a great bearing on your longevity at the top. Your capacity allows you to ascend the heights, but your character keeps you flying. And your journey to the top determines your character. Therefore, the whole prescribed methodology to becoming great, by serving, is designed to develop the right character. That way, when the Lord prospers, He will add no sorrow to it. We're beginning to see a larger pattern here.

What sort of character does serving produce? The lame answer is the character of a servant. But what does that consist of?

A. Humility
A precautionary note. Humility is not to reduce oneself to a worm. That's self-humiliation, which is sort of like self-flagellation. Now, if you enjoy that sort of thing, well, that's your private business. I wouldn't personally try it though. Rather, humility is an acknowledgment of reliance on God, and on others, that you're not in this alone and entirely independent. Nonetheless, humility involves an honest acceptance of self. In a strange RPGish analogy, if you're a level 10 character, you're acknowledge a level 10 character.

B. Faithfulness
Servants, at least good ones, are faithful in the work they've been given. They get things done. Good servants may tell their masters that a certain task is difficult, or even that they don't think they are able to accomplish it. But the one thing they never say is 'No.' The litmus test is not a 100% success rate. The litmus test is commitment. Faithful servants give it everything they have. And truly, if they gave their best, and it still didn't work out, who can fault them for it? Lets throw in the bonus analysis. Servants do what they are told. If they try their best and fail, it would be the fault of the one who assigned the task. This is not because the master caused the failure, but because he allocated his available resources wrongly, or took on too difficult a task for his resources. Now consider the following:
i) God never makes mistakes. No, not even me.
ii) God has infinite resources.
So guess what the result of faithfulness to God is?

Note that in no part of faithfulness is there an element of competition. In fact, Jesus explicitly tells Peter to forget about what was in store for John. "What is it to you ... You follow Me." I'd provide the link to a fuller discourse on faithfulness and competition, but I don't have it. I promise to get it though.

It should be pretty clear by now that elitism has no part in a servant's character that produces lasting greatness. There is no lording it over other people. No "muahaha, I'm better than you" attitudes. A servant doesn't need everyone else to tell him he's a good servant. It would be nice, but hardly necessary. A servant's worth is measures in his master's estimation alone. And that measure is on faithfulness alone. That provides a supreme confidence of worth that cannot be displaced, along with it the character to withstand the buffeting winds on the mountaintop.

So really, elitism? Not for me.