If a young man drops to one knee and says, with great passion and sincerity to the young woman in front of him: “I love you with all my heart!” – would the young woman be impressed? What if he then said, “And I commit to forsaking all others, until death do us part.” – would she be wanting to consider the state of the relationship between them?

Unless the young woman was hard hearted, the answer would be ‘Yes’. And I suspect this use of our ‘hearts’ is still readily accepted in our world, if the young people I work with are any indication.

Yet the idea of a personal centre that is engaged with both our physical and non-physical aspects of life is clearly missing in our professional worlds. This has been particularly evident in the spheres of psychology and education in my experience over the last 40+ years. The pattern of thinking leading to this neglect is not difficult to see:

1. We (psychology and education) wanted to be considered ‘serious’ professionals.
2. In a world where science has moved to scientism (scientism insists that all truth must come via the scientific method), these professions also moved to scientism.
3. This means that philosophy, logic and theology become personal novelties, not professional essentials – in other words, ‘You can keep your faith, but only at home.’
4. Thus, our understanding of the human person as embodied souls has become the study of personality testing.
5. Subsequently, the self as personality has become focussed on achieving potentialities with a focus on feeling good about life, which means feeling good about self.
6. Sexuality, and other hormone-driven sensualities, have taken predominance in considering identity, because they offer (in a shallow way) the endorphin hits that we equate with ‘feeling good’.
7. Identity, as the language of self (rather than virtuous character), has become so powerful that it has adopted political positioning.
8. The politics of self means that I can demand, legally, for you to accept and affirm my inner thoughts about me, even if I am now detached from physical and social realities.
9. That is why I can demand that you treat as a sensible the claim that I can use my body differently to how it has been given to me (from the Creator), and that you must accept as sensible that I may have been born into the wrong body.
10. And all this means that if I belong to a group with stronger self-identity and self-defined truths, and you do not, I can claim that you, as part of your group, are less worthwhile as a person (i.e. identity politics at work).

Alternatively, if we are embodied souls, we will have moral accountability. That it because it is our spirituality that enables us to decide what to do with our instincts. Part of that transcendent capacity is deciding what is right and wrong in our thinking, speech and actions. Every time we exercise this capacity, we are demonstrating what is on our hearts. “Hearts” in this context means who we are, in total, before our Creator.

And this is what our current elite professional leaders wish to avoid. They cannot afford to accept that we get to decide what to do with our physical, social and spiritual contexts. But we are not animals or animated machines. We are not programmable. We have a conscience, which is a gift from our Creator. If our hearts are soft towards seeking Truth, our hearts are soft towards the Giver of all gifts. And as Jesus noted, those who seek shall find (Him).

However, this confusion is not new. Jesus explained it to some hearers of His day (in Matthew 15:10-20). They were being taught that certain physical habits had deep spiritual bearing – that is, that unless you washed your hands in a particular way, you were defiling your body. This is similar to what we see today – overstated physical aspects of reality dominating spiritual aspects of reality.

What was Jesus’ response? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. (v. 18, ESV).  

This truth explains why, in contrast, heart commitments to do good are so powerful. Such faithfulness transcends our animal impulses and selfish desires. Such goodness results in safe relationships based on respect – respect, even if you are my enemy.

Are we made in the image of the Creator, or not? Are we simply shaped by our nature (physical inheritance and capacity) and nurture (our social contexts past and present)? Or can we reflect, find deep fellowship and love with others before our Creator, and seek His ways?

As Jesus also taught, we need search for the heart of the matter – and that is called prayer.