On Integrity - The Basics

What does integrity really mean?  It is a word used rather frequently now, during a period of corporate fraud and manipulation, scandal within the church, and the global reaction to terrorism.  I conducted a small survey of various groups, asking each person what integrity means to them.  The most frequent responses included honesty, truthfulness, honor, etc.  They chose a particular virtue which they thought to be synonymous with integrity.  Others were more broad, such as high moral and ethical standards, etc.  Most of the responses implied action rather than a passive state of mind.

I believe the integrity concept includes a more basic element than the above qualities.  The word comes from the Latin integritas, translated wholeness, completeness, entireness, purity, undividedness.  The words integer and integrate come from the same Latin word.  It means that two or more parts are brought together as unity.  Our physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual components are brought together to function as a whole system.  This involves a union of the human spirit with the divine spirit.  In addition, the wholeness involves our interrelationships with others and the world, just as morality implies interaction with others.  In the human domain, this is what wholeness or undividedness means.  After this process begins, our outward signs (virtues) of integrity begin to be noticed by others.  We are perceived to be honest, thought to own a desirable value system, perceived as a person who "does the right things."  Integrity becomes our paradigm of life.

Integrity is not a state of being.  It is not simply something one either has or does not have.  However, some people are so low on integrity that one could deduce that they have none at all.  Others seem to be filled with integrity.  For most of us, it is a continual spectrum ranging from no detectable signs of integrity at all to those overflowing with the signs.  It appears that integrity is a process.  People of high integrity usually build this up gradually.  Some, depending on their moral development, spiritual growth, etc. seem to progress more rapidly.  Those who begin the process in early childhood might develop the qualities of integrity earlier.

Integrity, at its most foundational level, involves a fusion of the human mind with the mind of God.  The spirit of God supersedes the human spirit and the two become a unity.  In Mat. 16.21-23, Peter was thinking and speaking according to the human spirit.  When Jesus said "get behind me, Satan," he was symbolizing the priority of the spirit of God.  A similar example occurs in the story of the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness.  The three temptations (tests) presented by the devil represent an attempt to entice Jesus to think and act according to the human spirit (Lk. 4.1-13).  When Luke writes that the devil departed "until an opportune time," he emphasizes the perpetual struggle between the human and divine spirits.  The development of integrity is a lifelong process and struggle, with recurring testing as the human spirit attempts to overcome the divine.

Integrity is a relational concept.  It involves intrapersonal relationships between our four human aspects as well as our interrelationships with other people, the world, and God.  As we become more whole and less fragmented, our signs of integrity become more apparent.  One valuable effect is enhanced relationships among all involved,  This is a self-perpetuating cycle.  Our integrity is enhanced even more by our enhanced relationships.  The idea of relationships is a fundamental and recurring message of the entirety of both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament.

Now, a question arises:  There are those who deny the existence of the spiritual aspect of humanity.  To them, the mind is the highest of the planes of existence.  This includes atheists and some agnostics.  Does this paradigm exclude them from developing integrity?  Not completely.  The reason is based on the concept of God's grace.

Grace (Gk. charis) involves the idea of free giving.  It is a gift which the recipient does not deserve.  The grace of God implies a perpetual gift of love (Gk. agape) for the world.  Its goal (telos) is the very best for the world.  This includes all people, regardless of their opinion regarding the existence or characteristics of God.  Grace is universal.

One of John Wesley's brilliant theological ideas was that of the four phases of grace.  The initial phase is what he called prevenient grace.  This is grace which is active before we give any conscious thought to God or have any kind of relationship with God.

In the realm of process theology, God is thought to offer a possibility for every thought or action of which we engage.  This possibility is the best regarding the outcome of the thought or action.  These suggested possibilities might be thought of as "pulses of grace."  We have the ability to accept or reject these pulses either consciously or subconsciously. 

Due to the presence of God's grace, unbelievers may benefit from God's presence and not realize it.  This in effect, provides some degree of the spiritual element within the person.  Therefore, they may have some degree of integrity.  I suspect that, everything else being equal, their integrity would be higher if they had a more developed spirituality.

Comments

[Barry]

Your post has raised a few questions in my mind. Your definition and understanding of integrity reminds me of Paul Tillich’s description of God as the "Ground of Being". You say that "Integrity is not a state of being" but "involves a fusion of the human mind with the mind of God." How does this compare with Tillich’s understanding of God as Ground of Being or Being Itself? I am no expert on Paul Tillich, but I think that he would say the way we connect with God is to go inward to the core of who we were created to be. If that core is integrity (wholeness, completeness, entireness, purity, undividedness) then is finding that integrity synonymous with finding God?

My second question, what is the connection between a life of integrity and the outward signs of integrity? You wrote, “After this process begins, our outward signs (virtues) of integrity begin to be noticed by others.” In my experience, I have found people who show outward signs of integrity who on the inside or devastatingly broken. Some are just good at hiding their brokenness while others are deceitful. Can we learn to fake integrity or do those actions begin to affect our true integrity? Do our actions lead to integrity or does our integrity lead to our actions?

Finally, if we believe in prevenient grace (and as a good United Methodist I do), can we develop lives of authentic integrity without ever recognizing God in the process? You made the claim that atheists and agnostics were not excluded from developing integrity, and that they may not realize the presence of God’s grace, but at what point do they have to recognize God’s presence in the process before they can go any farther? Do they ever have to name God to find wholeness and fusion with the mind of God?

[Ed]

Barry brought up a few significant questions. I will try to answer or at least share my opinion on these. First, I also am no expert on Paul Tillich's theology. However, the way I understand his idea of Ground of Being is: God is being itself. That is, God is the essence of being. This may sound somewhat confusing. An analogy might be Plato's famous Theory of Forms. According to the theory, there is an essence (Form) common to everything. This makes anything what it is. A chair is a chair because it participates in the Form of a Chair. The Form is the ideal and perfect metaphysical representation of anything material. The essence of anything material is contrasted with its matter. Things "come to be," while Forms "are."

Using this analogy, I understand this means that God is being itself. Our being is a representation of God's Being. God is Being itself. One interesting implication of this is God is the creative source of all being. This is very similar to the idea within process theology that God's Initial Aims (pulses of grace) are the source of all creativity within the universe. Without God's persuasive luring, we would simply mix the past and present with nothing truly new resulting.

Now, to relate all of this to integrity. Remember, integrity implies wholeness or undividedness of the entire person. I mentioned the fusion of the Mind of God with the human mind in the article. If complete, this would be a reflection of the essence of God. Jesus is a prime exemplar. In most people, the fusion is far from complete. However, the higher the integrity of a person, the greater would be the fusion.

Our "spirituality" is the medium through which we have a greater fusion with God. Considering all of this, I do believe that Tillich's concept of Ground of Being is highly related to the concept of our integrity. Since integrity implies the person is operating as a whole system, the connectedness with God influences all aspects of the person.

Regarding the outward signs of integrity, Aristotle thought there are four cardinal virtues. Three of these (courage, moderation, and practical wisdom) are intrapersonal. The fourth (justice) is interrelational with the world. This is the case with any list of virtues -- some are personal and others are relational.

There is an idea called the "unity of virtues." One intepretation of this is: to have any virtue is to have them all. Another intepretation: all of the virtues work as a complete system with practical wisdom (Gk. phronesis) being central. This is the interpretation I prefer. The outward signs of high virtuosity imply the presence and functinality of both the personal and relational virtues. Therefore, such a person could not be "broken" internally.

A modern analogy would be Stephen Covey's excellent book "7 Habits of Highly Effective People." The first three habits are personal and the next three are public. One must begin with the personal habits before they have a real chance of mastering the public habits. All of Covey's 7 Habits could be labeled virtues. As I said, integrity imvolves not only possession of the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual aspects of humanity, but the integration of all aspects into a functional, synergetic system.

Also, high integrity implies eudaimonia (a flourishing life). I do not believe eudaimonia is possible in any person who is internally devastated. A life of eudaimonia might be called the "good life." A life of high integrity is also the good life.

Finally, regarding the association of prevenient grace with integrity, I mentioned that his association could result in "some degree of integrity." However, they are not yet a complete person. I do not believe that the development of highest integrity is possible unless the individual pregresses into the next phases of grace. Integrity, like eudaimonia, is a progressive process. Ideally, both will continually increase during our lifetime.

It is very difficult to cover all aspects of integrity in a brief article. I supose this is one good reason for writing a book.