Zealot or Zealous?

 

If a person were motivated enough to dig up my views and how they have changed (and not changed) over the years they might find that I am no different than anyone else.  There will be themes and topics where my thoughts and opinions have morphed and adjusted as my experiences taught me.  But there will also be numerous guiding principles that have been relatively consistent.  They too, have changed, as I learn and grow.  Yet they have been refined because I have always sought to be better and do better - as much as I possibly can.

You could say that I have exercised a great deal of zeal in my effort to learn throughout my life.  But, would you say that I am a zealot?  And, if you did, would that be a good thing?

Historically, a Zealot was a member of a Jewish sect in the first century AD that put themselves against Rome and polytheism (the Romans recognized a pantheon of gods).  They were aggressive in their opposition and uncompromising in their opinions and beliefs.  The term "zealot" now refers to any person who is fanatical and uncompromising as they pursue their beliefs and ideals.  

That leaves me with a question.  I have been told that I was zealous in my pursuit of learning and that I show zeal when I promote intercropping or pollinator planting.  I take that as a compliment.  But, is it a compliment if someone tells you that you are a zealot?  

The first-century Zealots were so committed to their points of view that they came to despise fellow Jews who sought peace and conciliation with the Romans.  Some even resorted to terrorism and assassination, killing those they felt were friendly to Rome (it didn't matter if the "target" was a Jew).  One issue here is that some Zealots became so set in their views that they no longer considered persons who did not wholly agree with them to be worthwhile humans.

I wonder sometimes how those people found themselves going down that path.  And then I realize that people in every age of the world have taken that same journey.  It's a journey that starts with an ideal that seems right and appears to have real value.  Over time, that ideal gets jeopardized by alternative viewpoints that may or may not fully agree with a person's perception of that ideal.  Some people take the time to learn and re-assess what they know - hopefully coming out on the other side with a more complex and complete understanding of the world around them.

Others militantly reject anything that doesn't appear to line-up without further consideration.  Eventually, they begin to devalue anything who doesn't agree.  And once you don't think another idea has any value, it doesn't take much more to decide the person who has that idea also has no value.

That's when we have a problem - in my opinion.

In the end, I decided that I was ok with someone telling me I was zealous in my pursuit of learning.  Or that I have shown zeal over time in my efforts to encourage people to support a wide range of pollinators.  But, the word "zealot" bears with it the possible implication that a person is, in my opinion, no longer an effective advocate for the things that person has zeal for.

For example, I presented at an event where I was talking about pesticide drift.  It can be a difficult, and often polarizing, topic.  And, one person could not contain themselves, aggressively and uncompromisingly expressing an opinion that clearly set boundaries of good and evil, acceptable and unacceptable, decent human-being and something unworthy of mention.

Eventually, they were asked to allow the panel - who had worked hard to prepare for this event - the opportunity to share their information with the audience, some of whom were getting a bit impatient with this person.  Even if some of them - and some of me - agreed with some of this person's sentiment.

So what was the problem?  If we had some point of agreement, why was it that many of us grew tired of what they were saying?

Well, I don't know about the other people in the room, but my problem was that they were actually eroding the credibility of what actually could be a pretty good argument.  The result of being this kind of zealot is that you push others who might actually agree with you AWAY and you harm the ultimate cause.

I know this is not how that person saw it.  In fact, I am certain they now feel that my opinion no longer has value because I did not stand beside them and denounce that which is evil with the same zeal (and agenda and language) that they had.  They let me know that I had sullied myself by my very presence with people who were clearly "them."

There was more to it than that as well.  But this is not the time to cover it.  Instead, I'll leave you with this.  It is one thing to be zealous, to have energy for sharing the good agendas in your life.  It is quite another to force that agenda on others.  The life of a zealot is not for me.