The Grace To Be Wrong

The quest for and the defense of correct doctrine has been the primary rallying flag of argument, division, and in-fighting within the ranks of Christendom for almost two thousand years. Even in the first decades of the church, New Testament writers were attacking and seeking to protect the church from what they described as false and divisive teachings.
And, to state it bluntly, there is just too much doctrinal disagreement and contradiction from institution to institution, denomination to denomination for everyone to be right at the same time. Simple logic dictates that a lot of the popular, widely held doctrinal beliefs floating around out there are just plain wrong.
So how do we determine who is right and who is wrong? Exactly what doctrines are we supposed to have in place? Does Scripture make these necessary doctrines perfectly clear without any room for differing interpretations, or do we have some room to manuever when it comes to the beliefs we embrace and promote? When establishing doctrine, are we completely free to interpret, add to, or subract from Scripture in any way we find convenient? Should doctrinal constructs originating from outside Scripture - personal visions or revelations, for example - be considered legitimate? How important is it to have all your doctrinal ducks in a perfect row? Is it even possible for fallible humans (even fallible humans of the divinely inspired variety) to attain absolute doctrinal perfection?
Now, I know I have a bad habit of throwing out more questions than answers, but, to be perfectly honest, I don't even pretend to have the definitive answers to all these questions.
I do believe that Scripture is very clear on many central, foundational points, but I have to admit that there are quite a few mysteries in Scripture that I'm just not sure about. And, even after extensive study, I find Scriptural evidence that appears to support opposing sides of many long-standing doctrinal disputes. I'm talking about age-old interChristian conflicts such as free will versus predestination, the exact nature of the Trinity, the precise prerequisites for salvation, and the question of whether or not salvation can be lost once attained.
Of course, I have my opinions on these and many other doctrinal issues, but in all honesty, there are passages of Scripture that make it hard for me to be fully confident in my own opinions. I don't think this is a matter of real contradiction within Scripture, but, rather, I suspect the problem lies primarily with the limitations of human logic and reason. I think the Bible contains many truths which appear to be self-contradicting or incomprehensible to human beings - a conundrum caused by the fact that created beings just aren't capable of fully wrapping their minds around an infinite, uncreated God. In addition, I think that the vast gulf of time and cultural change between us and the Bible's contributing writers makes it hard for us to catch their intended meaning in some places.
With so much room for error and misunderstanding, I find it interesting that we Christians tend to grant ourselves and each other so little room for imperfection when it comes to doctrinal matters. The general rule in modern Churchianity is to choose your doctrinal answers and stick by those answers as infallible no matter what. And if you disagree with any of the official doctrines of your church or institution, you'd better either keep your mouth shut or start looking for a church or institution that lines up more with the way you see things.
I don't know if it's just theological vanity or the simple weight of tradition and expectation, but it's a rare occassion when Christians leaders and institutional bodies allow themselves the simple, liberating grace of not being 100 percent right 100 percent of the time.
What this carved-in-stone approach to doctrinal matters has created is a static, starkly divided state of affairs in which birds of like doctrinal feathers have all flocked together in seperate camps. Inside these religious camps, diversity of belief is scarcely tolerated, and free and open discussion of doctrinal issues is practically nonexistent.
While I don't think this is a healthy state of affairs for the Body of Christ, I do understand some of the reasons and dynamics behind it. For one, people generally don't enjoy having their beliefs and habits of thought challenged. Expanding your mind can be painful and difficult, and it's just easier to create an environment where those who agree on doctrine can do so without any interference from those who don't. In addition, institutions, by their essential nature, are self-preserving and self-perpetuating, and something as unstable as doctrinal uncertainty threatens the stability and future survival of the institution.
So what is the correct approach to matters of doctrine? Heck, I don't know, and only the Good Lord does, I suspect. But if you want my admittedly fallible opinions, here they are.
I think we're called to be disciples, which literally means students or learners. And I don't think we ever reach a place where we can say that we've learned it all - or even that we're completely correct about everything we think we've already learned - and then sit back comfortably on our laurels.
On top of that, I don't think that we're only called to be students of Scripture but to be students of life, as well. What I mean by that is that Christ has called us into a real relationship with Him - a relationship with literal interaction and communication going both ways - and it's through this day-to-day relationship that we learn a lot of the things we need to know as disciples. Don't get me wrong, I'm not downplaying Bible study. In fact, I think that if we focus on a real, Spirit-led relationship with Christ, we'll find Scripture and life experience confirming each other in amazing ways.
I also believe we can learn a lot from each other as believers. That's one of the main reasons we've been instructed to come together as body - for mutual support, growth, and education. With that said, I think we severely hinder the collective quest for sound doctrine by limiting free and open discussion about doctrinal matters and insisting that we've already figured it all out. By doing this we're pretty much telling the average pew-warmer that their questions and possible contributions regarding doctrine are beneath consideration.
As far as establishing an A-to-Z list of doctrines on everything under the sun, we're just not there yet, and I doubt we're ever going to get there. And by insisting on inflexible doctrinal stances, I fear that contemporary Christianity is stunting its own growth and education.
Maybe someday God will get it through our thick skulls that knowing Him personally is much more profitable than just believing all the right things about Him.