Deconstruction and the Church 2: The Pain of Deconstruction

 

2 The Pain of Deconstruction 

Although the outcome of deconstruction is usually experienced as liberating, the process is often experienced as painful. In this post I like to explore why this is so. I think it is important for church leaders and Christian parents of critical children to think about these things. 

Depending on the nature of the deconstruction, it often involves (to some degree) a paradigm shift. In other words, it involves a restructuring one’s personal identity in relationship to questions like: Who am I? Who or what is “god”? What is unique about the human species? Is there an absolute morality? Can I accept the traditional teaching (of church, parents, Bible) regarding these things in light of contemporary cultural convictions and scientific teachings? In the process of comparing ideas and convictions (truth-constructions) and replacing some of these, there is often an experience of Insecurity and loss. The philosophical basis of one’s personal identity is shaking and the new ideas are first experienced as alien, thus threatening, and the whole experience is not unlike the grieving that is experienced with the passing of a close relative or good friend. It takes time to restructure the (perceived) reality to achieve a new stability and sense of peace. 

Aside of the internal paradigm shift, there are aspects of loss in terms of our relationships. Perhaps we can distinguish aspects of conscience, community, and culture. 

Conscience 

When I started to listen to and learn from Baptist leaders, I was abhorred to learn that many (if not most) in my church refused to see Baptists as fellow Christians. In our church, we were convinced that -just as in the Old Mosaic Covenant children were included in the people of God (as symbolized in circumcision)-, so children of believers were automatically included in the New Covenant. Therefore, they should be baptized and accepted as members in the Church of Christ. Since the Bible was clear on this (!), obviously the Baptists were seen to reject the Word of God and therefore no true believers, and a Baptist church could not be seen as a genuine Church of Christ. Quite a few leaders would no hesitate to label such churches ‘false (or fake) churches’, which actually implies they were seen as ‘Synagogues of Satan’. 

When I publicly rejected this -and some other (informal) teachings in the church-, I lost my teaching job and my wife and I were formally treated as those, who in doctrine and life gave evidence that we were unbelievers.1  So, when I started to attend a Baptistic seminary, my church leaders told me that they saw this as evidence of my hardening in sin. Also, my father, who had celebrated the successful completion of a secular M.Sc. study had nothing positive to say about me attending a Baptistic seminary. The first day I attended, my conscience made me feel badly out of place. I felt totally alien, and had serious doubts whether I was doing the right thing before God, since I was obviously rejecting the “faith of the fathers”. Now, our consciences are certainly a tool of God’s Spirit to warn us about straying from the will of God. On the other hand, they can be hijacked by well-meaning parents and church leaders to make us feel guilty about non-essential things. 

Community 

When people deconstruct, this does not only involve a shift in thinking, in accepting what is true and/or good, but it also involves a social deconstruction. 

Read 1 Peter 4: 1-5 and see what happens when someone embraces the Gospel: their (former) friends find it strange that the recent convert no longer seeks and loves the things they used to do together with them. If their converted friend does not leave these friends too early, he may be a person of peace to share the love of God, which gave him a new hope and joy and purpose in life. 

Read about the conversion of a Muslim to the Christian faith, like Nabeel Qureshi’s account, and you recognize what a social sacrifice had to be made. For many Christians, Jesus’ words may not really penetrate, that his followers must be ready to accept the shunning or even death threats by family and friends in order to fully follow Him. 

Especially in smaller, rural, or more traditional situations, belonging to a church community is a major component of one’s identity and life. So, it is a huge risk to openly question or criticize their common traditions or convictions. In our traditional church denomination, the common idea was that the six days of creation had to have been 24 hours long. Personally, I knew theology professors and pastors, who had come to other convictions, yet they knew that it would have been suicidal for their status in the church if they had shared this publicly. It was not open for honest, brotherly discussion. I have been called a theistic evolutionist and an unbeliever when I shared my doubts about the exact length of the creation days. Also, I have been warned by good friends in the Reformed church not to search the Scriptures on the issue of infant baptism vs. believer’s baptism, as this would probably cause a lot of pain and hardship for me and the church. If people are so controlled in their walk and talk, will they not become mere people-pleasers, rather than God-pleasers? 2   And, if they, for a longer time, live separated from this community (and the primary reason for adherence is removed), will they not be swayed by information and ideas they had never heard or considered before? Or, if their whole community is slowly deconstructing, will they not continue to follow such trends as true people-pleasers? If tradition and control dominate the church, how can there ever be a reformation or revival? 

While traditional churches may run the risk of an underground deconstruction, (even though superficially they remain orthodox), liberal churches typically experience communal deconstruction. They may rightly condemn the ecclesiastic tribalism and pride of some traditional churches in their idea that they have a monopoly on the Truth. Yet, this is often a prelude to relativism and the tolerance of all kinds of heresies. Rather than seeking the renewing of their minds by God’s Word and Spirit, they often reject the clarity of Scripture and the authority of the written record of the apostolic teaching. So, they gladly grasp for modern hermeneutics in order to explore new ways of reading and interpreting their former norm for faith and life. In this kind of setting, it is the one who refuses to deconstruct their faith, who must face marginalization, alienation, and rejection in ‘the church’. This is the common pattern of ‘the intolerance of tolerance. 3

Culture 

Again, every church denomination or congregation has its own particular culture, which defines what one is to believe, say, and do. From this cultural standpoint, others are evaluated and judged. As one of my seminary professors quipped: ‘On Sundays, the Reformed folk look at the Baptists, shaking their heads; ‘Look at them! They claim to be Christians, yet after church they go to a restaurant! can you believe that?’ Meanwhile, the Baptists look at them and wonder how they can claim to be Christians, if they drink beer and wine and even smoke a cigar or pipe. These may be caricatures, but there are of course other dividing issues. While most Reformed churches see themselves under the Law of God, in that they are required to obey the Ten Commandments, most Baptists seem to hold that New Covenant believers are free from the old code and its curse, yet, as they love Christ, they desire (in loving thankfulness) to obey his teaching.

1. Heidelberg Catechism, Q/A 85: .”… According to the command of Christ: Those who, though called Christians, profess unchristian teachings or live unchristian lives, and who after repeated personal and loving admonitions, refuse to abandon their errors and evil ways, and who after being reported to the church, that is, to those ordained by the church for that purpose, fail to respond also to the church’s admonitions— such persons the church excludes from the Christian community by withholding the sacraments from them, and God also excludes them from the kingdom of Christ. 

2.  Gal. 1: 10 * For am I now trying to persuade people, or God? Or am I striving to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ. 

3. D.A. Carson. The Intolerance of Tolerance. (Eerdmans, 2013)