1 The Background and Forms of Deconstruction
The term ‘deconstruction’ was
coined by French philosopher Jacques Derrida. I have not yet studied his views or
insights in depth, so I love to learn more to check if my understanding is
correct. One focus for him seems to be on binaries: contrasting concepts, such
as darkness-light, water-earth, chaos-order, evil-good, male-female. Derrida
finds that there is no strict boundary between the two poles and that it is
rather fluid over time (or between cultures). This is indeed true in our fallen
world. Yet, when God ‘constructed’ the cosmos, he used separation to bring order
into the existing chaos. And, when the rebellious one sought to destroy this,
God promised that he would continue to protect -and eventually restore- the
cosmos. And, in this context, he promised to maintain the essential antithesis
of good vs. evil until the end.
Derrida essentially follows through in
postmodern thinking where absolute truth does not exist. When we use terms like
darkness-light, male-female, or evil-good, each one of us has our own idea of
the referenced reality of each term. Partially, this is based on the mental
construction, given to us in our families, communities, and cultures, and
partially it is formed by our own experiences, preferences, and feelings.
Critical observers will notice the effects in (post)modern art and culture, like
in movies or in books. If you are familiar with Lemony Snicket’s A Series of
Unfortunate Events, you will have noticed how the concepts of good and evil are
slowly brought from enmity to harmony. At the end of the story we find no happy
homecoming, the long-time hope that there were loving parents ‘out there’, still
in control of the events is dashed, and there is no happy homecoming after all.
Rather, good and evil decide to journey together, like Beauty and the Beast.1 The
antithesis gradually morphs into a synthesis, like ‘Yin and Yang’.
When most
people talk about deconstructing ‘the’ faith, however, there is a more specific
process in view. Alisa Childers has been there. She writes: “Deconstruction is
the process of systematically dissecting and often rejecting the beliefs you
grew up with. Sometimes the Christian will deconstruct all the way to atheism.
Some remain there, but others experience a reconstruction. But the type of faith
they end up embracing almost never resembles the Christianity they formerly
knew.” 2
This is not restricted to (young) people, leaving the church or the
Christian faith. In fact, it can happen at an older age and it can happen from
any culture, tradition, or group-association. Biographies can be very revealing
on this process.
Fritz Schumacher, author of Small is Beautiful- economics as if
people mattered, grew up in a German, nominal Christian family. Deconstructing
the nominal faith seemed not too hard, and the critical thinker Fritz became an
atheist. As a student, he began to see the growing individualism and materialism
in the modern, western world. When he was in his late twenties, he deconstructed
from his privileged background and became a communist. However, over time it
became clear to him that communism was not truly charismatic. Rather, it was
full of resentment and hatred towards the privileged people. So, about fifteen
years later, he deconstructed from communism to Buddhism. And then,
surprisingly, twelve years later he committed himself to the Roman Catholic
faith. 3
Nabeel Qureshi was a devout Muslim from a Muslim missionary family. Not
long after the 9/11 attacks, while at a collegiate forensics’ tournament, he met
David Wood, a Christian with strong convictions, who had spent the previous five
years studying the Bible and learning to follow Jesus. They became friends.
Since they both took their religions seriously, they spent a lot of time
searching for the truth. It took more than four years of deconstruction and
reconstruction before Nabeel surrendered to Christ. He wrote a fairly detailed
report of this experience in his book “Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus.” 4
Although I
grew up in a Christian family and today, I am a committed follower of Jesus
Christ. Nevertheless, I grew up in quite a strict, traditional Dutch Reformed
church, where most other church traditions were seen and treated as apostate
imitations of the genuine church. In my late twenties, I began to critically
examine what I had been taught at home and church in light of the Bible. So,
over time, I began to question some of the early convictions, partly because I
experienced that Christian young people from (the bad) evangelical church were
often more godly in their talk and walk than my peers in the ‘superior’ church.
My deconstruction process was ratcheted up after our migration to Canada, where
the associated group of Reformed churches was still as traditional and strict as
ever. Although, in private discussions, I found kindred spirits in the church,
there could be no open dialog with our church leaders. When I was about forty
years old, I made a fairly thorough inventory of my concerns, which led me to
write a fairly critical analysis.5 The church then labeled me a heretic, and we
were placed under church discipline until we left about a year later to join a
more accepting Reformed church. When I was almost sixty, we were back in The
Netherlands for a stay of three years. After some searching, we requested
membership at our former church in my home town. There, I discovered that en
masse the church had deconstructed, so that (almost) all churches and ideas were
tolerated and the apostolic teaching was actively re-interpreted to ensure the
church would have a contemporary character and appeal. We were not prepared to
deconstruct in this way, and after some research and attempts to share our
concerns, we decided to join a Baptist church in town.
It has been said that the
word deconstruction refers to a combination of destruction and (re)construction.
This is helpful for when we reject a certain teaching or culture, we implicitly
adopt a new teaching, a different culture. So, when we are talking about
deconstruction, it is important to explore what exactly is being destructed (and
why) and what we are constructing to take its place. Hunter Beaumont argues 6 that
we all need to discern between what the Bible teaches and how this is worked out
in a particular church culture. In other words, we must distinguish between
deconstructing the Christian faith and a cultural deconstruction, which keeps
clinging to the apostolic teaching of the church of all places and times. In
traditional churches, however, little or no distinction is made between these
forms of deconstruction, so cultural deconstruction (asking sincere yet critical
questions about the doctrine and/or life of the church) is considered negative
or threatening and is therefore strongly discouraged. This can easily lead to a
brain drain, where critically thinking believers are shut up or shut out. To
prevent trouble with church leaders, family, and/or friends many will keep
quiet, so that hypocrisy is fostered.
When I was a teacher at a Reformed high
school, some students asked me whether it was permissible to mow one’s lawn on
Sundays (in light of the fourth commandment), I replied that God does not
explicitly forbid this, but it seems like a good tradition to keep. Later, the
school board deliberated on this incident for hours, after which they sent me a
stern warning that I not say or teach such ideas ever again. It seemed to me
that the (good) church tradition was put on the same level as the revealed will
of God. 7
Most Christians will agree that not all deconstruction in the church is
bad. In fact, many would agree that it is essential that we encourage young
people to do as the Bereans did,8 and test their church’s doctrine and preaching
in the light of the Bible. If they are to be(come) strong, committed believers,
who can stand the tests of faith, they must personally wrestle with and
appropriate the Christian doctrines. And the church must facilitate this process
in gentle dialog and wise coaching. And, if the church keeps reforming, it must
engage as Body of Christ in an ongoing deconstruction (read: Reformation) to
face the challenges of the secular age with the truth of Scripture. Yet we must
be on our guard, for there is much deconstruction that challenges the teaching
of the Bible. In the next post we must study this process in greater detail.
2. Alisa Childers, Another Gospel?: A Lifelong Christian Seeks Truth in Response to Progressive Christianity (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale, 2000), 24.
3. Barbara Wood, E.F. Schumacher, his life and thought (Harper & Row, New York, 1984).
4. Nabeel Qureshi. Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus. A Devout Muslim Encounters Christianity. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 2014.
5. Isaac Smit, Praying for Rain. A Call for Renewal in the Canadian Reformed Churches. (Mount Hope, 1998)
6. Hunter Beaumont, Don’t Deconstruct, Dis-enculturate Instead, chapter 4 in ‘Before You Lose Your Faith: Deconstructing Doubt in the Church’ (The Gospel Coalition, 2021)
7. A similar experience is related in this blog post: http://isaac-smit.blogspot.com/2013/07/tradition-and-will-of-god.html
8. Luke describes in Acts 17: 11, 12 that the Jews in Berea listened intently to Paul’s teaching, after which they studied the Scriptures to verify whether his teaching was reliable and true.
No comments:
Post a Comment