somewhere in the middle...

There are a couple of terms that I have used in previous posts that you may or may not be familiar with. Others have written on them for years and they are not exclusive to religious debate. For my simple blog, let me offer a simple definition.

“Moderns” or “Modernity” is rooted in reductionism. It is an attempt to explain a complex set of facts or an entity by understanding its’ smaller pieces. By understanding its’ smaller pieces and then putting those pieces back together, one can understand the whole.“Post-moderns” or “Post-modernity” is grounded in “deconstructionism.” Simply put, it seeks to “poke holes” in the conclusions or absolute truths asserted by “moderns”.

In our church and Christian sub-culture, we have been very scared of post-modernity. At its’ extreme, post-modernity leaves no room for absolute truth and everything is relative. Yet modernity at its’ extreme can be equally dangerous. Consider these two quotes by Brian McLaren from an open letter to Chuck Colson found here.

“Anyway, Chuck, you’re legitimately worried that “postmoderns” will use their relativism as an excuse to do anything they want. But they’re worried that you and other “moderns” will use your absolutism as an excuse to do anything you want.”

“Even for those of use who claim to know God and have faith in the Bible: we need to look back over our own history and realize that just as there are disastrous consequences to claiming there is no such thing as legitimate moral judgment, there are also disastrous consequences to claiming that we have unquestionably legitimate moral judgment. Our ancestors judged slavery as morally justified, and brought in Scripture to enforce their point; we now judge slavery wrong, also using Scripture. Are we so naïve to think that all our judgments are finally right, just because we quote the Bible?”

In the article, McLaren repeatedly articulates that a “post-modernity” that claims “no morality, no ethics, and no reality is truly pathetic and dangerous.” Yet at the same time he writes “people like me want neither the self-indulgent narcissism of the one[extreme post-modernity] nor the unreflective absolutism of the other[modernity].” I find myself in the same place. I am by no means a “no-truth, everything is relative” kind of guy. But, I am equally not a “we have it figured out, now we just need to preserve it and defend it” kind of guy. Did you notice his description of modernity in the last quote? Unreflective absolutism. As much as I am distressed by “self-indulgent narcissists” I am equally distressed by those who seemingly see no value in reflecting or questioning. Actually changing is a whole other topic.

So I am somewhere in the middle. It is a place where truth and question become partners and not enemies. I don’t want to be overly dramatic and I am undoubtedly about to be, but the analogy makes my point, so please excuse me and know that I don’t take myself too seriously(I think). From my simplistic perspective, I look at the events in Iran (and really in our own American Revolution) and see people who are waking up to the laws, rules, power and leadership that had been sold to them as absolute reality and truth. Simply put, they are now questioning the reality, the hierarchy and the existence they have been handed and they are wondering and I am sure may undoubtedly be convinced that there is a greater way to live than what the current generation in power (and the ones before them) has offered. I have imagined if I lived there. Would I protest vigorously and risk death which would leave my children fatherless or would I stay inside to live another day and raise them? I would hope that I would teach them more about living in my dying than I would by just accepting things as they are in order to wake up another day. (Thankfully, I don’t have to make that choice today and I sincerely can’t imagine what it would be like to have to. So again, excuse my simplicity.)

I see it very similarly in my heritage and in the church sub-culture around me. Almost all of my posts so far have been about ways we have missed the point. At the heart of things, this is not an exercise of theological musing and banter. To me this all matters. These ideas are not just about tweaking our church paradigm here or there. I don’t think everything is generally ok because, after all, nothing will ever be perfect. I think that so many absolutists have not only gotten some things wrong, but that they have been downright destructive in the conclusions that they refuse to honestly reflect on. I can’t just ignore it or just play along and accept it. I can’t look at my daughter and say “Melanie, I think our conclusion about women and their role in the church is completely wrong and based on faulty theology, but you’re just going to have to make the best of it because daddy can’t do anything about it.” Right now I am just talking and writing. I’ll be very disappointed in myself if it never leads to doing and creating.