A long-time friend of mine recently sent me a link to a podcast that he thought was interesting and wanted my take on it. His interest was clearly piqued as my friend is not prone in any way to pass on much unless, in his mind at least, it has weight. 

Rarely has he disappointed, so I quickly engaged with the content, but in so doing I was experiencing a lot of de ja vu.

The podcast (which I will not name, it is in this context unnecessary) raised my eyebrows when they boldly purported that this platform was all about truth, in a manner that makes me a little uncomfortable – maybe my issue, happy to wear that.

Anyway, the subject of this episode was around yet another new purported ‘reformation phase’ (my words) and this seemingly insightful ‘truth’ conversation with a more modern theologian of some weight, but also of a particular genre, which I don’t want to misrepresent, so I’ll set that aside too. 

The title they gave this new demographic (rather than movement) was ‘Deconstructionist’.

It is here, that I want the reader to now do some quick searching to find a defining framework for this, as this writer does not want to misrepresent it, as it seems like many of the post-Christian and subsequent post-Truth musings, is potentially ‘slippery’, and if my ‘grip’ on this is seen as unfair or misleading in any way, then redefinition can be quickly reframed in an attempt to skate on what it may deem an unfair characterising. 

As indicated earlier, my regard for my friend meant there was some positive anticipation of the subject I was about to engage, but again, as mentioned, my first thought was… this smells like a reforming mood that presented some 20 years earlier.  Back then it was called the ‘emerging church’, and I wasn’t surprised to hear that some of the same actors back then are still in play now. 

As I listened and heard definitions and somewhat negative commentary about the orthodox evangelical movement, and various justifications for existing criticisms of these ‘new’ frameworks were presenting, it began to dawn on me that it was really attempting to craft pre-emptive ramparts for what in my experience, is the all too often intellectual musings of what Professor Calvin Miller (in his significant work ‘Into the Depths of God’) called the ‘protected’.  Miller wrote that, “Only the protected have the privilege of making theology a discussion, the persecuted cling to it and weep.”

Like most attempts at neo-reformation moments (not movements) is must find a point of difference from the existing playbook. The new lens on this emerging church offering seems to go beyond the (not unfair) legalism bashing rhetoric and, to engender some form of ‘uniqueness’, seemingly embraced the now fashionable ‘trauma’ informed ideology being overlaid on it.  It would now appear that any setting that one deems not simply traumatic (however you want to define that) but disappointing, distressing and even disagreeable to a struggling, offended, wounded and/or prideful psyche is that trigger for shuffling into Deconstructionism.

Don’t get me wrong, abuses and quite vicious mistreatment of people in some church contexts is very real. This author has experienced its full ferocity in the ministry with workplace bullying, intimidation, abuse and then thrown out of the ministry. Experiences that have had some observers tell me that they couldn’t believe I was still following Jesus, let alone going to church.

To give you just some small insight into this longtime-to-get-over experience which ended with the following screaming words down the phone – “the gloves are off and I’m going to make you pay.”  This was only after four years of intimidation and bullying which included a ‘disciplinary’ time where, as a team pastor, I was unable to have any ‘platform’ involvement, was given every disagreeable administrative and operational task that no one else wanted to do, and at which period end I was told. “I’ve treated you much like a dog, and you took it, so you have a future in this church.” 

To unpack the entire 4-year nightmare would be too long and distressing for all involved - and I must add as with all such scenarios, I too am a participant and as such I'm reminded of the old adage, ‘that there are three sides to every story, mine, theirs and the truth.’ Suffice to say there was adultery in the pastoral team, coverups, ‘staged revivals’ to maximise the faux repentance, professional and personal confidences blatantly breached, bullying, screaming, doors taken off hinges and… you get the gist.

So, why did I stay so long? That’s all on me…I was scared for my livelihood, but more, my vocation which I’d planned, prayed, served in many roles for 16 years to achieve – This full-time paid pastoral role was the culmination of that earlier dream and goal. 

I was utterly shattered. Our ‘calling, community and cash’ were all taken in one day. No love offering, no new job, nothing to go to. My wife was shocked, and our three kids confused – our little world collapsed. 

All this was done at the hands of another and all with God watching and seemingly condoning – This is the stuff that existential crises are made of.

So, what happened next?

Did I move into a new and wonderful phase of ministry and fellowship with the Bride of Christ? New doors of opportunity and blessing open up? Did my family find joy and peace in the midst?

None of the above, at all! 

Ah, but what did happen and is still happening, is a sobering and utterly remarkable recalibration that all started with this necessary humiliation. My (and I would argue all our) ‘calling’ was to serve God full-time and that to a 19-year-old backslider meant at some stage being a paid to serve Pastor.

In short, I had lost sight of what I always taught, that I am a Disciple-servant who gets to yoke with the King of Creation and plough where He leads. I had completely unwittingly disconnected from the humble yoke of following my Lord as I should and instead yoked with expectations, ideals and yes, even entitlements, that I believed were Heaven’s purpose for me. Had I been dabbling in ‘magic’ and our gracious Heavenly Father had to rescue me? More on that later. 

What did that – does that – recalibration look like? 

A journey of continuing humility under his gracious hand of loving discipline. 

The next 20 plus years were not easy, nor abundantly fruitful. And as my lens changed from traumatised victim to a wayward son being profoundly remade, I revisit these difficult seasons, not yet with joy, however, with a deep sense of satisfaction and a new trust that our God is ALWAYS GOOD. I do not ‘hate’ or ‘avoid’ certain ecclesial settings out of distrust, fear or angst – not at all. I may prefer or lean into certain contexts because good, sound doctrine based on humility seeking truth prove to be the best-practice and therefore subscribed to. I can and do fellowship with many ‘flavours’ of the faith, but always with a heart of service in Divine Truth. 

I deliberately did not want to revisit the full extent of the very real trauma here and the following decades of difficulty for a number of reasons, and not least that those perpetrations have been forgiven, regardless of the lack of repentance – But most vitally, because forgiveness is mandated and inevitable for anyone claiming Christ as Saviour and Lord. In this context all such abuses are completely redeemable. This is a simple process, but not an easy one, especially for a wounded soul that believes it has been terribly wronged. It took me nearly a year to really forgive, but a decade to not feel the insecurity and angst that is trauma cycling back. However, continual forgiving and releasing, not ‘retelling’ the trial and learning to truly let go was and is the path of healing and strengthening.

 Yet, here in lies the rub – These new Theo-social machinations currently emerging, with a undoubted noble attempt to wrestle these harms and maximise a genuine accountability for abuses has the potential (and it seems to be actualising) to not produce what ‘emerged’ from my quite horrendous experience, rather a different posture – one that enables and equips reframing, not of church and Christianity, but of our Sovereign God and His perfect wise ways. 

Whilst it is and can be right to label one suffering at the hands of these abuses as a victim, the Kingdom that Christ came to model and manifest cannot let that define you. 

If our psycho-social and emotional devastation is not surrendered to the Author and Perfector of our faith and it is not correctly recognised, but inappropriately affirmed by our context, then it inevitably becomes an imprisoning lens, that embraces victimhood and delays or even denies forgiveness which can quickly morph into not just an accusation of and reframing of the church, but even of God Himself. 

Please hear my heart in this; these remarks are in no way meant to diminish the deep pain and wounds that these events can inflict, (wounds as you have read, I know all too well) but it is a pivot away from what has become for many purported saints as an entitled posture.  That entitlement may not be something as crass as, ‘I thought God was going to look after, protect and prosper me, this is not what I signed up for’ response, but it is remarkable how certain ‘framing’ of Jesus Christ and His Kingdom have led people to some potentially idolatrous spaces.

An idol, simply put in Biblical terms, is any idea, object, principle, person or ‘thing’ that you worship above the one True God – by worship, it means pay greater attention, allegiance or compliance with/to.

To borrow a question from Calvin Miller, ‘there is only one real question for the believer: How does God view my discipleship?”

• What effigy of God or His Body have you conjured? 
• What juxtaposing do you engage in? 
• Is the One True God, the Saviour and Lord of your life, or something else?
• Is Jesus Christ the centre and final authority in your life or do you trust in and rely on something or someone else?
• What is ‘colonising’ your spiritual paradigm?

Outstanding novelist, essayist and award-winning American writer Mary Flannery O’Conner penned that … “To know oneself, is to above all, know what one lacks. It is to compare oneself with the Truth, not the other way around.”

This is why objective Biblical Truth understood first and foremost in the postures of Saviour and Sinner – Shephard and Lost – Master and Servant, will we then be able to surrender to the One who knows best, not the simply the one we hope will make our best work. If we miss this clear juxtapose, one must ask, is that person actually Saved? 

Calvin Millers outstanding work Into the Depths of God, written at the start of the Millenium really hit all these issues very well indeed. (A work to consistently recommend to all Christian leaders)

“I’m convinced that most people don’t really know how to articulate what they want out of church. In short, they want Jesus, but the Apollos tale in Acts proves the danger of an incomplete Christ. They want his Spirit to permeate their lives, but they don’t know him as the wind and fire. The validity of every religious gathering is to be evaluated by Paul’s question; ‘Have you received the Holy Spirit when you believed…Only the protected can make theology a ‘discussion’, the persecuted cling to it and weep.”

An apparent refrain in the deconstructionist diatribe on the Church is that they want or miss Jesus, but I’m not sure which version of Him they are referring to? As mentioned previously an incomplete effigy of Christ is nothing short of an Idol, and we find ourselves worshiping the inadequate and incomplete and subsequently such a deity fails us, and disillusionment follows. 

Regardless of our personal ‘reframing’ of the Christ to reflect the attributes or designs we feel most affinity with, it is His directives – His commands that must be our final touchstone for engagement.  John defined our love for God perfectly in his first letter when he simply stated that… “The true love of God is this; that we obey all His commands and we do so joyfully.”

These pre and proscriptions are not legislation, they are directives to best practice in His New Covenant Kingdom, and they are not negotiable. The Triune God empowers our capacity to comply with the indwelling Third Person on the Trinity, but He can only work with what He is permitted to do by the one claiming Christ.

The very initial call from the Saviour – God Himself, is unequivocal and non-negotiable. “If anyone would come after me, let them deny themselves, take up the cross and the follow.” (Matthew 16:24)

It’s important to note that this is not about ‘permission’, this is about capacity. Here in lies the rub. If you do not deny yourself, you will be unable to take up the cross. If you do not take up the cross you will be unable to follow. We are supposed to surrender to, collaborate with and follow Jesus, not advise, coerce or worse, demand from or manipulate Him. This is the divergence of Magic and Religion, as the ‘father’ (arguably) of Social Anthropology and ethnography Bronislaw Malinowski defined. Magic is the attempted manipulation and control of powers that may be, whereas religion is the practice of surrendering to those powers. The question one must as of the faith that is being practiced; at its foundation is it religion or magic?

I think many would-be disciples seek to practice magic rather than religion, attempted control of spiritual power, which is the very posture of the first rebellion – When Lucifer wanted to be God and have the ultimate authority, in fact, as we see it is this pride that is to quote Charles Finney, the “President and First Peer or Hell.”

Ah, but I think that is the real sticking point. 

We want to negotiate to achieve what we subjectively ‘feel’ is the Jesus we want to ‘befriend’ and allow to ‘befriend’ us. Whilst this aspect of the New Covenant relationship is real, it is but a posture that is always subject to His Kingly sovereignty and Lordship. To quote Judson Cornwall, “Jesus is God in human form, but God nonetheless.”

Set Apart From and For

“The Ecclesia Christi, the disciple community has been torn from the clutches of the world.” Bonhoeffer.

A really good practical step for all these folk would be to spend a month working/talking with the Persecuted Church – Arguably the ‘real church’ – to help recalibrate their perspective on the profound relationship of the Head of the Church and His Body. 

I believe it was A.W. Tozer who once quipped that ‘God cannot fully use a man (individual) until He has deeply wounded them.’ This, of course is the very essence of trauma that many in the perceived church are trying to avoid. 

I think Nik Ripken’s work ‘The Insanity of God’ is a good read/watch for all would be Disciples of Christ, but particularly those trying to reframe Jesus Christ to suit a First World protected culture. 

I think it is also important for any emerging ‘reforming’ or ‘reframing’ concept to have a lexicon of key New Testament words and phrases and how they choose to define them within the context of real and perceived, harm, offence, abuse and/or trauma.

The following is just one short list to consider.

• Discipleship
• Love
• Obedience
• Righteousness
• Idolatry
• Humility
• Integrity
• Holiness
• Persecution
• Forgiveness
• Trial
• Repentance

As I close out this brief post on this subject, I want to reiterate again that trauma, trial, and temptation however perceived is real to the person experiencing it. However, the key in it all is not the avoidance or denial of it, rather the surrendering to the one who can take you out, over, around, or most likely through. It is only that which will bring about a growth, maturity and strength that is never found in the victim posture that fosters unforgiveness, resentment, bitterness and the, all too often ‘reframing’ the One True God as a tyrant – such is posture of the, all too often entitled child. 

Shane W. Varcoe – Disciplesplanet