One of the wearying aspects of church life today is the constant weaponization of disagreement. I’m referring to the tendency to take an honest disagreement we have with someone (perhaps over minor points of theology, or questions of political prudence, or parenting methods) as a sign that he or she should to be “unhealthy” – and that is why we brandish this disagreement as a weapon, as a way to sully the person’s entire vision or ministry.
The superficiality we see today stems at least in part from what Nicolas Carr described like the new mental patterns that develop in a world of scrolling and online comments. In this new world, Christians seem less and less able to criticize without canceling. We do not see in our disagreements an opportunity to seek the truth together, to argue using Scripture, logic, reason and tradition. Instead, disagreements turn into arguments. All heat, no light.
Easy labels
Easy labels play an important role in weaponization. Words like “grounded” or “woke,” “progressive” or “right-wing,” “problematic” or “troubling” are often used not precisely because of theological disagreement, but because we may think that others are careless, inconsistent or simply wrong. how they apply their theological convictions to the choices we face in today’s world.
- She voted for Trump, so she’s a right-wing fanatic whose approach to everything else must be suspect (and she’s probably a closet racist!).
- He expressed doubts about vaccines or the wisdom of locking down schools. So he must be a gullible conspiracy theorist who doesn’t love his neighbor or who harbors authoritarian desires!
On another side . . .
- This church was closed for more than a few weeks and the pastor encouraged vaccination, so they are obviously in line with the compromised “woke” evangelicals who are “progressive.”
- This author thinks there may be human causes of climate change, so he is obviously “liberal” or at least deceived by the global elites!
The detailed and historical confessions of faith that once marked religious traditions and communities are erased from view. The slogans, labels and epithets remain. From a theological perspective, you cannot call anyone “liberal” anyone who unreservedly affirms the Westminster Confession of Faith or the Baptist faith and message. And one cannot fairly characterize complementarians as “abusive” or “misogynistic” simply because they align with the Church’s traditional, ecumenical consensus on the issue.
Unfortunately, political debates occupy such a place in the consciousness and imagination of the evangelical mind that we are increasingly incapable of separating issues, of welcoming good faith disagreements on matters of prudence without presenting the opponents in the worst possible light or castigate them for their behavior. (gasp) disagree with us.
Signals on substance
Over the last eight or nine years, I’ve noticed a shift toward online signage rather than substance. Not only do we expect others to agree, but we believe we should all agree in the same way and by sending the same signals.
If you don’t comment on every major case of racial injustice, if you don’t announce every time another church leader is exposed for sexual abuse, if you don’t pay attention to the latest crazy tweet from someone who claims the role of Christian. Nationalism – well, you’re part of the problem. You are complicit. Compromise. Suspicious. “Silence is violence!” »
The same goes for the other side. If you do not express your indignation at the latest misdeeds of doctors addicted to gender ideology, if you do not express regular and vehement disagreement with the president’s proposals, if you do not express your alignment with the ” fill in the blank” in today’s report, you’re not really of sound mind. You are not committed. Asleep. Weak.
Late last year, a colleague of mine was accused of being a “progressive” agent working undercover to undermine the theological foundations of his faith. The proof? He had a few friends whose disagreements had already been weaponized (Ah! Fraternize with the enemy!) and he did not post on Twitter any comments or celebrations regarding the overthrow of Roe v. Wade last summer. I got you! Never mind the fact that this coworker was random on social media, rarely said anything online, and was so dedicated to the pro-life cause (actually, not just on social media) that he and his wife had taken in several adopted children.
Do you see what’s happening here? It is not even disagreement that divides, but it is not the fact of agreeing in the same way. You are not strong enough in your agreement! You do not adopt the same posture or proposition! The result is even more fractious, even among people who are on the same wavelength, simply because they don’t signal their allegiance in the same way. (I remember the thunderous applause that everyone was supposed to give when Nicolae Ceaușescu was dictator of Romania. Don’t be the first to stop clapping! Don’t be the first to sit down! Your “loyalty” will be suspect.)
Different members of one body
When differences of views and opinions coalesce into bullets that become ammunition for the Great War in which we consider ourselves engaged, our targets become brothers and sisters in the barracks instead of the powers and principalities where the war rages. the true spiritual battle. The Bride of Christ is the victim, and the Evil One laughs.
If Christ’s body seems distorted today, perhaps it is because all the body parts are disproportionate, insisting that each is an eye, an ear, or a mouth. Rather than recognizing and appreciating different gifts and skills (not to mention different callings), we take a totalizing view of online engagement.
The body is complex. If we want to heal a sick and divided Church, it can take many medications and treatments. But we will never get healthy if we assume that anyone, with a different mix of medicines, is trying to poison the Church instead of healing it.
The path to follow ?
What is the solution to this tedious war? We cannot simply gloss over our disagreements and cheer “unity” over and over again, as if that will solve all our problems. Denominations do not heal that way, just as churches and families do not heal by sweeping disagreements under the rug. We should strive for unity, yes, and we must stop weaponizing disagreements in ways that misrepresent, reduce, oversimplify, or attack brothers and sisters acting in good faith. But talking about unity will not resolve disagreements.
John Stott found ways for creative collaboration and partnership by doing his best to listen carefully to critics concerned about this or that – whose disagreement was sincere and well-intentioned – and he often found that the truths they wanted to safeguard were also the ones he considered valuable. Creative solutions may arise once this common ground is sufficiently established for productive conversations. But I sometimes wonder if all this is possible online.
Which makes me dig deeper into why we got to this place.
Why is it so difficult to criticize without canceling people?
What happened to us online that made it so easy to dismiss others?
How can we tell the truth when doctrinal drift poses a danger to a leader’s soul and the souls of others, without contributing to the culture of easy labels and quick cancellation?
What habits would help us cultivate charitable criticism, following James’ advice to be “quick to listen” and “slow to speak” and especially “slow to anger”?
What have we become? Who are we becoming?
I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but I do know that the Church would be better served by more Christians emphasizing face-to-face interaction, resisting the impulse to constantly signal online that we belong to this or that tribe and choosing to avoid constant criticism on issues on which we are unlikely to be able to convince others. Maybe we need more cold takes than hot takes. And maybe that starts with reevaluating our habits and, at the very least, committing to no longer using good faith disagreements as a weapon.
If you would like my future articles emailed to you, along with a curated list of books, podcasts, and helpful links I find online, enter your address.