Thank you Prof Du Mez. You continue to inform and inspire me. It's always troubled me that we believers are the last people any LGBTQ person would seek out for help or advice, or just for acceptance. I feel that our "message" to them has always reflected ungrace. Thank you for sharing Ryan's story here and I will share with others also.
Kristin, on this pivotal issue for all Christians right now, I think you have just hit the ball out of the ballpark with your biblical, reasoned, compassionate perspective!
Thank you for being such a strong voice, and a brave one. And thank you for the link to Ryan's story. What a writer, and what a story. Should be compulsory reading by every Synod 2023 delegate.
The pain caused by the "righteous ones" ... their perfect binary world has to be defended tooth and claw ... and, yes, for some, "deconstruction" is the only way forward, but for others, as noted here by Dr. Du Mez, it's a matter of building upon the good that was offered, and that's the point, I suppose, "the good" was offered. Here's where Reformed Orthodoxy has always possessed the energy of progress, even as it could be used for repression.
Well said. I'm not against "deconstruction" as necessary, I've just never felt it characterizes my own faith journey. For me, my path does feel like a long walk in the same direction.
That's certainly been my sense of it ... as best as I can tell, there was nothing I had to shed, or shred ... I was able to build upon a God of great love.
I have not had to deconstruct too much... although memorizing the Heidelberg would be at the top of my list of useless time spent... and a commitment to a certain political party would be another...
While born and baptized a Presbyterian (Sheboygan, WI), I grew up in the RCA - I attended public schools in Wisconsin, and then, with my family's move to GR, I attend GRCHS, Calvin College, and then Western Seminary. I was ordained in the PCUSA in Jan. 1970. My background was not quite as "demanding" as those who grew up in the CRC. I chuckled re your note about "memorizing" ... and felt distress on the "commitment to a certain political party," (something that has always disturbed me about some of the Dutch who came to this country and their descendants. I suspect they brought racism with them from the Netherlands and its colonial heritage, and a distrust of "big government," along with the distorted notion of wealth proves God's blessing and approval). Thanks for the note ...
Ryan's life experience is honored with your writing. Apart from anything else, I read & hear the the kingdom of God embodied in his life, in his humanity. Thank you Ryan for your willingness to be seen.(and I am humbled)
Thank you for these important words, Kristin, and for including Ryan's and Len's words. (BTW, Len and I were in school together from kindergarten through college; it was clear way back when that he would be a leader. I'm grateful that he continues to lead.
I’ve appreciated your discerning (and compassionate) thoughts on this issue. Very well put. And I don’t remember if it was you or Randy B who had shared a link to one your church’s sermons - but they’re really quite lovely. I’ll often listen to them midweek while doing afternoon paperwork. :)
I also don’t think of myself as deconstructing because I wasn’t raised Christian. So I wasn’t formed by 80’s/90’s/00’s evangelical culture, I was formed by the non-Christian faith of my childhood and by the progressive/gay world of my late teens and 20’s (and I feel like I deconstructed *that* world).
I was not prepared for how much being a Christian, as a woman in a same-sex marriage with kids, would bring up every vulnerability I have ever had around rejection. So good for people like Ryan who can stay and try to change things.
Thanks for reposting Ryan’s poignant words and Len’s fine exploration of Matt. 11. I am struck by Jesus’ invitation to “Take my yolk upon you…For my yoke is easy and my burden light.” When we incarnate Jesus, when we love as Jesus loves, that’s light work filled with joy.
Thank you for this! I have had so many unsatisfying conversations on this topic with relatives and this post with Ryan's, Len's and your perspective helps me to articulate my swirling thoughts. You are all gifted communicators and that helps the rest of us to advocate for others!
"Being yoked to Jesus means he will stick with us. Sometimes we will have choices to make about what it means to follow him, and we will not know for sure what way to go. But we can be sure of one thing. Even if our choices turn out to be the wrong ones, he remains at our side and will tug us back to the right path."
I needed to be reminded of this... thanks for sharing a part of the ministry of Len with us.
Let me start with three bits of full disclosure. 1) I was raised Catholic, went through an extended period of agnosticism, and was received a few years back into the Episcopal church. 2) Relatively late in life, I decided to acknowledge that I was a transgender woman and to "own it", transitioning about the same time as I re-embraced Christianity. 3) I am Jesuit-trained in philosophy (Fordham PhD.), and if you ask my friends and colleagues, might in fact be OVER-trained in it.....
Reading your post, I was intrigued about the meaning of "deconstructionism" in an Evangelical Christian context. While I am not a follower of the philosophy of Jacques Derrida, the ur-figure of deconstruction, I realize that he is a philosopher who is often misunderstood (sometimes wilfully so), and then looked up what I could about religious "deconstruction" to see what connections it had with Derrida and his acolytes, and whether it tracked with a generous and accurate appraisal of Derrida himself.
I'm still pretty unsure about all this, and why it's controversial. It seems to me that "deconstructing" one's faith is little more than subjecting it to analysis and critique, which is nothing new and as much Socratic as it is Derridian. Moreover -- and maybe this is my Jesuitical side shining through -- I fail to see how this could be construed as even potentially a BAD thing. I'm sure I'm missing something: any help as to resources for understanding deconstruction as a movement within Evangelicalism would be appreciated.
One reason I think critical re-evaluation of one's faith commitment, even approaching RUTHLESS critique, is a good thing is that it also can work in the other direction: this was certainly true in my own case. I was motivated to leave Roman Catholicism because I believed that it was incompatible with a deep commitment to a philosophical way of life. I began to "deconstruct" these convictions after the 2016 election of a man who seemed at antipodes to basic human decency, not to mention loyalty to the liberal republican democracy he pledged to serve. Even more disturbing: his most fervent supporters were self-professed Christians. This smacked of idolatry to me, and since "idolatry" is an ineluctably theological concept, it prompted me to re-read Christian theologians I encountered along the way, in particular Barth and Bonhoeffer, whose witness was centered around the idolatrous identification of the Christian God with the nation and the "herrenvolk." It changed me. So deconstruction -- or critical re-evaluation of one's core, life-constituting convictions -- can cut both ways.
That this ties into the gender transition, that was brewing at about the same time, is no accident either. I don't want to give the impression that I was just "shopping around" for a faith-community hospitable to my identification as a trans woman. I found the Episcopal church -- or rather it found me -- largely because I concluded that its ecclesiology was right, it's "via media" between Protestantism and Catholicism was on the mark, and it's conviction that the practice of worship and the quality of liturgy was at the heart of its tradition ("lex orandi lex credendi") was aligned with what I always thought was true. But my admitting to myself that I was trans and deciding to stop evading it is not UNrelated to the direction my conversion took. The REconstruction following the DEconstruction of my prior core convictions made sense to me. Which is why the Episcopal church is now my spiritual home.
I can understand why many LGBTQ members of Reformed (or Catholic) traditions would want to remain in their denominations; I also can understand why some would want to change or even leave altogether. What I am having trouble understanding is why this PROCESS of "deconstructive" critique, which is also SELF critique, might be problematic. I am sure I am missing some salient point, but I am not sure what it is. (Philosophy does that to you.....)
Keep up the good work, Prof. DuMez. Big fan of your work. ---Laura Nelson
I think both the affirming & non-affirming sides need a much more robust understanding of what it means to be made in the image of God.
For the affirming side: it doesn't mean being in a committed, lifelong sexual partnership (marriage). It also doesn't mean living without unfulfilled longings.
I think all affirming Christians would do well to read Wesley Hill's book Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality.
For the non-affirming side: it doesn't mean "converting" to heterosexuality, in order to even have human dignity and access to God's grace.
If you're a heterosexual Christian who believes that gay sex is sinful, then foster the mindset of Philippians 2:3 (in humility, value others above yourselves), and don't give heterosexual sins infinite mulligans while condemning gay people.
Keep C.S. Lewis in mind, who wrote, "Ever since I served as an infantryman in the first world war I have had a great dislike of people who, themselves in ease and safety, issue exhortations to men in the front line. As a result I have a reluctance to say much about temptations to which I myself am not exposed. No man, I suppose, is tempted to every sin."
I think all non-affirming Christians would do well to read Bridget Eileen Rivera's book Heavy Burdens: Seven Ways LGBTQ Christians Experience Harm in the Church.
Being made in the image of God means that marriage is not essential to human dignity and worth. (Related: evangelicals often have a lousy theology of singleness.)
Is that what any gay advocates are saying though? We’re not saying marriage is essential to human worth, we are saying that forced celibacy is damaging and gay relationships can be healthy and holy.
Thank you Prof Du Mez. You continue to inform and inspire me. It's always troubled me that we believers are the last people any LGBTQ person would seek out for help or advice, or just for acceptance. I feel that our "message" to them has always reflected ungrace. Thank you for sharing Ryan's story here and I will share with others also.
Kristin, on this pivotal issue for all Christians right now, I think you have just hit the ball out of the ballpark with your biblical, reasoned, compassionate perspective!
Thank you for being such a strong voice, and a brave one. And thank you for the link to Ryan's story. What a writer, and what a story. Should be compulsory reading by every Synod 2023 delegate.
The pain caused by the "righteous ones" ... their perfect binary world has to be defended tooth and claw ... and, yes, for some, "deconstruction" is the only way forward, but for others, as noted here by Dr. Du Mez, it's a matter of building upon the good that was offered, and that's the point, I suppose, "the good" was offered. Here's where Reformed Orthodoxy has always possessed the energy of progress, even as it could be used for repression.
Well said. I'm not against "deconstruction" as necessary, I've just never felt it characterizes my own faith journey. For me, my path does feel like a long walk in the same direction.
That's certainly been my sense of it ... as best as I can tell, there was nothing I had to shed, or shred ... I was able to build upon a God of great love.
I have not had to deconstruct too much... although memorizing the Heidelberg would be at the top of my list of useless time spent... and a commitment to a certain political party would be another...
While born and baptized a Presbyterian (Sheboygan, WI), I grew up in the RCA - I attended public schools in Wisconsin, and then, with my family's move to GR, I attend GRCHS, Calvin College, and then Western Seminary. I was ordained in the PCUSA in Jan. 1970. My background was not quite as "demanding" as those who grew up in the CRC. I chuckled re your note about "memorizing" ... and felt distress on the "commitment to a certain political party," (something that has always disturbed me about some of the Dutch who came to this country and their descendants. I suspect they brought racism with them from the Netherlands and its colonial heritage, and a distrust of "big government," along with the distorted notion of wealth proves God's blessing and approval). Thanks for the note ...
Ryan's life experience is honored with your writing. Apart from anything else, I read & hear the the kingdom of God embodied in his life, in his humanity. Thank you Ryan for your willingness to be seen.(and I am humbled)
Thank you for these important words, Kristin, and for including Ryan's and Len's words. (BTW, Len and I were in school together from kindergarten through college; it was clear way back when that he would be a leader. I'm grateful that he continues to lead.
I’ve appreciated your discerning (and compassionate) thoughts on this issue. Very well put. And I don’t remember if it was you or Randy B who had shared a link to one your church’s sermons - but they’re really quite lovely. I’ll often listen to them midweek while doing afternoon paperwork. :)
We probably both did. :) I'm incredibly grateful for my church.
I also don’t think of myself as deconstructing because I wasn’t raised Christian. So I wasn’t formed by 80’s/90’s/00’s evangelical culture, I was formed by the non-Christian faith of my childhood and by the progressive/gay world of my late teens and 20’s (and I feel like I deconstructed *that* world).
I was not prepared for how much being a Christian, as a woman in a same-sex marriage with kids, would bring up every vulnerability I have ever had around rejection. So good for people like Ryan who can stay and try to change things.
I offer whatever embrace or encouraging words that will heal... may God's peace & presence be with you.
Thank you! That’s very kind.
Thanks for reposting Ryan’s poignant words and Len’s fine exploration of Matt. 11. I am struck by Jesus’ invitation to “Take my yolk upon you…For my yoke is easy and my burden light.” When we incarnate Jesus, when we love as Jesus loves, that’s light work filled with joy.
Thank you for this! I have had so many unsatisfying conversations on this topic with relatives and this post with Ryan's, Len's and your perspective helps me to articulate my swirling thoughts. You are all gifted communicators and that helps the rest of us to advocate for others!
Thank you for gentle and insightful comments from Ryan, Len, and you. It’s a wonderful piece.
I the Native Americans have it right with two-spirited. They are honored as they can speak from 2 perspectives.
"Being yoked to Jesus means he will stick with us. Sometimes we will have choices to make about what it means to follow him, and we will not know for sure what way to go. But we can be sure of one thing. Even if our choices turn out to be the wrong ones, he remains at our side and will tug us back to the right path."
I needed to be reminded of this... thanks for sharing a part of the ministry of Len with us.
bill
Let me start with three bits of full disclosure. 1) I was raised Catholic, went through an extended period of agnosticism, and was received a few years back into the Episcopal church. 2) Relatively late in life, I decided to acknowledge that I was a transgender woman and to "own it", transitioning about the same time as I re-embraced Christianity. 3) I am Jesuit-trained in philosophy (Fordham PhD.), and if you ask my friends and colleagues, might in fact be OVER-trained in it.....
Reading your post, I was intrigued about the meaning of "deconstructionism" in an Evangelical Christian context. While I am not a follower of the philosophy of Jacques Derrida, the ur-figure of deconstruction, I realize that he is a philosopher who is often misunderstood (sometimes wilfully so), and then looked up what I could about religious "deconstruction" to see what connections it had with Derrida and his acolytes, and whether it tracked with a generous and accurate appraisal of Derrida himself.
I'm still pretty unsure about all this, and why it's controversial. It seems to me that "deconstructing" one's faith is little more than subjecting it to analysis and critique, which is nothing new and as much Socratic as it is Derridian. Moreover -- and maybe this is my Jesuitical side shining through -- I fail to see how this could be construed as even potentially a BAD thing. I'm sure I'm missing something: any help as to resources for understanding deconstruction as a movement within Evangelicalism would be appreciated.
One reason I think critical re-evaluation of one's faith commitment, even approaching RUTHLESS critique, is a good thing is that it also can work in the other direction: this was certainly true in my own case. I was motivated to leave Roman Catholicism because I believed that it was incompatible with a deep commitment to a philosophical way of life. I began to "deconstruct" these convictions after the 2016 election of a man who seemed at antipodes to basic human decency, not to mention loyalty to the liberal republican democracy he pledged to serve. Even more disturbing: his most fervent supporters were self-professed Christians. This smacked of idolatry to me, and since "idolatry" is an ineluctably theological concept, it prompted me to re-read Christian theologians I encountered along the way, in particular Barth and Bonhoeffer, whose witness was centered around the idolatrous identification of the Christian God with the nation and the "herrenvolk." It changed me. So deconstruction -- or critical re-evaluation of one's core, life-constituting convictions -- can cut both ways.
That this ties into the gender transition, that was brewing at about the same time, is no accident either. I don't want to give the impression that I was just "shopping around" for a faith-community hospitable to my identification as a trans woman. I found the Episcopal church -- or rather it found me -- largely because I concluded that its ecclesiology was right, it's "via media" between Protestantism and Catholicism was on the mark, and it's conviction that the practice of worship and the quality of liturgy was at the heart of its tradition ("lex orandi lex credendi") was aligned with what I always thought was true. But my admitting to myself that I was trans and deciding to stop evading it is not UNrelated to the direction my conversion took. The REconstruction following the DEconstruction of my prior core convictions made sense to me. Which is why the Episcopal church is now my spiritual home.
I can understand why many LGBTQ members of Reformed (or Catholic) traditions would want to remain in their denominations; I also can understand why some would want to change or even leave altogether. What I am having trouble understanding is why this PROCESS of "deconstructive" critique, which is also SELF critique, might be problematic. I am sure I am missing some salient point, but I am not sure what it is. (Philosophy does that to you.....)
Keep up the good work, Prof. DuMez. Big fan of your work. ---Laura Nelson
Since I’ve read this - my heat breaks for Jeff Chu as he has tried to stay in CRC spaces even though they continue to reject him.
He’s in the RCA but similar.
Ahh I try but my born & raised non-denom brain never keeps all the schisms straight.
I think both the affirming & non-affirming sides need a much more robust understanding of what it means to be made in the image of God.
For the affirming side: it doesn't mean being in a committed, lifelong sexual partnership (marriage). It also doesn't mean living without unfulfilled longings.
I think all affirming Christians would do well to read Wesley Hill's book Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality.
For the non-affirming side: it doesn't mean "converting" to heterosexuality, in order to even have human dignity and access to God's grace.
If you're a heterosexual Christian who believes that gay sex is sinful, then foster the mindset of Philippians 2:3 (in humility, value others above yourselves), and don't give heterosexual sins infinite mulligans while condemning gay people.
Keep C.S. Lewis in mind, who wrote, "Ever since I served as an infantryman in the first world war I have had a great dislike of people who, themselves in ease and safety, issue exhortations to men in the front line. As a result I have a reluctance to say much about temptations to which I myself am not exposed. No man, I suppose, is tempted to every sin."
I think all non-affirming Christians would do well to read Bridget Eileen Rivera's book Heavy Burdens: Seven Ways LGBTQ Christians Experience Harm in the Church.
So being made in the image of God means you can’t be in a same-sex marriage?
Being made in the image of God means that marriage is not essential to human dignity and worth. (Related: evangelicals often have a lousy theology of singleness.)
Is that what any gay advocates are saying though? We’re not saying marriage is essential to human worth, we are saying that forced celibacy is damaging and gay relationships can be healthy and holy.
Realistically, what are the implications of this whole Revoice-ish set of beliefs for married gay people with kids?