I was talking with a much respected pastor friend recently who suggested that what may actually be happening in the church at present is not ‘de-construction’ but actually ‘de-struction’.

An interesting observation and a valid concern… so I thought I’d take a few minutes to think out loud about what the differences may be between the two.

(For those unfamiliar with the idea of ‘de-construction’, my layman’s explanation is that its to do with exactly what it says – de-constructing or disassembling what we are familiar with in terms of church life and structure – but ultimately (hopefully) with a view to re-construction – putting the essential and vital components back together in a way that has biblical integrity  and reflects the true nature of church.)

So what might be the differences between the ‘de’s’?…

·         First up I have a feeling that attitude and intent has a heap to do with what is experienced. If the attitude to the established church is ‘you’re a bunch of idiots and wouldn’t know a church if you fell over one’ then its more than likely destruction. Harsh hurtful criticism (or even inane whinging) and mindless demolition of ‘the church’ is not helpful to anyone – and is way too easy to do in a context where most congregations are struggling.

·         I also have a sense that de-struction pulls apart the old with little regard for what may be valuable and worth retaining. It tips baby and bathwater down the gurgler. De-construction is aware that there is a baby in there that we need to be able to find and protect, because the baby is of great valuable.

·         It’s possible – and likely that de-struction will have little, if any long term value – it will simply leave an ugly mess for another generation to clean up. Whereas de-construction, while painful, may actually give birth to new forms and expressions that ultimately are more healthy and true than what went before.

·         Maybe its also possible that de-struction is so intent on reform that it ignores the people toll in its scathing bombardments (friendly fire perhaps?) Whereas I imagine de-construction to be about walking with the people thru the change and hopefully growing with them. Destructive types seem to talk about the church as ‘them’ whereas ‘de-constructionists’ speak of church as ‘us’.

·         And then I’d have to say that de-struction can probably be accomplished by anyone. It doesn’t take too much grey matter to swing a sledgehammer. On the other hand de-construction requires some degree of thoughtful informed action. And if its with a view to re-construction then it will require a sharp mind, a well formed biblical ecclesiology and a healthy imagination.

Just a few thoughts… If you have any others then I’d like to hear them. Having said all that I haven’t offered my take on what I see happening, but my guess is that it’s probably a bit of both. When people are discontent its easy to pull out the wrecking ball and I have observed a fair bit of demolition work. I think I’ve also been involved with people who are further down the track, who are concerned with the issues I mentioned above and who are seeking with integrity to re-construct/re-imagine/re-discover what it means to be the church again.

Its not an easy line to walk and I sense that anyone with a cynical streak will be prone to de-structive tendencies!

Unfortunately even de-construction is painful (particularly for those of us who are long term churchies). But it’s a vital process for us to embrace if we want to see the bride looking as beautiful as she can be and if we want to re-connect with a world that sees us largely as a relic of a bygone era.