Postmodernism and Church Planting
How Derrida’s Deconstruction and Binary Oppositions Can Inform the Church Planter’s Practice
In this article we will apply Derrida’s postmodern refrain of ‘nothing outside the text,’ to the role of the church planter who seeks to attract and keep postmoderns.
Derrida’s postmodern concerns the understanding of text and its meaning. This aspect of postmodernism is relevant because much of the church’s kerygma is based around text. The text of God’s written word, liturgy and preaching are examples of the important ways in which a church planter speaks to their new congregation and the people they want to reach. Derrida’s novel idea is that texts can be ‘deconstructed’. This process is something the text does to itself, not something we do to the text. He explains,
“Deconstruction is the very means, by which to expose, reverse and dismantle binary oppositions, with their hierarchies of values; that is, to render untenable the logic which, while pitching one term against the other, fails to recognise that each term both differs from and defers to the other term”
Derrida is implying that in language has a problem because we always have to refer to another word to explain the word we are using.[1] He also implies that we have placed more importance on one part of a binary opposition (for example, equality is more important than inequality). Derrida suggest that we should not do that, because firstly, a words definition is inextricably linked to the meaning of the other word and secondly, the lower term can be seen to be as or more important than the hierarchy we have chosen. An example would be that inequality produces in people a sense of injustice, which can manifest itself as a positive act of courage to act for change not produced in the arena of equality.
Derrida says that,
“contexts are flexible and dynamic: contexts change as time and place changes, generating different meanings and interpretations”
Derrida is saying that a text has no ‘true’ meaning,[2] only the meaning we place on it.[3] This means that there are no ‘disinterested observers’ as we all read through the lens of our own opinion and/or prejudice. This flexibility of texts is the most common understanding of Postmodernism and is an important consideration for the church planter and how they use the church’s ‘texts.’
What does this have to do with Church Planting and attracting Postmoderns?
Church planters will need to consider deconstruction in the texts its uses. The first critical question is, ‘Is there any danger of the new church plant placing their own meaning onto the texts they use?’ Derrida is helpful here in pointing out that the meaning of a text is always “in context.” This suggests that the meaning the new church plant places onto a text may be slightly different from the sending denomination, for example, due to their differing contexts. Derrida says that a ‘community of interpreters’[4] has the role of agreeing the meaning of the text along with a ‘policing’ role in terms of keeping the meaning true to that community.[5] Derrida denigrates the idea, which many people have, that obscure meanings can be produced from texts or that any text can made to say anything you want it to say. For Derrida, the text can only produce legitimate meanings for that context. The church planter will have to balance the context of the new church plant with the context of the sending denomination and may need to prioritise. This community led interpretation promotes the inclusiveness of the new church plant, but is not without issues.
A critical question that needs to be considered is, ‘Can a community of like-minded individuals agree on something that is in opposition with the sending denomination?’ Derrida implies that this is entirely possible if the community reads texts deconstructively. These texts may reveal that the sending denomination has placed a hierarchy on a binary opposition which does not fit with the new church planting community’s interpretation. An example is the hierarchy some churches place on tradition over word. This could be overturned by the church planter who believes that the word has been subordinated by tradition and should become more prominent than tradition. Postmoderns would say this is a positive step forward, but there are pitfalls to be aware of in promoting word over tradition.[6]
The church planter would be wise to firstly examine or question the hierarchies of the sending denomination to ascertain how they fit the context of the new church plant. At this stage it would be wise not to exchange the places of the binary opposition’s location in the hierarchy for the new community, as this would not remove the binary oppositions only invert them. It would be wiser to raise the subordinate, so that word and tradition have equal prominence. This is a difficult task, as in certain situations, one will be preferred over the other. At this point, for postmoderns, it would be preferable for the community to decide which one (word or tradition) speaks better into certain situations. This can lead to an examination of words and concepts that may have been subordinated by a denomination’s tradition.
A danger to be aware of in extreme cases is that problems may arise if a church plant focusses entirely on attracting one group or type of people. If this group interprets a passage that fits with the group’s ideals, this may attract more likeminded people. The church then becomes fixed in its interpretative stance on a single issue, creating a cycle which ends in a homogenous church of like-minded people. The church planter must use wisdom when examining and moving forward from binary oppositions.
In conclusion, Derrida’s deconstruction can reveal hidden binary oppositions from the sending denomination needing critical evaluation by the church planter. It should also make them aware of the issues when the ‘community of interpreters’ places their own meaning onto a text in their context.
[1] In looking at a definition of a term in a dictionary, it refers us to other words and their definition, which refer to others and so on ad infinitum.
[2] Caputo, J., What would Jesus deconstruct? The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), p. 47.
[3] Stetzer, E., Planting New Churches in a Postmodern Age (Nashville, TE: Broadman and Holman, 2003), p. 123.
[4] Smith, p.53.
[5] A Biblical example is the meeting in Acts 15 where texts regarding Gentiles are interpreted by the community in their own context, which bring about the decision to include Gentiles without circumcision.
[6] For example, in extreme circumstances it can lead to what Smith calls ‘primitivism’ where the new church plant goes back to the first century church to apply the principles there, ignoring twenty centuries of contextual application of God’s word to inform tradition.
Stephen Kemp
Stephen is currently completing a Theology degree at St. Hild College, with research interests in Biblical languages and reaching men with the gospel. Prior to this he was a Secondary Science teacher for 25 years. He is based in Sheffield with his wonderful wife Kathryn and three girls.
