On being a post-postmodern Christian
A “post-postmodern Christian”. What does that even mean? It could mean anything, really. Among academics there is a
growing consensus that postmodernism is a thing of the past. But if we have grown beyond postmodernism, where are we? Some academics have suggested the term “post-postmodern”. Many hate that term, pointing out its inadequacies, and have suggested other terms, and yet these terms seem to fit some fields of study and not others. So I just go with “post-postmodern”.
So what do I mean by that? In a very simplified form, how I use the term looks like this:
Enlightenment - Truth is knowable. Using the scientific method, theoretically we will eventually discover all truth in an objective manner.
Postmodernism - Truth, if it exists, is not knowable. All we can know is our perceptions of the world, totally constructed out of each person’s unique perspective. There is no objectivity. All “truth” is formulated by those in power, often to the conscious or unconscious oppression of those not in power. To empower the marginalized we must see the dominant explanations for what they are and give equal, or preferential, value to the world constructs of the oppressed.
Post-postmodernism - There is truth, but the best we can do is approximate it because our perceptions are strongly biased by our perspectives. Truth is objective, but we can only know it subjectively. We must value the traditional worldviews insomuch as they have grasped some aspects of truth, but we must also critically evaluate the aspects of traditional worldviews for biases designed to entrench the power of the dominant culture that promoted them.
So a “post-postmodern Christian”? Let’s just say that I reject the idea that deep truths can be understood by the scientific method. There’s much more to this world than can be empirically validated. There is a spiritual element to this world. And I reject the strands of postmodernism that say that we must reject all religion because it is just an invention to establish and maintain power. As a post-postmodern Christian I both embrace and reject religion. I embrace the wisdom of the ages that has perceived the life of spirit and has honestly tried to understand the deeper things of the world. At the same time I acknowledge that while there have been sincere spiritual guides down through history, there have also been devious religious leaders who have manipulated dogma for their own advantage. As well, there have been sincere religious leaders who have mislead others by mistaking their own psychological structures for “God’s truth”.
A simple analogy: There are many parents who abuse their children. But of instead of rejecting the whole idea of parenthood, I embrace the value of parenthood, and put down abusive parenting as deriving from psychological distortions, or even evil. Abusive parenting is antithetical to what parenting is really about. With Christianity I embrace all that is good and beautiful, and I seek to filter out the evil that has been done in Christ’s name. Violent and oppressive Christianity is antithetical to what Christ is really about.
But here’s where I have a problem with the term post-postmodern. It sounds like a 21st Century development. Actually, it pre-dates enlightenment and postmodernism. The principle I outlined above is, after all, what the Protestant Reformation employed. And it is the principle employed by the Catholic Church’s response to the Reformation – the Council of Trent. And it didn’t start there. You read it in Jesus’ words and actions throughout the Gospels. In fact, it is the basic principle of cognitive growth and of posttraumatic growth, as I touch on in my book, Losing Your Faith and Finding God: “thesis-antithesis-synthesis”.
Post-postmodern Christianity, then, is an attitude of being critical of one’s own faith in order to root out what is not of God, critically embracing the good in our faith tradition, and being open to other expressions of faith in order to enrich a deeper perception of God.
