Passive Aggressive Dissent: It’s a Trap

Passive Aggressive Dissent: It’s a Trap May 3, 2015

I know how to hold any view in Evangelical churches and remain in good standing.

This process of passive aggressive dissent is so effective that in the hands of a winsome person it can be used to allow “good standing” while doing almost anything and believing almost anything. The exceptions will be actions or beliefs that are viewed as vile by both the Evangelical culture and the Democratic Party. These beliefs or actions will be condemned and you will be unable to get any traction trying to change Evangelical minds. If you want to dissent and have a career, with very little work, you need a belief that Evangelicals reject, but American secular elites accept.

This kitty is not dead. Don't be judgemental.
This kitty is not dead. Don’t be judgemental.

For example, if you wish to dissent from the American consensus on monarchy or a church state give it up.  Mainstream Evangelicalism will never accept you and there is no process that will help achieve that acceptance.

Under no circumstance listen to the voice of the global church. Make sure your concerns remain American Evangelical concerns as filtered through your American experience and that you react only to them in a way that fits the educational elite in America and Western Europe. You might think this will get you in trouble with Evangelicals and it will, but you can make an entire comfortable career out of this struggle.

Oppose all colonialism but educational colonialism.

Since Americans are more likely to struggle with dissent from the American establishment rather than “foreign” Christians, we need not worry about the global church nearly as much as one might think.

Finally, do not worry if the church has considered your heresy or bad practice many times. When you drag the desiccated body of your heresy or sin out in public, ask how we know it is dead? Always suggest that some nuance makes it it different this time. Always pretend that an advance in science now tells us what we ought to do. 

Say this: “It is true that this idea was rejected many times in church history, but it is not dead yet. Science has advanced, space shuttles and stuff, and the old ideas do not fit my experience.”

Then follow this sure process to allow any dissent on practice or doctrine.

First, find a doctrine or practice that non-Evangelical theologians have attacked or changed. Make sure that this dissent is the sort backed by people likely to vote for the Democratic Party. Make sure the focus is on any push back on your change of views. Your view may be such that nobody dissenting could be hired at a secular school, but if somebody challenges you at an Evangelical school make much of it.

Struggle with this doctrine, especially in an Evangelical college or context. Generally one should avoid any further  formal education so that one can go on being angry about the doctrine in a simplistic manner. Under no circumstance consider simply leaving for the many other church options.

Second, develop a group, however small, of Evangelicals who dissent from the view. The good news for them is that even if few have heard of them before they dissent, the New York Times will declare them a “leading evangelical voice” and you can use this often. If you actually land a leading Evangelical voice, your work will be much easier.

Third, if this group is younger than average, proclaim that your view is the future.

Fourth, ask for a dialog on this issue.

If dialog is rejected, because this is a settled issue, move to five. If dialog begins, make sure the dialog always ends with an affirmation that you are an Evangelical in good standing. We just disagree on this issue. Always compare your disagreement to eschatological disagreements. 

Five, develop a few Evangelical “leaders” who dissent from the theology or practice. Announce that dialog should not be closed in an area of disagreement. Dialog and make sure that the dialog ends with an affirmation that you are brother or sister in Christ who just disagrees on this issue.

Six, as you dialog keep the issue narrow. Do not let the implications for epistemology, anthropology, or other parts of theology become part of the discussion. Keep the topic focussed on a particular implication of the change you advocate.

Seven, tell your story often.  If it is not allowed to trump exegesis, church history, or reason, look sad. Ask why the Evangelical church always shoots her wounded. Don’t consider whether your story might not be enough for millions of people to change their mind.

This process can be repeated almost on any issue. At the end of step six, one generally has two options. The dissident can make an entire career out of being the minority in a tough place (dialog with Evangelicals) or one can consume huge amounts of Evangelical time and then leave for a non-Evangelical church. Both of these strategies can be applied with effect.

Under no circumstance recall that Saint Paul and the Church Fathers would refuse to fellowship with Christians who practiced gross sins and encouraged other to do so. Under no circumstance remember that Saint Paul and the Church Fathers would not fellowship with heretics. Make every issue about not “majoring on the minors” even if no major Christian leader before 2000 would have thought the issue minor.

This method works and it will help you to make a career. That it may damn your soul is a mere inconvenience as you can simply try this process before the Judgement Seat of Christ on the Last Day. I cannot guarantee results there.

 


Browse Our Archives