My MTh thesis had the word "deconstructionist" in it. Deconstruction is one of the most useful things I have learnt. Here is a text (below) which describes a transition in a Church -- and lends itself unusually well to deconstruction. First, pick out some obvious statements: programs were "difficult to sustain", the transition brought about "profound change", and so on. These words reveal a lot -- all the more so when one contrasts them with what one calls "oppositions", or opposites. The oppositions of other words reveal more: the word "unifying" points to conflict, the word "purpose" suggests drift, and so on. I speak loosely -- an actual deconstructionist critique would be systematic.
"At the time of this transition of pastoral leadership, Cedar Ridge had grown to include several hundred people and was supporting many activities, ministries and programs that were difficult to sustain in terms of resources and staff, and there was an increasing recognition that a central, unifying focus was needed. Seeking greater clarity and purpose for the future, yet desiring at the same time to maintain its underlying values and beliefs, the people of Cedar Ridge engaged together in an intense year of 're-envisioning the church.' This time was both difficult and rewarding. It meant profound change as old systems and programs were released to make way for something new, and also provided opportunity for personal transformation as participants engaged in discernment, fasting, sacrifice and prayer."
No comments:
Post a Comment