Why the RPCNA pushes shame and doesn't understand joy

 

Having read a lot of books on shame (Chronic Shame by Patricia DeYoung is a good example) and most recently a book on Joy (The 4 Habits of Joy-Filled People by Marcus Warner and Chris Coursey), I want to piece together why NAPARC churches, and the RPCNA specifically, are stuck on a fear loop and unable to teach their members a joy-filled life.

Throughout life, when we experience trauma, we often need others to come beside us and help us deal with the intense emotions.

The Fear Loop:

One approach to dealing with trauma involves rejection. Often, rejection stems from believing that certain emotions are evil or are an incorrect response to the situation. Maybe we see a child who is crying because the Mac-n-Cheese was homemade and not from a box. Rejection can take multiple forms from direct threats to non-helpful verse quoting, but the point is ultimately that their strong emotions are not welcome.

"If you can't stop crying, I'll give you something to cry about"

"Your dad is in a better place now. No reason to be upset."

"All things work together for good"

"This too shall pass"

"It's been a month since that happened. Time to move on."

There's a lot of complexity to the effect of rejection (see Chronic Shame). Essentially, our right brains are looking for a connection with our caregiver, authority or friend, and when we are rejected, our left brains fill in the blanks with the only theory possible - that the rejection is rational and that there is something wrong with us. (DeYoung calls this left-brain response "shame")

Since we are communal beings who want to fit in, we learn to suppress trauma so that we do not suffer rejection. This suppression has negative consequences. It leads to anxiety, "chronic" shame, and fear of rejection. It can cause adverse health conditions.

I think that this loop is the experience of many lifelong RPs, and a pretty typical experience within our American culture. Rejection is a natural response to, a screaming child, or an angry parent or whatever thing breaks the peace. We want that to go away, and rejection is the simplest approach. We couch that rejection in religious terms, and now God is part of the fear loop. We're taught that our strong emotions don't belong in the throne room of God, and since we approach God's throne in prayer, our prayers need to be positive.

When I've experienced "Joy" taught in a fear cycle church, it's taught in a completely repressed or dissociative sense. In other words, joy is what we experience when we suppress our natural emotions for the "good" of the community. Joy is a pasted-on smile.

There is a lot of talk about churches "grooming" people for abuse. This is a mechanism by which spiritually abusive churches groom their members. The members are trained, by continual rejection, that their strong emotions are problematic. They are not trained to understand and deal with the emotions, but rather suppress them in the name of the peace of the church. When an evil person comes along, they know that members of these "fear cycle" churches have suppressed their natural defenses against evil people, in the supposed name of Jesus. People lose their ability to discern the difference between pastors and wolves because they are using the same techniques (fear manipulation) to motivate change in the church.

Ultimately, the fear/shame loop teaches an incorrect view of God and an incorrect view of humanity. We see God as the scowling judge, and not as our loving father. No matter how we shove our emotions and paste on a smile, we know we are never pleasing. We look at our peers with contempt and distrust, because our hurts and pains are never important enough to be reconciled. Instead, visible peace must be preserved at all costs, even if it means I hate my fellow church member for what they did to me, but I know that the church will discipline me for my "uncharitable spirit" if I ever bring it up.

The Joy Loop:

A different way of dealing with trauma is mirroring. Whether we agree with the cause of the strong emotions or not, our first step is to respect the humanity of this person by being present. Job's friends sat with him for a week helping him process these emotions before they started questioning whether the emotions came from truth or falsehood. For children, it might be saying something like, "I see that you are really really angry." - naming the emotion. We want their whole brain (see The Whole-Brain Child by Siegel and Bryson) to be engaged in processing the emotion.

I think this is shown in scripture. We don't believe in a God that, like the fear cycle teaches, is somehow unable and unwilling to deal with our strong emotions. Quite the opposite. We believe in a God who wants us to pour out our hurt and pain, our joy, whatever is on our hearts, to him, and we believe that same God calls us to do the same for others as we represent him. Even if we are unable to listen, we can be honest.

"I understand you are hurting and you deserve help, but I'm too busy right now." 

"That's a huge burden! I'd love to help, but I'm emotionally spent."

Maybe we sound like we're uncaring, but what is more uncaring, being honest or saying something trite to put their burden back on their shoulders with the added confusion that something must be wrong with them?

The joy loop isn't easier. It's more difficult, in my opinion. We humans, by nature, are going to avoid the pain and commitment of walking beside someone as they process their trauma. It takes a second to reject someone, but maybe hours or weeks to sit with them and hear their story.

However, God has modeled the joy loop and set it as the pattern for how we operate as a church. We're told if one member suffers, we all suffer. That isn't a fear cycle statement. In the fear cycle, one member suffers and the rest say, "suck it up and put a smile on your face!" God asks us to do the hard things. True reconciliation, true restoration. We don't slap a band-aid on trauma so we can "move on".

I was in a church situation, unfortunately, I was young, opinionated and abrasive. The church was split over some important issues, but nothing that was "fundamental". Instead of acknowledging the strong emotions, having adult conversations and perhaps compromising, or at worst, parting ways as brothers, each side launched into an underground proxy war. First, elder candidates were scrutinized about their beliefs, and, in response, became evasive and defensive lest they say something that would cause open war. Then the session made some decisions that were not popular, causing complaints to presbytery. The pastor kept saying, "we need to move on." It was awful, and as I look back, the whole thing was important, but I'm sure we could have figured out a compromise if we first acknowledged the strong emotions and asked for understanding and clarity.

When emotions are accepted, then that gives us the time and space to process those emotions instead of repressing them. Maybe we acknowledge that we overreacted, or that the emotion came from some incorrect understanding or wrong belief. This happens so much in marriage!!! Once we process the emotions, we can return to joy. Not a "suck it up and paste a smile on joy", but a joy in understanding that we matter.

In my opinion, this teaches a faithful view of God. God wipes tears away, not by shoving them back in my eyes, but by bringing justice and reconciliation. He isn't afraid to dive into my trauma and turmoil. God does not want me to repress who I am, but wants the true me, the me he created, to shine forth. In the same way, it is more important for the church to weigh into the hurts and the disagreements and the trauma than to hide the truth from the congregation or the outside.

Legalism:

When people call the RPCNA "legalistic", pastors are correct that it is not technically "legalism". Legalism supposedly means that members would have to believe that they are saved by their works. Instead, legalism is more appropriately a church that, for one reason or another, is using a fear/shame cycle to goad its members into external righteousness. The Pharisees were likely legalistic in a similar sense, because of what Jesus says about them. Externally righteous, but internally filthy. The ones who knew better or should have known better are shutting the door to those who would enter.

It's not surprising that some of the issues coming before Synod this year are about sessions using their "authority" to cover up uncomfortable truths and to maintain control of the narrative.