Responses to Failed Disagreement

Aug 7

I’m on vacation putting some final touches on my Field Guide to Christian Disagreement. As I’m working through it, I’m wondering more and more about the various misunderstandings people have of disagreement. There are quite a few circling out there. For most, I think it’s the misunderstanding that disagreement is merely “non-agreement.”

On an experiential level, we know the difference between "non-agreement" and "disagreement." We can feel it in our gut. It could be that moment in which you exclaim, “you’re not hearing me” or “that’s not my point!” Maybe they’re playing Devil’s Advocate; maybe they’re just being obstinate. But you can tell they are saying “no” just to say “no.”

We all know that’s not disagreement. Disagreement is deeper. I’ll talk more about this—and the distinguishing features of disagreement and non-agreement—in another post. But in this post, I want to highlight a few assumptions people have and prescriptions they give when disagreement “fails.” What do they think will fix the current failure to disagree?

At least two responses are on the market (there are more, no doubt). Both “camps” assume that there are a handful of well-intentioned Christians out there who value discourse and civility and want to go beyond a mere exchange of ideas. They want to disagree and make their disagreement clear. The problem is: they end up pulling out their own hair or their interlocutor's. Why is this?

One camp concludes that this is because these “well-intentioned Christians” are ill-equipped to do it. They don’t have the tools of disagreement. So this “camp” throws techniques at these Christian disagreers. If people just knew how to disagree, they would. Their diagnosis is a kind of Socratic ignorance—give them the goods and they will definitely do it.

The other camp assumes it's because these people are weak. During crunch time they cave or capitulate. They make a spiritual misstep. So the camp exhorts them: “Don’t be tempted by winning the argument—stay the course! Be strong!” Their diagnosis is a kind of Augustinian incurvatur in se—“stop making it about you being right and remember it’s about God’s Truth.” That’ll work.

Perhaps some of these “well-intentioned Christians” do need the hammers, screwdrivers, and a measuring tape of disagreement.  There are people who don't know how to assert, argue, or when to acquiesce. And others do need to be built up and mature in their endeavors to disagree. At the end of the day, some do come under the spell of trying to be right for the sake of being right.

But I think more is needed. Some don’t know the difference between disagreement and non-agreement. Some don’t think body postures have anything to do with it. Some try to disagree with everyone. Some believe disagreement will always lead to dissension, division, and disunity. Some think demonization goes hand-in-hand with disagreement. More help is needed.

There are a lot of books out there on disagreement. Almost all of them fall into the strategies of the two “camps” mentioned above. They are doctrinal in content and devotional in approach. “Here’s how to disagree without losing your faith” (doctrinal) and “here’s some encouraging stories of Christians who survived some pretty heated disagreement—and you can too!” (devotional).

While these books have a place, I find them to be narrow in scope (e.g. the tools the individual needs) and old guard in content (e.g. here’s how to rebut an argument). Field Guide to Christian Disagreement is different. I want to help readers zoom out to see the significance of it all. Not just the purpose of disagreement but all of the other social and embodied factors that matter.

Here are a few of the topics I address:

A theology of disagreement and why the triune God wants us to disagree—especially in the church.

What is the purpose of disagreement? When do we know when it’s working?

We can’t possibly or properly disagree with everyone. So who should we disagree with and who should we avoid? Here are the “Six Devilish Disagreers” you must keep an eye on at all times.

How should we carry our bodies during a disagreement? All the gestures, postures, and moves that are key in making it work.

Where should we disagree? Places and spaces that can help foster and facilitate more than a “No!”

Advice for being chill, constructive, and charitable while being critiqued.

The cultural pitfalls of reactionary countering and wholesale canceling and how to resist them.

As I finish up the book, I’ll be posting more about these topics and layers to disagreement. I hope they are insightful and helpful. As always, feel free to disagree.