Shame: I Want To Live Without You

Shame is a painful emotional experience. It has become so painful that some are trying to redefine the human condition so that they can free themselves from shame's shackles and live without it. And that was recently the expressed concern of the board chairman of the Gospel Coalition, Kevin DeYoung (click here for a bio).

DeYoung laments over the recent modern attempts to define shame out of existence. He rightfully talks about its necessity in the Christian life because of our sinfulness and our need for feeling it for it drives to the cross (click here for his article).

However, DeYoung acknowledges that not all shame is Biblically-friendly shame. For he briefly mentions 'misplaced shame'--that is feeling unnecessary shame, Unnecessary shame is felt when we feel bad about things for which we have no responsibility or reason to feel responsible for. But then he quickly returns to a discussion of what he calls 'well-placed shame' and encourages people to feel its full effects.

The brief mention of misplaced shame indicates a recognition that today's avoidance of shame might be due to either the misuse of shame by past and present leaders or the wrongful employment of shame by sincere believers. And one hopes that is the case. Regardless of that possibility, DeYoung does not fully address legitimate reasons why some are avoiding shame at all costs.

We should note that DeYoung seems to define shame as negative feelings for having done something wrong. And that imprecise definition is one reason why he is not adequately addressing the misuses of shame and how they might contribute to the avoidance of it.

So to add to DeYoung's article on shame, a better working definition is needed. And here, if we check the Meriam-Webster Dictionary, we can discover both a good and bad definitions of shame. The good definition describes how we should feel when having failed God. The bad definition describes how we should not feel regardless of having failed God.
 
How does the Merriam-Webster Dictionary define the word 'shame'? What will be done here is to contrast the first two definitions (click here for the source):

1. a painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety
2. a condition of humiliating disgrace or disrepute

There is a subtle difference between the two definitions. While the first definition makes no indication of referencing others as at least a partial reason for feeling pain, the second definition does. In other words, while the first definition describes how we might feel when reflecting on a failure without reference to or comparison with others, the second definition definitely talks about how our consciousness of others comes into play when feeling shame. The second definition indicates that a source for negative feelings comes from feeling inferior to others.

That second definition of shame is probably a reason why many of today's younger people seek to live a shame-free life. And when we look at the Scriptures, such an avoidance of shame should be viewed as unnecessary. For the feeling of such shame may, in most cases, not be a biblically sanctioned kind of shame. To make our case here, one only needs to turn to the parable of the two men praying (see Luke 18:9-14) where the tax collector, in contrast to the Pharisee, is overwhelmed with shame. But in expressing his contrition, he makes no mention of the Pharisee and how he had fallen short of the standards set by the Pharisee. Rather, his sadness was due solely to having only failed God.

Shame that revolves around feeling inferior to others, besides not really being a Biblical approved shame, often sabotages a person's attempts to repent. For such shame leads to a strong sense of alienation and a reluctance to reach out for help or even the inability to adequately admit one's failures. And thus it seems right that people should attempt to live without this kind of shame. The only shame here in avoiding this kind of shame is reducing the definition of shame to this kind of shame. And this kind of shame might lead to another reason why today's people are seeking to live a life without shame.

DeYoung fails to mention that, all to often, excessive shame is expected of people who have experienced moral failures. Now because of the seriousness of sin and God's holiness, some might look on sin as my youngest granddaughter views chocolate. For just as she believes that one cannot have too much chocolate, so some well-meaning fellow religiously conservative Christians believe that we can feel too much shame for our sins. But excessive shame too can sabotage attempts to change oneself.

We can experience excessive shame from what DeYoung calls misplaced-shame, or from the kind of shame that comes from feeling inferior to others, or from the efforts of others or ourselves to feel as much legitimate shame as possible. Excessive shame can end up being nothing more than an effort to punish ourselves to the extent as a way of compensating for our failures and wrongdoings.

When what was legitimately accepted in the past is wholly rejected by current generation, it is usually due to its misuse. We see that in Post Modernism where the metanarratives of both Pre Modernism and Modernism  have been totally rejected because both have been used to visit great injustices on people. Thus, whatever valid points found in those metanarratives are easily discarded along with what is false because of how they were used opportunistically to hurt and exploit people. So too, as we see many of today's people try to live without shame, it is all but certain that the Church, which deals with shame, has misused significantly causing people to feel either unnecessary shame or excessive shame.

There is really nothing terribly wrong with what's in DeYoung's article. His article is both an easy and worthwhile read. But he could have done a better job explaining why some people today seek to live shame-free lives.