The title of this post is a rhetorical question asked by a young man who joined our church several years ago. He had grown up in a family that acknowledged as a matter of doctrine that they were sinners but acted as if they never committed sins. When this young man went to his parents to talk about his doubts about faith and struggles with sin, he received theological answers rather than pastoral care. When he tried to talk with his parents about shortcomings in his upbringing, his parents were unwilling to sincerely admit to errors or weaknesses in their parenting. People at his home church never talked about struggling with sins, or at least non-respectable sins. Probably this young man was not completely accurate in his perception of his family and home church, but it seems likely that there is considerable truth in his assessment. My wife and I tried to give him a home away from home with our family, but sadly he abandoned the faith, left our church, and stopped responding to our communication.
I think the core aspects of what this young man experienced are widespread in conservative Reformed churches. It may seem odd that people who formally believe total depravity and full grace and forgiveness in Christ have such a difficult time sincerely acknowledging that they are corrupt sinners, but there it is. Perhaps pastors hear about peopleās sins, but the typical member does not. Instead, our churches appear to be filled with nearly righteous people who just need some rough edges smoothed off. I suppose we could call this a revised version of Pharisaism, except in this case, it claims a false righteousness based on superficial imputation rather than superficial works.
In recent years, Iāve heard some Christians distinguish guilt from shame. In their definition, guilt is feeling bad about bad things that youāve done, and shame is feeling bad about yourself because you are a bad person. They assert that itās good to feel guilt but bad to feel shame, which is an idea that appears to have been imported from secular psychology. I suppose this concept is reconciled with the doctrine of total depravity by acknowledging that we are bad people apart from Christ, but in Christ, we shouldnāt feel shame about ourselves. Thereās a certain truth to this, but I fear this freedom from shame is obtained via a shallow repentance, as if we can make a vague confession of our sinfulness to God and thereby receive permission to view ourselves as righteous.
Perhaps one test of our heart attitude is what we believe about our future state in heaven. Will we all be like the angels and appear perfectly righteous with our past sins entirely forgotten or completely obscured by our covering of righteousness in Christ? Or will all of our past sins and their shamefulness be totally apparent to everyone, such that we will all marvel at the grace that weāve received to still be accounted as righteous in Christ? If the latter is true, then wouldnāt it be a foretaste of heaven for people to know about our sins and their shamefulness even now in this life, so that we can marvel at the grace weāve received?
Does forgiveness in Christ take away our shame, or does it make our shame bearable, by assuring us of divine love, despite our shame? If we feel too ashamed for people to learn about our non-respectable sins, have we really experienced grace? Perhaps instead itās the case that we havenāt really repented and are still clinging onto our pride.