For Shame.

Shame says: "You are something wrong."  Guilt says: "You have done something wrong."

There is no room for shame in the church.  Guilt, yes.  Shame, no.  How is shame helpful?

My class on Pastoral Care of Men has been attending to the idea of shame in our readings.  I am aware that for many men in our culture, and yes, in the church, shame has been thrust upon them, upon us, upon me, since birth...in both subtle and not so subtle ways.

How many times have you said (and with what tone) or heard (with what response): "Shame on you."  "Have you no shame?"  "For shame!"  "I am ashamed of you."  "It's a shame..." How are any of these helpful?

I'm wrestling with this idea, and am willing to be wrong, but in humble confidence, I am pretty sure that shame has no place in the church. 

Perhaps it is shame that is shameful; shame is something wrong.

Comments

[Ken Moore]

Dear Josh,
I'm afraid I must disagree. This may be just arguing semantics, a favorite activity of students, but I think it is more than that. I see guilt as a personal internal recognition of wrongful acts or conditions. I see shame as a corporate external discernment of such acts or conditions of others.
As an example, I steal your ipod, realize that it is wrong, and I feel guilt. Or, I don't feel guilt, continue stealing ipods, but get caught and the shame is pronounced on me by my family, friends, community, society etc.
I believe the concept of shame is still useful especially concerning those who should feel guilt but do not and show no inclination towards repentence.
Philosophically yours,
Ken