Evangelicalism, Ecumenical Diversity, and the Unity of the Church
Before addressing the relationship between evangelicalism and the broader Christian tradition, let me offer a bit of background regarding my own relationship to the evangelical tradition. Throughout the course of my post-secondary educational career including undergraduate, seminary, and doctoral studies, as well as eighteen years as a faculty member of an evangelical seminary, I have been nurtured and formed by evangelical communities and convictions. While I continue to identify with and participate in the life of the mainline Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in which I was baptized, raised, and confirmed, evangelical instincts and intuitions have deeply influenced my sense of what it means to be a Christian to the point that even where I have come to dissent from some of the hegemonic aspects of the North American evangelical tradition, I do so for reasons that seem to me to be very evangelical.
In terms of the basic content of these evangelical commitments I would include the following elements: a focus on the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the Way, the Truth, and the Life and the one in whom God reconciles the world; the centrality of Scripture in the economy of God as the principle (but not exclusive) means by which the Spirit guides and directs the life of the Christian community; a commitment to the importance of intentional discipleship in the way of Jesus; and living a life of active participation in the mission of God in the world. I view these evangelical commitments from a missional and postmodern perspective within the Reformed theological tradition, shaped most especially by the theology of Karl Barth, the missiology of Lesslie Newbigin, and the philosophy of Merold Westphal.
From this perspective I have always had the sense that evangelicalism is more like a particular movement within the larger history of the Church and the churches, rather than something more central. I have never understood the evangelical tradition as something distinct from other traditions but rather as a general movement within various traditions. So we see Presbyterians, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Anabaptists, Baptists, Pentecostals, etc. who also identify as evangelical. Of course, there are those who identify primarily as evangelicals but even in these cases such persons generally draw on the wider Christian tradition in expressing convictions on various theological matters. While one might speak of a particularly Reformed way of understanding the providence of God or soteriology, such a distinctive counterpart does not exist in evangelicalism. Evangelicals have no set of traditions or confessions that serve to frame these issues in distinctive ways. One can be an evangelical Calvinist just as easily as an evangelical Wesleyan.
This highlights an element of evangelicalism that is often overlooked and/or disregarded: its inherently ecumenical character. The North American evangelical tradition includes participants from the full spectrum of Protestantism representing many different theologies, hermeneutical trajectories, and ecclesial practices. Further, while the media often depict evangelicalism as a fairly monolithic right-wing movement, it is in fact characterized by considerable ideological diversity. In light of this, no particular group is in a position to define evangelicalism theologically, ideologically, or politically. It is a movement that crosses theological, denominational, confessional, and ideological boundaries. In so doing, it manifests a diversity that has been an inherent part of the North American evangelical movement since its beginnings.
However, while the evangelical movement has been characterized by a rich ecumenical diversity, this does not mean that evangelicals are comfortable with this plurality. For the most part they are not. Instead, they tend to be committed to establishing the one true faith over against other versions. They pursue the one true way to be a Christian, the one right way to read the Bible, the one true system of doctrine, the one right set of practices. In their collective search, different groups have come up with alternative and competing conclusions. This has spawned a seemingly endless series of contentious and ill-tempered debates concerning theology, hermeneutics, ethics, and church practices. These conflicts have produced a divisive and contentious spirit among many evangelicals that has significantly compromised our witness to the gospel. This divisiveness is often justified as a necessary consequence of articulating and defending Christian truth.
Ironically, this approach to truth runs contrary to the witness of the New Testament and its emphasis on the unity of Christ’s followers. In John 17 a close connection is made between the truth and the unity of the church. The church is entrusted by Jesus with the continuance of the divine mission as those sent by Jesus into the world to proclaim the reality that Jesus had been sent by the Father for the purpose of reconciling the world to God. The unity for which Jesus prays is to be a prime indicator of this truth. This unity can be seen by the world and is a visible testimony to the reconciling love of God in Jesus Christ and is a central aspect of its missional vocation to be the people of God, the Body of Christ, in the world. In light of this, evangelicals would do well to heed the admonition in Titus 3:9-11 (NIV): “But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.”
Evangelicals should repent of divisive beliefs and behaviors and embrace the diversity of both the evangelical community as well as the broader Christian church as the blessing and intention of God. From a Reformed perspective, the notion of divine sovereignty leads to the conclusion that the diversity in the Christian tradition is by divine design and that therefore this must be a good thing. The diversity of biblical, theological, and confessional perspectives in evangelicalism and the broader Christian tradition are a necessary and appropriate manifestation of the church. This is because no single linguistic context or interpretive community is able to bear fully adequate witness to the truth of the living God. In this way of looking at things, the traditions of the Christian tradition (of which evangelicalism is but one) are bound together by their commitment to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. All bear their distinctive gifts and treasures for the instruction and edification of the whole church in the shared task of teaching and bearing witness to the one faith.
As evangelicals we should continue to bear our distinctive and diverse witness to the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But we must also realize that we are only a part of a larger body whose head is Jesus Christ. We are dependent on this broader community for our health and strength in the work we are called to do. We cannot bear our witness alone. We were never intended to do so. We need each other. It cannot be otherwise. We are called to bear the image of the triune God.
That evangelicals are not comfortable with plurality is deeply rooted in the fact that evangelicalism (in spite of its very biblical core beliefs) is at heart a modernist movement that holds to the belief that absolute truth and meaning are accessible to the human subject. So even though many are not divisive at heart, their commitment to and belief in the availability of absolute truth—and the resultant equation of this absolute truth with their own opinion—necessitates a militant knee-jerk reaction aimed at combatting all "non-truth." A postmodern epistemology or even a Barthian one might be so helpful, but it seems an impossible task given the deep mistrust among many evangelicals against everything postmodernity has to offer. Yet this is, in my humble opinion, where a lot of work needs to be done if evangelicalism is to have a voice in the future.
That evangelicals are not comfortable with plurality is deeply rooted in the fact that evangelicalism (in spite of its very biblical core beliefs) is at heart a modernist movement that holds to the belief that absolute truth and meaning are accessible to the human subject. So even though many are not divisive at heart, their commitment to and belief in the availability of absolute truth—and the resultant equation of this absolute truth with their own opinion—necessitates a militant knee-jerk reaction aimed at combatting all "non-truth." A postmodern epistemology or even a Barthian one might be so helpful, but it seems an impossible task given the deep mistrust among many evangelicals against everything postmodernity has to offer. Yet this is, in my humble opinion, where a lot of work needs to be done if evangelicalism is to have a voice in the future.
That evangelicals are not comfortable with plurality is deeply rooted in the fact that evangelicalism (in spite of its very biblical core beliefs) is at heart a modernist movement that holds to the belief that absolute truth and meaning are accessible to the human subject. So even though many are not divisive at heart, their commitment to and belief in the availability of absolute truth—and the resultant equation of this absolute truth with their own opinion—necessitates a militant knee-jerk reaction aimed at combatting all "non-truth." A postmodern epistemology or even a Barthian one might be so helpful, but it seems an impossible task given the deep mistrust among many evangelicals against everything postmodernity has to offer. Yet this is, in my humble opinion, where a lot of work needs to be done if evangelicalism is to have a voice in the future.
I find it interesting that the author of this piece includes only Protestants. Evangelical Catholics (George Weigel put out a book by this title this year) may provide clues for how to be more inclusive, less divisive.
I find it interesting that the author of this piece includes only Protestants. Evangelical Catholics (George Weigel put out a book by this title this year) may provide clues for how to be more inclusive, less divisive.
I find it interesting that the author of this piece includes only Protestants. Evangelical Catholics (George Weigel put out a book by this title this year) may provide clues for how to be more inclusive, less divisive.
Thank you for your thoughtful article on a difficult subject. If Evangelicals followed your model of love and inclusiveness, there would be, imo, less damage done.
Thank you for your thoughtful article on a difficult subject. If Evangelicals followed your model of love and inclusiveness, there would be, imo, less damage done.
Thank you for your thoughtful article on a difficult subject. If Evangelicals followed your model of love and inclusiveness, there would be, imo, less damage done.
It would be helpful if you identified some of these areas that 'evangelicals' argue against others.
In my almost 7 years as a pastor in Michigan I am amazed that 2/3 of the Christian Ministerial Association does NOT believe in the authority of Scripture, does not believe that Jesus is the only "way, truth, and life", does believe that the Koran is equally effective at finding the truth of God as the Bible, does believe that homosexuality is NOT a sin, and does believe that women should have the right to kill unborn babies. This is 2/3 of the Christian Churches represented at the Ministerial Association! Should the 'evangelicals' remain silent for the sake of a false unity?
In my 21 years of faith, attending an Evangelical Free Church, a Baptist Church, and now pastoring an ex-Baptist Church (now non-denominational) I can say with 100% confidence that most of those who have taught me and dialogued with me have been very humble in issues such as raptures, returns, and issues of gifting through the Holy Spirit. So, in my experience, I have not seen the heart described here which claims an attitude of argumentation about less important matters.
I pray that our nation's churches would be beacons of Jesus' truth because without truth we are doomed as a nation.
It would be helpful if you identified some of these areas that 'evangelicals' argue against others.
In my almost 7 years as a pastor in Michigan I am amazed that 2/3 of the Christian Ministerial Association does NOT believe in the authority of Scripture, does not believe that Jesus is the only "way, truth, and life", does believe that the Koran is equally effective at finding the truth of God as the Bible, does believe that homosexuality is NOT a sin, and does believe that women should have the right to kill unborn babies. This is 2/3 of the Christian Churches represented at the Ministerial Association! Should the 'evangelicals' remain silent for the sake of a false unity?
In my 21 years of faith, attending an Evangelical Free Church, a Baptist Church, and now pastoring an ex-Baptist Church (now non-denominational) I can say with 100% confidence that most of those who have taught me and dialogued with me have been very humble in issues such as raptures, returns, and issues of gifting through the Holy Spirit. So, in my experience, I have not seen the heart described here which claims an attitude of argumentation about less important matters.
I pray that our nation's churches would be beacons of Jesus' truth because without truth we are doomed as a nation.
It would be helpful if you identified some of these areas that 'evangelicals' argue against others.
In my almost 7 years as a pastor in Michigan I am amazed that 2/3 of the Christian Ministerial Association does NOT believe in the authority of Scripture, does not believe that Jesus is the only "way, truth, and life", does believe that the Koran is equally effective at finding the truth of God as the Bible, does believe that homosexuality is NOT a sin, and does believe that women should have the right to kill unborn babies. This is 2/3 of the Christian Churches represented at the Ministerial Association! Should the 'evangelicals' remain silent for the sake of a false unity?
In my 21 years of faith, attending an Evangelical Free Church, a Baptist Church, and now pastoring an ex-Baptist Church (now non-denominational) I can say with 100% confidence that most of those who have taught me and dialogued with me have been very humble in issues such as raptures, returns, and issues of gifting through the Holy Spirit. So, in my experience, I have not seen the heart described here which claims an attitude of argumentation about less important matters.
I pray that our nation's churches would be beacons of Jesus' truth because without truth we are doomed as a nation.
I'm pleased to hear that you haven't personally encountered the theological conflicts that have been such a prominent part of the history of the evangelical movement Phil. Count yourself fortunate! I've not only observed them on numerous occasions, I've been personally attacked for holding views that someone or some group considered to be a heretical position. My experience is far from unique. The issues that have divided evangelicals cover nearly every major area of doctrine: the nature of God (debates on open theism v classical theism); the work of Christ (debates about the nature of the atonement); the work of the Holy Spirit (debates about the nature and function of spiritual gifts); salvation (Calvinist/Arminian debate); the nature of biblical authority (inerrancy debate); eschatology (millennial debates). The list could go on and on. The problem is not that these differences exist. It's that the debates are often characterized by a lack of civility and respect. That's the very reason for this forum promoting respectful conversation. However, it's not simply the lack of respect that is problematic, it's the outright hostility towards evangelicals and Christians who hold alternative positions. Roger Olson felt the need to write an article for Christianity Today over a decade ago entitled, "Don't Hate Me Because I'm an Arminian" (http://www.ctlibrary.com/ct/1999/september6/9ta087.html) to address this suspicion and hostility in the evangelical community. In light of the current state of the church, this situation is truly sorrowful.