Archive for category: The Future of American…

My wife and I recently watched the futuristic film Elysium. As science fiction enthusiasts, we thoroughly enjoyed the writer’s predictions of our nation and world in the year 2159. As much as any actors, plot, or action, we relished every prospective social, political, and cultural detail purported by the film as it served to give us perspective about our current climate.  This is the power of contemplating the future through art. It makes us stop to consider what is possible, both negatively and positively. 

What is the future role of American Evangelicalism? There really are two paths which this movement can take in the future. One path is that of increasing cultural irrelevance. The church is currently well positioned to accept this path and passively allow for its own death. The Europeans have provided a model for this trend that the United States appears to be comfortable following. On the contrary, American Evangelicalism can see a future of increased influence on the culture, psyche, and morality of the American people. The church can embrace a future in which it recaptures the hearts of the people by bringing to life the person of Christ for new generations.

In his 1963 Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Dr. Martin Luther King said about the early Christians that “The church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society.” Dr. King understood the tremendous weight of responsibility carried by Christians in every nation and generation. Furthermore, he recognized that without a commitment to prophetic independence, their impact on the greater society would be limited.  As purveyors of light in a world suffering from the consequences of sin, the church’s public function is crucial. As a result, it must strive to constantly align itself with the right principles, rather than the right people. In this way civic engagement is important, but must be tempered by a spirit of independence that places ultimate allegiance to Christ over political or economic interest groups. 

The American church faces an important question. Will it own this important transformative role for future generations or allow itself to be relegated through partisanship, division, and hypocrisy to irrelevance for a large swath of the population? There is no more significant matter. Practically, for the evangelical community to retain and increase its influence for future generations, it should embrace a focus that is two-fold. 

The primary focus must be on the power of individual witness. In his book The Way of the Modern World, author Craig Gay states that “practical atheism has become so disarmingly attractive in the contemporary situation that we have actually embraced it within our churches.” For Christians to bolster the role of faith in the greater society, we must begin with the individual. Faithfulness, love, righteousness, service, humility, community engagement, and a peaceful, articulate, and impassioned intellectual defense of the gospel are as crucial now as they have ever been. Christians whose lives display a counter-cultural commitment to discipleship have the ability to be the greatest agents of change in local communities. Above all else, Evangelicals must retain their devotion to the pure gospel. A watered-down Christian witness, diluted for the sake of comfort, tolerance and social acceptance, does the world little good. In fact, it promotes a further lack of respect from our critics as Christianity has historically experienced its greatest periods of growth when clearly distinct from and persecuted by the mainstream. As the apostle Paul reminded us, “when I am weak, then I am strong.” Our individual examples, even when rejected by the majority, are powerful.

Secondly, the church should collectively resist the temptation to retreat from the public square. There exist a number of areas in which the church is uniquely positioned to provide life changing service and solutions to the world’s most pressing conundrums. They include the AIDS crisis, immigration reform, ethical compromise in governmental leadership, racism and ethnic strife, uplifting communities trapped in poverty, transforming a culture of violence into a culture of peace, and shining the light of Christ through embracing adoption and models of healthy family. These are all glaring crises for which most secular institutions have both limited impact and potential solutions. A thoughtful, compassionate, and holistic approach to these dilemmas will solidify the church’s influence for years. Whether it recognizes it or not, the world is searching for the love and hope only Christ’s church can provide. 

The beauty of this battle lies in the Jesus’ scriptural promises. In Luke 21:33 Jesus says “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” Whether the church’s future influence rivals American’s Puritan forefathers or Christians become an increasingly persecuted American minority group, His influence will last. We will win.  Consequently, as we continue our battle for the heart of American culture, we simultaneously recognize that our greatest hope lies in the one who overcame death. His hope is eternal. In this way, regardless of cultural outcomes, the future of American Evangelicalism remains bright.  

I’ve spent a lot of time in the last few weeks mulling over our conversation, in many different settings. On a Sunday afternoon a little over a week ago, for instance, I was at “Convenient Care,” lying on my back while a friendly and blessedly competent nurse inserted a catheter. I needed to think about SOMETHING other than what was immediately happening. It was a perfect opportunity to consider yet again this strange dialogue, in which—with all the good will in the world—we rarely seem to be talking about the same reality.

I HAVEN’T spent a lot of time thinking about the future of evangelicalism, because I don’t think we are likely to be any more far-sighted than our counterparts were at the end of 1913. Not that opinions are in short supply (they never are). In The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years, a book coming from Oxford University Press next May, Steven Miller exaggerates the impact of evangelical Christianity in the United States from the 1970s onward, only to conclude that “[b]y 2012, the Age of Evangelicalism was winding down.” The most recent issue of The American Scholar (Winter 2014) features an article by Jim Hinch.  The cover-copy isn’t subtle: “The Empty Cathedral” (in giant letters, imposed on a photo to match), and this below: “Why Evangelical Christianity is going the way of the drive-in movie theater.” Who knows? Maybe Hinch is right. Then again, an argument that rests on the fate of Orange County’s Crystal Cathedral as diagnostic for the larger story of “evangelicalism” (whatever exactly that means) will strike some readers as underwhelming. (And it will make some readers think wistfully of the years when Joseph Epstein presided over The American Scholar, which the current version of the magazine resembles in name only).

My wife, Wendy, and I joined Faith Evangelical Covenant Church in Wheaton when we moved out here in 1994, transferring our membership from the Covenant church in Pasadena where we’d been members for 16 years. Neither the alleged ascendancy of evangelicalism nor its prophesied decline have been evident in the life of our congregation. Very few of the people we worship with would describe themselves as “evangelicals,” though that label wouldn’t be inaccurate if someone wanted to apply it. We believe the outrageous things that Christians have believed since the first century and continue to believe today around the world. There are all sorts of wrinkles, of course, points of contention of the kind that have divided Christians from the outset and continue to do so today, sometimes with sickening arrogance and ferocity, other times kept in perspective by the great truths that unite us, the hope that we share, whatever stream of the faith we find ourselves in.

The story of Christmas? Yes, beneath all the crap, the kitsch, the hideous muzak, we think it’s real. Preposterous, of course—but what if it’s true? How wonderful that would be.

Some in this conversation have challenged the propriety of a phrase like “American Evangelicalism.” Sarah Ruden, for example, rightly laments that the “American” part of this phrase is quite worrisome. I want to pick up on this discussion a bit.

For most of my adult life I would have construed “evangelicalism” to be fundamentally a religious term, a label for a particular group of Christians, like Catholics or Quakers. My spiritual formation as a Christian took place in a Canadian evangelical setting, with strong fundamentalist influences. I believe “evangelical” in that setting was an authentically Christian label that located my church in a certain theological place. There were, to be sure, cultural and political glosses but, at its heart, it was an expression of Christianity.

A few decades have now passed. During those decades “American Evangelicalism” evolved dramatically into an entirely new species. What was once a gloss has become the heart and the heart is now the gloss.  I now think of “American Evangelicalism” as a political and cultural movement—like environmentalists, the GLBT, or vegetarians—with a gloss of Christian rhetoric.

The new post-Christian species of “American Evangelicalism” is doing very well financially. Having abandoned any serious concern about the love of money, it is wealthier than ever. Its leaders enjoy lavish “lifestyles of the rich and famous” free of any criticism. Its constituents have embraced self-serving political positions like “cutting food stamps helps the poor.”  Or “unemployed people are just lazy.” Or “climate change is a hoax.” Or “raising the minimum wage hurts the poor.” Or, my favorite, “lowering taxes on the rich makes us all better off.”  A consistent theme runs through all these positions, namely that American Evangelicals want to get richer, love being led by the fabulously wealthy, and that poverty should be ignored.

The interests of American Evangelicals are now being advanced by some of the world’s wealthiest people: the Koch brothers, without whose wealth the Tea Party and its menagerie of curious candidates would be long gone; or Sheldon Adelson, who single-handedly funded Newt Gingrich in the race for the GOP presidential nomination.  The GOP platform is now the creed of American Evangelicals; Fox News is its voice; fighting Big Government is its cause.  And Jesus, who Fox News assures us was “white,” was a first century capitalist who is often misunderstood as a champion of the poor.

This over-simplified picture of American Evangelicalism is certainly not what any authentic evangelical wants for their tradition. So how did we get here?  We got here the same way that the gridlock got into our political system:  by gradually oversimplifying the world into “us” and “them.”  Our discourse is now such that we cannot distinguish between a criticism of “us” and an affirmation of “them.” Witness the hostility that Chris Christie received when he embraced Obama in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Christie being “nice” to Obama was somehow the same as being “not-nice” to the GOP.

Two dangerous things happen when things get this polarized: First, people are often forced to make choices that should have been unnecessary; and sometimes they decide with their feet, as I did when I said “enough” and joined an Episcopal church. Evangelicalism, not surprisingly, is experiencing a steady and intellectually corrosive “brain drain” now by forcing its educated leaders to pick sides—which often means they take their voices elsewhere. The second and more damaging thing that happens is the silencing of reforming, even prophetic, voices with the evangelical community.  We hear calls to embrace those in our community, set aside our differences, and reserve criticism for those outside our community.  So what happens when those within our community need to be criticized by their extended family? How does that work?  The sad reality is that it does not work and the result is the “American Evangelical Jesus” has become almost invisible.

I am skeptical that “American Evangelicalism” can recover its lost soul. There is just too much money at stake.  If it were to happen, it would require decoupling its religious commitments from its politics and the many interests that are exploiting it. Let me suggest the following as examples of what needs to start happening on a large scale:

1)    Evangelicals need to adopt a much more critical stance toward those with great wealth.  If Mitt Romney or John McCain asks evangelicals for their votes, we should ask them why they have not disbursed their vast fortunes to the poor as Jesus commanded the rich young presidential hopeful in his day. We should demand that televangelists like Benny Hinn and Creflo Dollar return their vast wealth to the poor from whom they extorted it. We should ask every politician seeking our vote how they plan to deal with America’s growing wealth disparity.

2)    We need to reject political hate speech, even when it comes from people on “our side.” Three of the nation’s leading purveyors of hate speech—Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Michelle Malkin—present themselves as loyal Christians speaking up for Christian values. This is unacceptable. As an experiment I have raised this concern with many of my evangelical facebook friends. With no exceptions, the response has been that “hate speech from right wing pundits is OK because there is also hate speech from left wing pundits—like Ed Shultz and Martin Bashir.” That evangelicals think like this shows how thoroughly they have been politicized, and how insignificant Jesus has become.

3)    We need to embrace diversity and even controversy; we need to value critical voices from within, recognizing that internal criticism makes you stronger and larger but external criticism only makes you defensive and smaller.  When our colleges run off professors for being too “liberal” on this or that issue, or our churches run off our young people frustrated by their community’s lack of interest  in social justice, we are all weaker. Indulging our obsession with uniformity and tradition exacts a large toll on our communities.

There are, of course, millions of authentic Christian voices in American Evangelicalism, genuine followers of Jesus.  Many of them are my friends and my family. But their communities need better leaders, not opportunists driven by agendas that have nothing in common with the teachings of Jesus. Until American Evangelicalism rejects the growing cancer of its own politicization, no progress on any meaningful religious front is possible.

What is on the horizon for American evangelicalism? If the European West is wrestling with postmodernism and its aftermaths and the global South is grappling with postcolonialism and its socioeconomic convulsions, American evangelicals will continue to struggle with post-denominationalism in coming to grips with a postsecular and yet post-Christendom world. On the one hand, post-denominational trends might be understood as signaling the ongoing unfolding of the full promise of the Protestant Reformation and the early modern Enlightenment. Freedom of conscience, un-coerced religion, and democratic liberty initially displaced religious hegemony with confessionally organized ecclesial options. But in the present time, such Protestant confessionalism is also showing itself less flexible in mobilizing people. On the other hand, then, creeds are being replaced by relationships, and people are saying that even denominations are too cumbersome, unable to adapt quickly enough in order to meet the needs of those having to navigate the vibrant twenty-first century context. At least the pietist stream – or river – within the American evangelical landscape has always been suspicious of institutionalized orthodoxies, and hence their concerns for a more Christ-centered orthopraxy and Spirit-filled orthopathy leave them more inclined to follow out the post-denominational currents of the present time.

Such post-denominational developments are also being fed by globalization. Migration is transforming the demography of North American life and this will be progressively felt in evangelical churches. The very important issues of black-and-white that ought not to be forgotten are being gradually complicated by red, brown, and yellow, etc., presences. Denominational loyalties are hence being superseded by missional charismatic leadership, engaging worship styles, and racially, ethnically, or culturally significant ecclesial forms. Along the latter trajectories, there are emerging also multiracial, multiethnic, and multicultural mega- and other types of churches, among other experimental forms prompted by the needs of migrant communities and their descendants. But this means there are generational, stylistic, theological, and other factors related to these endeavors that will need to be adjudicated long into the future. To the degree that denominations are ineffective in adjusting to these migration, globalization, and related factors, to that same degree they will be irrelevant in the future.

In the global context, of course, there are an additional set of dialogical challenges. On the one side, one would think that the currently shrinking global village along with our ever-expanding information society would urge American evangelicals to seriously consider other cultural traditions and ways of life. In so far as the evangelical center of gravity is also slowly shifting from the American West to the global South, one might expect that American evangelical perspectives are being enriched, reshaped, and challenged, by majority world voices, beliefs, and practices. And to some degree, that is happening. On the other side, the post-denominational tendencies presently at work illuminate how modernity’s individualistic axiology is playing itself out, and this is occurring not only in the North American context but also around the world. This is the consequence not only of Western influence but also of how the forces of globalization flow in both directions: from the rest to the West and vice-versa. In that case, is it just as likely that non-Western communitarian ideals will influence Western and American evangelicals as it is likely that modern American individualism will gain further foothold elsewhere. To parse the question this way, of course, is rather reductionistic, as if communitarianism and individualism could be demarcated thusly. However, even a more nuanced discussion will still need to confront the questions related to globalization dynamics: how the West interacts with, imposes itself upon (whether intentionally or not), as well as gains from, the rest.

The future of American evangelicalism in a post-denominational world will hence be increasingly fragmented, multi-colored, and constituted by global dynamics. If confessional orthodoxy on its own is no longer persuasive, can the center hold? This is of course the ancient question regarding the one and the many. Of course, orthopathic sensibilities, while essential, are also unable to stand solely. “Do you love Jesus?” opens up the conversation, but then the question that follows sooner or later on its heels is, “toward what end?” The latter suggests that orthopraxic actions and behaviors – related to the mission of the church – also play an indispensable role. Yet having just framed it this way indicates that an ongoing triangulation of orthodoxy, orthopathy, and orthopraxy is unavoidable. Some might think such a multi-foundational set of interconnections is debilitating in terms of providing not one (i.e., confessional) but a potentially and perennially shifting number of fundamental commitments. I would urge instead that we consider such a triadic structure as offering a wider range of resources for rethinking and reconsidering not just American but global evangelicalism in our time.

As a pentecostal theologian, I default to an incarnational and pentecostal – and hence arguably more robustly trinitarian – understanding of how this orthodoxic-orthopathic-orthopraxic nexus empowers Christian, and evangelical, identity in an uncertain world. Christ’s incarnation register’s divine commitments to redeeming human embodiment, temporality, culture, and particularity, and the Spirit’s outpouring on all flesh (Acts 2:17) reflects divine modalities of renewing human language, ethnicity, and culture. “Jesus is Lord!” captures the thrust of the Spirit’s ongoing work, although Jesus’ lordship is realized through the Spirit’s gifting differentially the many members of Christ’s body (1 Cor. 12), which includes, albeit does not reduce to the registers of race, ethnicity, culture, and socioeconomic class. In our post-denominational times, how adept will we be in engaging with these “others” for evangelical faith? This is a rhetorical question, surely, as it is not as if we have a choice if we are committed to the values of the coming reign of God constituted by what the Apocalypse describes in terms of many peoples, tribes, nations, and languages (Rev. 7:9).

Needless to say, evangelical theologians are and can be exemplary in taking up the dialogue with theologians of race, theologians of culture, and theologians of globalization on the one hand and with Asian, African, and Latin American evangelical and other theologians on the other hand. In a fluid global context, denominational confessions will continue to give way to theological hybridity – evangelical self-understandings that, for instance, link orthodoxy to orthopathy and orthopraxy. This triadically framed node of identifiers will involve racial, ethnic, and cultural qualifiers in some cases and social, political, and economic ones in others, sometimes conflating in multiple directions. For instance, mine is a “pentecostal-East-Asia-by-way-of-Malaysia-to-America-1.5-generation-immigrant-concerned-both-with-ethnic/Chinese-enclaves-and-with-second-and-later-generation-assimilationist-trends-married-to-a-5^th-generation-Mexican-American-pentecostal-woman-who-grew-up-on-the-migrant-trail-and-still-remains-the-only-college-graduate-in-her-family” set of perspectives.

America was formed from out of the experience of migration. Evangelical health in the twenty-first century will depend on renewing, and being renewed by, such a diasporic and hybridic identity, one capable of connecting the historic old to the globalizing new. Our post-denominational climate allows for new confessions to emerge that capture and inspire human hearts, hopes, and aspirations (the orthopathic dimension) while engaging with and empowering effective ecclesial mission, evangelism, and social witness (the orthopraxis domain) in a complex and ever-shifting world. Anything less may result in the passing of evangelicalism en route to a new form of ecclesia as the people of God.

As the wide range of discussions in this conversation have shown, American evangelicalism is complicated, contested, and multifaceted. We have often failed to reach agreement on how to define many aspects of evangelicalism even within the confines of this forum.

As a social scientist, I spend much time seeking the best ways to define and measure aspects of religious beliefs, behavior, and belonging. Such work helps us better understand the relationship between religion and politics. But when I reflect on the future of American evangelicalism as a movement, I am less concerned about precise scholarly definitions than I am about the popular usage of the term.

Outsiders are unlikely to make much distinction between those who identify themselves with evangelicalism and those who are labeled as such (even if they eschew the label). From their perspective, our internal divisions may look like needless hair-splitting or meaningless squabbles. What they know is what they see from afar. My hope is that American evangelicals can unite in ways that allow us to become a force for positive change; my hope is that outsiders will yearn to know more about God because of what they see evangelicals doing and proclaiming in Christ’s name.

My vision for the future of American evangelicalism is a positive one, although I do have a few concerns. As many of the contributors to this ongoing conversation have noted, evangelicalism has a long, robust, and meandering history. Like all movements, evangelicalism is undergoing change and will continue to transform as society and culture create new obstacles and opportunities. But the underlying principles and beliefs that unite American evangelicals are strong enough to ensure that they will continue to provide salt and light for decades to come.

So what are some of the major challenges and opportunities facing American evangelicalism? As we look to the future, evangelicals should pay particular attention to demographic trends that are changing the American landscape even as we focus more attention on teaching the faith.

Demographic changes are creating both challenges and opportunities for American evangelicalism. Consider several trends.

First, the composition of American churches is changing. Mainline Protestantism is on the decline; church membership numbers have been dropping for decades, and many churches are closing their doors. At the same time, evangelical denominations are more likely to be maintaining their numbers or experiencing growth. Pentecostalism in particular is growing rapidly.

On the other hand, survey data suggest that evangelical numbers may begin to decline as the population ages. When compared with older generations, young adults are less likely to identify as evangelical and more likely to claim no religion at all. Secularism is on the rise, especially among younger Americans. In Pew Center surveys from 2012, for example, 32 percent of 18-29 year olds claimed no religious affiliation compared with only 9 percent of those 65 and older. It has been a common experience for younger adults to stray away from attending church but begin to return as they settle down and have children. But as marriage rates decline and other cultural shifts remake the landscape of American family life, it is less clear that this pattern of returning to church will continue.

Another trend suggests both challenges and opportunities. The nation is growing in racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. According to Census Bureau projections, the size of the non-Hispanic white population will peak in about a decade and then decline. Hispanic and Asian populations are expected to double in size by 2060; the African American population is estimated to increase by 50% in the same time frame. Within thirty years, the United States will be a majority-minority nation. The future of evangelicalism in part depends on how evangelicals respond to these dramatic shifts.

Although Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s observation that” the most segregated hour of Christian America is eleven o’clock on Sunday morning” is still an apt descriptor, American churches are growing in racial and ethnic diversity. According to the 2010 Faith Communities Today study conducted by researchers at the Hartford Institute for Religious Research, 14.4 percent of Evangelical congregations are multiracial, double the percentage of Mainline Protestant churches, but significantly less than Catholic and Orthodox churches.

So, what steps might American evangelical Christians take to respond to these trends?

Opportunities for multiethnic and multiracial collaborations abound. Evangelical leaders are beginning to address their lack of diversity, working intentionally to broaden their multiethnic reach and appeal. Many churches also house other congregations that host services in native languages of immigrants and refugees. Such efforts need to increase as the church seeks to meet the needs of a changing population and more accurately reflect the diversity of the church universal.

White evangelicals also need to seek opportunities for greater partnership with their African-American brothers and sisters. Although black and white Protestants often worship in different churches (a legacy of racism and exclusion that forced African Americans to create their own, parallel institutions), they share many foundational beliefs. White congregations need to reach out, repent of their past sins against African-Americans, and seek restoration and reconciliation.

Evangelicals also need to teach the faith so that worshippers know what they believe and why. We need to train our own children and church members so that they have a robust, deep, and personal knowledge of the faith. Such education should begin in our own homes and in children’s programming in churches. Our faith communities should seek to build the strong and lasting multigenerational friendships that are so essential for helping young people learn the faith and continue to follow Christ into adulthood.

Evangelical colleges and universities also play an important role in forming future generations, and we should support their efforts. One important way to help is encouraging our children to attend CCCU schools. Of course, Christian colleges are not “one size fits all,” and many evangelical students will find a place on secular campuses. But CCCU schools are an excellent place to train future generations, teach the faith, and prepare students to serve God and His kingdom in a wide range of academic disciplines. We should also uphold Christian colleges and their unique mission with our prayers and financial support.

If we continue to strengthen our churches, bridging past racial and ethnic divides and teaching our young people the faith, American evangelicalism will thrive in the coming decades. Together we can come alongside those in need, be positive agents of change, and share the love of Christ with a broken and hurting world.