Hoping for the Best
“Evangelical”, like the word “postmodern”, can mean both everything and nothing. Depending upon the company one keeps, “Evangelical” can be code for something as simple as “Bible believing Christian” or as specific and pejorative as “anti-intellectual Republican fundamentalist” or a number of other labels. The multiplicity of associations provides many with sufficient reason for choosing a label less susceptible to misunderstanding and unhelpful baggage.
Not me. While as a theology professor I would not call myself a typical anything, I am unapologetic about owning the label “Evangelical.” It is a label I can own because it does not have to bear the weight of the full history of Christianity. Evangelicalism is a mostly Protestant expression of Christianity that has continuity with aspects of pre-Reformation Christianity but is clearly different in terms of areas of emphasis and cultural expression. At its best, Evangelical Christianity in the United States has aimed to give great prominence to the authority of the Bible, deep personal experience of conversion to Jesus and a commitment to sharing the gospel with others. Part of the strength of evangelicalism is the fact that it is a conservative Christian ecumenical movement that brings together a wide range of denominations while respecting (sometimes) differences in doctrinal emphasis and ecclesial practice. Of course, this breadth has led some to regard evangelicals as people who are so broad that any significant depth of faith is sacrificed on the altar of this conservative ecumenism, but I am not convinced that this hazard is an insurmountable weakness.
I readily admit that one dimension of evangelical weakness stems from one of its strengths: fidelity to the Bible. Often the Reformation slogan sola Scriptura is morphed into a view that places the Bible in an exclusive domain set apart from any notion of the larger Christian tradition (for many, this may be due to equating “tradition” with “Roman Catholic”). The Reformers did not dismiss tradition but wanted it to be subject to revision in light of the primacy of Scripture; many contemporary evangelicals essentially eliminate what they regard as tradition and strive to cross two millennia of history in their own personal encounters with the Bible in personal study and public reception of Bible proclamation. But is this genuine weakness actually an essential part of what “Evangelical” means at its best? Though I can understand why some might argue in the affirmative, I am not convinced this is the case. Deep commitment to the Bible does not mandate a rejection of tradition (and it does not take that much effort to make people aware that they stand in the stream of some tradition, even if it is a tradition that minimizes the broader Christian tradition). That said, it is true that what we could call an allergic response to tradition is reason to encourage, catalyze and facilitate a disposition of generosity toward the broader Christian tradition, especially when such generosity can help the evangelical populace recognize that there is much that could be learned from an encounter with some of the pre-Reformation Christian tradition, from the early church forward. This encounter can be guided by fellow evangelicals already conversant with the traditions outside evangelicalism, or perhaps even better by engagements with generous Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians (ideally those less interested in drawing Protestants to their side). A generous evangelicalism can encourage tours of our vast Christian heritage with the result that we understand our own particular tradition better along with gaining an appreciation for some of the unique emphases outside the confines of the evangelical world.
As an African-American evangelical, I want to dedicate the remainder of this post to the question: “Is the persistence of evangelicalism into the future a critical element of God’s work in the world?” I know African-Americans who fit the label “evangelical” in some way or other who would not hesitate to answer “no”, but as I stated above, I am not one who is joining the chorus of those singing a version of Bob Marley’s “Exodus” tailored specifically for a march out of evangelicalism. There are very good reasons that many African-Americans feel compelled to move on to other shores, often because of the failure of White evangelicals to give sustained attention and effort to the deepest dimensions of the lingering problems related to race, particularly at the level of institutions. Some time ago, I had a conversation with someone who strongly expressed the view that evangelical theology was simply not equipped to do what is necessary to address the deepest issues and concerns of minorities in general (and African-Americans in particular). What this person suggested (and others as well) is that the social and cultural fabric of the evangelical world is not able to be changed in a way that would truly facilitate the emergence of an ethos that incorporates and promotes the lingering concerns that show up in books, articles, blog posts and other forms of social media.
So why am I holding on to the label and more optimistic about a contribution from evangelicalism when so many have been frustrated and exasperated by their experience with institutions and individuals in the evangelical world? It actually comes back to the same emphasis that caused the problem with tradition above: the evangelical commitment to the Bible. If evangelicals are “people of the book” and have a posture of reception to God’s word in Scripture, then the possibility is always present that such openness to Scripture can lead to a revival (or perhaps even revolution) where those who lead, construct and steward evangelical institutions begin to usher in a transformation where African-Americans and other minorities see that there is no cost for being “evangelical” but only benefits of deeper and more robust faith pursued alongside those in the majority culture. As I see it, if evangelicals are people of the book who are willing to listen to Scripture and be open to God’s leading by the Holy Spirit, then more changes could happen than many currently anticipate. I realize this is a view based on a potential future, yet it is a potential future that always remains a possibility for evangelicalism at its best. At their best, evangelicals are people willing to be subject to all that Scripture commands, which would include ways of obeying the second greatest commandment that lead to repentance and renewal in ways that would pleasantly surprise those who have decided to move on. It is this hope for what is possible that compels me to see evangelicalism as an important tradition in the future of God’s mission in the world. Just imagine what it might look like if the evangelical tradition lives up to its commitment to Scripture: such a state of affairs would probably stun us all. We are not there yet, but I believe big changes can still happen in future. So I’ll hold on to the label.
Recent Comments