About 50 Evangelical leaders held a two-day, closed-door conference at Wheaton College this week. [1] They gathered as Katelyn Beaty (editor-at-large for Christianity Today) put it, to explore "how we have gone wrong and how can we repair what’s clearly broken.”
Wheaton College
Blanchard Hall at Wheaton College near Chicago. Photo courtesy of Creative Commons.
Given that those who gathered were open about why they were meeting and honest in acknowledging the brokenness which exists in much of contemporary Evangelicalism, I feel okay in writing about the brokenness, which I would agree is blatantly obvious and grievous. I do so as one who used the term 'Evangelical' to describe myself for a long time, but no longer do so. Whether or not I ever will again use it remains to be seen.
But as a once "card carrying Evangelical," the gathering at Wheaton has led me to offer some observations about things which must be done to address the acknowledged brokenness.
First, we must recover a larger and more historic/theological understanding of Evangelicalism. Richard Foster has provided an excellent assessment in his book, 'Streams of Living Water.' [2] Foster explores the contributions and pitfals of Evangelicalism over time. The concerns he raised about it in the book in 1998 are even more obvious and onerous today.
More recently, Michael Gerson has written an overview article in 'The Atlantic' in which he shows how Evangelicalism (particularly in The United States) has devolved from its roots and become increasingly sectarian and divisive. [3] Gerson not only offers his perceptive observations, he also cites secondary scholary works that substantiate his observations and provide resources for exploring the evangelical dilemma in more detail. It is the finest single source I know for recognizing what's gone wrong.
Putting Foster and Gerson together, it is clear (as those at the Wheaton gathering also acknowledged) that Evangelicalism has been hijacked (and substantially counterfitted) by fundamentalist Christians, in ways that are comparable to fundamentalist takeovers in politics and in other world religions. The point is, what is being alleged to be 'Evangelical' by fundamentalists is not in critical and key ways, and the recovery of Evangelicalism requires that we do our historical and theological homework to remember what the real thing is.
Second, we must continue to call out the unholy alliances between the pseudo-evangelicals and right-wing politics and ultra-conservative ideologies, and their even more dangerous associations with toxic white nationalism. [4]. This is a very sad part of the problem because it reveals how (as in times past) a once valid and viable religious tradition has sold its soul to the company store, and is now being defined by an ethos and motives that are anti-thetical to the Gospel and to the ministry and witness of Jesus himself. As in the time of Ahab, false prophets are eating at Jezebel's table (1Kings 18:19)
This is of even greater concern than the historical alterations because it means that those who represent pseudo-evangelicalism are deforming the soul (essence) of Christianity itself, not just one tradition within it. How can any of us fail to speak and act against this when the Christian witness is, in too many ways, decidedly non-Christian, and in turn is causing more and more people to have nothing to do with Christianity and the Church?
Third, we must continue to make clear that that no single tradition holds the copyright on terms like 'biblical' and ''orthodox.' And even more within specific associations like those in my own tradition who would have people believe they are the 'true Wesleyans.' Here is yet another place where dualistic thinking has created a straw man and then used it to gather others into their groups.
The truth is, all theological terms and identifiers exist on a spectrum. [5] The acknowledgment of this reality engenders edifying conversations (known in the Christian tradition as holy conferencing) that have the potential to enhance the Body of Christ--something that in/out thinking, and "we're right"/you're wrong" allegations cannot provide. Simply put, pseudo-evangelicalism is non-conciliar, preferring a "pure church" mentality that has created a group-defined righteousness and a corresponding fortress mentality.
There is more that could be said and other reasons that moved the fifty leaders to gather this week at Wheaton. Hopefully, we will see and hear more from the real Evangelicals themselves that will encourage those of us who are troubled and saddened by its fundamentalist takeover. But whatever else the fifty leaders discern and achieve, it will include a recovery of the historic/theological roots of Evangelicalism, the denouncement of any and all unholy alliances within it, and the reminder that "the faith once delivered to the saints" is never defined by, or in the hands of, one group of Christians.
[1] Emily McFarlan Miller, "Evangelical Leaders Discuss Future of Their Movement in the Trump Era," Religion News Service, April 17, 2018.
[2] Richard Foster, 'Streams of Living Water' (HarperOne, 1998), Chapter 6, "The Evangelical Tradition: The Word-Centered Life," 185-233.
[3] Michael Gerson, "How Evangelicals Lost Their Way, " The Atlantic, April 2018.
[4] Here I am benefitting so much from William Barber's "The Third Reconstruction" and Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove's "Reconstructing the Gospel." And in an even larger context, the writings of Walter Brueggemann have opened my eyes to the characteristics of imperialistic religion and to the necessity of a prophetic exposure of it, all the while envisioning and pointing toward a better day.
[5] The recognition of spectrum theology can be seen in the Creeds, where overarching beliefs are affirmed without going on to delineate variations. For example, the phrase "from thence he shall come" unites all Christians in our belief in Christ's return, but does so without requiring a particular eschatalogical interpretation of how and when he will do so. This is Spirit-inspired wisdom, and it gets lost when any group moves beyond creedal-level faith into particularized statements of faith that require adherence in ways that too easily separate Christians from each other--declarations that reflect group-defined in/out thinking that evokes a spirit of judgmentalism in the Body of Christ.
Steve Harper New
The Rev. Dr. Steve Harper and his wife, Jeannie Waller Harper.
The Rev. Dr. Steve Harper is a retired seminary professor, who taught for 32 years in the disciplines of Spiritual Formation and Wesley Studies. Author and co-author of 31 books and a retired Elder in The Florida Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church, he and his wife Jeannie Waller Harper are frequent leaders of workshops and spiritual retreats. This post is republished with permission from his Facebook page.