Empathy for 'Evangelicals'

by

This has been a tough week for folks who consider themselves “evangelicals.” At least five noteworthy articles have appeared that examine their identity and influence, including whether their ranks are declining from systemic racism and political disenchantment a year into Donald Trump’s administration. The articles I’ve read include:

“The Last Temptation: How evangelicals, once culturally confident, became an anxious minority seeking political protection from the least traditionally religious president in living memory” by Michael Gerson, a self-identified “evangelical” Christian and former speechwriter for President George W. Bush, in The Atlantic magazine.

“White Evangelical Women, Core Supporters of Trump, Begin Tiptoeing Away” by Michael Tackett of the New York Times.

“Why White Evangelicalism Is So Cruel” by Chris Ladd, which was originally posted on Forbes.com but was taken down as being “out of bounds” and is now posted on PoliticalOrphans.com.

“A Quiet Exodus: Why Black Worshipers Are Leaving White Evangelical Churches” by Campbell Robertson of the New York Times.

“Can American Evangelicalism Be Saved?” a review by Jana Reiss of the book “Still Evangelical: Insiders Reconsider Political, Social and Theological Meaning” for Religion News Service and reposted on Red Letter Christians. Disclosure: the book contains essays from many of the socially progressive “evangelicals” who collaborate on Red Letter Christians’ website.

Taken together, these articles clarify the problem facing all American Christians today: Protestant Evangelicalism has been identified as normative for U.S. Christianity and has taken with it the nation’s political identity. Jana Reiss writes: “As contributor Shane Claiborne puts it in the book, when more than 80 percent of white evangelicals voted for a man whose ‘actions and life choices contradict the core values of evangelicalism itself,’ there’s a problem: Jesus and the GOP have been whirled up in a blender, and there may not be hope of separating them ever again.”

Each of these articles presents a part of the evangelical identity, which is far more complex than most people give it credit for being. Taken together, the articles convey, if not a death knell for evangelicalism, then at least an alert for emergency resuscitation.

By now, readers are probably wondering why “evangelical” appears inside quotes. That’s the influence of my editor, the late Rev. Spurgeon M. Dunnam III, and one of my pastors, the late Rev. Wil Bailey. Both United Methodist clergymen, they consistently refused to cede the term “evangelical” to conservative forces in church or society.

“I’m evangelical and so are you,” Wil would assert in his sermons. “We’re evangelical because we believe in the good news of Jesus Christ, here and now, not just in the afterlife.”

The articles by Chris Ladd and Michael Gerson confirm Spurgeon’s and Wil’s perspective. It’s doubly ironic that Forbes took down Ladd’s article as “out of bounds” because it’s reflected many times over by the history that Gerson cites. Consider these two excerpts:

Chris Ladd: “If all you knew about Christianity came from a close reading of the New Testament, you’d expect that Christians would be hostile to wealth, emphatic in protection of justice, sympathetic to the point of personal pain toward the sick, [the] persecuted and the migrant, and almost socialist in their economic practices. … Any Christian suggestion of social justice was carefully and safely relegated to ‘the sweet by and by’ where all would be made right at no cost to white worshippers. In the forge of slavery and Jim Crow, a Christian message of courage, love, compassion, and service to others was burned away.”

Michael Gerson: “The moral convictions of many evangelical leaders have become a function of their partisan identification. This is not mere gullibility; it is utter corruption. Blinded by political tribalism and hatred for their political opponents, these leaders can’t see how they are undermining the causes to which they once dedicated their lives. Little remains of a distinctly Christian public witness. … The corruption of a political party is regrettable. The corruption of a religious tradition by politics is tragic, shaming those who participate in it.”

So where do these observations leave us in The United Methodist Church? We have congregations that are devoted to the kind of policies now being enacted by the Republican majority in Congress, just as we have congregations devoted to opposing those policies. In the face of these realities, my good friend and colleague, the Rev. Dr. Christy Thomas, along with other United Methodist Insight contributors such as the Rev. Jeremy Smith, are sounding the alarm about an “evangelical” takeover of the UMC. It may well be that the fervor with which “reform and renewal” forces are campaigning for the church’s future represents the last attempt of "evangelicals" to maintain control of a major U.S. denomination.

How shall United Methodists proceed? For what they’re worth, here are my own observations:

This is not the time to exult over “evangelicals” being held in disrepute. In biblical terms, our “evangelical” kindred have sown the wind and reaped a whirlwind of mistrust and scorn. In particular, “evangelical” congregations that have welcomed people of color but failed to address the systemic racism that oppresses them – including the blatant racism promulgated by the current U.S. president – are now facing what we call a “come to Jesus” moment. We United Methodists are a case in point: as a predominantly white denomination in the United States, we’ve spent and are spending millions of dollars arguing about how people love one another, but we’ve barely addressed our own history of white privilege and racism that are still going on in the church. We “progressives” own this comeuppance as much as do “evangelicals,” but we're still lax in addressing it.

This is not a time to practice cruelty toward “evangelicals.” Those of us not in the “evangelical” camp know it’s true: we "progressives" have been as harsh and unloving toward them as they’ve been toward us. If anything, “evangelicals” deserve our pity; they’ve sold their religious birthright for a mess of pottage named Donald Trump, and now they can’t get out of excusing his immoral behavior and backing his corrupt regime (see Michael Gerson’s article if you don’t believe me).

This IS a time to strive for the highest ideals of Christian faith. The best example of how to approach this situation may be Jesus’ instructions to the disciples when he first sent them out as missionaries: be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Yes, “evangelicals” have demonstrated the holier-than-thou attitudes and actions that we’ve shown and are now tempted to exhibit toward them again. Yes, their behaviors have inflicted hurt and engendered mistrust, and yes, we’re right to resist harmful behaviors. Yet the best way we can respond as Jesus’ disciples is to empty ourselves of personal animus, invite Christ to take over our relationships, and seek reconciliation rather than revenge.

In other words, this reversal of fortune for our “evangelical” kindred provides us an opportunity to refute Michael Gerson’s assertion that Christian public witness has died out (it never did). What we need are continued examples of “a Christian message of courage, love, compassion, and service to others,” including kindness toward our “evangelical” kin. That’s the best public witness we Christ-followers can give.

Cynthia B. Astle serves as Editor of United Methodist Insight, which she founded in 2011.