"Evangelical" has become a dirty word in the USA. The movement is in a crisis and attitudes towards American evangelicalism spills over into New Zealand. Kiwis see news items about what are described as "evangelicals" and they reinforce their scepticism, providing more data supporting their negativity towards New Zealand Evangelicals.
Unfortunately, some of that negativity is deserved. There is much that is wrong with American evangelicalism and we need to reflect objectively about New Zealand evangelicalism. Not all of the criticism is fair by any means. Some of it simply reflects a dislike for Christianity or a desire to continue living selfishly without being challenged. Nevertheless, Evangelicals might need to pray, with David, "Search me, O God, and know my heart: test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting" (Ps 139:23-24).
On February 4, 2022, the New York Times published an article by David Brooks entitled The Dissenters Trying To Save Evangelicalism From Itself. It is worth a read. The comments below the article are largely critical of evangelicalism. What has gone wrong that Evangelicals have such a bad name?
I do not understand the situation well enough to provide any sort of proper analysis but these thoughts occur to me.
- There is a growing division within evangelicalism. It is easy to see why people think evangelicals are hypocritical when they proclaim unity and love but are deeply divided and at each other's throats.
- It is easy to see why people think evangelicals are hypocritical when they have spoken loudly about issues of immorality yet defend immorality in their own context, or for political reasons.
- When the church becomes allied with politics, it suggests a lack of dispassionate rationality. People across the political spectrum are sinners like the rest of us. No party is always right or always righteous. A less partisan approach that sees strengths and weaknesses in all parties and their policies might allow for better communication and less division.
- Many people, but young people in particular, are walking away from evangelicalism but not necessarily from Jesus. What they see in the organisations and institutions is incompatible (in their view) with what the Bible teaches.
- Much of what is rejected is indicative of the church having abandoned some fundamentals of the Christian faith. How much different might it be if...
- Jesus' prayer for unity led to humility and attentive listening, grace and submission rather than anger and rudeness? Political agreement has become more important than Christian unity.
- Sins inside the church were acknowledged and humbly confessed. There have been examples of sexual sin, racial prejudice, discrimination and injustice against whole groups (women, LGBTQ+, foreigners, etc.) that have been denied or justified.
- There was a focus on the power of the gospel to change a society more than political manoeuvring and aggression.
- Serving was a higher priority than power.
- Church structures and practices seem out-of-step with a genuine Christianity. As the article says of younger people (represented in this case by seminarians at Fuller) "They want to build communities that are smaller, intimate, authentic, which can often fit in a living room. They see faith as inseparably linked to community service with the poor and marginalized. There’s a general interest in getting away from all the bitterness that has devoured the elders and just diving back into the Bible."
- In the past, Evangelicals have been at the forefront of social reforms and fights for justice. Many in our world are deeply concerned about injustice yet the church today sometimes criticises that concern or demonstrates its own tendency for injustice. Can we have a passionate concern for justice that integrates perfectly with the gospel and with biblical fidelity? Are they really enemies?
- Many Christian groups that have developed a strong social conscience have also de-prioritised evangelism. We see that and become suspicious of social justice issues but can we hold tightly to both?
- Some so-called justice issues are at odds with what the Bible teaches. Others are very biblical. Can we discern which is which? Abortion is one example. Many American Christians ignored Donald Trump's moral character simply because he expressed a conservative view on abortion. Our support needs to be more nuanced, recognising the good and the bad. We should not feel that we have to be 100% this or 100% that. It is not about being left wing or right wing but about being biblical, which will include elements of both.
- The article suggests there is a re-aligning of allegiances within evangelicalism. If two, very different, forms of evangelicalism emerge, what do you think will be the characteristics of each?
- The article states that "Over more than a century, Catholics have established a doctrine of social teaching that helps them understand how the church can be active in civic life without being corrupted by partisan politics. Protestants do not have this kind of doctrine."
- Tim Keller's plan for renewal (outlined in the article) might have a lot going for it and warrant serious discussion and action.
- The article ends positively. It concludes by saying that modern, individualistic society has left people disenchanted. They long for something more communal and that gives life transcendent meaning. "Christianity is a potential answer for that search, and therein lies its hope, and the great possibility of renewing its call."
