Riverwood Presbyterian Church

Culture Wars

On Being “Evangelical” in America….

by Jimmy Hopper

I have been, for several years now, one of those Christians who, despite being actually and totally evangelical in the classic sense, have become very nervous about being labeled “evangelical.” It is my belief that the term has been perhaps irremediably ruined when it became a political and cultural catchword for protestant Christianity. It is applied to “Christian leaders” who ply the halls of power promising and delivering blocs of non-thinking voters and to oily hucksters who promise health, wealth, hot wives and handsome husbands to all who have enough faith and can prove it by their contributions. I am quick to dismiss politicians and their advocates when they are obviously trying to selling Christ for votes. When I am seen as evangelical, I feel that I am seen as an advocate for the O’Steens, Hagees, Copelands, Robertsons, Hinns, et al, especially when I am speaking to a sceptic or avowed non-Christian.

Last week I ran across an editorial by William McKenzie re-printed from the Dallas Morning News that spoke of a manifesto by evangelicals who were as tired of the juxtaposition as I was. The article is linked here. McKinley spoke of an attempt by a broad spectrum of evangelicals to prepare a manifesto to “address the confusions and corruptions that attend the term ‘evangelical” in the United States and much of the Western world.’” Needless to say, I was interested and went to my computer to find this document.

I will confess that I was impressed. It does not pretend to be an apologetic for Christianity accurate to the last jot and tittle and it certainly isn’t but it does cover the essential basics; Christ is fully God and fully human and the only name by which we may be saved; and there is no salvation possible apart from His atoning death on the cross. The manifesto also speaks to the absolute Biblical ideas of ministry to the weak and helpless and of not catering to the rich and powerful.

As to my objections to the current meaning of the word, I will quote the Manifesto, first to the hucksterism and growth at any theological cost:

We confess that we Evangelicals have betrayed our beliefs by our behavior. All too often we have trumpeted the gospel of Jesus, but we have replaced biblical truths with therapeutic techniques, worship with entertainment, discipleship with growth in human potential, church growth with business entrepreneurialism, concern for the church and for the local congregation with expressions of the faith that are churchless and little better than a vapid spirituality, meeting real needs with pandering to felt needs, and mission principles with marketing precepts. In the process we have become known for commercial, diluted, and feel-good gospels of health, wealth, human potential, and religious happy talk, each of which is indistinguishable from the passing fashions of the surrounding world.

Regarding the dispicable politicizing of Christ, the Manifesto speaks as follows:

The other error, made by both the religious left and the religious right in recent decades, is to politicize faith, using faith to express essentially political points that have lost touch with biblical truth. That way faith loses its independence, the church becomes “the regime at prayer,” Christians become “useful idiots” for one political party or another, and the Christian faith becomes an ideology in its purest form. Christian beliefs are used as weapons for political interests. Christians from both sides of the political spectrum, left as well as right, have made the mistake of politicizing faith; and it would be no improvement to respond to a weakening of the religious right with a rejuvenation of the religious left. Whichever side it comes from, a politicized faith is faithless, foolish, and disastrous for the church – and disastrous first and foremost for Christian reasons rather than constitutional reasons. Called to an allegiance higher than party, ideology, and nationality, we Evangelicals see it our duty to engage with politics, but our equal duty never to be completely equated with any party, partisan ideology, economic system, or nationality. In our scales, spiritual, moral, and social power are as important as political power, what is right outweighs what is popular, just as principle outweighs party, truth matters more than team-playing, and conscience more than power and survival. The politicization of faith is never a sign of strength but of weakness. The saying is wise: “The first thing to say about politics is that politics is not the first thing.” The Evangelical soul is not for sale. It has already been bought at an infinite price.

The critics of the manifesto seem to be urging the status quo to be continued. Even McKenzie wants politicians to consider the “new evangelicals” in their campaign. The political aspects of it are apparently the reason he opined about it. In another piece, The Milquetoast Manifesto, Lisa Miller of Newsweek magazine seems to be lobbying for increased politicizing of Christianity instead of less. Her comments are here. Many of the comments on the website are the same; confrontation and “in your face” arguments about details.

I’m not sure the word “evangelical” can be redeemed at this point. There has been a lot of ink and hot air flowing under that bridge, but there is little in the manifesto I disagree with, and they have certainly defined the problem clearly. I can appluad their efforts at redemption of the concept.