Scot McKnight
on his blog today has an increasingly frequent discussion of whether evangelicalism is ending. McKnight sticks by Bebbington and Noll's 4-fold definition of evangelicalism:
- conversionism
- activism
- biblicism
- crucicentrism
My problem with this approach is that it mistakenly thinks that there is some objective thing called "evangelicalism." Even worse, it plays into some self-perpetuating myth by which a particular social group can consider itself the true heirs of Christ, not unlike the Roman Catholic Church. That's laughable.
In reality, this word will have multiple meanings at any particular time and its meaning will change over time. So let's be clear, the question being asked is
whether or not the particular social movement known as neo-evangelicalism, which rose in the late 1940s, is on the wane. It is not a question of whether these four things are true and necessary (or, if so, how):
- a personal commitment to God in Christ
- a commitment to action so that the world transformed for God
- a sense of Scripture as a sacrament of revelation
- Christ's death and resurrection as God's focal mechanism of cosmic reconciliation
I am not sure that the social group that was twentieth century evangelicalism is on the wane so much as its heirs are changing. My wording above in itself reflects some of the ways in which it may change. I do doubt that evangelicalism as the Republican special interest group it has been will have much power going forward. But, then again, I would have said that in 2000 right before 9-11 and would have been completely wrong.
Many would say the word is toast, too spoiled to use. But as long as you'll give us a little lee way with it, it will allow many of us to continue to associate until some better term comes along...
9 comments:
Will younger evangelicals want to be identified as such? In their desire to distance themselves from cultural fundamentalism, might they seek a new identity label, or consciously reject any label at all? How will we define 'personal commitment?' Will we lose the idea or concept of conversion as we have known it? As you have said yourself, only time will tell. Will a different approach to hermeneutics (with a different conclusion on some of the controversial issues that continue to grieve older evangelicals and anger or befuddle younger ones) result in making any reference to evangelical markers no longer relevant?
My thinking still is influenced by my experience of the culture wars. And I don't know if what I read online represents the vast majority of younger evangelicals, though as the leadership of any generation goes, so do the followers.
I am something of a Puddleglum, and thus not optimistic about the future of American Christianity. Yet I know that God is working in ways I can't see, and perhaps in the end we will see a stronger, more robust Christianity emerge (no pun intended) from what seems to be the ashes of the evangelical movement. You would be more right than I, I would think, but I wonder, nonetheless.
This is what I wrote on my FB wall today, because of the angst I've felt over our political situation in America.
FB friends, many of you have "suffered" under my political posts....I've been attempting to assess how and why humans do what they do apart from the religious framing of "original sin" (government being leaders in positions of power that subvert the subjective/personal aspects of our lives)....I have come to some tentative and speculative hypothesis.......each and every human being is born with certain tendencies in human needs, personality/temperament and abilities. These are developed within our family of origin, wider social and geographical contexts....Therefore, understanding a "universal" apart from basic human physical needs is impossible because of the situatedness of our experience and how a particular experience impacts us personally (which has to do with the "personal"; basic personality/temperament, interests, and past experiences and expectations.).....
Leaders that have a bent to judgments, and control in their personalities can leave little room for those under them to "move". And many of us are not prone in America to make such harsh judgments because of our social/geographical context/ kind of government! But, then, there are those fundamentalists, that DO make such judgments.
I know that judgments must be made but the question is "what for"? Judgments are for "security" (self identification) and are defined by laws....but when laws become so cumbersome/regulatory that humans have little room for personal differences,and choice, then humans can feel oppressed (if these are more perceptive in their personalities)...That is why America's political environment has found the "Independents" (or Libertarians) to be growing....the Democrats and Republicans have grown too defined by their ideological commitments.... The Democrats have become defined by Government and the Republicans by "God". Government was to be limited, while "God' was to remain undefined, except by personal conscience.....Both Government and God has grown beyond the original intent of our Founders. And this is why we find ourselves in a "hostile political climate" where civil discourse is dissolved under name calling. Some are seeking power through Government control, while others are seeking power by defining "God" under government power. Power under Government control is communistic, while defining "God" politically is theocratic....both were not our kind of government...Americans must turn back to the basic principles that our country was founded upon...the rule of law and personal conscience....
"security" is a practical matter, too, of survival of a specified entity (organization, nation)...not just of personal identification...so laws are necessary for the maintenance of society's order.
I wonder if the disdain for using the word, "terrorist" comes from the assumption that our laws/boundaries don't matter, when it comes to those that would usurp them. Granted that labeling others is "politically incorrect", but we must do so, if we want to survive those that would bring about barbaric acts, such as happened in Benghazi. We do nothing except grant indirect approval in enabling those to disrespect us further!!! Does diplomatic immunity grant such behavior???? Just wondering....
Just as much, if not more so, America should hold their government officials to the "rule of law", where they cannot subvert our government "for greater good" or "ends" that the population they are to Represent does not consent to....
"I am not sure that the social group that was twentieth century evangelicalism is on the wane so much as its heirs are changing."
Interesting article (categorizing protestants) that Dan Kimball just linked to, in which the author says:
"Now what is important about this spectrum is noting where the future growth of the Protestant tradition will come from. I believe that all signs and trends show that the two movements on this spectrum that will ultimately dominate the Protestant stream of Christian faith over the next 40-50 years will be the Reformed Evangelicals and the Neo-Evangelicals, who I believe will ultimately win out over the Reformed movement because of its commitment to orthodoxy and progressive missiology and practice."
http://brandanrobertson.com/blog1/2012/12/27/the-spectrum-of-protestantism-in-2013-part-1.html
Rick,
You are probably right as those that believe in supernatural claims do tend toward believing their way of understanding should be everyone's. That is problematic when "faith claims" clash, which they inevitably will.
It is important to remember that not everyone will choose "faith" as a value, much less "an ultimate value"...
Maybe it could be framed as "ultimate concern", as Tillich described "faith", which leaves room for differences of values...
Rick, I read Brandon Robertson's post....but his post does not give any room for "secular faith"...his is a division within what exists within the Church, not what is possible for humans to choose as a value...
This is how I divided the "spectrum". I probably have not thought it out thoroughly enough, but..I am still processing. Hopefully, all of us are!11
Oops, here is my blog post; http://angiespoint.blogspot.com/2012/10/where-are-you-on-spectrum-of-faith.html
Post a Comment