I’ll Trade You My Keller Card for Your Whitfield Rookie Card
I will trade you my Tim Keller, Andy Stanley, Tony Evans, John McArthur, and Franklin Graham cards for your John Wesley, George Whitfield, John Newton, and William Wilberforce’s rookie cards. Okay, you can have my Jonathan Edwards All American card too.
While the term Evangelical has become synonymous with Conservatism, Republicanism, Fundamentalism, and Hobby Lobby in the United States these days, these characteristics are one of many expressions of the movement that finds its roots in the 18th century British religious landscape.
In “Evangelicalism in Modern Britain,” D.W. Bebbington creates the historical and theological framework of the movement that was birthed centuries after the Reformation. The lovechild of Puritanism, Pietism, and Presbyterianism, Evangelicalism in the British aisle, during the 18th and 19th century, was a shapeshifting as the many other new expressions of Christianity were at this time.
“Evangelical religion has been in contact with shifts in the mood of the intellectual elite. Like so many other aspects of British life, from political rhetoric to wallpaper design, it was affected by alterations in taste,” argued Bebbington. [1]. That is to say that trying to clearly define Evangelicalism at this period, much like in the United States, is remarkably difficult due to plethora of figures, convictions, and autonomy from church-state institutionalism.
At the same time, Bebbington lays out some of the critical components of this diverse movement, including holiness, social and political activism, biblicism, revivalism, and nonconformity. Take a listen to most of the hymns in the Methodist and Baptist movements, written mainly by Charles Wesley and John Newton, and you will see the critical role of crucicentrism in Evangelical preaching and theology. Like their Reformer forebearers, early British Evangelical leaders took the authority of Scripture seriously, not only for the church but its impact on the individual’s life. My grandparents’ generation would be shocked to learn that the Wesley brothers borrowed pub tunes for the basis of most of their hymns.
When you take a bird’s eye view of the Evangelical movement in Britain at this time, it is remarkable to see the scope of its reach to other expressions of the church, including and not limited to the thousands of expressions of Baptists, Methodist, Moravians, Quakers, Presbyterians, Assemblies of God, Brethren, and Nazarites.
I always find it remarkable when the news, politics, and academia refer to the White Evangelical base in America, separating this very diverse, uncoordinated, and divided extended family as one. It’s akin to simplifying and lumping all National Football League fans into just being Dallas Cowboys fanatics, which is insulting, demoralizing, and woefully inaccurate.
Evangelicalism is probably best classified as a culture more than a set of clearly identified ideals in our modern age. But like its forebearers, this thing that we think of as Evangelical is broader, more divergent, and ever-changing than what most believe.
For students of history, knowing where we came from helps us understand where we might go, trying our best to prevent past errors and striding forwards with learned lessons from past successes. Bebbington provides us a historical roadmap in understanding the similar convictions of some that led to the blossoming of many expressions of Christianity. At its best, Evangelicalism is focused on the redemptive work of Jesus Christ in this world. At its worst, well, I’ll let you make that call.
[1] Bebbington, David. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s. (London: Routledge, 2005), 276.
About the Author
Andy Hale
Associate Executive Coordinator of CBF North Carolina, CBF Podcast Creator and Host, & Professional Coach12 responses to “I’ll Trade You My Keller Card for Your Whitfield Rookie Card”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Andy, such a good job of pointing out how the changes in Evangelicalism centuries ago continues to morph and, if anything, has become even more diverse than ever. I agree with this statement: “Evangelicalism is probably best classified as a culture more than a set of clearly identified ideals in our modern age.” It seems movements are not monolithic as they were in the past. Even in Mormon Utah, beliefs and behaviors vary widely among active LDS folks. How much do you think Evangelicalism is being identified with Christian Nationalism these days? P.S. take it easy on Cowboys fanatics! Some of us may resemble that remark. Use the Yankees next time?
Roy, that’s a fascinating conversation. Unfortunately for those who are Evangelical and do not identify with some of these tropes, they are still being thrust upon them.
Evangelicalism and White Christian Nationalism have become synonymous with each other.
I highly recommend three books, “White Too Long” by Robert P. Jones, “Unholy” by Sarah Posner,” and “White Evangelical Racism” by Anthea Butler.
Andy: While evangelicalism is a culture of its own, I would say that the movement is better defined by the tenants of its beliefs. Those orthodox beliefs (God, Creation, Christ, the Cross, Holy Spirit, etc…) is what makes the movement hold together. Without those central beliefs, the system falls apart don’t you think? Nice discussion on this book; I found it a great read.
Troy,
In studying history, it hasn’t been until the last 100 years that these core beliefs were transformed from a generous orthodoxy into a power grab of doctrinal self-righteousness. We used to say that we believed in the authority of Scripture. Now, we have. people who believe that if you can’t agree to their self-prescribed descriptors of the Scriptures, you do not believe in the Bible.
If we can hold these core values, knowing that there are broad interpretations and perspectives of these values, then the church and denominations would be in a lot better place.
You are hilarious. You opening two paragraphs… tell me how you feel!
I hear your frustrations for sure. However, I am less certain what is ideal in your mind as to how we should think and engage as Christians and the church. Being that I don’t think this is the kind of conversation to have via a chat group, is there a book or two (or articles) that would best capture your framework of how you think we ought to think and engage as Christians?
That’s a great question. I would have to give it some deeper thought.
Can I just offer a suggestion that perhaps it is not too late to adjust your NPO and one of your prototypes to be a set of playing cards as listed in your opening paragraph?
Similar to Eric, I’m wondering if you have thoughts on not just how Christians ought to engage, but if you feel there’s a better vocabulary out there to use than Evangelical? My initial thoughts are with how many in the church couldn’t be able to tell you distinguishing factors, how much more complicated it is for those with no foundational context or understanding.
That prototype would be a whole lot easier than what I’ve got myself into.
I think the term “Evangelical” is a misnomer for many traditions. For example, Baptists are typically lumped in with Evangelicals even though they existed long before this movement, and many expressions of Baptists have nothing to do with it.
It’s a catch-all term that inaccurately catches all.
There is a growing movement of people that refer to themselves as post-Evangelical. For some, that’s a significant way to express what they are not while trying to figure out what they are.
Andy,
Your posts often make me laugh and this one did not disappoint. Being a National League Football fan, I can totally see the oversimplification comparison with Evangelism. Dallas Cowboys, a no, give me a Seahawk or a Titan any day.
I am interested to hear about any aspects of the Evangelical mindset that you find valuable in your work.
That’s a brilliant question. However, many of the things taken on by the greater Evangelical movement are really just Baptist identity, such as the local autonomy of the church, the priesthood of all believers, the authority of scripture, and religious freedom for all.
Andy, like you, I will gladly trade my contemporary theologian cards for cards from previous generations. Of course there’s always the exceptional contemporary theologian like Richard Foster, who I find really profound and able to integrate scripture with history to speak powerfully to a modern generation. What I continue to wrestle with is how may our generation attain the depth, relevance and appeal of Wesley, Wilberforce and others of generations past?
Henry,
Like our forebearers, I believe people are taking on innovative spiritual endeavors that we will look back and appreciate, but not in our time. For example, Wilberforce was not a beloved figure to the people impacted by the abolition of slavery. However, now, universally, he is accepted as a hero.
I guess we will look back at work around sexual and genre equality, seeking justice against systemic racism, and the fight against White Christian Nationalism in the way that we see Wesley, Wilberforce, and so on.