{"id":15744,"date":"2018-01-04T11:36:48","date_gmt":"2018-01-04T19:36:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=15744"},"modified":"2018-01-04T16:59:11","modified_gmt":"2018-01-05T00:59:11","slug":"the-spread-of-evangelicalism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/the-spread-of-evangelicalism\/","title":{"rendered":"The Spread of Evangelicalism"},"content":{"rendered":"

In an article published yesterday by Christianity Today<\/em>, the author, Richard Mouw discusses the recent claim of NY Times columnist, Ross Douthat, who argued that western evangelicalism is heading for a \u201ccrackup.\u201d Mouw writes, \u201cThe more dramatic gap, as Douthat sees it, is between, on the one hand, the elites\u2014\u2018evangelical intellectuals and writers, and their friends in other Christian traditions,\u2019\u2014and those millions of folks, on the other hand, who worship in evangelical churches.\u201d[1]<\/a> Douthat (who we will be reading later this semester) and Mouw are American evangelical heavyweights who have joined with countless other scholarly evangelicals who are seeking to understand the dynamics of evangelical support for Trump. The article is part of a CT series called, \u201cEvangelical Distinctives in the 21st<\/sup> Century,\u201d seeking to understand the meaning and place of western evangelicalism in today\u2019s world. Douthat maintains a rather bleak outlook, claiming that the evangelical support for rightist causes in the 2016 election shows that evangelical sociology has never actually been committed to intellectual rigor. What will happen, he predicts, is that the smaller group of evangelical intellectual elites will split from the vast majority of evangelical nationalists. Mouw maintains a more optimistic outlook by rejecting Douthat\u2019s claim that the evangelical intellectual leaders are far removed from the folks in the pews. Mouw uses Fuller as an example of an institution that maintains rigorous intellectual commitments along with grassroots connection, to prove his point. Perhaps the same could be said for Portland Seminary.<\/p>\n

However it is that we seek to understand western evangelicalism today\u2014from Brexit to Trump\u2014we are wise to keep the early 20th<\/sup> century Fundamentalist\u2014Modernist Controversy in view, for many of evangelicalism\u2019s factions find their origin here. Bebbington\u2019s book, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain<\/em>, chronicles the history of the evangelical movement over the past three centuries in Great Britain. The author generously describes the spread of evangelicalism as a cross-denominational movement, and therefore does not limit his discussion to the Church of England. While his focus is on Modern Britain, it was unavoidable for the author to ignore evangelicalism\u2019s parallel spread in North America. With insight and sensitivity to the many moving pieces of his research, the author provides an historical perspective which helps bring correctives for evangelical critics who criticize the movement as thoughtless and narrow, and for \u201cblind\u201d or \u201cpurist\u201d evangelicals who are unable to see the reality of strong cultural influences on historical and current evangelical commitments.<\/p>\n

The evangelical characteristics described by the author are the same throughout the western world (Europe and North America): conversionism, activism, Biblicism, crucicentrism<\/em>.[2]<\/a> In his chapter, titled, \u201cWalking Apart: Conservative and Liberal Evangelicals in the Early Twentieth Century,\u201d the author writes about the spread of liberal theology among Anglican Evangelicals, which came with the rise of biblical criticism: \u201cAlthough it still deliberately avoided the word \u2018liberal\u2019 in its title for fear of causing offence, the movement was associated with a collection of essays entitled Liberal Evangelicalism <\/em>and issued a set of fifty-three pamphlets to publicise the same position. \u2018It is the mind of Christ, not the letter of Holy Scripture, which is authoritative\u2019, runs the introduction to Liberal Evangelicalism<\/em>.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

In my context, I have recently begun a journey of leading our church\u2019s elders through NT Wright\u2019s book, Scripture and the Authority of God<\/em>, which interestingly, makes the same claim about the Scripture\u2019s relative authority which points to the ultimate authority of God himself. Our group of both conservative and liberal evangelicals at John Knox Presbyterian Church in Seattle in 2018 mirror the discussions that were taking place a hundred years ago, related to the authority of Scripture, science, and social issues. While the changes and shifts to evangelicalism in Britain over these centuries are many and varied, as the author does well to describe in detail and nuance, some of the challenges of evangelicalism remain the same, most notably, the question of how it will adapt once again to the changing times. The question that I am looking at in my context today, is whether there is still a place for evangelicalism within mainline congregations, or whether the characteristics of evangelicalism as described by Bebbington will find their home outside a more unified liberal mainline expression. This, I hope does not happen as I believe it will reduce the church to the duality of our political party system. But, I also acknowledge that I write from the perspective of a more liberal evangelical (although I\u2019m not comfortable with the word \u201cliberal\u201d or \u201cconservative\u201d for that matter).<\/p>\n

What\u2019s obvious about evangelicalism from its inception until now is its elusive nature. I recently engaged an email debate with NY Times columnist from Yale Divinity School. The way she used the term \u201cevangelical\u201d was consistent with its political definition but not its theological definition. I pointed out to her that many of the leaders who she was referring to as \u201cevangelical\u201d would be better categorized as \u201cfundamentalist,\u201d such as Franklin Graham and Pat Robertson. I suggested that evangelical leaders would rather include Rich Mouw, Ross Douthat, Tim Keller, Mark Labberton, and Russell Moore, to name a few. I suppose one of the key distinctives around these two groups would be their understanding of Scripture\u2019s authority, which then shapes how one reads Scripture. When Scripture\u2019s authority is understood narratively, it leads to a categorically different witness than if the Bible is understood and applied literally (or \u201cinerrantly\u201d). A narrative view of Scripture makes space for improvisation, imagination, and an eschatological vision that comes to bear on the present. A literal \/ inerrant understanding of the Bible, which predicts a more grim view of God\u2019s future, does not encourage improvisation or imagination in the same way as narrative readers of the Bible. The NY Times columnist from Yale Divinity rejected my criticism and chose to stick with painting evangelicals with one broad brush. Perhaps my critique and assumptions are too simplistic, but as Bebbington made clear, there is no authority structure to unify evangelicalism or offer theological correction in the name of \u201cEvangelicalism.\u201d In fact, my debate with the NY Times columnist was a futile effort on my part to accurately define what neither I, nor anyone else, has the authority to define. Rich Mouw doesn\u2019t get to define evangelicalism any more or less than Pat Robertson. The question for our church community today is to discern our relationship with this term going forward. Do we claim it for ourselves, offer a definition that is consistent with our particular variety of evangelicalism, and then seek to live into it, or do we abandon the term because we\u2019d prefer not to be labeled with the nationalist label that the media has so generously given to the term, \u201cEvangelical?\u201d Although this is not a new question by any stretch, it has become highlighted once again, post-2016 U.S. presidential election.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Richard Mouw, \u201cThe Unlikely Crackup of Evangelicalism,\u201d\u00a0Christianity Today<\/em>, January 3, 2018,\u00a0https:\/\/www.christianitytoday.com\/ct\/2018\/january-web-only\/unlikely-crack-up-of-evangelicalism.html<\/a>\u00a0(accessed January 4, 2018).<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> D W. Beddington,\u00a0Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s<\/em>\u00a0(London: Routledge, 1988), 9.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> Members of the Church of England, \u201cLiberal Evangelicalism: An Interpretation,\u201d in Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s,<\/em> D W. Beddington,\u00a0(London: Routledge, 1988), 324.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In an article published yesterday by Christianity Today, the author, Richard Mouw discusses the recent claim of NY Times columnist, Ross Douthat, who argued that western evangelicalism is heading for a \u201ccrackup.\u201d Mouw writes, \u201cThe more dramatic gap, as Douthat sees it, is between, on the one hand, the elites\u2014\u2018evangelical intellectuals and writers, and their […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15744","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","cohort-lgp8"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15744","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15744"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15744\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15748,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15744\/revisions\/15748"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15744"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15744"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15744"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}