Thursday, October 25, 2007
Who are these evangelicals?
Editorial commentary
Recent contributions
- Can we be a two-trolley town?
- Striving for civility
- School funding no fantasy
- Pesticide board's work will continue through merger
- Commentary archive
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Gerald McDermott
McDermott is a professor of religion at Roanoke College. He teaches, among other things, religion in America.
In Roanoke Times editorial writer Elizabeth Strother's intriguing study of Sen. Barack Obama ("One nation, under whose God?" Oct. 10), we are told that the Democratic presidential candidate "adopted the language of evangelical Christians in concluding, 'I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth.'"
Most evangelicals would say they don't recognize this description. In fact, most would say that is a perfect description of the hopes of liberal Christians -- which is what Barack Obama claims to be. Evangelicals are emphatic that, while they are commanded by Scripture to help the poor and make this world a better place, human efforts will never bring about the Kingdom of God on Earth. Only Jesus will do so, when he returns visibly to Earth.
We're also told these evangelicals are religiously "exclusive" because "the kingdom they are awaiting on Earth is a Christian kingdom," not open to "every people and faith." Later in the article we are led to believe that these same evangelicals are "intolerant."
This too would be news to most evangelicals. And also to Christian Smith, University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) sociologist, who argues in his book "Christian America? What Evangelicals Really Want" that evangelicals as a group are hardly monolithic and are far more likely to advocate tolerance and change through example and personal Christian discipleship than through public mandates.
Evangelicals may not agree with liberals on the meaning of sex and marriage (although a surprising percentage do), but this doesn't mean they want to drive non-Christians out of their neighborhood. Or that they would deny to others the religious freedom they have long prized.
According to the "World Christian Encyclopedia," widely trusted by scholars for its demographic data, America has at least 40 million evangelicals. This is a huge number, with enormous diversity of views along a long continuum. It includes disciples of the late Jerry Falwell as well as Democratic author/activists Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo, who are courted by Democratic presidential candidates and followed by myriads of 20- and 30-somethings.
Part of the problem is that this column lumps both fundamentalists and evangelicals into the same basket -- as do most academics and the media. But, as one would suppose from a group as large as 40 million Americans, there are remarkable differences among them, especially between evangelicals and fundamentalists (typically called "evangelicals" by pollsters).
Fundamentalists tend to read the Bible more literally, while evangelicals tend to look more carefully at genre and literary and historical context. Fundamentalists question the value of human culture that is not created by Christians or related to the Bible, whereas evangelicals see God's "common grace" working in and through all human culture.
Fundamentalists tend to restrict their social witness to protests against homosexual practice and abortion, but evangelicals also want to fight racism, sexism and poverty. Fundamentalists often want to separate themselves from liberal Christians (which sometimes means evangelicals), while evangelicals are more willing to work with other Christians toward common religious and social goals.
While both groups preach salvation by grace, fundamentalists tend to focus so much on rules and restrictions (do's and don'ts) that their hearers can get the impression that Christianity means following behavioral rules. Evangelicals, on the other hand, focus more on the person and work of Christ, and personal relationship with him, as the heart of Christian faith.
Strother is probably right to suggest that fundamentalists think only conservative Christians will be in heaven. But this is not the case for evangelicals. In a Beliefnet/Newsweek poll conducted in 2005, randomly selected American adults were asked, "Can a good person who isn't of your religious faith go to heaven or attain salvation, or not?" Sixty-eight percent of evangelicals said "Yes, they can attain heaven."
For some theologically confused evangelicals, it might mean that anyone's good works will save that person. But for most evangelicals, it simply means that Jesus' life and death can save those who through no fault of their own have not heard the gospel but are otherwise moved by God to follow the light they have.
Most evangelical readers of The Roanoke Times were distressed to read that Strother's "evangelical" friends were so chauvinistic. But I imagine they were also disturbed to learn that their own beliefs were misrepresented.
