A Christian Response to "White Evangelicals"

In 1854, Wesleyan leader Robert Young declared that, “Christianity is essentially aggressive.” He did not mean aggressive as a shocking number of modern white evangelicals mean it--- disrespectful speech or physical posturing; he meant aggressive as in aggressively busy, aggressively evangelizing, aggressively intrusive into the systems of this world, and aggressively requiring Christ-like action and character from its adherence. He was reflecting the evangelicalism of his day which was characterized by vast renewal movements and extensive social action. It was the evangelicalism of D.L Moody who lead massive revivals around the English speaking world; founded Sunday schools, homeless shelters, and orphanages; hosted theological conferences, formed the Moody Bible Institute, which sent missionaries around the world; and shared his pulpit with reformers, women, and preachers from all walks of life. It was a compassionate, activistic, global-focused, fearless evangelicalism.

Like all words, “evangelicalism” can shift meaning over time and in different locations. In America’s public discussion, it is used almost exclusively to identify a subset of white, Republican voters who are characterized by fear-based politics and religious rhetoric. They need an aggressive alpha male in the White House to protect themselves from liberals. They need giant arsenals of guns, not because they like to collect them or like to hunt, but to protect themselves from protesting black Americans. They need to shut of the borders of the country to the stranger and the streets of their suburbs to those trying to move out of poverty to protect themselves from the crime and lack of control they may bring.

Pollsters and reporters have two main ways of identifying evangelicals--- they either ask “are you evangelical” or ask what Christian denomination they associate with and then demark certain denominations as evangelical. Further, most research groups automatically exclude those who identify as black from the evangelical category and sometimes those who identify as Hispanic. On one hand, this is fine because most black Christians do not want to be known as evangelical in today’s climate, but it automatically eliminates a group of theological evangelicals who tend to vote overwhelmingly democratic (90% for black Americans and 65-75% for Hispanic Americans). Grouping Christians into evangelical denominations does the same thing for black Christians since they are most often lumped into a category of “historically black” churches since these churches had a radically different genesis than other denominations. This also reduces the number of evangelicals because it cuts the evangelical memberships of mainline denominations such as Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, etc. all of which have large “evangelical” movements within them. What these ways of measuring evangelisms leave the pollsters with is a mostly monolithic group of white, middle class Christians who overwhelming vote republican, are suspicious of social change, and tend to associate with their own kind.

Theologians and historians have a more stringent standard for measuring evangelicals that searches for trends and behaviors that tie all evangelicals together throughout time and space. Foremost among these is David Bebbington who has proposed (and most theologians have accepted) four requirements for characterizing people, denominations, or movements as evangelical. First, they must place an overwhelming emphasis on the Bible for theological standards and personal devotion. Most historians credit Puritans and evangelicals with ending illiteracy in America and Great Britain because they wanted everyone to be able to read the Bible. Second, evangelicals place an emphasis on the Cross. Humans needed saving and Christ’s attornment on the Cross did just that. Everything else in the Christian life hinged on Calvary. This led to the third emphasis of evangelism which was conversation. Conversation has many symbols but is identified as the moment a person surrendered to God, accepted the salvation of Christ on the Cross, and invited the Holy Spirit into their lives. It also allowed evangelicals to divide humanity into the saved (“born-again”) and those needing to be saved. Finally, evangelicals must be characterized by activism. Charles Spurgeon implored his congregation to “do something, do something, do something!” He went further and told his theology students to reach out to all classes and groups: “go up to the level of a poor man and down to the level of an educated person.”

While evangelical ideas are woven throughout the history of Christianity, the modern evangelical movement is typically dated from the First Great Awakening in the United States and the Methodist revivals in Great Britain in the 1700’s. In the 1800’s, it left the English-speaking world and stretched around the globe through the Modern Missionary Movement, which reached its peak in early 1900’s. It also transformed its home countries of the United States and England through social activism and aggressive evangelism. In the early and mid-twentieth century, evangelicalism went big--- Billy Graham’s Crusades, huge social organization like YMCA and Boys and Girls Club, radio and TV dominance--- and went charismatic--- Pentecostal denominations sprung up across the states and the world as Christians in the global south welcomed a form of Christianity that resonated with the spiritualism of their cultures.

And then the 1970’s hit and American Evangelicalism retreated. The language shifted from “Onward Christian soldiers” to “build a wall.” This is not a minor change in lingo. Throughout its history, evangelicalism had gone and done. The Salvation Army, Graham’s Crusades, the Suffrage Movement, The Temperance Society, the Student Missions Movement--- all believed that in the conflict between Christianity and evil, the Christians were the invading force, the ones on the move, and with God on their side, the ones with the upper hand. After the psychological losses of the Cold War, the Flower Movement, prayer being removed from school and Roe V. Wade, the Boomer generation of evangelicals flipped the roles. Evangelicals and Christian values were now the ones under attack and the responsibility of a good evangelical was to defend and retreat. Retreat from Boys’ Scouts and YMCA and form their own nature and health clubs. Retreat from public schools to Christian schools and homeschooling. Retreat from social activism that focused on the other and defend activism that protected us.

The good news is that global evangelism did not share this mentality. As American evangelicals batted down the hatches, evangelicals around the world through open the gates. These groups were strong enough in their faith that they could move forward even as the groups that birthed them cocooned. Two-thirds of the world’s theological evangelicals live in the global south where evangelical is not defined by race but by the Bebbington quadrilateral (the Bible, the Cross, conversation, and activism). It still means social activism like in Africa where 70% of AIDS care is channeled through churches. Evangelicalism still means unashamed evangelisms like in China which has the fastest growing church in the world and some of the worst persecution. It means building schools and hospitals throughout Latin America; it means recycling plastics to create jobs and protect the environment in Kenya. It means refugee work, orphan care, and safe labor laws. It means every culture and tongue coming together to tackle problems. None of the churches are perfect, of course, but they embrace historical evangelicalism far more accurately than “white evangelicals.”

          The voter block in America known as “white evangelicals” are divorced from historical and global evangelicalism. As research by Pew and other groups who have demonstrated, a shockingly high rate of those who call themselves evangelical do not attend church regularly, read their Bibles or pray, or take part in volunteerism. Biblical literary and personal Bible reading are both at historical low levels, and increasingly sources other than the Word of God--- political leaders, TV personalities, celebrity preachers, etc.--- are the sources of white evangelicals’ moral and political positions. The Cross--- with its stark reminder of the consequences of sin and the beautiful promise of salvation--- is vanishing from worship songs and personal definitions of salvation. While youth camps still do altar calls, conversation--- that belief in transformation---- is a bygone issue. In the 1970’s Democratic Jimmy Carter’s easy acknowledgement that he was “born again” helped win him the evangelical vote against his Republican rival. In 2016, white evangelicals overwhelmingly voted for a candidate who stated he had done nothing he needs to repeat for and some Christians go so far as to argue that this man who does not believe he ever needed to convert could be evangelical. And activism is inward focused--- giving to political and social causes that benefit us and volunteering within my own group. This voter block may be white, but three centuries and six continents of evangelicals question their right to call themselves evangelical.