|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Is the death of evangelicalism going to happen?
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
The answer would appear to be "yes", if you read Frank Schaeffer's latest screed.
* think it is safe to say that the evangelicalism that he is dealing with is the rather odd version that he helped to found, and that he has come to regret being associated with.
A more useful form of the question would be "Is the form of evangelicalism associated with right-wing politics going into a death spiral?" or some such. The visible extreme example would be Franklin Graham, the guy who persuaded Donald Trump, Rupert Murdoch and Oliver North to come to Billy Graham's 90th ********, in an attempt to completely destroy Billy G's reputation.
Or is this question just an example of the fervour of the convert, F. S. being said convert?
[ 20. September 2014, 10:55: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Squirrel
Shipmate
# 3040
|
Posted
I've been following the reported demise of the "Religious Right" for a while now, since I consider myself a "Recovering Fundie" who used to watch Pat Robertson's 700 Club.
My hunch is that Frank is partially right. The political evangelicalism of the Robertsons, Falwells, Huckabees, etc, does seem to be losing much of its steam, especially amongst the young, leaving behind an aging crew of increasingly wacky fanatics who will eventually largely die off.
HOWEVER, I am not so sure whether the religious component of conservative evangelicalism is on its last legs. Here in New York City (a town once dubbed the "graveyard of ministers), evangelical churches such as Redeemer Presbyterian (founded by best-selling author Timothy Keller) are growing at a fantastic pace. They still preach things like biblical inherency, being "born again" and the idea that marriage is for heterosexuals only, but stay away from the right-wing politics. These congregations are typically young, and well-educated. In addition, they are very interested in social justice, help for the poor and promoting the rights of every ethnic group. I've met a lot of people who belong to such churches, and they do not love Ayn Rand.
As for those who can't accept the "fundamentals," most of the ones I've met have gone on to mainstream protestant churches, or belong to certain Catholic parishes where the clergy pay less attention to matters like sexual preference.
--------------------
"The moral is to the physical as three is to one."
- Napoleon
"Five to one."
- George S. Patton
Posts: 1014 | From: Gotham City - Brain of the Great Satan | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think what is happening is the collapse of the church, and the theological positions that rely on a visible and tangible church system are collapsing as well. This is not just evangelicalism, although that is the most high-profile stream (they shout loudest).
Evangelicalism will not die - it will merely change. I hope it will change to more of my position, but of course I do. The truth is, it will change. In fact, all expressions of faith that are defined by church are changing, and will continue to change.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
I think it is safe to say that the evangelicalism that he is dealing with is the rather odd version that he helped to found, and that he has come to regret being associated with.
As the article says "the evangelical movement I grew up in is dying" (my emphasis) I agree that that is safe to say. Whether he is right or not is a different question, and one I find myself unable to answer.
The evangelicalism I was converted into just looks like a completely different form of faith than what Frank Schaeffer has left. Evangelicalism as I have known it didn't really have a defined political position. I've known some individuals who would probably vote Conservative, some who would be closer to the small socialist parties, but the mean political position would probably be left of centre LibDem or Green. The extent to which I experienced organised evangelical political campaigns these were relating to campaigning against poverty, injustice, for fair trade and the like - almost always in association with other Christian groups.
I don't know the extent to which the far-right evangelicalism dominates the US scene. But, I would be surprised if the rest of evangelicalism is not represented at all, even if those churches don't make such a large impression on society beyond their doors in the way that those churches which take particular political positions, run TV channels etc do. I can see how a largely exclusive identification of "evangelical" with one narrow portion of the evangelical spectrum might make it hard for members on other parts of that spectrum to adopt the evangelical label, or for those who are rejecting parts of the package of the narrow evangelical churches to consider other evangelical churches as a place where they could fit in.
But, perhaps the losses from that narrow section of evangelicalism might allow the rest of the spectrum to step out from the shadows and be seen. Instead of the death of evangelicalism this might result in a rebalancing of evangelicalism and a renewal of evangelical faith on a broad foundation rather than lifted high on a thin pedestal.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think it will morph rather than die out. Certain strands of evangelicalism which are more allied to the spirit of a previous age will die out.
The whole definition of evangelicalism is now very fluid anyway - so we have to more specific as to what aspect or element we are talking about.
Franky Schaeffer seems quite angry and embittered and he's rattling cages all over the place. The Orthodox were pleased to have him at first but now they are beginning to groan whenever he opens his mouth ...
Recent interaction on other boards (mea culpa) has convinced me even more that US evangelicalism - and US conservative Christianity in general - is a very different beast to its equivalents over here. Sure, there are features in common, but by and large it's a different species.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel:
They still preach things like biblical inherency,
Is that the dogma that you should inherit a Bible rather than buy one for yourself?
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I understand that American evangelicals only became associated with rightwing political activism from about the '70s onwards. That's not very long. And if changes in society mean that politicians and evangelicals become disillusioned with each other they'll eventually part company again. For example, I've read that some evangelicals are disappointed that right wing politicians simply haven't delivered. And the politicians are no doubt aware that the vast majority of Americans are unimpressed by religious extremism.
That article mentioned in the OP seems to be pointing at the decline of evangelicals in general, though, not simply the decline of evangelical political activism. Presumably, what this means is that the most moderate are deserting, leaving behind a smaller but more committed and conservative core.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel:
They still preach things like biblical inherency,
Is that the dogma that you should inherit a Bible rather than buy one for yourself?
No, no you're thinking of biblical inheritancy. Biblical inherency is the belief that whatever I believe is inherently present in the Bible (even if it's not obvious to anyone else) because my beliefs are inerrant and cannot be contradicted by the Bible.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
It wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. Coming from an evangelical background, the whole point is not about prioritising adjectives or trying to define "what kind of christian are you?". For some (and I think here of some anglicans I know), that is far greater worry than it for evangelicals.
Rather, the whole point of evangelicalism is that it is something that points not to itself, but to Christ, through the proclamation of the gospel.
If, as seems to be the case more in the US than here, evangelicalism has become identified with a conservative worldview, then by all means it should die. Though maybe die isn't the right word. Rather, it needs to get back to the purpose it ought to serve, a kind of reformation if you will.
I'd far rather focus on Jesus as the risen Messiah than on pointless quibbling over adjectives.
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
I'm intrigued and encouraged by the rise of what is being called 'post-evangelicalism', an approach which I think is exemplified by people like Brian McLaren and Rachel Held Evans. They, and others of the same ilk, claim to love and respect the Bible as inspired by God, but their interpretive method is more flexible (I think that's a fair word to use!) than the traditional evangelical approach.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Try Dave Tomlinson as well.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel:
They still preach things like biblical inherency,
Is that the dogma that you should inherit a Bible rather than buy one for yourself?
No, no you're thinking of biblical inheritancy. Biblical inherency is the belief that whatever I believe is inherently present in the Bible (even if it's not obvious to anyone else) because my beliefs are inerrant and cannot be contradicted by the Bible.
Sounds a bit like biblical inco-herency.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel:
They still preach things like biblical inherency,
Is that the dogma that you should inherit a Bible rather than buy one for yourself?
No, no you're thinking of biblical inheritancy. Biblical inherency is the belief that whatever I believe is inherently present in the Bible (even if it's not obvious to anyone else) because my beliefs are inerrant and cannot be contradicted by the Bible.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) Quotes file
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Post-evangelicalism is quite old now. Progressive Christians might be a more hopeful understanding (not defining itself by what it isn't).
But this is all just labels. They don't really mean anything. We need a change of attitude, of understanding, not just of label.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think I'm post-post evangelical.
It's been quoted before, but at Greenbelt a few years ago a speaker apparently said, 'Don't call yourself post-evangelical but pre-catholic ...'
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Post-evangelicalism isn't the same as anti-evangelicalism or ex-evangelicalism ... it's still quite 'evangelical' in many ways - that is, if we define evangelicalism in its broadest sense as being concerned with the 'evangel'.
My nearest Orthodox parish describes Orthodoxy as 'evangelical but not Protestant'.
All these terms are a bit slippery.
I tend to find the Emergent crowd to be too slippery for me, I must admit.
My concerns about evangelicalism per se aren't so much with the content but the presentation ... although I would suggest that some of the content (as well as the style of presentation) does need re-examining.
I was talking to some Anglican clergy about this issue the other day - and these were people who would certainly accept the label 'evangelical' - and they observed that a great deal of the apparent growth and success of evangelicalism has been down to sociological reasons ... and this has caused some evangelicals to become smug and to look down their noses on everyone else.
'Nuh-na nah nah nah - we're evangelicals and we haven't been caught up in the same spiral of decline as you nasty lib'ruls and catholics ...'
Now there's been a shift and the evangelicals have been caught up in the way things are going more generally and they don't know how to deal with it ...
I don't think evangelicalism is finished, though. It's far too robust for that. What I think'll happen is that some sectors will become even more hard-line and return to what they consider to be core distinctives - whereas others will morph and develop with variations on an overall pietistic theme.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
You could argue that what Bebbington points out is that Evangelicalism morphs with it's context: Puritanism, Methodism, Keswick and so on in their historical prime all look rather differant from the modern flavours of pop protestantism but at the same time resonate with their cultural context and share his much quoted quadrilateral (Bible, Cross, Conversion and Doing).
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
We'll know that evangelicalism is in its death throes when it incites as little comment and interest as modern Methodism....
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, I think Bebbington's Quadrilaterals do allow for that degree of flexibility, Twangist.
However, I'm always struck that when evangelicals make presentations about how impactful Christianity has been and can be, they almost invariably draw from non-evangelical traditions and examples.
I've recently seen evangelicals cite Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Solzhynitsyn and all manner of other people as role models ... seemingly oblivious to the fact that none of these people were in fact evangelical.
Ok, that's fair enough if they are thinking of Christianity in wider terms - of which evangelicalism is simply a subset.
But it does make me wonder about the spiritual capital of a movement when it has to draw reference points from outside itself ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
I try hard to understand and appreciate evangelicalism.
I hope that it will not die out as far as its emphasis on:
personal conversion
discipline of daily scripture reading
social justuce
go.
But I pray for it to die as far as:
casual attitude towards sacraments and liturgy
homophobia
self-righteous smugness
belief that nobody but them are 'saved'
conservative politics
go.
While they claim to have lots of young people, some research suggests that they grow out of it and that when they reject Christianity it is because they think that this is the only form of Christianity. Very few move on to more liberal or catholic churches.
One formerly huge congregation near me is losing numbers at an alarming rate and is running on a deficit budget for the first time ever and with a protracted larger deficit next year.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, I think Bebbington's Quadrilaterals do allow for that degree of flexibility, Twangist.
However, I'm always struck that when evangelicals make presentations about how impactful Christianity has been and can be, they almost invariably draw from non-evangelical traditions and examples.
I've recently seen evangelicals cite Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Solzhynitsyn and all manner of other people as role models ... seemingly oblivious to the fact that none of these people were in fact evangelical.
Ok, that's fair enough if they are thinking of Christianity in wider terms - of which evangelicalism is simply a subset.
But it does make me wonder about the spiritual capital of a movement when it has to draw reference points from outside itself ...
Maybe a good sign, that they can see the impact from all sorts of traditions. Maybe they were catering to an audience that would recognise these people. I would treat MLK as a role model, in at least some ways. It doesn't mean that I have to accept his entire theology - any more than if I were to cite Prof Alice Roberts as a role model (she has an admirable desire to find the truth).
So for me, that is a good sign.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think it's a good sign too, Schroedinger's Cat but at the same time consider that evangelicalism HAS to look beyond its own borders if it is not to disappear up its own bottom.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Do you know what I sincerely believe?
Accepting that in many ways evangelicalism grew out of revivalism and fundamentalism grew out of a desire to 'protect' the fundamentals from people seen as 'liberals', I believe that evangelicalism and indeed the entire church will go on reacting to external influence.
What I see is that the last 100 years has seen churches revelling in the luxury of being ignored by the world and spending lots of time talking to itself. We've talked ecumenically, we've talked evangelically, radically, liberationally, liberally, Vatican II-ally, now we are shouting at each other over gender and sexuality. And in some ways it's all theological and ecclesiastical masturbation because it satisfies no one else except ourselves.
Something however has changed.
The world has started to change its apathetic view of the church and for some reason Islam and atheism has begun to 'attack' - or at the very least, suggest that we are worthy of 'pressure'.
Knowing therefore that Christianity is good at writng creeds in response to heresy, laws in response to free-thinking, and militancy when under threat, etc, etc, I think that as we are attacked more and more, as we are called into account more and more, as we are ridiculed and legislated against more and more, the Church is suddenly going to assert itself as a defense mechanism. And because we are under threat the luxury of liberalism will be seen as just that - a luxury that cannot be afforded because it is a weak point when we are under attack.
In these situations that the west, so far, has avoided and thus wallows in self introspection, the Evangelicals will get more evangelical, the Catholics will get more catholic, the Orthodox will get more orthodox, the Anglicans will come up with a modern-day Oxford Movement.
In other words, the Church will strike back and those who are liberal or agnostic or too broad in their theology and churchmanship will not have a leg to stand on when they are faced with the onslaught of Islam and secularism. Only the churches, of whatever doctrinal persuasion, that are convinced and assertive in their beliefs and practices will continue.
Evangelicalism will not die.
Catholicism will not die.
Orthodoxy will not die.
I can't speak for United Methodists, United Reformed, Presbyterians, the ECUSA and the Church of England, however.
Sorry.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
@leo some very fair points.
I imagine it might the task of some of the other "sectors" of the church to show us a more excellent way in regard to the weaknesses which you identify.
In the past I got the impression that many folk in the more liberal and sacramental wings had either grown up or been converted as evangelicals and then had "graduated" to other views. Would this be less the case now?
@Gamaliel
I can see 2 not mutally exclusive reasons: pragmatism (one of evangelicalisms besetting sins) and maturity - seeing ourselves as a part of the whole Christian tradition (maybe a little paleo-orthodoxy if that's not over egging ).
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
I think evangelicalism is mostly healthy at it's core - but has developed a fair amount of fluff and excess around the edges as the result of various sociological trends.
As such, I fully expect that a large amount of it will waste away - due to the time limited nature of it (a large number of mega churches which are based on particular demographics).
However, as an essentially populist movement, I think most if it won't - even if it develops sometimes in rather unhelpful ways. I think it'll be interesting how the shift in geography affects it - as the dominant voices become less American over time.
For all that, I think Rodney Stark's ideas have perhaps less value than some evangelicals have claimed, and they will remain at their core a group that develops along sociological rather than theological lines.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
I think there are, essentially, three types of evangelicalism.
There is the reformed, Calvinistic, cessationist variety - the Free Presbyterianism, hats in church, don't smile on Sunday 'we hate the Pope' type.
There's the Salvation Army/Primitive Methodist/Moody & Sankey/now Spring harvest/Graham Kendrick type
Then there is the the snake oil salesman wild West camp meeting stuff that has grown into the Todd bentley miracle-spring-water, green prayer handkerchief 'God TV' type of stuff.
If that dies, I'll go to the funeral.
It ain't real evangelicalism.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Mudfrog - I agree with you insofar as Catholicism/Orthodoxy/Evangelicalism will be the strongest out of Christian denominations, though I think that's for sociological reasons (particlarly the first two) as much as anything else. Evangelicalism is particularly suited to Western capitalist societies due to its individualism.
However, while obviously none of us can make a statement on the precise future of non-evangelical Protestant denominations, I certainly think they will shrink. I don't think that's necessarily bad. IME those churches and the new emergent churches springing up alongside them are particularly suited for the wanderer, the outcast, those who feel left out by the strongest denominations. Yes, we may grow weaker and weaker but I do believe that Christ's strength being made perfect in weakness applies here. I don't think we will die, I think our purpose is different. I identify as Anglo-Catholic and not especially Protestant, but I know that I would go with the traditional Nonconformists over the RCs.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's got a way to go before that happens, SvitlanaV2.
Of course. The point is that people (here on the Ship and elsewhere) are only fascinated by and nervous about evangelicalism because it still seems to matter. When we all lose interest, from within or without, that'll be the sign that its day is nearly done.
With reference to the title of the thread Peter Brierley claims that evangelicals are growing numerically and also as a proportion of the world's Christian population, though growth over the next 35+ years will be slow. Islam and evangelicalism are the only significantly growing religious groups.
In terms of the UK I think it'll be interesting to see if the growth in immigration and also the increasingly ageing population will have any impact. There will have to be some fresh thinking about the work with young people, as their numbers are due to drop further. I'm wondering why technology isn't more widely employed for teaching, especially since the young are so comfortable with screens. It should no longer be a disaster that most congregations don't have trained and dynamic youth leaders. The work might have to be done ecumenically in many places.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
@leo some very fair points.
I imagine it might the task of some of the other "sectors" of the church to show us a more excellent way in regard to the weaknesses which you identify.
In the past I got the impression that many folk in the more liberal and sacramental wings had either grown up or been converted as evangelicals and then had "graduated" to other views. Would this be less the case now?
@Gamaliel
I can see 2 not mutally exclusive reasons: pragmatism (one of evangelicalisms besetting sins) and maturity - seeing ourselves as a part of the whole Christian tradition (maybe a little paleo-orthodoxy if that's not over egging ).
I agree with you on both these scores - your response to leo and your response to my post - Twangist.
I also think that leo's comment about evangelicals 'falling away' in droves is over-egged.
Certainly a lot of new converts quickly fall away in evangelicalism - and I'd suggest that some of these were never properly 'converted' in the first place but simply brow-beaten into an emotional response of some kind ... but that doesn't apply in all cases of course.
For those who stay the course, I've been surprised how remarkably resilient they are. They stick at things through thick and thin.
Scratch below the surface of many Anglo-Catholic and liberal clergy and you'll find an evangelical underneath. I used to have an Anglo-Catholic spiritual director (I might still have but we haven't met for a while) and he had an evangelical conversion at the age of 14 and certainly doesn't disparage that nor the reality of evangelical spirituality in general ...
Where I think there is a falling away is in the area that Mudfrog has identified - the kind of dumbed-down snake-oil version. If Mudfrog attends its funeral I'd attend with him and blow a trumpet. carry a banner or bang a Salvation Army drum ...
Mudfrog may or may not be surprised to hear me say this but in essence I agree with him - but perhaps in less strident or militant terms (but then, he is an Army 'officer' after all so some militancy is appropriate) ...
The unifying factor I'd see in those parts of the Venn Diagram which overlap across all traditions - Protestant, Orthodox and RC - is what C S Lewis called 'Deep Church'.
Deep calls to deep.
That's the bit that excites me and floats my boat. It's the aspect I'd rally round and the aspect I'd go to the stake over.
I've certainly 'moved on' from aspects of popular or contemporary evangelicalism but the heart of it - the concern for the Evangel - is something that will always remain with me I think.
As Dr Andrew Walker once put it, 'Nobody is going to die for one of Don Cupitt's stories ...'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Back in the day, I remember someone identifying - rather conveniently - Twelve Tribes of evangelicalism.
If I sat down and thought about it I could probably remember most of them.
I suspect that most of them were variations on the three broad themes that Mudfrog has identified though.
I'm sure Mudfrog would be the first to acknowledge, though, that within the three categories he has identified there are variations, nuances and subdivisions.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
Derek Tidball had (has) a rubicks cube analogy. Which covered Soteriology, Ecclesiology, Missiology and various other bits and bobs on a number of axis.
To be uncharitable to Muddies 3 tribes the more grumpy Reformed types would view his 3rd grouping as the logical outworking of the 2nd ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Back in the day, I remember someone identifying - rather conveniently - Twelve Tribes of evangelicalism.
You could do worse than start with the story of One-Feather.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's been quoted before, but at Greenbelt a few years ago a speaker apparently said, 'Don't call yourself post-evangelical but pre-catholic ...'
I remember Dave Tomlinson speaking at Greenbelt, and subsequently I read the Post Evangelical. My over-riding impression was the evangelicalism he was post was almost completely alien to my evangelical experience. And, where he was describing himself as having reached as a post-evangelical wasn't really all that different from the evangelicalism I knew. As has been said, post-evangelical isn't ex-evangelical; it seemed to me that Tomlinson hadn't left evangelicalism just shifted position on the broad spectrum of evangelicalism.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Mudfrog - I agree with you insofar as Catholicism/Orthodoxy/Evangelicalism will be the strongest out of Christian denominations, though I think that's for sociological reasons (particlarly the first two) as much as anything else. Evangelicalism is particularly suited to Western capitalist societies due to its individualism.
I can see why you might say that - there is the emphasis on personal salvation, and in the affluent or aspirational west the evangelical prosperity Gospel (heresy) is attractive, but I wonder what your interpretation would be of the underground churches - all evangelical - in the USSR and nowadays in communist China, or of the huge numbers of evangelicals in Africa.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's been quoted before, but at Greenbelt a few years ago a speaker apparently said, 'Don't call yourself post-evangelical but pre-catholic ...'
I remember Dave Tomlinson speaking at Greenbelt, and subsequently I read the Post Evangelical. My over-riding impression was the evangelicalism he was post was almost completely alien to my evangelical experience. And, where he was describing himself as having reached as a post-evangelical wasn't really all that different from the evangelicalism I knew. As has been said, post-evangelical isn't ex-evangelical; it seemed to me that Tomlinson hadn't left evangelicalism just shifted position on the broad spectrum of evangelicalism.
As one who took the "post-evangelical" road, I think it is safe to say that it takes a long time to get aspects of evangelicalism out of your system. Long after I stopped identifying as evangelical or even considering myself as post-evangelical, people would assume that I was evangelical by some of the things I did. In a way, I guess bits never leave you (and that's not necessarily a bad thing).
I can't identify with the "not post-evangelical but pre-catholic" quote, though. Whilst the "post-evangelical" thing was a stepping stone away from what for me had become a claustrophobic and damaging evangelicalism, it didn't lead me into being more "catholic" (depending on how you want to define that). For me, post-evangelicalism was simply a movement away from something, rather than a move TO something. Once away, I could then start the process of seeing where I was headed.
Some "post-evangelicals" have ended up in the Orthodox Church or the Catholic Church. I suspect, though, that most have just given up on church altogether. That's part of the problem with some sorts of evangelicalism; they can present such an adamant belief that "our way is the only way" that if someone comes to the point of no longer wanting to be part of their way, the only alternative they know is to drop out completely.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Oscar - I do tend to agree. I identified as post-evangelical for a while, but came to realise that it was just a way of redefining my evangelicalism (which is why I tend to be rather dismissive of the term today).
I do understand where Tomlinson was coming from - I did recognise that version of evangelicalism - but I had already left that behind, so my progress was as you say, taking a look at where I stood and redefining that.
I did a couple of blog posts trying to explain what I actually believe, and why I am an evangelical still.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I think there are, essentially, three types of evangelicalism.
There is the reformed, Calvinistic, cessationist variety - the Free Presbyterianism, hats in church, don't smile on Sunday 'we hate the Pope' type.
There's the Salvation Army/Primitive Methodist/Moody & Sankey/now Spring harvest/Graham Kendrick type
Then there is the the snake oil salesman wild West camp meeting stuff that has grown into the Todd bentley miracle-spring-water, green prayer handkerchief 'God TV' type of stuff.
If that dies, I'll go to the funeral.
It ain't real evangelicalism.
Despite the name Paisley's Free Presbyterians are doctrinally closer to Baptists than to the mainstream Presbyterian tradition.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
'Free Presbyterian' refers not only to Paisley's lot but also to the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and possibly others - FPCS is a secessionist group from the national CofS.
? Did the original posting mean 'secessionist' rather than whatever 'cessationist' is?
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@Mudfrog, I think that Jade Constable is right, that evangelicalism appeals to a Western consumerist mindset - but I think it goes further than that. Essentially, evangelicalism is a product of Modernism, so it has a kind of Enlightenment/Post-Enlightenment appeal too.
As regards its appeal in other cultures and societies - Communist China, sub-Saharan Africa - well, there will be other elements within evangelicalism's DNA that would apply and appeal in those cases.
Because evangelical has appealed to a Western post-18th century mindset doesn't mean that other aspects of it aren't going to appeal in other contexts.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
'Free Presbyterian' refers not only to Paisley's lot but also to the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and possibly others - FPCS is a secessionist group from the national CofS.
? Did the original posting mean 'secessionist' rather than whatever 'cessationist' is?
No, I definately meant cessationist - the doctrine that the Apostolic gifts ceased with the death of the Apostles.
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I can understand the 'pre-catholic' thing about 'post-evangelicalism' because aspects of more catholic spirituality can and do appeal to those moving away from a more overtly evangelical base - and I wouldn't necessarily say that Catholic spirituality and evangelical spirituality as so diametrically opposed either.
Mudfrog will occasionally draw attention to the more 'catholic' aspects of the Wesleyan tradition, for instance - and yes, that is there and is a note that deserves to be recognised.
I think it was Meic Stephens (and I can't remember his sidekick and collaborator) who said that disaffected evangelicals largely move in one of three directions.
They either go:
- Liberal
- Mystic or
- High
A lot, unfortunately, do drop out of church life altogether. I'm not convinced, though, that they tend to lose their faith.
I know plenty of ex-restorationist 'new church' types who have - for whatever reason - found it difficult to settle anywhere else and who have essentially a developed a 'churchless faith' - but they still believe. I'll be catching up with one of them in a few week's time.
I think the full-on 'apostates' are less common than we might suppose.
I will agree that more fundamentalist forms of evangelicalism can be so rigid that when the wind blows they don't bend but break.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
The answer would appear to be "yes", if you read Frank Schaeffer's latest screed.
I think it is safe to say that the evangelicalism that he is dealing with is the rather odd version that he helped to found, and that he has come to regret being associated with.
A more useful form of the question would be "Is the form of evangelicalism associated with right-wing politics going into a death spiral?" or some such. The visible extreme example would be Franklin Graham, the guy who persuaded Donald Trump, Rupert Murdoch and Oliver North to come to Billy Graham's 90th birthday, in an attempt to completely destroy Billy G's reputation.
Or is this question just an example of the fervour of the convert, F. S. being said convert?
Franklin probably thought he was enhancing his dad's reputation by showcasing his right on evangelical friends. All he needed was Ted Cruz to complete the set. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) Billy did look suitably thrilled at the guest list.
The brand of right wing, Tea Party voting, Fox News watching probably is on the wane. Given that the majority are over 50 and they've not managed to convince a new generation, then time is going to achieve everything that reasoned argument never did. That said, a beast is at it's most dangerous when it's in it's death throes so I wouldn't count them out quite yet.
There isn't a direct equivilent in the UK, but I have heard mutterings of Christians voting for UKIP as they were the "Christian alternative". WTF?
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@Mudfrog, I think that Jade Constable is right, that evangelicalism appeals to a Western consumerist mindset - but I think it goes further than that. Essentially, evangelicalism is a product of Modernism, so it has a kind of Enlightenment/Post-Enlightenment appeal too.
As regards its appeal in other cultures and societies - Communist China, sub-Saharan Africa - well, there will be other elements within evangelicalism's DNA that would apply and appeal in those cases.
Because evangelical has appealed to a Western post-18th century mindset doesn't mean that other aspects of it aren't going to appeal in other contexts.
My point really was that these non-European societies see a more widespread evangelical church presence than we do in the west. If evangelicalism were so attractive to the west it would be bigger - in Africa the Salvation Army is absolutely HUGE. In 15 years - you'll not believe this - there was a 50% increase in the number of Salvationists in one of the countries (Zambia or Zimbabwe, I can't remember - or was it Kenya...?) Anyway, I don't see evangelicalism as being more popular in the west - I see it being amazingly popular in the developing or oppressed world.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
There isn't a direct equivilent in the UK, but I have heard mutterings of Christians voting for UKIP as they were the "Christian alternative". WTF?
Yeah, one of my best mates voted UKIP recently on exactly this basis. He usually votes Conservative but doesn't like the socially liberal (at least when it comes to sexuality issues) turn taken under Cameron's leadership. I don't think my friend liked Cameron saying he supports same-sex marriage because he's a Conservative rather than despite being a Conservative...
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The point I'm trying to make, Mudfrog is that evangelicalism HAS been popular and successful to an extent in the West due to the way it accords with particular post-Enlightenment values - including individualism.
Hence the growth in churches with a baptistic rather than paedo-baptist polity in recent years - it ties in with the zeitgeist to a certain extent.
I'd also argue that the period when evangelicalism was going to exert its greatest appeal here in the West is probably over - although things could change.
I'm not at all surprised at the growth of evangelicalism in Sub-saharan Africa - and for different - but entirely dissimilar reasons - for its growth in Latin America.
In Sub-Saharan Africa it won't be the individualism aspect that strikes a chord - although there will be an element of that and I do believe that aspects of evangelicalism are certainly empowering both for individuals and communities - but other aspects. It has a direct appeal and offers a 'direct' experience and engagement with God - in a way that is certainly going to appeal in an African context. There isn't a single sociological reason for this, but sociology and culture is part of it.
In South America, I would argue that the appeal lies in the sense of community - the sense of belonging to something bigger than oneself.
There are clear socio-cultural reasons why, for instance, Methodism was going to appeal to people in early industrial-revolution England but why it is going to have less appeal in a post-industrial context.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think it was Meic Stephens (and I can't remember his sidekick and collaborator) who said that disaffected evangelicals largely move in one of three directions.
They either go:
- Liberal
- Mystic or
- High
A lot, unfortunately, do drop out of church life altogether. I'm not convinced, though, that they tend to lose their faith.
I know plenty of ex-restorationist 'new church' types who have - for whatever reason - found it difficult to settle anywhere else and who have essentially a developed a 'churchless faith' - but they still believe. I'll be catching up with one of them in a few week's time.
Yes - that has been my experience too. I have known a number of people who are "ex-church" but whose faith is still relatively strong (though somewhat battered).
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Yes, Gamaliel has said what I was really trying to say to Mudfrog. Economic systems have influence on this too - the history of evangelicalism is intertwined with the history of capitalism, and it's not surprising that countries that are getting more strongly capitalist are also seeing evangelical growth. Yes, there were/are strong underground evangelical churches in communist countries, but also RC and Orthodox - speaking about say, communist Poland ie the country of Pope JP II as a secret evangelical hotspot is rather off in terms of history! Left-wing movements and Catholicism have been closely aligned in the past, and many still are - South American countries that are growing more capitalist are usually growing more evangelical.
All that said - I think evangelicalism (yes even the middle group of yours Mudfrog) has to change or it will be left with the cessationists and prosperity gospellers. I'm trying to stay out of DH territory - a lot of the change deals with that, but not so much the specifics, more how the churches deal with it. With DH issues and other controversies, I find that evangelical churches tend to view them as issues that secular society has forced on them, rather than issues that affect their congregation. I'm sure it applies to Catholics too, I just have less experience of that side outside of Anglicanism. I think evangelical churches need both more introspection and more engagement and communication within their congregations about how controversial issues really affect them, because I can guarantee that there will be GLEs (good little evangelicals) that are affected by nasty secular issues too. I think that's what's going to be what lets churches be dynamic and growing rather than static and ultimately stagnating. I realise there was a fair bit of vagueness there! There are going to be non-DH issues that need dealing with like that though, it's just DH ones that come to mind immediately.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
There isn't a direct equivilent in the UK, but I have heard mutterings of Christians voting for UKIP as they were the "Christian alternative". WTF?
Yeah, one of my best mates voted UKIP recently on exactly this basis. He usually votes Conservative but doesn't like the socially liberal (at least when it comes to sexuality issues) turn taken under Cameron's leadership. I don't think my friend liked Cameron saying he supports same-sex marriage because he's a Conservative rather than despite being a Conservative...
There was a passing reference to UKIP as the Christian alternative in the letters page of Christianity a few months ago. The writer supported them because of their anti-European stance - as they felt that was the source of much of the anti-Biblical legislation that needed putting a stop to.
How you square that with their unBiblical racism, hatred of the poor etc is a bit of a mystery. Actually, there's a thread in here that I'll try and start.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif){kind=icon}
