My last post attempted to name the theological streams that I feel refreshed by. Let me say first that the three terms - evangelical, wesleyan, and anabaptist are not in any particular order of importance. I don't list evangelical first because it is my primary descriptor that I read the other two through. I believe actually that all three of these streams complement and challenge one another in interesting ways.
First, evangelical. What does it mean? I almost gave up calling myself this a few years ago, because the term is so elusive. Several scholars have suggested that the term suffers from overuse and should be discontinued. But I still see value in the term used a certain way. Here are the things that I am still refreshed by in the evangelical stream:
1. Evangelicals tend to take the Word seriously. While some other streams of Christianity are backing away from the Bible - evangelicals have generally stood their ground in saying that the Word is the touchstone of Christian theology and practice. I have learned from the evangelicals to take the Word seriously.
2. Evangelicals have stressed the importance of a personal decision to follow Jesus. I believe this is an important point when we live in a culture with so much nominal Christianity.
3. Evangelicals have always emphasized the need to share our faith with others. I believe that a passionate witness for Christ is important.
All three of these evangelical points still nurture me. I believe these three points are part of an evangelical heritage that I cannot get away from. However, I have struggled with other evangelical weaknesses and have had to fill out my thinking from other streams.
Here are some of the weaknesses that I have had to wrestle with from within evangelicalism.
-Evangelical commitment to a personal relationship with God has sometimes discounted the importance of the church. We have given the impression that "me and Jesus" is all that really matters - and that belonging to a community of Christians is less important.
-Conservative evangelicals tend to have a very naive understanding of church, society and politics. Many seem to believe that the U.S. has always been a Christian nation and that we now have to fight to win it back. This has led to short-sided political stances, support of militarism, and lack of substantive critique of the role of church and state.
-Evangelicals still have (I believe) a small dose of anti-intellectualism, and we struggle to convince pastors and congregations of the necessity of robust theological thinking. Church lite seems to be winning the day.
-Many evangelicals still tend to see salvation as a point in time when we accept Christ and then we are ready for heaven. Evangelicals have done a poor job talking about what it means to live in the kingdom now.
-Evangelicals are getting better - but they have been slow in understanding social issues, such as poverty, war, and environmental issues. We have also been slow to develop a mature understanding of structural sin.
So why - if I list all these objections (and I could list more) do I still accept the term "evangelical". I guess because I believe the term is still worth fighting for. The emphasis of Word, conversion, and witness that I mentioned earlier - the strong suit of evangelicals - they are still worth believing and living.
