On or about May 7, a group of evangelical leaders will publish a document to be called “An Evangelical Manifesto: The Washington Declaration of Identity and Public Commitment.”  Here are my thoughts on the material posted at the following address:  http://blog.beliefnet.com/castingstones/2008/04/guest-post-whos-evangelical-ma.html?bt=polmashup  You can then choose to return here to read my thoughts or just read them in the comment section of that post.

It seems to me that the “Manifesto” may prove to be more of a watershed than it was intended to be.  Rather than advancing the idea that only a certain individual or group of individuals are entitled to speak for the evangelical community, it may reveal who is and is not really an evangelical.  Since the final document and its signatories are still somewhat enigmatic, it would be unfair to say which group is or is not evangelical. 

 

However, whatever definition of the term “evangelical” one uses, few would deny that it has historically identified a group unwilling to be labeled either “liberal” or “fundamentalist.”  The pejorative use of these two terms from the poles of the Christian community spectrum necessitated the “middle ground.” 

 

But, as is the case in many such definitions, the “middle ground” is shifting, or more accurately, widening. What we once called liberal now qualifies as evangelical, and “fundamentalists” have become increasingly marginalized as the Amish and more conservative Mennonite groups were in a previous century.  We have attached the word “legalism” to efforts mounted to stay the influence of the world on the church.  It reminds me of the little old lady who prayed, “Lord, forgive me.  I do so many things I used to call sin.”

 

I fear that rather than allowing the church to teach doctrine and inform lifestyle with Scripture, we have chosen to pressure the church into accepting both doctrines and lifestyle practices as normative that were soundly rejected by the previous generation.  In the interest of “personal freedom” we have torn down fences before we learned exactly why they were built.  Perhaps we have released an unthinkable beast on the church.  Personal choice has become the watchword, and hence the continual widening of what we call “evangelical.”

 

Nowhere is this better confirmed than in the findings of a recent survey among Roman Catholics in the USA pursuant to the Pope’s visit. The survey found that a high percentage of Catholics in our country feel that the Catholic Church is out of touch with their views.  This is to say that in the minds of those surveyed, the church’s value to their culture is diminished to the degree that it fails to capitulate to the shifting sands of their adjusted spiritual standards. 

 

Maybe it’s time we rethink the term “evangelical” and seek to find consensus on a practical definition of its boundaries. Only then will we know who can speak for that segment of the community.

 

Your response: