‘What kind of church is yours?’ Ever been asked that by someone who isn’t a Christian? I’m never quite sure what to say. ‘Evangelical’ – I suppose!
I’ve often wondered about whether the term, evangelical, is one that will continue to be worthwhile using. It doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. You can’t say it has an immediate connection with those who aren’t in the know. Its potential for being misconstrued is quite significant as well. With that in mind, is it worth ditching the term altogether and perhaps use a different label?
For my own church, there are a lot of labels I could use, except that most of them are to signify what we’re not rather than what we are. Using the term Protestant would indicate that we’re not Catholic, and the term Non-Conformist would indicate that we’re not Anglican. Our church uses the term Baptist in its name, but we’re not part of any Baptist network and if that term is only useful for indicating a particular view on baptism then that’s not very helpful in positively portraying what else we’re about.
Definitions of evangelical
The label, evangelical, is one that has been in use for centuries. It has been defined as encompassing four core commitments: to genuine conversion; to a life lived serving the Lord (particularly through sharing the gospel); to a high view of the Bible; to the atoning sacrifice of Jesus’s death on the cross. From these four core elements additional suggestions have been made, such as a commitment to the person of Christ, the work of the Holy Spirit, and belonging to the local church. If a person has a high view of the Bible, as in the third commitment, then these additions would certainly be included, whether implicitly or explicitly.
Evangelical, as a term, has been particularly helpful in riding the wave of theological liberalism. As liberals have taken a low view of the Bible, pulling it to pieces and reducing it to a human book, and as they have turned the death of Christ into a mere example of suffering at its best, so evangelicals have been able to rally around the term to uphold these core beliefs. This has been especially helpful for those within mixed denominations. With liberalism taking prominence in some of these denominations, evangelicals have then been able to find unity and fellowship in interdenominational gospel partnerships and other networks based on these evangelical theological commitments.
The core commitments of evangelicals haven’t changed. Liberals have not disappeared. But our battles have shifted. No longer is the main contention over our core theological commitments. Those battle lines have been demarcated and cemented over the years. Instead, the battles are now over the outworking of those differing commitments. For example, as many in the liberal sector embrace a so-called progressive view of gender and sexuality, evangelicals continue to hold firm to a so-called traditional view because of our ongoing commitment to a high view of the Bible, including its teaching on gender and sexuality. Being able to distinguish evangelicals from those who aren’t renders the label to be useful within the church and within theological debate for the meantime.
But how useful is the term in explaining who we are to those outside the church? In a post-Christian context, as we have been arguably for decades now, it’s not just that these theological debates are of no interest to the vast majority of the population. Rather, these distinctions of evangelicals and liberals simply have no frame of reference whatsoever. To most in our society, these terms are completely meaningless, theologically speaking. In fact, being defined by theological disputes is more likely to be off-putting to the non-Christian. If they are aware of the term, their understanding of evangelicals is more likely to have been influenced by whatever news coverage they have been exposed to in the media.
US politics
Whenever America has elections, evangelicals are given significant consideration by the Republicans, and the media is not shy about referring to them. The term seems to be used more for a particular political persuasion and demographic than for a theological stance. Though we’re over a year beyond his term of office, controversial Republican candidates like Donald Trump, who claim to be representatives for evangelicals, do no favours for us who share the name but live on the other side of the pond. Whatever our political persuasion, having Trump as our representative is not a good look in the UK.
The PR issue is not merely an American problem though. In the UK we’ve had our own scandals of recent years which have also appeared in the media, and the term evangelical is never too far away from those who have been embroiled. In fact there have been a number of recent scandals on a global scale beyond the UK and USA involving those who would have been considered to be evangelical. These stories will have crept into people’s newsfeeds and consciousness, influencing their perspective.
Whatever the source of people’s assumptions, in my experience those who are outside the church tend to think of evangelicals as either politically right wing, or ‘happy clappy’ in our worship style. Many of us who are evangelicals will be right wing and/or will be ‘happy clappy’. But many of us will be left wing, centrist, apathetic or a-n-other politically, and our worship style will likewise be on a wide-ranging spectrum from hands in pockets to hands in the air. These do not primarily define us. These kinds of wrong assumptions will cause many to misconstrue and miss out on what’s at the heart of who we are as evangelicals – those four core commitments.
Little of what I’ve said so far has taken into account the global reach of evangelicalism. According to researcher Sebastian Fath, over a quarter of all Christians around the world are evangelical, and 85% of them live outside of the UK and USA. There will be different nuances in different countries, but having that core shared global identity is not one we should discard lightly. For many around the world the term will continue to be precious and useful.
Opportunities to clarify
If we’ve ever had to explain the term evangelical to an unbeliever, it’s a good chance to correct those misconceptions people have and to positively explain what we do believe and even to convey the gospel through that. Being able to share that we take God’s word seriously can lead on to explanations of what the message of the Bible is. A chance to explain what the atonement accomplished is surely an opportunity to communicate the gospel, which is not to be missed. Yet, even though using the term evangelical might then require us to explain it and give us an opportunity to convey the gospel to those who are curious, you’ve got to ask how many might be put off by us using that term at all and who neither ask nor give us an opportunity to explain.
With all that in mind, would doing away with the term evangelical be preferable? Would it even be feasible? I’m not sure. I’m not sure what term would be useful in replacing it even if it were both preferable and feasible to do so. As an outward-facing term, its usefulness is limited and almost certainly unhelpfully confusing if given without any explanation. Perhaps labels altogether are unnecessary and unhelpful in facing outwards to the unchurched. As an inward clarification for our own theological position, if it isn’t going away and if it does serve in an ongoing helpful theological distinction, then maybe it is not past its best before date, at least not yet. Maybe we should even do more to embrace it and celebrate it.
Jonny Raine is pastor of Pontrhydyrun Baptist Church in Cwmbran and the editor of the Evangelical Magazine, the bi-monthly magazine of the Evangelical Movement of Wales (EMW). He was previously an assistant pastor in ChristChurch Harpenden and undertook training at Malpas Road Evangelical Church, Newport. He grew up at Bethel Evangelical Church, Leicester. He says: ‘Being a pastor is a real joy, especially to a congregation that makes the work “a joy, not a burden” ’(Heb. 13:17).
