“Unlike their spiritual ancestors, modern evangelicals have not pursued comprehensive thinking under God or sought a mind shaped to its furthest reaches by Christian perspectives.”
~Mark Noll
He’s right.
Where to start this rant… hmmmmm…
Noll starts his book by acknowledging that the modern Evangelical Church has had “dynamic success at a popular level.” And it has. But, despite this (or perhaps because of it) the modern Evangelical Church is not exactly known as a great institution of thought…
Quite the opposite.
All I really have to draw from on this topic is my own experience with the modern Evangelical Church. Here’s my spin on the facts, whatever they might be:
The literature with the “Evangelical Church” label is penned by Francine Rivers, Ted Dekker, Jerry B. Jenkins, and the like. Or it has “Chicken Soup” in the title. This is bad.
“Evangelical Church” politics seem to involve yelling. And arrogance. And television. And a moral obligation to vote Republican. This is bad.
“Evangelical Church” conferences need lights, and popular music groups, and lots of crying. This is bad.
The “Evangelical Church” teen-girl Bible study means ice cream and purity talks. This is bad.
I grew up in “Evangelical Church.” I have never read the entire Bible. This is bad.
When Noll was talking about approaching other subjects besides theology in a distinctly “Evangelical” manner, I grasped for something comparable. How do you study economics in a “Christian” way? How do you study anthropology in a “Christian” way? You can certainly do it in a “secular” way… that seems to be the only way anyone does it these days.
But is there a “Christian” way? Or is Richard Hofstadter right when he says, “In fact, learning and cultivation appear to be handicaps in the propagation of faith”?
Well, as long as the Evangelical Church keeps feeding itself intellectual Ramen, who’s going to prove him wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment