Preliminary Comments: A group of Evangelicals have produced a document titled, An Evangelical Manifesto: A Declaration of Evangelical Identity and Public Commitment. Currently, there are over 80 Charter Signatories including a number of high profile Evangelical leaders, pastors, and scholars.
As soon as the document was available online, I printed it off in triplicate, bound it (yes, I have a binding machine for just such an occasion), and began to comb over its contents word by word. In my “first read”, I was immediately impressed with the tone, intent, and substance of the Manifesto. Though I have some reservations (and will most likely have more in time), I believe this documents is a substantial contribution towards developing a robust Evangelical identity in an age where the very meaning of the word is on the verge of being forever lost. After an afternoon of deliberation and study, I added my name to the list of signatories (an insignificant addition, to be sure) and agree with the overall direction and content of the Manifesto.
Reasons I signed the Evangelical Manifesto:
The Manifesto stands firmly behind the Gospel of Jesus Christ - The documents asserts the deity of Christ, his death and resurrection, his atonement of our sins, and the imputation of his righteousness to believers. It affirms the "total truthfulness and supreme authority of the Bible" (p 6). Furthermore, it affirms the great Reformational doctrines of Scripture Alone, Grace Alone, Faith Alone, and Christ Alone. Perhaps most importantly, it forcefully rejects the revisionist liberal ideologies which strip Christ of his redemptive power. In an age where we are witnessing a wide-scale Christian abandonment of robust theological identity, the Manifesto declares that "Evangelicals should be defined theologically, and not politically, socially, or culturally" (p 4, 8). Though one may question whether many of the Charter Signatories themselves have a “robust theological identity”, it is refreshing to see a major Evangelical document recognizing the centrality of theology to the Christian faith
Negatively, the document is light on teasing out the theme of repentance of sin. The Manifesto contains a very strong call for the Evangelical community to repent of not genuinely and consistently living out the Gospel--and this is a very, very good thing. However, when explaining the Gospel itself there is no clear reference to the need for the sinner to repent of their sin. No genuine reading of the New Testament can ignore the foundational nature of repentance for salvation. Elements of this thought can be found throughout the document, but one searches in vain for a clear, forthright affirmation of this biblical teaching.
The Manifesto boldly calls for the Lordship of Christ in every sphere of life – The Manifesto states, "We believe that being disciples of Jesus means serving him as Lord in every sphere of our lives, secular as well as spiritual, public as well as private, in deeds as well as words, and in every moment of our days on earth...."(p 6). The Manifesto both recognizes our failures to live out the Gospel while simultaneously calls us to live our entire lives as disciples of Christ. I was disappointed to see so little focus on God’s glory (which is the reason Christ calls us to live as radical disciples in the first place). The 5th “sola” of the Reformation is not emphasized in the document, though one should not minimize the clear call to discipleship that the Manifesto contains.
The Manifesto rejects both liberal revisionism and fundamentalist isolationism.- Pages 8-9 of the manifesto take issue with the liberal and fundamentalist versions of 'Christianity'. The Manifesto strongly differentiates itself from liberalism, maintaining that it holds to a counterfeit faith that has "cut itself off from believers across the world and down the generations" and is "no longer...solidly, decisively Christian". The document, using Kierkegaard's phrase, refers to liberals as "kissing Judases" who "betray Jesus with an interpretation".
The document is more gentle with the Fundamentalist, though it does offer thoughtful critique. By isolating themselves from the culture, the fundamentalists have in effect entombed the glory of the Gospel within their own subculture. By hiding their light under a bushel, they are at risk of expelling the very flame of Christ's love within their hearts.
The Manifesto reasserts the primacy of personal transformation.- Much of the document is devoted to calling on Christians to first live out the implications of the gospel in their personal lives. It demonstrates its disgust with ‘gospels’ that replace radical discipleship with “therapeutic techniques, worship as entertainment,…expressions of faith that are churchless and little better than vapid spirituality, meeting real needs with pandering felt needs…feel-good gospels of health, wealth, and human potential, and religious happy talk” (p 11).
Page 12 of the document summons Christians to live out the radical implications of Christ’s lordship—which are only possible when we embrace the robust message of Scripture. This section, which I will not repeat here, is a natural outworking of the beautiful definition of the gospel given earlier in the document. The earnest believer would do well to read and reread this section.
The Manifesto calls for faithful engagement in the public sphere.- Recognizing the two extremes (both the privatization and politicization of faith), the document reminds Christians that we are “called to an allegiance higher than party, ideology, and nationality” and are never “to be completely equated with any party” (p 15). It sees Christians who confuse faith with a specific political party (whether liberal or conservative) as being “useful idiots”(an unfortunate phrase that should not have been included) who are simply being manipulated and deceived (p 15). It reminds us that “the Evangelical soul is not for sale. It has already been bought at an infinite price”.
At the same time, the document empowers Evangelicals to take a stand on the important issues of the day. It champions the need to address the social evils of abortion, racism, genocide, and oppression—and to actively resist these evils and intervene. The Manifesto strongly repudiates the prevailing view that Christian faith has no place in the public square, and calls upon Christians to live out their personal faith publicly.
Weaknesses of the Document:
There is no mention of the need for repentance – As mentioned above, the document suffers from this glaring deficiency. It rightly calls on the Evangelical community to repent of not being consistently Christ centered, but fails articulate the concept of repentance in it's presentation of the Gospel. Since the Gospel itself is crystal clear on this issue, any explanation of the gospel should be also.
There are only a few Theologians and Scholars among the Signatories – Evangelical scholarship is poorly represented in the Manifesto. Though it certainly contains some amazing signatories (Timothy George, Darrell Bock, J.P Moreland, Mark Noll, Alvin Plantinga, Kevin Vanhoozer, etc), it excludes some of the most important Evangelical thinkers of our age. Considering the Manifesto defines Evangelicalism “theologically, and not politically, ethically, or culturally”, it seems odd that only a few of the leading Evangelical theologians had a hand in its drafting (in fact, of the above names listed, it appears only Timothy George was involved in the drafting of the Manifesto).
The Manifesto’s commitment to a ‘civic public square’ is naïve and simplistic – While the document correctly affirms the right of religious (or irreligious) expression, it also argues against the right of any one viewpoint to dominate the policies of our nation. It correctly rejects the current atheistic attempt to keep religious morals out of the public sphere, and also rightly reminds us that Christianity is founded upon the principle of persuasion, not coercion. As such, it calls for a distinctively American view of the equal rights of all (whether Christian, Muslim, Atheist, etc).
However, at no point does the Manifesto explain how we can rise above the current culture war. At present, our nation is warring over which vision for morality is best for our country. All parties (Islam, Atheist, Christian, Mormon, etc) are advancing their own ethic and seeking to influence this nation according to that ethic. The policies of a society are merely the enshrinement of a particular ethic (applied to a particular situation).
For example, our country will either uphold the tradition view of marriage (the Christian ethic), meaning that atheists will be forced to accommodate themselves to a foreign ethic; or, we will revise that view to include same-sex or multiple-partner relationships, forcing Christians to accommodate to a foreign ethic. As the culture wars are ethic-driven, holding to a system of ethics will inevitably produce conflict. Instead of lifting Evangelicals above the culture war, it plays a monkey’s game of “see no evil” as it covers its eyes to what is a very real ‘war’. Though it repudiates ethical relativism (quite forcefully), its conclusions cannot logically lead to any other option.
Concluding Evaluation:
In the end, the document does not solve the political conundrum of how Christian faith should relate to the public square, though it does offer some valuable correctives. The documents strength lie not in its view of political engagement, but rather in its definitions of what it means to be Evangelical.
Recommended Links:
An Evangelical Manifesto (main document & website)
An interview with Os Guinness (by Justin Taylor).
A brief summary of the Evangelical Manifesto (also by Taylor)
8 comments: