To Which Church Do You Belong?

Published on by D. G. Hart

The fault line that still doesn’t show up on the Allies’ radar:

The recent controversy surrounding World Vision USA’s decision to open employment to same-sex couples and the organization’s subsequent reversal reveals the fault lines in evangelicalism today.

For the evangelicals distraught by World Vision’s initial decision, the controversy was never about the legitimacy or worthiness of people with differing views of marriage doing good work around the world. We should applaud good deeds of relief and compassion wherever we see them and wherever they come from. No, this particular controversy was about the meaning of evangelical.

Can an institution with an historic evangelical identity be divided on an issue as central as marriage and family and still be evangelical? Related to this discussion are questions about the authority and interpretation of Scripture, cultural engagement, and institutional power. All sides of the debate recognize that the definition of evangelical is at stake, which is why some are now publicly casting off the term altogether.

The World Vision decision was a tremor that warns us of a coming earthquake in which churches and leaders historically identified with evangelicalism will divide along all-too-familiar fault lines.

At the risk of sounding proud, Protestants who actually believe that church membership and ordination matter, the World Vision kerfuffle was just more background noise.

11 thoughts on “To Which Church Do You Belong?”

  1. A lot of the angst over the term “evangelical” would go away if churches would just adopt a historic Protestant Confession. It’s trying to reinvent the wheel (and please everyone) that causes problems.

    Like

  2. FYI, posted on this over at The Federalist:

    “Yes, there is a code of Christian conduct — God’s Law — but it is lived out in the community of the church, of forgiven sinners. The sinner of the church is not alone, but is embraced by Gospel promises, the assurance of pardon in the sacrament, and a loving body of Christ that desires to support one another as they grow in holiness. And only in extremis, when these simple terms of divine forgiveness are absolutely rejected, does it sorrowfully acknowledge that the Christian identity is no more.

    This is the essence of Christianity, and it is precisely what the parachurch lacks. Which is why World Vision is a perfectly fine relief organization, but has nothing essentially to do with the Gospel.”

    http://thefederalist.com/2014/04/04/for-world-vision-is-sexuality-more-important-than-theology/

    Like

  3. Erik, doesn’t every Evangelical church display a confession or set of beliefs that is basically in lockstep with obvious streams of E?

    Like

  6. I think E means Evangelicalism, making this the one and only context in which dropping E is good for one’s health.

    Like

  8. Very good, Jesse

    (typing Evangelical is brutal, best to take a Wodehousian approach and simply initialize a word that is already stated in a thought and cannot be confused for another)

    Like

  10. I don’t capitalize on my name, or many opportunities in life. Reading a half-dozen reviews on the bio of eec has left me wanting to be gruntled once more.

    Like

  11. Evangelical churches don’t have Confessions. What they have is a statement of faith that is identical to whatever the guru believes at whatever Seminary the most learned pastor on staff attended. Often many of the other pastors will have not gone to Seminary so they just parrot what this lead guy who parrots the Seminary guru says.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.