The New Evangelical Social Engagement, Part 2
Phillip
Luke Sinitiere
Similar
to Seth Dowland’s response,
reading The
New Evangelical Social Engagement left me perplexed, but in a good way.
What is it that we mean by the term evangelicalism, with its historical
baggage, political connotations, and multiple expressions? Yet there it is,
still: evangelicalism. It is here, present (and past), in the form of
self-identifying evangelicals or self-identifying evangelical institutions; but
then it is, again, elusive, a social and political construct or frame deployed
over time and used to advance legislative objectives or cultural arguments. In
the midst of these questions, discussions, and arguments, the editors and
essayists in The New Evangelical Social Engagement
leave us perplexed in a good way by providing much about which to ponder, reflect,
analyze, and of course engage in future scholarship.
While
Seth’s insightful summary provided much to consider in terms of new evangelical
political opinion, the history of evangelical politics, environmental activism,
and social outreach, for me the volume highlighted the multiple methodologies and
numerous disciplinary perspectives currently used to analyze the undefinable,
but identifiable, evangelicalism. While Seth was particularly enthusiastic
about the way that chapters on politics and activism open new doors for future
analysis—an excitement I share and look forward to in the form of his own
forthcoming work on new evangelical politics—my enthusiasm centers on how
particular chapters offer what ethnography and sociology (and for that matter psychology,
with T. M. Luhrmann’s When
God Talks Back in mind) will continue to reveal about evangelical
identity and its fascinating lived, expressed dimensions.
Although
trained as a historian to have faith in documentary evidence, I have also
learned to see the light from engaging in fieldwork/participant-observation and
asking questions to practitioners. On these points I’ve learned much from the
theoretical interventions of folks like Robert
Orsi, Ann
Taves, Thomas
Tweed, and Manuel
Vasquez—as well as Kate Bowler’s model of “collaborative ethnography” in Blessed.
But I’m also propelled in this direction when I recall where fellow historian
Randall Balmer refers to himself as a “shade tree sociologist” (here
and here).
For my own work I opt for the term amateur ethnographer since my nearly completed book on Joel Osteen and Lakewood Church employs both the analysis of documentary evidence and the participant-observation of ethnographic fieldwork. For all these reasons
and more, I found in The New Evangelical
Social Engagement intriguing chapters by James Bielo, Omri Elisha, Adriane
Bilous, and Laurel Kearns, along with the co-authored efforts of Michael Emerson
and Gerardo Marti.
Bielo’s
chapter focuses on the “localized” social engagement of a group of “Emerging evangelicals”
in Ohio. Building on his great study Emerging
Evangelicals, Bielo’s fieldwork with new evangelicals associated with
the Emerging church movement zeroed in on group scripture study and organized
attempts at spiritual formation within the context of intentional Christian
community. Bielo’s Emerging evangelicals in Ohio wanted to actively resist the
evangelical division between the spiritual and the temporal (e.g., “in the
world but not of the world”) in favor of an active communalism and focused
community engagement. Bielo’s ethnographic research documented that part of
understanding the Emerging strain of new evangelical social engagement is to
grasp how, in the context of intensive study of the Bible and a desire to make
a spiritual imprint on “the world,” theoretical commitments to communalism and
social activism exist in tension with evangelicalism’s identifiable
individualism. Bielo’s work in this chapter and in his books
on evangelical scriptural analysis expertly show how ethnography can reveal
important aspects of evangelical life. If his previous scholarship is any
indication, then Bielo’s current
ethnography of a theme park associated with the Answers in Genesis
operation—especially in light of recent coverage of the Bill Nye-Ken Ham “debate”—will
no doubt create a compelling ethnographic analysis that will prompt us to think
in new ways about evangelical social engagement.
Omri
Elisha’s chapter builds on his illuminating ethnography of Tennessee evangelicals,
Moral
Ambition, by charting recent intersections of evangelical-Catholic
social activism. Born from some evangelicals’ willingness to read and learn
from Catholic writers coupled with evangelicals’ energy to engage social issues
in American society, the “resonances” (p. 74) between evangelicals and
Catholics on questions about suffering, charity, and social justice reveal “closer
alignments in their modalities of religious and social action” (p. 74). Elisha’s
research revealed evangelical efforts at compassion inspired by the Catholic
writer Henri Nouwen. Influenced by the materiality of Catholic sacrementalism,
Elisha’s evangelical informants expressed a commitment to an embodiment of “grace”
in the form of charity and self-giving. Finally, evangelical articulations of
social justice by employing language of the “common good” and enacting
initiatives of environmental justice, for example, highlighted more robust understandings
of structural injustice (as opposed to the evangelical obsession with personalized
infractions of “sinful” behavior) that owe a debt to Catholic social teaching. Elisha’s
chapter shows that on-the-ground analysis of contemporary evangelicalism—as
opposed to solely textual or discursive study—unveils fascinating, complementary,
and contradictory elements of the new evangelical social engagement.
In a
chapter on evangelical social engagement through the creation of multiracial
congregations, social scientists Michael Emerson and Gerardo Marti—both
accomplished scholars in the field of race relations and the sociology of
religion—track the study of race and evangelicalism in a new direction by
demonstrating first that in the last four or five decades (white) evangelicals have
become conscious of America’s racialized society and, as a result, seek a
social engagement of racial justice. Second, Emerson and Marti show that the consequent
rise of multiracial congregations created a class of pastoral leaders the
authors call “diversity experts” (p. 179) whose churches adopt a “badge of
diversity” (p. 183) as a way to instruct other congregations how to transition
from a homogenous racial identity to one of multiple racial identities. The
problem, as Emerson and Marti show in their close analysis of rhetoric and discourse,
is that the evangelical activist impulse that brought about positive changes on
the diversity front actually work against evangelicals. Evangelicalism’s relationalism
leads to “diversity experts” trafficking in racial stereotypes and perpetuating
racial divisions due to an inability to understand structural racism apart from
individual acts of discrimination and by
avoiding tough, emotionally charged discussions about race altogether. Emerson
and Marti suggest a very measured hope for the future of new evangelical social
engagement on race matters. While this new social engagement on race has
witnessed advances towards racial and economic justice, spiritualizing
categories of race and ethnicity has failed up to this point to reckon robustly
with the structural inequalities that fostered injustice all along.
Additional
exciting chapters rooted in aspects of ethnographic fieldwork include those of Adriane
Bilous on evangelical feminist politics and Laurel Kearns on evangelical environmental
activism. Bilous’s chapter focuses on millennial evangelical female “servant
activists” (p. 110) to understand a broad cross-section of younger evangelicals
in New York City. Through fieldwork, Bilous discovered that these servant
activists maintain a fidelity to evangelical theological teachings and an abiding skepticism towards
defining evangelical political action in terms of the Republican Party, while
applying a service-oriented politics of social engagement to local antipoverty
work, for example, as well as to global eradication of human trafficking. Inspired
from her own work at the intersection of religion and environmental activism, Kearns’s
chapter effectively explains the diversity of evangelical opinions about what environmentalism
actually means, from money-saving strategies of megachurches to go green, to well-funded
evangelicals who deny climate change, to other broad-based coalition work
associated with groups such as the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common
Good. With activist logics bathed in scriptural teachings that suggest care of
and for God’s creation, Kearns shows that problematic to green evangelicals’
future is the largely Anglo roster of environmental activists, as well as the
individualism that hampers a evangelicals’ grasp of societal structures that
lead to environmental devastation in the first place. Nevertheless, Kearns
predicts that a large range of environmental issues will remain vital to the
future of green evangelicals’ social engagement.
In
sum, The New Evangelical Social Engagement
does not provide an overarching definition of “evangelical” or explain the
benefits or drawbacks of either continuing to use the term or discarding it
altogether. However, this worthwhile, must-read essay collection does leave us
with the future task of continuing to highlight contextual, local features of
evangelical beliefs and actions, providing analysis from multiple disciplinary
perspectives. It persuades us to attend to the complex political, racial,
ethnic, and/or gender alignments on a whole host of political and social issues.
Above all, it compels us to remember that never (and certainly not in the
future) has only one political orientation or political party defined what “new”
evangelical social engagement means.
Comments
To the question of defining "evangelical," as opposed to say, liberal Protestant or Catholic, descriptors like individualistic, entrepreneurial, and utilitarian come to mind. The reflection on the Marti and Emerson chapter is especially leading me to ask: Do these "new" engagements mark a significant break with those aforementioned evangelical traits? Does Bielo's work or the new monasticism chapter, for instance, suggest that these evangelicals are developing a more robust, corporate sense of the church (like liberal evangelicals tried to do in the 1920s and 1930s)?
So while I think the jury is still out with regard to your query on historical comparisons, there does seem to be distinct communalist impulses present. It also strikes me that one’s perspective on this question may be determined in part from what disciplinary framework (or frameworks) one is working from. Yet, one of the conclusions I draw from the history, sociology, and ethnography I've read on the subject persuades me that the material and political realities evangelicals hope to change and/or adjust are typically hampered by the persistent individualist (or, as you rightly say, entrepreneurial, utilitarian, etc.) thrust that often spiritualizes culture. Or at least the impact of evangelical social engagement on particular issues have unintended, ironic and/or contradictory outcomes.