Reflections on An Evangelical Manifesto

There has been much talk in the new recently about An Evagelical Manifesto (see article from CNN here).  For better or worse, I decided that it is time to put my voice into the coversation.

First, a little background.  An Evangelical Manifesto (AEM) was drafted by some leading Evangelicals over the last three years for two purposes: “first to address the confusions and corruptions that attend the term Evangelical in the United States and much of the Western world today, and second to clarify where we stand on issues that have caused consternation over Evangelicals in public life” (2).  The main authors include Os Guinness and Timothy George.  The website also includes a list of those involved in the Steering Committee and a ever growing list of signatories.

I really like this document.  The first section of the document explains that an Evangelical must be defined theologically:

Evangelicals are Christians who define themselves, their faith, and their lives according to the Good News of Jesus of Nazareth.  (Evangelical comes from the Greek word for good news, or gospel.) Believing that the Gospel of Jesus is God’s good news for the whole world, we affirm with the Apostle Paul that we are “not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation.” Contrary to widespread misunderstanding today, we Evangelicals should be defined theologically, and not politically, socially, or culturally.

I am an Evangelical, and the reason why is because I’m devoted to Jesus and his gospel.  I am not devoted to a political party, a sub-culture or a social demographic.  Jesus is my Lord, and his message is what consumes me.  I absolutely agree with this section of the document and the theological affirmations that it is grounded in.

The document goes on and highlights seven implications of this meaning, which include (5-9):

1. First, to be Evangelical is to hold a belief that is also a devotion.
2. Second, Evangelical belief and devotion is expressed as much in our worship and in our deeds as in our creeds.
3. Third, Evangelicals are followers of Jesus in a way that is not limited to certain churches or contained by a definable movement. 
4. Fourth, as stressed above, Evangelicalism must be defined theologically and not politically; confessionally and not culturally. 
5. Fifth, the Evangelical message, “good news” by definition, is overwhelmingly positive, and always positive before it is negative. 
6. Sixth, Evangelicalism should be distinguished from two opposite tendencies to which Protestantism has been prone: liberal revisionism and conservative fundamentalism. 
7. Seventh, Evangelicalism is distinctive for the way it looks equally to both the past and the future.

Each point made is extremely evenhanded and avoids extremes.  For example, point five explains that the gospel is “overwhelmingly positive, and always positive before it is negative.”  However, this point is not saying that Evangelicals affirm the postmodern idea that everything is ok and relative.  As the document explains: “Evangelicals sometimes have to make strong judgments about what is false, unjust, and evil” (8).   The good news is, after all, for a fallen world consisting of sinners who have fallen away from God.  This point is not popular, but it is what makes the message of Jesus such good news.

The next section is about reforming Evangelical behavior.  The tone of this section is extremely humble as it describes the various ways that Evangelicals fall short of the very message we proclaim.  I resonate with much of this section as well.

The final section is about Evangelical interaction in public life.  Again, notice the even-handedness of each section:

1. An Evangelical’s faith is “Neither privatized nor politicized.”
2. An Evangelical’s affirm “A Civil rather than a Sacred or a Naked public square.”
3. An Evangelical seeks “The way of Jesus, not Constantine.”  That is, Evangelicals wish to avoid the extremes of ”coercive secularism on one side, once typified by communism and now by the softer but strict French-style secularism; and religious extremism on the other side,typified by Islamist violence … our choice is for a civil public square, and a working respect for the rights of all, even those with whom we disagree” (18-19).

The document concludes with an invitation to all different types of people “to take serious note of these declarations and to respond where appropriate” since this document speaks only for the Evangelicals that have drafted and signed the document.

As one can see, there is much to like about this document.  I really only have one critique, and it is a small one.  I do agree with Al Mohler who said that “when the Manifesto presents a theological definition of Evangelicals, it turns out to be a rather minimal definition.”  The draft could have been much more theologically rich.  However, to be fair, the objective was not to draft a theological confession for Evangelicals.  I do disagree with Dr. Mohler that this point, and the others that he makes in his response, are enough to not support or even sign the document.  Any Evangelical should affirm this statement and not let minor critiques prevent support.

I encourage you to read the document for yourself, either the summary version or the full version.  I thank God for those who took up this work so that we Evangelicals would be defined by Jesus and his message, and by nothing else!