Crib Sheet: "Values Voters"
Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, and where the terms separate.
By Lauren Dunn, Tufts University
Monday November 6, 2006
Regardless of the election results on November 7, there will undoubtedly be discussion of the “value voters.” After the 2004 election cycle, some analysts identified these voters as mobilized evangelicals who solidified the conservative control of both the legislative and executive branches. So this week, many pollsters are focused on voters of faith to see whether they maintain their conservatism or sway progressive. A poll released by The New York Times and CBS News distinguished “self-described evangelicals” and discovered a huge shift in voter intentions for the 2006 elections from the exit polls of 2004. Evangelical voters split almost equally when asked which party will receive their vote, as opposed to heavily favoring conservative candidates in 2004. And a recent Pew poll found that white evangelical Christians in particular are loosening their party loyalties and may no longer be as reliable a voting block for conservatives as they have been in the past.
Progressives have long represented many of the causes evangelicals care about most, including peacemaking, anti-poverty and anti-hunger work, and environmental stewardship. Many have come to think that evangelicals are only mobilized around social issues like abortion or opposition to gay marriage. But, in fact, the issues that inspire the Christian faithful to act have broadened as evangelicals partner with religious and secular progressives to strengthen today’s progressive movement.
Does this mean that progressives are collaborating with the Christian Right? Hardly. Since 1973, when a group of 40 evangelical leaders created a “Declaration of Evangelical Social Concern,” progressive evangelicals have been reclaiming their mission of fighting injustice, racism, and discrimination. The work of evangelical organizations like Sojourners, a group guided by biblical principles “to transform individuals, communities, the church, and the world,” has helped reinforce the differences between progressive evangelicals and the Christian fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals that form the Religious Right. Still, many in the public square do not recognize these important distinctions, making it important to recall the theological and practical differences between evangelicalism and fundamentalism.
Evangelicals get their name from the Greek word “evangel” which means gospel, referring to the good news of Jesus Christ. As their name suggests, evangelicals are charged with believing, living, and spreading the gospels. There are characteristic beliefs that distinguish evangelicals from other Christians, including mainline Protestants. The first is a strong belief in the infallibility and authority of the Bible as the only inspired Word of God. The second is the necessity of a personal conversion experience, what some evangelicals refer to as being “born-again.” Through this experience, an evangelical must chose to accept that salvation is only through belief in Jesus Christ. Finally, evangelicals are known for feeling a personal responsibility to proselytize their beliefs. For them, Christianity is culturally relevant and the evangel must be shared.
Although these are the most easily and frequently identified characteristics of evangelicals as a whole, in reality evangelicals do not express these characteristics identically across the spectrum. There are a variety of evangelical congregations and churches, including denominational communities, independent and non-denominational gatherings, formal and informal services, small groups of practitioners, and huge mega-churches that meet in auditoriums, and sometimes even stadiums. Today in the United States, the National Association of Evangelicals represents the majority of evangelicals, including 60 member denominations and more than 45,000 churches across America. Around the globe, evangelical churches representing about 420 million evangelical Christians in 127 nations are networked through the World Evangelical Alliance. Included in both of these communities are Christians who identify not only as evangelicals, but also as fundamentalists.
Fundamentalist Christians are sometimes referred to as “neo-evangelicals,” a more conservative movement of Protestants formed at the end of the nineteenth century as a reaction against the modernization of society and religion. As a group, their adherence to the “fundamental” beliefs of Christian faith including the inerrancy of the Bible, the divinity of Jesus, the virgin birth, and the resurrection and return of Jesus is much stricter than that of the larger evangelical population. For example, fundamentalists interpret the Bible not only as inerrant but also as the literal word of God. While evangelicals might understand parts of the Bible as metaphor, fundamentalists read the stories in the Bible as literal accounts of the history of God or the literal words of God passed on through generations of Christians. Literal interpretation of the creation story in the book of Genesis leads many fundamentalists to reject theories of evolution entirely. Fundamentalists generally consider the conversion experience to be a single event or moment in one’s life that led to a devout commitment to Christianity and thus would not recognize a series of events or the maturation of one’s understanding of God to be a born-again experience. Also, fundamentalists take very seriously the return of Jesus and believe in the eventual end of human history. Fundamentalist belief in the imminent Rapture has led many to be less inclined to care for the environment.
While evangelicals and fundamentalists can be technically defined as different, completely separating them into two camps is unrealistic. This spring, Time magazine published a list of the 25 most influential evangelicals, which included both fundamentalist Christians and more mainstream evangelical leaders. Even President Bush, who many think of as a representative of the evangelical Christian community, does not fit into either of these camps neatly—while he calls on the most conservative religious leaders for spiritual and political guidance, he remains a member of the United Methodist church, the largest mainline Protestant church in the United States that, as a whole, advocates for a strong progressive agenda.
Lauren Dunn is a Special Assistant to the Executive Vice President for Policy at the Center for American Progress. In February 2006, she received a BA in Comparative Religion from Tufts University and a BFA in Studio Art at the School of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
--------
Comments
|
!
What an interesting and timely discussion of faith and spiritual motivation. Your article enlightened my little, albeit growing, knowledge of evangelism and fundamentalism. You writing flowed superbly. Well done, lauren!
— lisa - Nov 6, 10:24 PM - #Interesting,well-written article to read on election morning before I head to the polls. Thanks for the continuing education on the effect one’s faith and values has on political choices.
— Patricia - Nov 7, 08:37 AM - #After reading your description of fundamental Christianity, I would like to offer two corrections to assertions that were made.
(1) Neo-evangelicalism is different than fundamentalism. It was a term coined by Harold J. Ockenga in 1947 which refers to those who distanced themselves from the fundamentalists. Among other things, the new group planned to infiltrate mainline denominations in an effort to turn them back to biblical truth. The fundamentalists believed that this was wrong because the Bible called for separation from error.
(2) Fundamentalists do care about the environment. However, they view spiritual issues as much more important because they believe decisions made now will affect what happens after death.
With a variety of definitions for fundamentalism and evangelicals, I can see how it would be difficult to understand the two groups. I hope my comments help you to better understand the subject.
— Pastor Andy Rupert - Nov 7, 02:02 PM - #What a great, educational article. It’s wonderful to hear that even within typically “conservative” communities voting polls suggests great diversity. Fantastic writing Lauren!
— Katie - Nov 8, 05:45 PM - #Only the Ignorant are Trying to Teach Creation
Is there a “Creation/Evolution” controversy? No, there isn’t. Because
the theory of evolution and the current false teachings of creation
are not opposing viewpoints. Thanks to the bias of the American
news media, coverage is given to any and everything that highlights
evolution, while word of the true teaching of Genesis is withheld,
and denied equal exposure.
The text of Genesis is about the reoccurring death and restoration
of life on Earth since Creation Week. Genesis does not tell us how
the Earth was created. Anyone saying that Genesis contains a
“creation account” is ignorant of the text, and is not qualified to
speak on the subject. But since the news media prints the words
of the ignorant, and rejects the articles of the expert, the world is
still kept in the dark about what Genesis is about, and how it explains
the 600+ million year fossil record.
Herman Cummings
— Herman Cummings - Nov 18, 10:23 PM - #Ephraim7@aol.com
(706) 662-2893