“Exvangelical”
(also, “sojourning evangelical”)
This is a word that could use some definition, but not too much.
“Exvangelical” acts as a bit of a catch-all term that finds definition in what it is not more than in what it is. There are a lot of people in the world who define themselves as “evangelicals” or as “evangelical Christians”. The term evangelical came to refer to a particular branch of Christian faith, most often (but not always) Protestant, often conservative in regards to social issues. Evangelical faith usually centres around a personal experience of God and a conversion narrative or incident. Conversion can be punctiliar (in a particular moment), or more gradual. The important matter is that there is a focus on individual wrong (sin) and repentance, then forgiveness by way of an expression of personal belief in Jesus. Evangelical churches range in political view, style, slickness and tone. Some are highly charismatic (into supernatural manifestations and expression), some are suspicious of anything charismatic.
“Exvangelical” has come to refer to people who at some point saw themselves as evangelical, but to large degree no longer do.
People who connect with the term have in some manner, pushed away from their evangelical background or experience. Some have pushed away from Christian faith altogether, others speak of finding a deeper Christian faith unencumbered by what they experienced as the excess, power, control, and emotional manipulation of evangelicalism.
There is an interesting essay in the current issue of “American Scholar”. T.M. Luhrmann tells the story of some people who have moved away from evangelicalism. I found the stories of personal experience in the essay compelling; the journalling, the reflections on “hearing God’s voice”, and the obvious examples of religious manipulation and abuse. The article is worth reading. I did not connect as much with some of the conclusions or the attempts to generalize on what “exvangelical” means in regards to understandings of God.
Theologian Karl Barth over half a century ago seemed to offer some caution about what a faith might become that was focused on fear of hell, and on individualistic, moralistic experience. Barth, in speaking about the way of conversion that would become the norm in evangelicalism said that, “the gospel cannot be presented at gunpoint”. He said that anything presented in such a manner must be more bad news than good news.
If there would be a term for that it could be “dysvangelical”.
”Exvangelical” is a temporary term. However, it can still be helpful. There are lots of people, myself included, who have come to realize that “evangelical” (bearer of good news) often came to mean in truth, “dysvangelical” (bearer of bad news). In the desire for more hope and compassion and freedom and acceptance terms such as, “exvangelical”, “sojourning evangelical” and other similar monikers may help along the way, even if they don’t offer a place to land.
Promised Poetry
(another poem from George Herbert)
A picture of someone invited to be a guest at a dinner. The person feels as if they are not worthy to attend. The host (aka “Love”, a representation of God, of Jesus Christ) lovingly insists and pushes past the self-doubt of the person invited.
Love (3)
Love bade me welcome; yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning,
If I lacked anything.
A guest, I answered, worthy to be here:
Love said, You shall be he.
I the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on thee.
Love took my hand and smiling did reply,
Who made the eyes but I?Truth Lord, but I have marred them: let my shame
Go where it doth deserve.
And know you not, says Love, who bore the blame?
My dear, then I will serve.
You must sit down, says Love, and taste my meat:
So I did sit and eat.
On “God, can you hear me”? by T.M Luhrmann.
I read this essay several times and wondered how I could comment concisely.
The question arises, what are we asking God to hear? What do we need from God?
I think we are looking to be known. We cry out for perfect intimacy to fill our void.
If our “ordinary life” and “boring” church do not bring us fulfillment how do we find the “self” that recognizes the perfect love that our Redeemer offers. Our soul aspires to connection.
Myself, I am confused by the labels that Christian churches given themselves. Too much damage has been done by a “dualist faith”, as T.M Luhrmann describes, “a radical tension between the aspirations of the soul and the gross desires of the body”. How can we find comfort and acceptance from God if we are “suffocated” by His “disapproval”.
So if we are asking God to hear us we must remain open to His voice. He just might be telling us that “saving someone’s soul doesn’t matter”. Getting the cockroaches out of their house really does”.
-What a joy it would be to sit as a student in the Lecture Hall of T.M. Luhrmann.
TW if you ever manage to get a public speaking engagement with her, please sign me up!
On “Love”:
This is a sweet poem, almost psalm-like. I wondered what George Herbert, who lived a short life as a priest, saw in the church that produced “dust and sin”. Or, was it himself that “produced” dust and sin....and led him to die of consumption. I would hope that, like the “guest”, this poet priest was perhaps having a conversation with God. How profound the shame, that the guest could not “look on thee”. What a wonderful reminder from Love...”Who made the eyes but I”?
This is our reminder...the One who made the eyes.....the One who “bore the blame”.
With His blood he shed the shame! We are worthy to “sit and eat”.
Sweet poem...