Refugees from Evangelicalism

In church today, the preacher referred to a group of us as "refugees from evangelicalism" and that lodged in mind. Earlier this weekend another friend reflected "I found the Devil, right inside of the community where I also found God". So I think "refugee" may be exactly the right metaphor for my relationship to evangelicalism.

One big difficulty for those of us who are post-evangelical and yet still Christian is the fact that the toxicity which drove us out of white American Evangelicalism was not the only thing present in that space. For all of it's faults white American Evangelicalism was not all bad. Poisoned soup is still soup, even if poison is one of the ingredients. I certainly did find God through white American Evangelical style Christianity. That isn't to say that I might not also have found God through any of a million other faith traditions, it is only to say that white American Evangelicalism happens to be the vehicle through which (and, yes, in some ways in spite of which) I did find God. And also that is where I found the Devil.

Having spent some significant parts of my life with refugees it strikes me that there are some worthwhile parallels. Refugees are people who leave countries which have become entirely inhospitable to them, whether through wars, famines, or political tyrants. Countries fall apart; sometimes countries collapse. But many refugees can remember a time when their home countries were still habitable places, even places where they thrived. But then the rot set in, the war began, the economy collapsed, the crops failed. In some cases the rot was there all along; maybe the war was already being waged and they were protected from it for a time.

White American Evangelicalism is failing; it is collapsing; the center can not hold and it leaves behind a throng of refugees wondering who will take us in. Some of us are finding new homes, and some of us are still wandering. My family and some of my friends were accepted, welcomed, into a loving, Jesus-centered, LGBTQ+ affirming Mennonite Church in North Baltimore. I have seen other friends find refuge among the Episcopalians and the Eastern Orthodox, a few new groups have established themselves in the embers or on the edge of the desert. As so many refugees do, we are making real home, finding new citizenship among these lovely new communities (God has special blessing for those who welcome in the outcasts and the wanderers) and sometimes they let us bring a bit of our culture--the gold we smuggled out of Egypt--with us. And for all of that, some days it is hard to know how to feel about the death of the "land that gave us birth"--the communities where we found God and the Devil and were taught a love of both. "Home" must always have two meanings for us now because we are immigrant peoples finding home, making home, finding new Life away from the toxic home where we first found Life. But then, I suppose, that is what death and resurrection is like isn't it?

An Experience I Had with the "Vineyard Theological Forum (unofficial)" or "One Reason I Worry About Christian Nationalism"

In 2017 I was kicked out of the Vineyard Theological Forum (unofficial) on Facebook—and let me emphasize that it really is unofficial, these folks do not represent the Vineyard USA or the Vineyard movement internationally in any official capacity; I have even been informed that the group was asked, and refused, to take "Vineyard" out of its title—because, after years of interactions and conversations, the forum administrators decided that my continued advocacy for LGBTQ+ acceptance within the Vineyard movement specifically and Evangelical Christianity more broadly, was too divisive, and was out of line with the forum's stated theological non-affirming position on the subject(1).

Just so that you have a good idea of what I am talking about, the Vineyard Theological Forum (unofficial)—VTF(u)—is basically a collection of theologically charismatic conservative evangelicals—think The Gospel Coalition but they also speak in tongues. Now I am not at all saying that it was somehow horribly wrong or unfair for this little group to kick me out over my LGBTQ+ advocacy. It is their private forum and they can exclude or include whomever they choose for any reason they find compelling. What stood out to me then, and now, is not that I was booted, but rather the contrast between their approach to me and approach the administrators took to some of the other participants on the forum. To put it plainly: that forum (and I suspect many like it) is a breeding ground for online extremist Christian radicalization, and it represents a tendency within white American Evangelicalism which is still insufficiently understood.

When I was kicked from the forum, I contacted one of the administrators and asked him for the reasons. He gave the answer which I have summarized above. Now, I had been involved in discussions on that forum for quite a few years and had interacted with many, many people over various aspects of theology as it relates to LGBTQ+ poeple. In that time I found that a significant majority of the forum participants basically held to the position which the American public seems to expect from Evangelicals: the "love the sinner hate the sin", "gay marriage is wrong", "transgender identities are not valid cuz—God made people" pabulum; essentially they are big fans of the Nashville Statement(2). These are the folks I was frequently arguing with. After that there were also (I have no idea whether they are still there) a smallish minority of participants who were theologically affirming of LGBTQ+ folks. All of that is what I think the US public would expect to find in that context. What I was shocked and appalled to discover is that there was (and likely still is) a vocal minority of participants who believe and advocate for the death penalty for LGBTQ+ folks. Further, they were clear on that forum (I have the receipts—screenshots are forever) that in public they do not yet advocate for their draconian punishments of LGBTQ+ people because they realize that the public isn't ready for "truly Biblical governance" yet. They believe that they have a responsibility to play a waiting game, and to shift the laws and social beliefs gradually to a point where they will be able to publicly advocate for their position.

My surprise was not that these people exist—we have likely all read about them or encountered their depraved vitriol in one context or another—my surprise was that their advocacy was tolerated in what I had taken to be a mainstream white Evangelical context. The point I want you to catch is that in 2017 the administrators of that forum felt like my position (the full equality, participation, and inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in society and the life of the church) was too divisive and extreme for their forum but that advocacy for killing (one man literally hopes to bring back stoning to death) LGBTQ+ folks was not.  I need to bottom-line this before moving on:

In the eyes of these conservative evangelicals, it is worse to advocate for the full acceptance of LGBTQ+ people than it is is to advocate for the death of LGBTQ+ people. 

Hold that thought. Sit with it if you need to.



(1) FWIW The Vineyard USA is of the position that Lesbian and Gay Christians who are in sexual relationships (married or otherwise) with someone of their own sex are not eligible for ordination within VUSA and that Vineyard pastors are prohibited from officiating same-sex marriages (at least insofar as they do so acting in their capacity as VUSA pastors). VUSA is officially silent on all questions relating to transgender identities and church participation. The VTF(u) takes a significantly more restrictive position condemning all same-sex sexual relationships as sinful, and denying the validity of transgender identities.
(2) In fairness VTF(u) does contain a number of participants who take the more nuanced "gay sex is sinful but being gay/lesbian as such is not sinful" position.
(3) It is worth keeping in mind that neither Hitler nor Mussolini came to power by winning majority popular support in free and open elections, and Franco used a civil war. That doesn't mean it is at all impossible for a fascist to gain power by fully winning a fair election (some of the new-fascists may have managed to do just that), only that the original fascists didn't.