Evangelicalism Falling to Pieces?

October 20, 2016 · Robert Arakaki

Source

“2016 State of American Theology Study,” a survey sponsored

by Ligonier Ministries and carried out by LifeWay Research, gives an
intriguing and sometimes disturbing overview of what Americans
believe. Care was taken to ensure that the 3,000 people who took
part in the survey reflected the U.S.’s diverse population.

The results of the survey have generated considerable discussion

among Protestants. In a recent article in First Things, Matthew Block
bemoaned the spread of heretical beliefs among American
Evangelicals. He notes that among “Evangelicals” – those who hold
to core Evangelical beliefs – 71 percent believed Jesus to be a created
being and 56 percent believed the Holy Spirit to be an impersonal
force.

Mr. Block’s article just scratched the surface of the survey. Other
significant findings include: (1) the majority of Americans (60
percent) agree with the statement “Heaven is a place where all people
will ultimately be reunited with their loved ones;” (2) 49 percent of
Americans agree with the statement “Sex outside of traditional
marriage is a sin;” and (3) 77 percent of Americans agree “an
individual must contribute his or her own effort for personal
salvation.” (See the Research Report pages 3-5) To put it another
way, 60 percent of Americans are universalists, almost half do not
think fornication to be sin, and more than three quarters believe in
salvation by works.

While reading the survey findings it is important to note that two

groups were being surveyed: Americans in general and
Evangelicals. Thus, it behooves the reader to make sure that the
percentages enumerated are applied to the right group. For example,
the findings in the previous paragraph pertain to Americans in
general, not American Evangelicals in particular. One need not be
surprised if a substantial percentage of the American public are said
 to hold deviant beliefs; however, it should be a matter of concern if a
similar percentage of Evangelicals hold deviant beliefs. For
example, in the section “Ethics” (Statement No. 39) it was found that
only 52 percent of self-identified Evangelicals agreed with the
statement that sex outside of traditional marriage is a sin – a startling
shift away from historic Christian morality.

Link

On the other hand, in another section (Statement No. 18) it was found
that the more often one attends church the more likely one is to
disagree with the statement that one can contribute to one’s salvation
through good works – affirming salvation by grace alone, through
faith alone which are core Protestant beliefs. It should be noted that
the graphics are not accompanied by percentages. For scrupulous
researchers this is quite frustrating.
Link

Some Caveats

Readers who wish to examine the survey research and analysis are
advised to visit the following sites: (1) the 26 page Research
Report (White Paper) which summarizes the findings (2) the 103-
slide PowerPoint presentation of survey results, (3) Bob Smietana’s
easy-to-read overview, and (4) Ligonier Ministries’ analysis.

I found the survey very informative but noticed one important

omission, the religious identity of the respondents. In the latter half
of the PowerPoint presentation, the responses were broken by region,
ethnicity, economic status, and age, but not by religious affiliation. It
would be helpful to know how Evangelicals stand in relation to liberal
mainline Protestants, Roman Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah
Witnesses, and secularists. This kind of demographics profile would
help make sense of the data especially as America becomes
increasingly pluralistic with the rise of the so-called “Nones” and the
growth of the non-Christian population.

Another matter of concern is the confusing manner in which numbers

are presented. The Research Report finds that 95 percent of
Evangelicals affirm the statement: “The Bible alone is the written
word of God.” In contrast, only 42 percent of the general American
population believe that. However, I find this puzzling because when I
add 33 percent of “strongly agree” with 19 percent for “agree
 somewhat” I get 52 percent. The inconsistent numbers presented
raise questions about the validity of the survey.

p. 15 Link

Evangelicalism Falling Apart?

As a Protestant convert to the Orthodox Church, I found the

responses on how Evangelicals understand the church striking. The
responses suggest that American Evangelicalism, at least in its
corporate expression, is falling to pieces – becoming increasingly
fragmented doctrinally and ecclesially.
p. 19 Link

In response to the question: “Worshiping alone or with one’s family is

a valid replacement for regularly attending church,” some 59 percent
of Americans agreed, while 29 percent disagreed. In the caption
underneath the graphic, LifeWay noted that Evangelicals were less
likely to agree, giving the percentages of 42 percent versus 63
percent. First, even if 42 percent of Evangelicals agree that’s still
quite a high percentage that has abandoned the traditional view of the
Church. Second, I have no idea what the number 63 percent refers
to. I don’t think it refers to those who agree versus those who
disagree because the total should come close to 100 percent, not the
105 that results from adding 42 to 63. This is where the LifeWay
survey falls short. Greater precision is needed in the presentation of
the findings in order for readers to benefit from the research project.

This devaluing of church membership seems to support the rise of the

“Nones” and the “Dones.” See Mark Sandlin’s article “The Rise of
‘The Dones’ as the Church Kills Spiritual Community” in which he
attempts to explain how the current dysfunction in Evangelical
churches is alienating and driving away committed people. In his
explanation of the emergence of the “Dones” – unaffiliated believers,
Mr. Sandlin writes:

The Church is killing spiritual community or at least killing it

in an ever-growing portion of our population. The Dones’
experience with the Church killed their desire to ever go to
that place of spiritual relationship in community again.

He elaborates:

The Dones are right. The communities making up far too

many churches are much more soul sapping than they are
spiritually nurturing.

This growing disenchantment with church life, while quite different

from doctrinal orthodoxy, ought to be of concern to
Christians. Christianity’s future in America depends not just on right
doctrine but also on life in community.

What really caught my attention were the responses to the question:

“My local church has the authority to withhold the Lord’s Supper
from me and exclude me from the fellowship of the church.” Some 45
percent of Christians who attended church on holidays or more
frequently “disagreed strongly,” while another 17 percent “disagreed
somewhat.” Those who agreed, strongly or somewhat, comprised
only 29 percent. It seems that Evangelicalism’s emphasis on a
personal relationship with Christ has taken on more extreme forms,
with many unwilling to accept the authority of the Church.
p. 20 Link

This is contrary to the historic Protestant understanding of the three

marks of the Church: the pure preaching of the Word, the pure
administration of the sacraments, and church discipline (See Belgic
Confession, Article 29). What is concerning about this rejection of
church discipline is that it constitutes a rejection of the Church as the
Mother of the faithful. It may surprise Evangelicals to learn that John
Calvin believed this. Calvin wrote:

“For what God has joined together, it is not lawful to put

asunder,” so that, for those to whom he is Father the church
may also be Mother. (Institutes 4.1.1)

Calvin’s high view of the Protestant (Reformed) Church, reflects his

qualified view of the Ancient Church. (Calvin alternately praised and
scorned the the early Church Fathers — depending on whether they
were in agreement with him.) Cyprian of Carthage, a third century
Church Father wrote:

He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the
Church for his mother. (On the Unity of the Church §6)

The implication here is that in dispensing with Christian life in the

visible Church — whether Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Orthodox —
Evangelicalism has become doubly estranged from its historic
Christian roots: both in the Reformation and the early Church. As
Evangelicalism, especially its Anabaptist variants, take on more
extreme positions, it becomes a religion that neither the early
Reformers nor the early Church Fathers would recognize as Christian.

Scripture and Creeds

One surprising finding is the positive regard Americans have towards

creeds. There was a largely negative response, 58 percent, to the
statement: “There is little value in studying or reciting historical
Christian creeds and confessions.” This suggests an openness to
using historic creeds or doctrinal statements to offset the emphasis on
private interpretations of Scripture.

The next question then becomes which creed ought to be used? Each
Protestant denomination has its own creed or confessions. For
example, a Lutheran might tout the Augsburg Confession (1530), a
Reformed Christian the Westminster Catechism (1646), and the
Anglican the Thirty-Nine Articles (1563; see Note 1). For those
interested in the early Church there are the Apostles Creed and the
Nicene Creed.

Sola Scriptura?

The authority of Scripture cannot be understood apart from the

interpretation of Scripture. It was found that half of the American
population (51 percent) believes that “the Bible was written for each
person to interpret as he or she chooses.” The Research Report (p.
14) noted that only 30 percent of Evangelicals agreed with this. That
as many as a third of Evangelicals hold this view, (as opposed to half
of the American public) while positive, should still be a matter of
concern. Augustine of Hippo wrote:

If you believe what you like in the Gospel, and reject what you
don’t like, it is not the Gospel you believe, but yourself.

Augustine here was warning against private interpretation of

Scriputre. It is curious then that so many Protestants love this quote
as IF Augustine agrees with their own doctrines and view or the
gospel! This is simply not true. As a fourth-century Bishop of the
Church, Augustine held firmly to an episcopal form of church
government – the local church under the rule of the bishop. This is in
sharp contrast to the presbyterian and congregational polity favored
by modern Protestants. Augustine believed in authoritative Apostolic
Tradition, the real presence of Christ’s body and blood in the
Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, the sacrament penance, Mary’s
perpetual virginity, the possibility of falling from grace, prayer to the
saints and praying or the departed — all common practices of the
ancient historic Church but which have been rejected and vilified by
many of today’s Protestants and Evangelicals. See Joe Wilcoxson’s
“Was St. Augustine a Protestant?” This narcissistic private reading of
Augustine and the consequent distorted understanding of church
history is tragic to say the least.

Much of the independent reading of Scripture can be traced to low-

church Evangelicalism. As a remedy to this Matthew Block prescribes
high-church Protestantism. Where popular Evangelicalism
favors solo scriptura — reading the Bible independently of outside
sources, historic Protestantism favors sola scriptura — reading
Scripture with the creeds and in the larger Church (See Note 2). Mr.
Block writes:

If we are going to address the rise of heresy in our churches,

then Christians must rededicate themselves to reading the
Bible in community—with the local church, yes, but also with
the Church throughout history. If the Bible is truly the
authority Evangelicals say it is, then we must also recognize
that God has exercised that authority over Christians other
than ourselves. The history of the Church, in its creeds and
confessions, is a witness to other Christians who have been
shaped by and wrestled with the Word of God. (Source)

However, Matthew Block fails to explain why Lutheranism,

especially his brand of Lutheranism, offers the best remedy for the ills
uncovered by the LifeWay survey. For all its affirming the authority
of Scripture, Protestantism has historically suffered from
fragmentation, in terms of doctrine, worship, and polity. Ultimately,
Protestantism’s denominationalism is rooted in the private reading of
Scripture implicit in sola scriptura. For example, one who joins a
Lutheran church is following Martin Luther’s reading of
Scripture. With the proliferation of mega-churches and many smaller
community churches private interpretation of Scripture has become
pervasive among Protestant churches today. Wheaton College
Professor of Theology, Beth Felker Jones, attributes the doctrinal
confusion to the rise of pastor-centered churches:

I fear that we’re spending too much time in cults of

personality around charismatic superstar pastors, who often
focus more on their personal theological idiosyncrasies and
pet ideas than on basic Christian orthodoxy. (Source)

Much of Matthew Block’s prescription for the ills of Evangelicalism is

sound but does not go far enough. He prescribes the classical
Protestantism of the 1500s but an alternative is Ancient Christianity
of the first millennium, e.g., the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the
Church Fathers.

What the best of Protestant pastors must confess is this: Luther’s

appeal to his own views can easily become the appeal of all sincere
Protestants — who can appeal like Luther did to his own conscience
and take his own stand even if it differs from Luther’s. Protestantism
is full of little Luther’s taking their own stand for biblical truth giving
rise to denominational differences that trouble Protestants who desire
a visible unity for the Church.

Implications for the Future of Protestantism

The LifeWay survey poses significant challenges for Rev. Peter

Leithart recent First Things article, “Is There a Future for
Protestantism?” In this article Rev. Leithart approaches
Protestantism doctrinally and sociologically. He asserts that as a
sociological entity Protestantism does indeed have a future. He
optimistically sketches a future where non-liturgical churches will
adopt liturgies, non-sacramental churches will start having weekly
Eucharist, and become more open to the rich heritage of historic
ancient and medieval Christianity. The problem is that Rev. Leithart
fails to present empirical evidence to support his claims. If anything,
the evidence presented in the LifeWay survey and the analysis by
Ligonier Ministries point to the spread of deviant doctrines and a
growing disregard for church discipline and common worship on
Sunday mornings. What we see here is more wishful thinking than
facts-based realism.

Safe Harbor

Unlike Protestantism, which has been marked by denominational

fragmentation, and even more disturbing, the inability to provide
doctrinal and liturgical stability, Orthodoxy is marked by a stability
that has endured for two millennia. Protestants tired of constantly
changing doctrines might want to seek shelter in the Orthodox
Church. The words of John Chrysostom, the fourth-century church
father, still resonate today:

Just as a calm and sheltered harbour provides great security

to the ships moored there, so does the temple of God: when
people enter it, it snatches them away from worldly affairs as
from a storm, and gives them the capacity to stand and listen
to God’s words in calm and security.

This place [the Church] is the bedrock of virtue and the school
of spiritual life…

You need only set foot on the threshold of a church and at

once you are liberated from the cares of daily life. (Source)

More Reforms Needed?

It is regrettable that Rev. Leithart insists on rejecting Orthodoxy and

its ancient patrimony of ancient liturgies, Church Fathers, Desert
Fathers, Ecumenical Councils, and bishops who can trace their
lineage back to the original Apostles. He calls for even more reforms
for Protestant churches, but who knows where it will take
them? Already much of what passes for “Protestant” churches today
would be unrecognizable and abhorrent to the original Protestant
Reformers. Those troubled by the predicaments and quandaries of
Protestantism should heed the words of the prophet Jeremiah:

This is what the Lord says:

“Stand at the crossroads and look;

Ask for the ancient paths,

Ask where the good way is, and walk in it,

And you will find rest for your souls.”

(Jeremiah 6:16 NIV; emphasis added)

Robert Arakaki

Note 1: Some Anglicans might dispute that the Thirty Nine Articles
are a creed, pointing out that Anglican rely on the Apostles Creed, the
Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed. However, the fact that several
sources refer to the Thirty Nine Articles as a “doctrinal statement”
indicates that it delineates the distinctiveness of Anglican identity in a
way that the three aforementioned creeds do not.

Note 2: Keith Mathison coined the phrase solo scriptura to highlight

modern Evangelicalism’s divergence from historic
Protestantism’s sola scriptura. See my review of Prof.
Mathison’s The Shape of Sola Scriptura.

Articles

“Is There a Future for Protestantism?” by Rev. Peter Leithart. First

Things 13 October 2016.

“Survey Finds Most Americans Are Actually Heretics” by G. Shane

Morris. The Federalist 10 October 2016.

“Evangelicals, Heresy, and Scripture Alone” by Matthew Block. First

Things, 4 October 2016.

“Evangelicals’ Favorite Heresies Revisited by Researchers.” by Caleb

Lindgren. Christianity Today28 September 2016.
“Americans Love God and the Bible, Are Fuzzy on the Details” by Bob
Smietana. LifeWay-Research, 27 September 2016.

“An Orthodox Remedy for Evangelicalism’s Heresy Epidemic” by

Robert Arakaki. OrthodoxBridge, 11 January 2015.

References

2016 State of American Theology Study – Research Report by

LifeWay Research.

PowerPoint Presentation by LifeWay Research.

State of Theology: Key Findings by Ligonier Ministries.

Orthodox Resources

A Pocket History for Orthodox Christians by Father Aidan Keller.

An Online Orthodox Catechism by Bishop Alfeyev Hilarion.