Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
To Leave or Not to Leave—That is the Question

To Leave or Not to Leave—That is the Question

Last updated on: January 27, 2018 at 7:59 am by Darrell Lackey

To Leave or Not to Leave—That is the Question 2018-01-27T07:59:51-08:00 Darrell Lackey

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I think I’ve mentioned before I don’t think everyone is “led,” “called”— (not sure what word…?), to leave the FG world. And depending upon one’s history, it may not even be possible to leave that world completely. In some ways it may be like being raised in the South but then relocating at some point in life. Even if one never goes back, can they ever say they are no longer “southern?”

I also think some are meant to stay behind and remain a voice, salt, and light—a change agent. For those in really toxic fundamentalist environments, I of course believe they should leave. I know even in those situations such is easier said than done. Marriage, or being too young to be on one’s own, can make leaving, if not almost impossible, then very, very difficult. I get that.

I can also see where being in certain evangelical environments would make leaving difficult. I had many wonderful friendships—and I looked forward to interacting and being with those friends on a weekly basis. There are also very thoughtful evangelical environments where they are self-aware enough to sort of “get it” and they realize their own short-comings as a tradition. This is all to say that each person has to decide whether or not they can stay in that world or not.

I was led to think about much of this after reading this essay (see here) by Craig S. Keener (see here). Dr. Keener tells us he almost left evangelicalism, gives us the reasons why, and then tells us why he chose to stay. I can see why he chose to stay, whether or not I agree or disagree with any particular reason.

It made me realize there are probably many reasons one might leave the FG world, but I think there are two primary reasons. And the first one is why Dr. Keener thought about leaving. He writes:

“My problem with evangelicalism wasn’t theological. My theological beliefs were solidly evangelical. It was evangelical subculture—not evangelical faith—that I was feeling increasingly alienated from.”

For him, it was the subculture, and specifically, the either outright racism of some evangelicals or their cluelessness toward the lives of “others”–those who were different, that caused the most discomfort for Dr. Keener.

I think the other primary reason people leave the FG world is theological and such is mainly why I left. The election of Trump may have been the spark, but the kindling, the wood, had already been laid—and it was theological wood.

The reason Dr. Keener almost left, the subculture, was also a problem for me and was a problem long before the theological came into play. But it was other aspects of the subculture that bothered me. Frankly, I was blind to what I now look back and see was racism and prejudice in my own tradition (Southern Baptist). Of course, since I didn’t bear the brunt of those prejudicial attitudes, it didn’t register. I guess that comes from the privilege of being white. I regret that blindness now.

No, for me, it was the kitsch of evangelicalism, the banal worship music, the leaning toward a Thomas Kinkade aesthetic, the longing for a Hallmark world washed of any dirt or complexity that made me uncomfortable. The propensity to desire a world surrounded by a white picket fence enclosing a sort of religious Disneyland almost seemed more a hell to me than a heaven. I also see now that such a vision probably contains latent historical (current?) racial prejudices too.

For those who stay in the FG world, who like Dr. Keener, are simply uncomfortable with the subculture, I wish them all the best. Stay and be a prophetic voice. In love, be a change agent, even if such is a lonely and often misunderstood place to inhabit.

I would add a caution however. It may be the case Dr. Keener and others like him have missed a vital and significant connection. Dr. Keener notes the problem was not evangelical theology, but the subculture. I would argue the theology produces the subculture. Yes, there are other factors involved, but a tradition’s theology is a tremendously important one.

Further, it was conservative, right-wing, fundamentalist/evangelicals who seem to have had the most trouble coming to grips with integration, the Civil Rights Movement, and “seeing” people of color as equal. Why was that? For those who think the Religious Right (which was made up primarily of fundamentalists/evangelicals) arose over the issue of abortion, it might shock them to learn it was really over segregation—something many of them favored (see here).

And what about women? They are often still treated in the same way as people of color were (are still?). I would submit that such treatment is also part of that same subculture with which he had problems and is also linked to the theology, with which he didn’t.

I will also note that prejudices, racial or otherwise, are alive and well in every religious tradition, not just the FG world. Duly noted. However, we do have to ask if some theological sensibilities actually give credence to such, rather than them being incidental to cultural/historical bias and ignorance.

The subculture, the sensibility, the aesthetic, the prejudices, the art, the music, the institutions, the intellect and its products, books, sermons, etc.., the very ethos of a religious subculture is produced by its theology (which is not to say just in an informational sense, in the sense of an abstract framework, but rather in a total sense of heart, mind, and experience, of living). Its way of life, its manner of living, is produced by its confessions and traditions (theology), and names what it really believes to be true.

My fear is that Dr. Keener and many like him will one day realize that the problem wasn’t really the subculture, but the theology/tradition behind it. One may have created the other. And even if it didn’t produce the racism he speaks of, it certainly produced the negative aspects I noted. If that day of realization comes, that one produced the other, then what?

Previous Post

January 20, 2018

Don’t Believe Everything You Think

Next Post

February 3, 2018 The True, the Good, and the Beautiful

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2025 February 2025 December 2024 October 2024 September 2024 July 2024 May 2024 January 2024 November 2023 September 2023 July 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 December 2022 November 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was killed for touching the Ark of the Covenant?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ahio Shimei Uzzah Abinadab