Anathematical: A New Category of Christian?

Last updated on: July 17, 2014 at 2:41 pm by Morgan Guyton

Anathematical: A New Category of Christian? 2014-07-17T14:41:52-05:00 Morgan Guyton

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.

Along with fellow bloggers Kurt Willems and Carson Clark, I have been contemplating my identity as an evangelical who is at odds with many other Christians that identify themselves as evangelical. I’m sure someone is snickering that this is the sort of thing that a privileged white Jesus nerd with too much time on his hands would pontificate about. Anyway, I’ve decided not to call the Christians I’ve been beefing with all my life evangelicals anymore. Since the word fundamentalist has apparently gone out of circulation, I’ve decided to rename them anathematicals. Let me explain.

There is one type of Christianity that says my faith works for me; it’s what I grew up with; other people have equally valid views based on their cultural contexts; I’m gonna do my thing, other people can do theirs, and I’ll live together with them in peace by not bothering them with my beliefs. That’s how I would tend to describe the “mainline” response to the gospel (correct me if I’ve got it wrong). My denomination (United Methodism) is mostly made up of mainliners, but I can’t say I’m one of them. Another type of Christianity says what Jesus taught, what He did for us on the cross, and how He was brought back from the grave really is the best thing that’s ever happened to the world since it provides the basis for human beings to be reconciled with God and each other in perfect community; therefore we should share this good news with everybody. This second kind is what I would call “evangelical” Christianity, with which I would identify. I would argue that the definitive feature of being evangelical is that your chief desire is to share the euangelion (good news) of Jesus Christ with the world.

But among those who think that Jesus is the only way, truth, and life, there is yet a further division: those whose theology is shaped by the constant desire to present the gospel in a way that makes sense to non-believers and those who presume that if a version of the gospel does make sense to the world, that’s proof positive that it has been corrupted by worldly views. I would argue that those who live to evangelize are rightly called evangelical, while those whose focus is calling out heresy in other Christians ought to be called something different, like anathematical, after the Greek word anathema, which was the term used for excommunication.

Whatever else is true about the recent Rob Bell controversy, the reason Bell got in trouble with anathematicals like John Piper, Kevin DeYoung, John MacArthur, et all, was because he wanted to present an account of the gospel that addressed many stumbling blocks that non-believers and ex-believers have with the way that Christianity is usually presented. Interestingly, he didn’t really make any claims that C.S. Lewis hadn’t already made in his Great Divorce, though Lewis got away with it by writing an allegory rather than a hard-hitting polemic. Certainly, it was fair for Bell’s arguments to be critiqued, but it was unfair for his motives to be impugned (he’s in it for the money, etc) and for him to be dismissively excommunicated from the church over Twitter.

I would argue that if Rob Bell made some mistakes, he made the kinds of mistakes that evangelicals ought to be making. We’ve got to find a way to explain the holiness of God that doesn’t end up making God look like an infinitely persnickety critic who’s allergic to imperfection like Simon Cowell from American Idol. God is not the parsimonious tightwad that He’s made to look like by the way that the gospel often gets presented. And people who aren’t at least a little troubled by God’s PR problem aren’t really evangelical. I’ve written elsewhere that the major problem with the mainstream evangelical gospel today is that we’re stuck on a hypothetical, extra-Biblical account of God created by St. Anselm that may have been appropriate to his 11th century feudal context but is no longer applicable to ours. Talking about sin as exclusively (or even primarily) a violation of God’s abstract infinite honor made sense to people who were concerned with preserving their king’s honor. But it’s not inappropriate to find a different way of describing the incompatibility of God’s holiness and our sin in a society where we do not have a king. Why not talk about God’s judgment of sin in terms of His solidarity with the victims of sin? There’s much more Biblical grounding for this way of framing God’s conflict with sin, and it makes more sense to postmoderns, particularly those invested in some notion of “social justice.”

In any case, it is because I’m an evangelical that I am filled with rage when the clunky caricatures of God that Christians present to non-believers make the One who is the source of all goodness and beauty look like a stupid redneck. My desire for the gospel I share to be genuinely beautiful is out of stewardship for my calling through the Great Commission; it’s not because I want to “fit in” with worldly people or find the magic formula to grow a huge megachurch where people go for shallow, feel-good spiritual entertainment. True evangelicals take seriously the critiques and challenges of our postmodern context rather than taking the intellectually lazy cop-out of dismissing it all in one broad swoop as “postmodern relativism.” My evangelism has been helped tremendously, for example, by Foucault’s explanation of the workings of power and Derrida’s account of the limitations of language. People who have actually read postmodern philosophy understand why the word “relativism” is such a bizarre and laughable descriptor for something which can scarcely be categorized collectively at all.

I think there may be a legitimate role for anathematicals, but they need to be acknowledged as falling into a separate category than evangelicals. Those who are truly called to evangelize shouldn’t be afraid to push the envelope and dance on the boundary lines of orthodoxy if they’re doing so in the interest of excising the unnecessary stumbling blocks that keep others from hearing the good news. Some people might call it “evangelism” when you share a canned gospel with others oblivious to its apologetic quality in the same way that some people think canned meat product is a reasonable lunch item. True evangelism implies a genuine concern with apologetics, whether or not the gospel makes sense to the person listening. It’s abominably cynical to throw up your hands and say, oh well, Jesus you told me to be faithful, not successful, when you’re making no effort to honor God with how you represent Him.

Now it is reasonable and important for those who are passionate about the Biblical integrity of the gospel to critique what the evangelists come up with as long as there’s a recognition that those who are experimenting with apologetics do not automatically become hell-bound heretics when they cross the line of Biblical orthodoxy. They need to be roped back in, not shunned and cast out. The conversation can occur if there’s an appreciation for each side’s respective dialectic roles.

The problem is when anathematicals start to believe that only an unreasonable gospel can be legitimate since “reasonable” automatically translates into “sold out.” A form of works-righteousness can take hold in which believing the “tough truths” about God is how I earn my salvation. I think this works-righteousness, which I call doctrinal Pelagianism, is the greatest heresy of the American Protestant church today, far more insidious than the errors made by evangelists who need correcting.

I’m doubtful that my new term anathematical will catch on. I just wish that the people who scorn the creative apologetic challenge of true evangelism would stop calling themselves evangelicals.

Previous Post

August 15, 2011

My Soul Languishes for Your Salvation: Monster-Psalm Meditation #11

Next Post

August 16, 2011 Some gems from Thomas Merton

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advent Beauty Will Save the World Bible Big Picture: Ephesians Bloggers Book Christian salvation and the Beautitudes Culture Daily Office Danceable Homiletics Deadly Sins Deep Roots: Genesis Devotions Dominican Republic May 2011 El Principio Misericordia (The Mercy Principle) Five verses God tattooed on my heart Fundraising FutureGospel Good Biblical Words Henri Nouwen Interview Jennings' Christian Imagination Jesus inside the beltway Jesus Is My Candidate Jesus vs the Pharisees Jesus vs. Plato Journey to Eternity Looking Back on 2012 Love Actually Monday Merton Monday Merton Music Occupy the manger On Earth As It Is In Heaven Original Sin Podcast Poetry Politics Prayer Psalm 119 Radical Jesus 101 Reviews Sermon on the Mount Sermons Spanish Bible study Special Series Spiritual but not religious Synchroblog Theology Things that made me think Thomas a Kempis Ugliness Into Beauty Uncategorized Viaje Dominicano 2013 Walking in the Valley (Lent) Welcome: It's More than a Mat Wild Goose 2013 Wrestling

Select a Month March 2022 January 2022 December 2021 September 2021 April 2021 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 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 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Though Israel played the harlot, I will betroth you to me forever in righteousness and justice, in love and what?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Holiness Compassion Faithfulness Truth