Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

slacktivist

A-moldering in the grave

Last updated on: June 23, 2022 at 2:11 pm   by Fred Clark

A-moldering in the grave 2022-06-23T14:11:46-04:00 Fred Clark

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 appreciate this sneaky Christianity Today piece by Louis A. DeCaro Jr.: “Why White Evangelicals Should Claim John Brown.” (Sneaky in a good way.)

DeCaro is a scholar who has written several books about Brown, as well as a biography of Shields Green, a Black man who accompanied Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry. He knows John Brown well and, therefore, admires him. “I dream that John Brown’s soul might march again,” DeCaro writes.

And if you don’t understand why, he suggests that’s because — at best — you’ve been sold a bunch of lies about the man, what he fought for, and the meaning of his legacy:

Among white people, Brown was widely dismissed by the early 20th century. As American society backpedaled from the idea of Black people becoming full citizens, Brown’s reputation couldn’t help but decline. Whites in the North celebrated reunion with whites in the South and tacitly agreed to talk about the soldiers’ honor and bravery and set aside the actual issues that had separated patriots and traitors.

Slavery itself was sentimentalized in this era, with lots of popular rhetoric and images of “mammies” and “piccaninnies.” Those who benefited from the system of white supremacy were depicted sympathetically, while those who defended it were imagined to be noble.

Meanwhile Brown, who hated slavery more than he loved his own life, was portrayed as insane. …

The first draft of history … was mostly written by the proslavery press. The initial interpretation of Brown’s actions was crafted by people who believed that “all men are created equal” was a lie.

Before that, though, DeCaro reminds his white evangelical audience of this essential truth about Brown: He was one of us. Brown, he insists, was a man of “deep evangelical faith”:

Brown testified clearly to his own conversion, and he prayed that those around him would know “the grace of God through Jesus Christ.” He continually held up the Bible as the authoritative Word of God, the supreme written norm by which God binds the conscience. He urged people, “Be determined to know by experience as soon as may be, whether Bible instruction is of Divine origin or not,” convinced that if they tested the Scripture, they would discover the truth.

He backs this up with numerous examples and citations of Brown’s Bible-soaked words and letters, reminding us also of the great esteem he earned among devout Christians outside of America. DeCaro quotes the revered British evangelical preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, who wrote that John Brown was “immortal in the memories of the good in England” and that “In my heart he lives.”

“It teaches me further to remember them that are in bonds as bound with them. I endeavored to act up to that instruction.”

That Spurgeon reference is DeCaro’s version of Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles saying “You’d do it for Randolph Scott.” He knows he’s writing for an audience of white evangelical pastors who routinely rely on collections of Spurgeon quotes to spice up their sermons.

CT’s editors shrewdly recognized that too, which is why they plucked that detail from deep in DeCaro’s piece and used it as a subhed: “We’ve forgotten what Charles Spurgeon knew …” That’s smart. The Spurgeon angle is more likely to entice their readership to engage with this article than a reference to “Bleeding Kansas” would’ve been.

The headline those editors gave to DeCaro’s piece was also cleverly designed to appeal to this audience, but here the appeal is more ambiguous. What does it mean to say that “White Evangelicals Should Claim John Brown”?

DeCaro’s actual argument is that 21st-century white evangelicals ought to listen to John Brown. He lays out the case that Brown belongs squarely in the category of “evangelical Christian” (provided one sticks to theological parameters rather than the cultural parameters Brown emphatically opposed). Brown’s words — and deeds — were expressed in the native language of evangelical Christianity and DeCaro very much wants contemporary white evangelicals to contend with the still-living witness of their brother John.

But DeCaro is not at all doing the other thing the headline seems to be attempting, arguing that contemporary white evangelicals should “Claim [Credit For] John Brown.”

This recalls my ambivalence about the use and misuse of Donald Dayton’s terrific little history Discovering an Evangelical Heritage. Dayton’s book is a collection of exceptional stories about exceptional people who excepted themselves from the prevailing spirit of their time to fight against grave injustices that were seen by the overwhelming majority of their contemporary white Christians as utterly unexceptional. The stories he collects and retells are inspiring and challenging and unsettling precisely because they are extraordinary.

Dayton’s book, in other words, is tremendously helpful if we view it as a reminder of the witness of all of these disregarded prophets, learning from that by striving to better heed the voices and witnesses of the prophets we have among us today. But those same stories become corrosive and toxic if we read them defensively, trying to “claim” their extraordinary, exceptional witness as typical of “our” heritage and “our” legacy.

David Swartz wrote a terrific piece about that last summer: “Innocent Readings of Evangelical History.” (I responded to that here.) Here is the heart of Swartz’s sermon:

The inspirational stories that moderate evangelical institutions tell about themselves aren’t helping. Many marshal a usable history to convince themselves that their tradition is not rotten at the core. Former George W. Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, for example, appeals to historical examples of 19th-century abolitionists and suffragettes. Wheaton College cites Jonathan Blanchard, its first president who made campus a safe stop on the Underground Railroad during the Civil War. Wesleyans, mining Donald Dayton’s Discovering an Evangelical Heritage …, point out that Methodists helped launch the women’s suffrage movement, that missionary E. Stanley Jones integrated evangelistic crusades — soon followed by Billy Graham.

To square this impressive evangelical past with the sordid present, they use the narrative device of historical declension. Evangelicalism, moderates maintain, has declined from its former enlightened stances on issues of social justice. Billy Graham’s legacy has been coopted by his son Franklin. James Dobson, the apolitical psychologist who began tasting the delights of political power, became a culture warrior. Evangelicals who never would have supported Donald Trump in the 1970s voted for him en masse in 2016 and 2020. If contemporary evangelicals would only know their enlightened history — and stay true to it — they would be more willing to say that Black lives matter.

The problem is that these narrations cherry-pick unrepresentative voices from the past. Abolitionists never really represented the mainstream of [white] evangelicalism. There were always more slaveholders than Grimké sisters. Leaders who want to minimize (or distract from) evangelical support for Trump narrate the movement as more cosmopolitan than it has actually been. They peddle what Cuban-American theologian Justo González calls “innocent readings of history.” They minimize the bad, emphasize the good, and ignore how moderation often perpetuates injustice. They portray their own history as more innocent than it actually was.

Despite that headline about “claiming” John Brown, DeCaro clearly is not interested in this kind of “innocent reading of history.” This is John Brown we’re talking about here, after all — someone whose whole life bears witness to the fact that an innocent history is not an option for any American, Christian or otherwise. He is fully aware that John Brown is extraordinarily extraordinary — a uniquely unrepresentative voice from the past who defies any attempt by us to “claim” him as our vicariously righteous, hashtag-Not-All representative. And he is valiantly appealing to Brown’s extraordinary voice against strong currents of whitelash and a moral panic over “CRT” and “wokeness.”

I think the CT editors use of that “claiming” language was probably less an actual attempt to do that as it was a way of using that unseemly appeal to entice its readers to engage with DeCaro’s richer, more subversively challenging argument. Or, at least, I hope so.

Either way, though, the hint of such an appeal using John Brown is, itself, an intriguing development.

The attempt to conscript John Brown in support of an “innocent reading of history” is a backhanded concession that John Brown was right. Yes, as Jesus said in Matthew 23, the elaborate building of tombs for the prophets is usually an exercise in hypocrisy. But it thus also serves as “the tribute vice pays to virtue” — identifying, locating, and reaffirming that virtue in spite of itself.

That, in itself, never stops anyone from flogging the prophets now among us in our churches and pursuing them from town to town. Cognitive dissonance, by itself, can’t be relied on to stop anyone from saying, “We are the righteous heirs of the righteous abolitionist Blanchard and therefore our righteousness cannot be questioned as we fire a Black professor with tenure for prophesying against bigotry.”

But still, the admission has been admitted: John Brown was right.

Stick a pin in that. Poke at that pin, forcing it under the skin and making sure that it can’t be ignored or forgotten. Make them say it. Make them own it. Make them claim it.

 

Uncategorized

history

slavery

Previous Post



June 23, 2022

6/23 Flashback: A tale of two headlines

Next Post



June 24, 2022 6/24 Flashback: Luther and Mohler


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 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 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 March 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 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who asked, "What is truth?" while questioning Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Herod Peter Pilate Nicodemus

Related posts from slacktivist

Family

JD Vance and the Flushing Remonstrance

slacktivist

Family

The problem with vulgar racism is not the...

slacktivist

Family

Baldwin Douglass Stevens Brown (Stevens Brown, Stevens Brown)

slacktivist

Family

Just showing up

slacktivist

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian

Donald Trump's Heaven? No Room For God

Donald Trump’s heaven would be filled with grudges, backbiting, refusal both to...

Peruvian airplane ready for Pope Leo XIV

The Chilean airline LATAM which serves as the main domestic flight provider...

Bear One Another’s Burdens, But Carry Your Own...

At first glance, Paul seems to contradict himself within the span of...

A Catholic Century or an Evangelical Century?

Will the form of Christianity that prevails in the years ahead be...

Crying in the Kitchen: When My Body Finally...

It was still dark when I found myself dancing in the kitchen...

'I Play Rocky': A Two-Fisted Tale of Hope...

Amazon MGM's 'I Play Rocky' recreates the making of the 1976 blockbuster...

view all Progressive Christian blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube