Ever since we were first astonished by the onset of a Trump presidency in 2016, so many of us have found ourselves in ongoing conversations around the glaring hypocrisies of religion in the United States.
Really enjoyed this. So what you're arguing is that we have to stop trying to reform evangelicalism and instead create something healthy ourselves, since those steeped in evangelicalism just can't hear it?
I'm beginning to think the same thing. But then the problem comes: How do we ever fix the huge issues if evangelicals keep being this monolith that hurts?
I guess the only good sign is that more and more people are leaving?
Hi Sheila, glad it was helpful. Those are the big questions indeed. I think perhaps its also a matter of the bigger forces of which evangelicalism is a part. The key evangelical feature of wanting to convert others is about conquering, winning, taking over. It's indeed a matter of justice both individually and socially. For me, I keep noodling on the idea of staying as a "leaver" and going on a process of better self (and other) knowledge. Working on it.
Reading this article was a life-changing moment for me, but not one of those conversion events you speak of! I have been practicing internal family systems (IFS) for my own healing from a lifetime of trauma, and today, reading your essay, I see that series of conversion events as contributing to my disintegration. That conversion story was the central identifying story of my life. But now I feel like I can breathe again. Again thank you! And to answer your question, where do we go from here? Back to the difficult and messy task of being authentically Christian and forming small, egalitarian Christian communities who reject this conversion myth. We need better theology.
So glad. Indeed, the way we get "converted" as children of evangelical or evangelical-ish parents in these same communities is so formative, and I can't think of a world in which this, in so many forms, is healthy. Glad though we have the opportunity to do the work of healing.
Lots to reflect on here and I appreciate exploring behavior. Specifically, I found the ways people shut themselves down to be helpful language.
I wanted to ask, could you elucidates the connection between the specific “born again” evangelical behavior referenced and why supporting the republican administration particularly? Looking at behavior, is there a connection between seeing others behavior as license to have one’s own behavior?
I want to add one perspective and ask your thoughts. This example may relate to the internalized shutting off parts of one self. When I’ve challenged some evangelically oriented people, I’ve made clear the contradictions between what is professed theology, and what may be suffering that would result from the republican administration actions. These folx’s reply, “Well, that’s not me, I wouldn’t do that” seemingly implying they wouldn’t act in the way politicians would act. There’s some kind of dissonance here and I don’t fully understand how this works for that person. Would enjoy hearing your insight.
Hi Maeve, thanks for your comment. The fact that some folx say that a politician's action isn't how they would act indeed does seem dissonant. They are pretending as though that politician's action isn't a reflection on their own character or theology. They are implying that to get a desired outcome for their ideas, then they must do so by any means necessary rather than through a principled action they profess. I still think it's an unconscious dynamic, based on being of two minds as "born again" Christians, where someone is blind to the inconsistencies of their own behavior. I also wonder about relational ethics in born-again cultures, which seem to show emphasis on belief rather than behavior and how we treat each other (despied the professed intention of the Golden Rule).
You’re welcome, David. And thank you for your reply. I am not sure if it is as simple to say this - it seems like some people just don’t do the work. Or as you put it, “through a principled action they profess.” I’m wondering if the idea of spiritual bypassing fits here. Or like a spiritual short circuiting.
I think it comes down to which God we believe in. If we think God is an angry guy on a cloud with a thunderbolt, then he might seem like something akin to the divine.
But if we see God as loving and merciful, we look at that and see pure evil.
Really enjoyed this. So what you're arguing is that we have to stop trying to reform evangelicalism and instead create something healthy ourselves, since those steeped in evangelicalism just can't hear it?
I'm beginning to think the same thing. But then the problem comes: How do we ever fix the huge issues if evangelicals keep being this monolith that hurts?
I guess the only good sign is that more and more people are leaving?
Hi Sheila, glad it was helpful. Those are the big questions indeed. I think perhaps its also a matter of the bigger forces of which evangelicalism is a part. The key evangelical feature of wanting to convert others is about conquering, winning, taking over. It's indeed a matter of justice both individually and socially. For me, I keep noodling on the idea of staying as a "leaver" and going on a process of better self (and other) knowledge. Working on it.
I recommend the documentary Bad Faith. Gives a lot of context to this story we find ourselves baffled to be living at the moment.
Reading this article was a life-changing moment for me, but not one of those conversion events you speak of! I have been practicing internal family systems (IFS) for my own healing from a lifetime of trauma, and today, reading your essay, I see that series of conversion events as contributing to my disintegration. That conversion story was the central identifying story of my life. But now I feel like I can breathe again. Again thank you! And to answer your question, where do we go from here? Back to the difficult and messy task of being authentically Christian and forming small, egalitarian Christian communities who reject this conversion myth. We need better theology.
So glad. Indeed, the way we get "converted" as children of evangelical or evangelical-ish parents in these same communities is so formative, and I can't think of a world in which this, in so many forms, is healthy. Glad though we have the opportunity to do the work of healing.
Lots to reflect on here and I appreciate exploring behavior. Specifically, I found the ways people shut themselves down to be helpful language.
I wanted to ask, could you elucidates the connection between the specific “born again” evangelical behavior referenced and why supporting the republican administration particularly? Looking at behavior, is there a connection between seeing others behavior as license to have one’s own behavior?
I want to add one perspective and ask your thoughts. This example may relate to the internalized shutting off parts of one self. When I’ve challenged some evangelically oriented people, I’ve made clear the contradictions between what is professed theology, and what may be suffering that would result from the republican administration actions. These folx’s reply, “Well, that’s not me, I wouldn’t do that” seemingly implying they wouldn’t act in the way politicians would act. There’s some kind of dissonance here and I don’t fully understand how this works for that person. Would enjoy hearing your insight.
Hi Maeve, thanks for your comment. The fact that some folx say that a politician's action isn't how they would act indeed does seem dissonant. They are pretending as though that politician's action isn't a reflection on their own character or theology. They are implying that to get a desired outcome for their ideas, then they must do so by any means necessary rather than through a principled action they profess. I still think it's an unconscious dynamic, based on being of two minds as "born again" Christians, where someone is blind to the inconsistencies of their own behavior. I also wonder about relational ethics in born-again cultures, which seem to show emphasis on belief rather than behavior and how we treat each other (despied the professed intention of the Golden Rule).
You’re welcome, David. And thank you for your reply. I am not sure if it is as simple to say this - it seems like some people just don’t do the work. Or as you put it, “through a principled action they profess.” I’m wondering if the idea of spiritual bypassing fits here. Or like a spiritual short circuiting.
This is good. Self love is a good remedy for the duplicity you appropriately name. What else? What are some theological places to land as a remedy?
Affirm the divine within. That would be the theological place to land.
Spot-on! Consistent with my own experiences and observations. Thanks!
It takes a discerning mind to see beyond the surface.
https://open.substack.com/pub/georgeallenbooks/p/the-brain-and-mind-of-democracy?r=4pmgma&utm_medium=ios
This was an incredibly helpful read for me, and one I will come back to. Thank you!
Excellent and informative insights. Thanks.
This was very thought provoking. Thanks for writing.
Well done!
I think it comes down to which God we believe in. If we think God is an angry guy on a cloud with a thunderbolt, then he might seem like something akin to the divine.
But if we see God as loving and merciful, we look at that and see pure evil.