Evangelicalism at a Crossroads

I have yet to read Megan Basham's new book "Shepherds for Sale," which explains the infiltration of left-wing ideology into evangelical churches. I did put in an interview request at The Daily Wire, but I am not holding my breath. If that changes, you will be the first to know.  

I have listened to and watched multiple interviews with Basham. The thrust of the book is that Left-wing organizations, including some under the aegis of George Soros, have been making inroads into evangelical churches with programs that have Christian-sounding names like "Creation Care" or have the word "evangelical" appended to the name to make the program more appetizing to congregations. 

According to Basham, these programs promote, among other things, Critical Race Theory, immigration, LGBTQ issues, and environmental concerns. The upshot, asserts Basham, is to undermine a reliably red voting block that has become known for its support of Donald Trump. 

Basham's book has its detractors. Some people find fault with factual errors and accuse the author of taking some people's stances and words out of context. There's a roundup here if anyone is interested.

I watched this very scenario unfold in real-time as an Episcopalian. Even though, at the time, I considered myself a good liberal, it was increasingly obvious that the church of my birth was moving away from the Gospel and toward social issues. 

Some of the prominent figures in evangelical circles may have chosen to align with left-leaning causes for strategic reasons. They may believe that the progressive horse is going to win and not just place or show, so they need to constantly reaffirm their stances to everyone. Alternatively, they may have had a personal "awakening" moment that led them to the blue side of the aisle. 

Or they could just be following a trend.

But what about the rank-and-file people in the pews? I don't think these left-wing organizations would be farming these churches if the soil was no good.

Earlier in the year, I reviewed the Rob Reiner film "God and Country" for another outlet. The film features plenty of evangelical luminaries, all of whom decry Christian nationalism and Trump supporters throughout the movie. 

However, many Christians, especially those who make up the target audience of “God + Country,” are susceptible to societal peer pressure. They may not be “of the world,” but they have to live in the world, or at the very least, live unmolested by it. Witness the popularity of “Duck Dynasty.” Christians everywhere were jubilant that a show about people who shared their beliefs was popular. While the mass appeal of the show began to wane, books by the members of the Robertson clan continued to appear on the shelves of Christian bookstores, even as beach towels bearing the image of Uncle Si with his teacup were finding their way to the bargain bins at Walmart. For a brief time, contemporary Christianity was cool.   

 With the death of George Floyd and the rise of BLM and CRT, I saw several rural Evangelical Christians post the now-famous Black Square on social media and adopt decidedly left-wing stances. That was the direction in which the world was drifting at the time, and these people were terrified of being seen as standing on the proverbial wrong side of history. This is especially true of believers who came of age in the era of Post-Modern Christianity and were raised on the top-ten list at K-LOVE.

 One may accurately surmise that these are the people at whom “God + Country” is aimed. The film is a 90-minute campaign ad designed to play on the fears of believers who may be suffering a crisis of conscience. These believers may think that they can retain their Christian identity while still meeting the ever-shifting demands of the secular, progressive, and popular culture. In some ways, It is the ultimate expression of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” mindset. It offers all of the “warm fuzzies” that come with being a member of the new Elect without the need for discernment. 

When I first became an evangelical, the church we attended was a reasonably straightforward place in which the Gospel was preached. But as time went on, someone complained that the music was not contemporary enough. Suddenly, those of us in church leadership positions found ourselves reading "The Book of the Week," written by one famous pastor or another. One of those books was by a church leader who had grown his flock to the point that his church had multiple campuses and a national presence. I began to see a pattern of the church doing everything the leader outlined in his book to recreate that success.

There was a woman who was active in several different MLMs. To succeed in an MLM, one needs a "downline" and a woman recruited from within the church ranks. At one point, her recruits posted on social media about special sticks they used to channel their energy to manifest success in business. The pastor was aware of the issue but, to my knowledge, did nothing about it. Why? It may not have been worth it to risk losing members of "spirit sticks" or whatever they were. 

By the time we left, the worship space was being made over into a room that looked like a low-rent strip club. It was the first of several metamorphoses to make the atmosphere more contemporary. Then the church threw out all the books in the library. Granted, some of the volumes were suspect, but contrary to what many believe, an intellectual presence has historically been an essential part of Christianity. 

A church may hold activities to fight human trafficking or third-world poverty or sponsor food or clothing drives. Those things are laudable, and the Epistle of St. James provides plenty of support for them. To be sure, the world will congratulate that church for its efforts. 

However, if a church declares that an unborn baby is a person, there are only two sexes, or that children should not be sexualized, the reception may be considerably frostier. Why have a youth group that gives kids a solid grounding in scripture and the Christian walk when it is more fun (and attractive) to have them eat pizza, go on field trips, and whack each other with pool noodles or something? 

The people injecting these programs into churches are in it to swell the ranks of progressives and fundamentally change the country. Evangelical leaders fronting these programs may be in it for the credentials and maybe job security. And possibly some cash considerations. But again, what about the churches themselves? In Revelation 2:4-5, part of the Letter to the Church at Ephesus, we read:

Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken the love you had at first. Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place.

If churches are buying into these programs, it may not be only to get the proverbial backsides in the pews. It may be because Christians want to be current, relevant, accepted, and even well-liked. They value the praise of the world more than they realize. Which is odd, considering the conditions under which Christianity got its start.