Well, I got ratioed pretty good yesterday, and maybe I deserved it. Sometimes you think you’re being pithy and it comes off snarky or dismissive. To the degree that happened, I’m sorry. I thought maybe I’d say a word or two to clarify what I did actually mean.
First, on punching down at evangelicalism. Folks seem infuriated at the suggestion that this is even possible. Objections were 1) isn’t criticism of evangelicalism justified given the state of things? and 2) how can you punch down at a dominant cultural power?
Let me start with what I’m NOT saying/didn’t say: I’m not saying EV is beyond criticism or innocent of abuses and failures. In fact, those who know me or my work will know that I’m regularly contributing to the critique, and have at times paid a price for it.
I’ve been writing about evangelicalism’s failures and compromises on celebrity, power, racism, politics and secularism (to name a few) for about a decade now. Sometimes, that work has come at a price. I still think it was worth it. But enough about me.
On “punching down”: cultural power is always relative and it’s always shifting. Certainly, EV holds a lot of power, and those who grew up inside EV communities will have a different sense of that power than those who didn’t.
But the idea that EV is the dominant force in our culture is disputable to say the least. I’d argue that academia, the media, and the entertainment industry are all much more dominant culture-making forces than the church. Also… Trump lost. And congress is blue.
Power is also tribal. So again, with EV, it can feel powerful and oppressive from inside. But criticism of EV from outside the tribe can be met with great accolades from the circles mentioned above and from the post-evangelical tribe online.
It’s also not hard to find examples of people paying the price financially, vocationally, or culturally for not conforming to certain progressive norms. If your narrative is, “they deserve it,” fine – but don’t pretend it doesn’t exist.
Part of the problem in our culture is that one of its biggest engines is grievance. It’s a competition to see who the real victim/villain is, So EV’s think it’s them and ExV’s do too. Guess what – both are right. But it’s context dependent!
Also re: punching down: It’s one thing to criticize someone’s ideas. It’s another to create a platform for yourself my mocking the idiot rubes who blindly hold to stupid, archaic beliefs. When that mocking is performative – for adoring fans – it’s punching down.
That sort of thing is especially pernicious when done under the banner of an enlightened or evolved Christianity. (Hence, my original tweet.) Whatever Christianity is/should be – for EV’s or their critics – it isn’t bitter, hateful, belittling or dehumanizing.
“But that’s exactly been what I experienced from inside EV,” one might say. I believe you! And that’s a failure of the church and failure of spiritual formation. That absolutely deserves to be critiqued as well!
The best criticisms of Christianity are going to be those that call it to be consistent with itself – its own call to self-sacrificial love of others, humility, gentleness, kindness, etc. On that front, I failed yesterday, choosing snark and creating discord. I’m sorry.
So again: I’m not at all suggesting evangelical Xianity is beyond criticism or wholly innocent. But when your critique of evangelicals is full of the same snark, vitriol, or hatred as the culture you’re critiquing, it’s not the effective tool you want it to be.
EV’s need to learn from those exiting. I felt that way 20 years ago when the emergent thing was happening, too. But no movement is beyond criticism, and if you embrace the tactics of your “enemy,” you’ve lost any claim to the moral high ground.
