Looking at More Protestant Labels

If you talk politics, labels are a given. Conservative or liberal, moderate or extremist, left-wing, right-wing, center-wing, or chicken-wing. Although labels like these are helpful in identifying an individual’s political tendencies, they also can be misleading and cause you to stereotype a person rather than understand his or her true position.

Labels are popular in Protestantism, as well, in part because a denominational affiliation doesn’t mean much these days. Because some denominations aren’t strict on following their confessions of fait (see the sidebar “Confessing a church’s beliefs” in this chapter), the denomination name can mean squat. For example, depending on the particular local church they belong to, two Methodists may have wildly diverging beliefs on the cores of Christianity, due primarily to the issue of modernism (see the “Confronting the Challenge of Modernism” section that follows).

Therefore, in spite of the risk of stereotyping, understanding these labels is helpful to better understand how Protestants identify themselves (though some people categorize themselves under more than one of these groups). These include the following:

Evangelical: The term evangelical comes from the Greek word evangel, meaning “gospel.” Back in the 16^th century, early Protestants used the term to identify their core beliefs about the gospel and to differentiate between the Catholics and the “out in left field” Protestant sects. Traditionally, an evangelical is someone who believes in the five solas that I discuss in the section “Examining Core Protestant Beliefs” earlier in this chapter. John Wesley (see Chapter 18) is a good example of what evangelicalism entails.

However, the term has also taken on a more specific meaning among American Protestants, so that not every Protestant is an evangelical. The more uniquely American usage is often closely associated with Christians who place emphasis on seeking to share the gospel with the world through evangelistic crusades and missions, being born again (which I discuss in Chapter 3), and prioritizing the issue of biblical inerrancy (see Chapter 6).

Fundamentalist: Started in the early 1900s, fundamentalism was a reaction against modernism, the secularization of society and the Church. Fundamentalists believed that modernists (or liberals, see the next bullet) were compromising on key components of the faith, including the nature of sin, the need for salvation through Jesus Christ, and the authority of the Bible. However, although the movement initially focused on “getting back to the fundamentals,” fundamentalists took on the stereotype of Bible-belting, narrow-minded anti-intellectuals, a stereotype that still exists to a large extent today, particularly in the media.

Liberal: Within the church context, a liberal is someone who embraces many of the contemporary views of the world (postmodernism, relativism, evolution, and naturalism) and looks at Christian faith through these viewpoints. As a result, liberals question the reliability of the Bible and don’t consider it to be the authoritative Word of God in the modern world (see Chapter 6 for more on the Bible as being authoritative). They’re also more optimistic about the ability of individuals to overcome sin, and they discount the possibility of miracles.

Charismatic: Charismatics (which comes the charisma, meaning “gift”) are Christians who “speak in tongues” – an intense spiritual experience that prompts a person to start talking in non-human speech (see Chapter 12). Charismatics also emphasize other spiritual gifts, including the ability to prophesy (highlighting biblical truths for a specific context), see visions, and heal people physically and emotionally. Although they once made up a small minority of Christians, charismatics have grown significantly since the 1960s.

In the past, speaking in tongues was deemed a fringe activity in a few Pentecostal churches, but it’s widely practiced today by a growing number of non-Pentecostal Protestants, Catholics, and even Orthodox Christians.

A must-read: Through the Gates of Splendor

He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.

-Jim Elliot

In the 1950s, Jim Elliot and four other “twenty-something” evangelical missionaries felt that God called them to go to Ecuador with their young families to share Christianity with a tribe of hostile Indians. Up to that point, no outsider had ever been able to talk peacefully with this remote, jungle-dwelling tribe known as the Aucas. Over a span of months, Jim and his friends established basic communication with the Aucas; during flyovers in an airplane, they gestured to the Aucas using hand signals and performed airdrops of boxed goods for them. When the timing seemed right, they landed their small plane on a sandy beach, prepared to meet with the natives face-to-face. But instead of smiles, the Auca Indians greeted the young missionaries with spears and slaughtered (without resistance) each of them on a chilly morning in 1956. Through the Gates of Splendor, written by Jim’s widow, Elizabeth, gives a biographical account of Jim’s decision to go to Ecuador and the events leading up to that fateful morning. Not only is the story riveting, but the book also taps into the heart and mind of a Christian who was willing to risk all for the cause of Christ.