Reflections on an professor's article by J. Randal Matheny

The March 16 issue of the Christian Standard arrived in the mail today. (Foreign delivery is still slow.) This periodical represents the Christian Church and Churches of Christ. This issue highlights the question, "Are We Evangelicals?" Two major articles take up the question, one for, another against.

I've long maintained there is no way a Christian can be considered an evangelical in the historical Protestant sense of the word. More on that later.

But even the article arguing against the question didn't satisfy.

The author of the second article* is dean and professor of NT at Emmanuel School of Religion. His language often borrows from denominational perspective. He speaks of "other Christians with Bible names (members of the Church of God, for example) ..." and of sacraments. He finds an apparently positive "limited kind of ecumenism" in promotion of and participation in evangelical parachurch organizations like Focus on the Family and Promise Keepers. He notes, with pride, it appears, that it "has become common practice to invite prominent conservative evangelicals to speak at special sessions of the North American Christian Convention."

Evidently, the author finds it good to wade in evangelical waters, but not to dive in whole-hog. Though he associates the "Stone-Campbell Movement" with Episcopalians and other high church groups for "our high view of the church and the sacraments."

His major points in the article are that the Christian Church has nothing to gain and much to lose by assuming the evangelical label. Much of what he says is good; his manner of putting things, however, undermines his thesis and weakens his positive points.

He says, in the middle of his article, "To the question, 'Are we evangelicals?' a good response is, 'Why should we care? Isn't it enough just to be Christians?'"

To my mind, the response lacks punch. The sentiment almost seems to be, Let's do our thing and let the rest of 'em do theirs. There is little of the appeal to truth: The Bible says this, so let's do this; others do that, so we can't accept that.

But then, what to expect from one who prefers to look at his faith from a historical, rather than biblical, perspective and whose school is named for religion rather than the authoritative Christ and his inspired Scriptures?

*Robert F. Hull Jr., "Why Can't We Be Just Christians?" in Christian Standard (March 16, 2003):197-99.