A collection of 60 or so “evangelical leaders” met for two days (April 17-18) for a by-invitation-only gathering at the Billy Graham Center, Wheaton College, Illinois. The common concern was the future of American evangelicalism in the era of Donald Trump.
You can read what little is known about the closed-door conversations here, here and here. Most of the commentary that I have found so far comes from Trump supporters, primarily members of Trump’s inner circle of “religious advisers,” who sound testy about the fact that others folks calling themselves evangelicals would dare to meet and bad-mouth their president.
I don’t know anything about this gathering beyond the things made available online, most of which is very biased. However, allow me to venture a few opinions on what I imagine animated the debates:
First, remember that 81% of self-identified evangelicals voted for Trump. (I, on the other hand, am a proud member of the 19% club — that is, the
minority of evangelicals who did not vote for Trump). Given those statistics, I can’t help but wonder if a number of the Trump critics venting their displeasure at this conference were former supporters who have become disaffected. Or was every attendee a 19-percenter?
I ask this question because I fear that the largest portion of anti-Trump animus today is fueled largely by the man’s “coarseness ” and the many accusations of sexual misconduct lodged against him. Stormy Daniels has become a bridge-too-far for many who previously remained silent in the face of Trump’s many offenses. (I hope I am wrong about this. Also, I do not, in any way, intend to lessen the evils of sexual assault or adultery).
It is also important to note that white evangelical support for Trump is at an all time high right now, according to a poll conducted by PRRI. White evangelicals continue to show their true colors.
Second, I ask these questions because I find the scenario suggested by this evangelical consternation conference every bit as disturbing as I do the 81% of evangelical support for Trump.
The whole thing smells to me of the very same “sin of selective outrage” that I criticized soon after Sojourners published its “Reclaiming Jesus” statement.
As I asked before, where was the progressive evangelical lament during the Obama presidency and its many violations of human rights around the world?
Where was the conservative evangelical lament during the presidency of George W. Bush and his disastrous, illegal war in Iraq?
Forgive me if I draw little comfort from a gathering of anti-Trump, evangelical critics now lamenting at Wheaton College. I know it sounds cynical, but my eyes do not see and my ears do not hear anything more than the prudish, parochial pretensions of Christian leaders who easily bit their tongues and plugged their ears — or maybe it didn’t even take effort; perhaps their eyes were already blinded and their eyes already plugged — to the Democratic and Republican war crimes, crimes against humanity, the trashing of international law and the shredding of the US Constitution committed by past presidencies.
It would be wonderful if this could be a much needed turning point for the cause of righteousness in the American church. But I doubt it. The whole affair smells of age-old partisanship in a new package. It is the same misbegotten impulse of looking to Washington for the shaping of American values.
Politics is by definition a business of compromise. No one sits in the White House who has not first learned very well how to compromise him/herself. Only a church that remains deceived by the Faustian lie that Jesus Christ can somehow benefit from a politician’s endorsement laments over the way this president is tarnishing evangelicalism’s image.
I fear that the Wheaton gathering was only another face, perhaps the more “progressive” version, of Christendom complaining that it has too little grip on the reins of power in Washington, D.C.
When will we learn?
