Many Evangelical Christians are growing discontent with being assigned “Evangelical” as a Christian label. They are experiencing some level of dysphoria. “Evangelical” means a great deal of things to a whole host of people. People of various stripes within the Evangelical movement are struggling to come to terms with these meanings, as well as with the issues dividing the movement. Such dysphoria or discontent is perhaps no more apparent than in dealing with sexuality and gender, as in the context surrounding the Nashville Statement.
The recently released Nashville Statement is “a document adopted by a group of Evangelical Christians seeking to reaffirm traditional Christian values on sexuality,” according to one of its signers, Albert Mohler, Jr. For Mohler, the Nashville Statement is “an expression of love for same-sex attracted people.” Regardless of the intent, not all conservative Evangelicals believe the Nashville Statement communicated such love effectively, or the issues surrounding sexuality and gender with the necessary complexity, especially during this particular cultural and political season (On such matters as responses to tone and context, refer here). Perhaps some of the signers will respond that such ‘statements’ never convey adequately the intent or intricacy of the issues they address. Mohler appears to think otherwise when it comes to the Nashville Statement, as he maintains it “was carefully written.”
While affirming the Nashville Statement’s authors’ “passion to uphold a historically Christian view of marriage and gender,” Evangelical theologian Preston Sprinkle writes of the “impersonal and one-sided” nature of the statement. He adds,
What does this do for the 14-year-old kid in the youth group who’s contemplating suicide because for some unchosen reason, he doesn’t feel at home in his own body and daily wishes he had a female one? So he puts on a mask at school for fear of getting beat up, mocked, or tormented on social media. He’s terrified to tell anyone—especially his youth pastor who just signed off on the NS. (I seriously doubt too many youth pastors will sign this, though.) Where is he in this statement? Where is the pastor’s wife who’s attracted to women but could never tell her husband or anyone else? What does this statement do to create a church culture where she could tell her church and be gladly received into a community of beggars who have found bread at the foot of the cross? (Refer here to Sprinkle’s full, initial response)
The Nashville Statement does not speak for all conservative Evangelicals, who also seek to affirm Christian Scripture’s call to holiness regarding sexual expression as well as its view on gender. It will be important as we move forward as a movement that we become increasingly dialogical, account for greater complexity on issues, and become more expansive on the issues we passionately address. The Nashville Statement addresses what is a very complex issue in rather simplistic terms and in such a way that its posture of pronouncement leaves little room for open conversation with those who disagree with some of its affirmations.
In addition to Sprinkle’s work, I encourage readers to consider the posture and dialogical approach of my colleague Evangelical theologian Brad Harper in his book co-authored with his gay son, Drew, titled Space at the Table. Moreover, some of the pressing issues Evangelicals need to account for when dealing with sexuality and gender (which appear largely lacking in the Nashville Statement) is consideration of the fall’s impact on all of us in terms of distorted sexuality, the difference between temptation and sin, the complexity of issues such as gender dysphoria (refer here, too), and children born with “both” or “ambiguous genitalia.”
Furthermore, if we are to craft statements that are intended to address the spirit of the age, we conservative Evangelicals must speak out in unison on male dominance, spousal abuse, sexual assault, and pornography, as well as racism in the wake of Charlottesville. Rather than remain silent on these issues, we need to hold our political leaders—and ourselves—to account.
Lastly, no matter what the age, statements like this one that read like a state of confession regarding the integrity and authority of the gospel should reflect a fundamental connection to the creed and the centrality of Jesus Christ (as in the case of the Barmen Declaration). Otherwise, observers can easily read such pronouncements as ad hoc and selective rather than fundamental to Christian faith and practice. It is also worth noting under this point that the more central the gospel of Jesus is to a particular discussion the more grace and truth one will find on display, reflecting the tone and posture of his humble glory and holy love.
The intent of this post is not to write off the authors or signers of the Nashville Statement on the one hand, or other Evangelicals of a more progressive orientation, on the other hand. We need to create dialogical space at the table with them, as well as with the various people inside and outside the Evangelical movement struggling with their sexuality and gender, along with those struggling with discontent over Evangelicalism on matters of sexism and racism. Dialogue, not monologue, is essential. Otherwise, we will only intensify the Evangelical dysphoria and increase suffering rather than move forward together as a movement and as a society on the pressing, life-threatening issues we face today.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In