For New Generation of Evangelicals, Falwell Was Old News

Washington Post: For New Generation of Evangelicals, Falwell Was Old News

In January 2005, Time magazine published a cover story on the 25 most influential evangelicals in America. Jerry Falwell did not make the list.

Neither did Pat Robertson and Bob Jones III. These leaders live on in the public imagination because they embody a certain flamboyant style, and because culture war is more interesting than consensus.

In reality, they represent a small fraction of evangelicals, and a fraction that is dying out. Some great figures die at the prime of their movement, such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Others, such as Mikhail Gorbachev, live on for years after their movement has morphed into something completely different, and it takes their deaths to make us realize how much things have changed. That is likely to be the case with Falwell.

"Evangelicals will think of him as part of the family, an elder relative who they might not agree with who died," says John Schmalzbauer, a professor of religious studies at Missouri State University who studies the recent mainstreaming of the religious right. ...

I only saw Jerry Falwell in person once and it had a significant impact on me. It was about '79 or '80 during a chapel service (compulsory attendance) at Mid-America Nazarene University, right after Moral Majority had formed. He was in tight with the president of the university and some denominational leaders. We had already been exposed to a number of soon to be Religious Right leaders through chapel services. I remember Falwell’s appearance as a tipping point for me. I already had serious doctrinal issues with the denomination on their distinctive positions (like sanctification as a second and distinct work of grace). The alliance I was seeing with what would be called the “Religious Right” was really beginning to grate on me. The Falwell event crystallized for me that it was time to search out a new faith community. So three years later I ended up as a member of a church that belonged to a much less conflicted and peaceful denomination; the Presbyterian Church, U.S.A. (Tongue thoroughly implanted in cheek!) So I guess in some sense Falwell was instrumental in me becoming a Presbyterian 24 years ago. The jury is out as to whether I should thank him or blame him. *grin*

Comments

[Dana Ames]

I'll thank him...
D.

[Michael W. Kruse]

Since I met Melissa at a Presbyterian Church I think the balance would have to be on the plus side.

Thanks.

[dlw]

I'm going to be interviewing at Northwest Nazarene University in Idaho so any suggestions on getting along with the Nazarene Church would be welcomed...

dlw

[Michael W. Kruse]

dlw, the Church of the Nazarene is the largest of the Holiness denoms to emerge out of the last 19th and early 20th Centuries. They are Wesleyan-Arminian historically but I'm not sure how many Nazarenes today would know what that means.

Their foundational mission was to recover Wesleyan holiness that they the believed the Methodists had abandoned. It has always been an odd mixture of Weslyanism, social action, pietism, and just enough fundamentalism thrown in at the edges to be really annoying. *grin*

The social action aspect waned after the 1920s and 1930s but has really been making a come back in the quarter century. Check out this interesting study from 2004 (Crow was one of my undergrad profs.):

Fundamentalism in the Church of the Nazarene: A Longitudinal Analysis of Social and Political Views.

Things have changed considerably since I was at Mid-America in the late 1970s so I may not be the best source of info for the current environment. I have a friend who teaches at Point Loma and she comes from a RCA background. She has enjoyed it. From some of the things you have written I'm guessing you would probably be a good fit.

There is quite a diversity at the Naz Seminary here in KC and emerging church has been on the radar in a positive way for a few years now.