Ryan Burge is a professor of practice at the Danforth Center on Religion and Politics at Washington University (Click Here for his FB> He likes to share data regarding religion in America, with one specialization being looking at the term “Evangelical.”

A recent post he shared on FB regarding the term Evangelical was regarding different groups and their view of the statement– “A Growing Immigrant Population– A Change for the Better.” For Americans who self-identify as Evangelicals, just over 20% agreed with that statement.

I can’t pretend to be shocked by this. Xenophobia does appear to be running wild among White American Evangelicals in recent years, with “Aliens,” and especially “Illegal Aliens,” joining labels such as “Socialists” and “Liberals” as the boogeymen that keep them awake at night. I really don’t know why any of these labels should scare anyone. Of course, in my case, I have actually been an illegal alien for a few months (in a different country), and while I would not describe myself as a Socialist or a Liberal, I would have to admit that my political philosophy would certainly be described as complicated.

Of course, this all got me thinking of whether I should describe myself as an Evangelical. I do believe in the highest authority of Scripture, and the necessity of God’s grace (and His grace alone) for salvation. I also believe in the necessity of sharing the Gospel message with the world. That is pretty Evangelical. So, the term should fit still, right?

For me— maybe, or maybe not. Consider the above example– just over 20% of American Evangelicals believe that it is “better” for there to be more immigrants than less. I struggle to see how a majority of Evangelicals could believe this. Only a small percentage of American Evangelicals can serve as international missionaries. For most American Evangelicals, their most effective strategy for sharing the gospel with the world is for the world to come to them. I feel that American Evangelicals should be absolutely thrilled to have an increase in immigration. The expansion of ministry opportunities increases so much in this.

I will admit, however, that I have seen this before. Back in the early 2000s, while living in the Philippines, I had spoken to numerous Filipino Christians, including pastors, living in Baguio City. They seemed to be, almost without exception, deeply troubled by an issue of in-country immigration. Many Muslims in Southern Philippines were moving to Baguio City. There was fear among the Christian population that the Muslims would “take over,” establish so-called “sharia law,” and create a sultanate of sorts.

Of course, none of that happened, and even back then, it was pretty obvious that it really could not happen. I made the argument that reaching out to Muslims becomes so much easier if they come to us. I remember seeking to do a ministry trip to Zamboanga Province many years ago, and all of the hoops we would have had to go through (including bribing Muslim militants) to make it happen. Ultimately, I realized that our group was ill-equipped for such an endeavor. But then, people from Zamboanga (and adjoining provinces) come to Baguio City, ministry becomes so much easier. I suggested to the Christians of Baguio to thank God for those coming from the South.

The issue, was not, however, about theology or labels. It was about power and prestige. Christians in Baguio had prestige and power, and they were so worried about losing that status, they could not see the immigrants as a blessing.

The same seems to be going on in the US. American Evangelicals are a bit inebriated with the opportunity of maintaining or extending power and prestige in society and are seeking to attack anything that undermines this goal.

I am not much into power of prestige and am not convinced that God is particularly concerned with our having these either.

If accumulating power in society is what makes one an Evangelical, then the label does not fit me. I do hope the label will endure and the bastardization of its meaning will change. But if not, I can certainly let it go. The early church seemed to struggle with labels— The Way, Christian, and the Church/Assembly, as well as a lot of different metaphors. It does not seem to

Perhaps there is a need for healing of the rift between (theologically) Conservative and (theologically) Liberal Christians. I am not talking about doctrine so much as emphasis. Conservatives tend to focus more on salvation and the Great Commission. Liberals tend to focus on ethics and the Great Commandment. Each side would benefit from more focus on what they have thus far tended to deemphasize.

But until that happens, is it okay for me NOT to describe myself as an Evangelical? Well, Ryan Burge also shared a statistic that 83% of people in my denomination describe themselves as Born Again/Evangelical. I don’t totally know what that means. Does it mean that 17% of people in my denomination reject both of those terms… or only one?

I am not sure… but 17% means, I think, that there are large numbers of people in my denomination who struggle with the term as well.

I don’t know that I have to come up with a new term. As soon as a group of people embrace a term, someone soon comes along to ruin it. Labels should always be cautiously embraced.

I do agree that Christianity is ultimately relationships— with God, and the people (inside of and outside of the church). That always defines things better than labels.