Periodical Reviews -- By: Jefferson P. Webster

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 170:680 (Oct 2013)
Article: Periodical Reviews
Author: Jefferson P. Webster


Periodical Reviews

By The Faculty and Library Staff of Dallas Theological Seminary

Jefferson P. Webster

Editor

“The Emerging Divide in Evangelical Theology,” Gerald R. McDermott, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56 (June 2013): 355-77.

Gerald McDermott, Jordan-Trexler Professor of Religion at Roanoke College, assesses the health of contemporary evangelical theology and finds it less than sound. Paradoxically, perhaps, the causes for his alarm are evident at a point when the movement has “come into its own” (p. 355); yet the prognosis he offers is severe, short of a change in direction. Specifically, McDermott warns that two conflicting factions he identifies as “meliorist” and “traditionalist” portend a future split within the evangelical movement, the foreshadowing of which is already evident. First, however, he must locate the movement on the ecclesial map before describing the rupture that threatens it.

“Evangelicalism” has always been a slippery term resistant to clear definition, but McDermott believes the essence of the movement can be captured by the six “fundamental convictions” originally suggested by Alister McGrath: 1) “the majesty of Jesus Christ”; 2) “the lordship of the Holy Spirit”; 3) “the supreme authority of Scripture”; 4) “the need for personal conversion”; 5) “commitment to evangelism and missions”; and 6) “the importance of religious community for spiritual nourishment, fellowship, and growth” (p. 359). He notes, of course, that these are not exclusively evangelical commitments, but the “degree of emphasis which evangelical theology places on the six marks” is enough to engender distinctiveness (p. 359). Furthermore, he is careful to differentiate evangelicalism from fundamentalism on one side and “classical Protestant orthodoxy” on the other, contrasting matters of “content and practice” in the former case and “method” in the latter (p. 361).

Today, however, the situation of evangelicalism is complicated by opposition between the Meliorists and the Traditionalists: “the former think the tradition of historical orthodoxy needs improvement and sometimes basic change”; the latter, though accepting need for occasional adjustment, nevertheless think that “generally it is more important to learn from [the tradition] than to change it” (p. 363). The result of the meliorist perspective is that the “Great Tradition” is being challenged within evangelicalism on matters that were simply not up for discussion in, say, 1976, Time magazine’s “Year of the Evangelical.” For example, Meliorists are questioning the legitimacy of the penal substitutionary at...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()