The Painful Medicine of Irony - Rachel Held Evans and her vision regarding the World Vision Matter

“When Christians declare that they would rather withhold aid from people who need it than serve alongside gays and lesbians helping to provide that aid, something is wrong.”

So says Rachel Held Evans, supposedly an authority on what Christian millenials believe, on CNN’s beliefblog on March 31, 2014.  Ms. Evans is right: something is wrong.  I agree with Ms. Evans that if anyone immediately withdrew their sponsorship of a child because of World Vision’s initial statement, that was wrong.  Ms. Evans is writing about the recent decision and reversal by World Vision with respect to homosexuality, and homosexual “marriage” in particular.  Ms. Evans excoriates the reversal as being brought about by what she labels “the evangelical machine.”  The evangelical machine apparently means anyone who believes in Christian orthodoxy – she cites Al Mohler, President of Southern Seminary, who she says wrote it was a “disaster.”

Giving Ms. Evans the benefit of the doubt, her one word summary of Dr. Mohler’s view is overwhelming simplification at best, downright misleading at worst.  In full disclosure, I am a student at Southern Seminary, so my view should be taken with that in mind.  However, one might want to actually visit Dr. Mohler’s website, AlbertMohler.com and read the article before accepting Ms. Evan’s summary. 

What is amazingly ironic about Ms. Evans is her insistent distrust of anyone who holds firm convictions and acts on them. Nonetheless, she exhibits a unabashed willingness to criticize vociferously anyone who disagrees with her own firmly held convictions.  It takes every ounce of energy for me to remain polite with the likes of Ms. Evans, as her attitude is as judgmental and arrogant as that which she proclaims to so dislike.

Ms. Evans is very sympathetic to LGBT matters, so her take on the World Vision situation isn’t surprising.  Jeff Chu, a homosexual who recently wrote a book asking whether God loves him, is shown on a video on Ms. Evans’ website today, March 31, 2014, despite her constant whining that evangelicals are losing millenials to the culture wars, in part because of “the obsession with opposing gay marriage.”  Ms. Evans seems to miss the entire point here.  This is a disagreement about what the Bible means.  Apparently, according to Ms. Evans, this is not a question of orthodoxy, just a simple matter of interpretation, open to debate. 

Therein lies the fundamental disagreement.  Ms. Evans has determined that the debate is about incidentals and chalks up everything else to rigid self-righteousness among (mostly) older evangelicals.  Interestingly, she seems completely unyielding when it comes to discussing whether this issue is more than merely incidental.  She won’t have it.  Any discussion about the sinfulness of homosexual behavior is simply off the table for Ms. Evans.  Her mind is made up and if the Bible happens to say something that is different than what she believes then it can be chalked up to “the few passages about homosexuality accepted uncritically, without regard to context or culture."  In other words, those who believe differently than her are “uncritical” and haven’t actually considered “context or culture” but are simply dogmatic . . . I don’t want to put any more words in her mouth.

You see, while Ms. Evans is partly right, she is also very, very wrong.  Many who are my age (51 this year) are in between on these things.  On the one hand, I agree with her the church hasn’t done a good job of getting people to understand why it has problems with homosexuality.  On the other hand, where Ms. Evans is wrong is in her wholesale, and, frankly, dogmatic determination that all possible wrong stems completely and utterly from (mostly) older evangelicals who just don’t get it.  How is that millenials are just so right about everything?  How is that they’ve got all the correct answers and those of us who are older (and, just possibly, wiser?) have it so profoundly wrong?  How have we so missed it, so badly, and so completely?  Supposedly, one of the hallmarks of millenials, according to Ms. Evans, is a longing "for faith communities in which they are safe asking tough questions and wrestling with doubt." (http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/27/why-millennials-are-leaving-the-church/).  She doesn't seem to have many doubts about who is right and wrong here.  Isn’t it at least remotely possible that some of us who believe differently than Ms. Evans just might actually have thought about it for more than a minute and even anguished over it?  Isn't assuming otherwise to be guilty of the very sins which Ms. Evans accuses older evangelicals?

Ms. Evans is wrong for bashing what she calls the “evangelical machine.”  What she is really bashing is people who think differently than her about the Bible.  So her complaint that they’re wrong to think differently than her is ironic given her big beef with evangelicals is that they’re supposedly putting their own views ahead of the bible.  Irony is such painful medicine, isn’t it?