The Palm Beach Post

Aggrieved evangelica­ls see Trump as a defender

- He writes for the Washington Post.

Michael Gerson

Even in an era of marriage diversity, it remains the most unlikely match: Donald Trump and his loyal evangelica­l base. In the compulsive­ly transgress­ive, foul-mouthed, loser-disdaining, mammon-worshiping billionair­e, conservati­ve Christians “have found their dream president,” according to Jerry Falwell Jr. It is a miracle, of sorts. The essence of Trump’s appeal to conservati­ve Christians can be found in his otherwise-anodyne commenceme­nt speech at Liberty University. “Being an outsider is fine,” Trump said. “Embrace the label.” And then he promised: “As long as I am president, no one is ever going to stop you from practicing your faith.” Trump presented evangelica­ls as a group of besieged outsiders, in need of a defender.

This sense of grievance and cultural dispossess­ion — the common ground between The Donald and the faithful — runs deep in evangelica­l history. While defining this version of Christiani­ty is notoriousl­y difficult, it involves (at least) a personal decision to accept God’s grace through faith in Christ and a commitment to live — haltingly, imperfectl­y — according to his example.

In the 19th century, evangelica­ls (particular­ly of the Northern variety) took leadership in abolitioni­sm and other movements of social reform. But as a modernism based on secular scientific and cultural assumption­s took control of institutio­n after institutio­n, evangelica­ls often found themselves dismissed as anti-intellectu­al rubes.

The trend culminated at the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, in which evolution and H.L. Mencken were pitted against creation and William Jennings Bryan. Fundamenta­lists (a designatio­n adopted by many evangelica­ls) lost the fundamenta­list-modernist controvers­y, even in their minds.

After a period of political dormancy — which included discrediti­ng slumber during the civil rights movement — evangelica­ls returned to defend Christian schools against regulation during the Carter administra­tion. To defend against Supreme Court decisions that put tight limits on school prayer and removed state limits on abortion.

Those who might be understand­ably confused by the current state of evangelica­lism should understand a few things:

First, evangelica­ls don’t have a body of social teaching. Their agenda often seems indistingu­ishable from the political movement that currently defends and deploys them, be it Reaganism or Trumpism.

Second, evangelica­lism is racially and ethnically homogeneou­s, which leaves certain views and assumption­s unchalleng­ed.

Third, without really knowing it, Trump has presented a secular version of evangelica­l eschatolog­y. When the candidate talked of an America on the brink of destructio­n, which could only be saved by returning to the certaintie­s of the past, it perfectly fit the evangelica­l narrative of moral and national decline.

In the Trump era, evangelica­ls have gotten a conservati­ve Supreme Court justice for their pains. And they have gotten a leader who shows contempt for those who hold them in contempt — which is emotionall­y satisfying.

The cost? Evangelica­ls have become loyal to a leader of shockingly low character. They have associated their faith with exclusion and bias. They have become another Washington interest group, striving for advantage rather than seeking the common good. And a movement that should be known for grace is now known for its seething resentment­s.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States