I recently learned that something I said in a previous post was not entirely clear. Never! I received a very good question about the post called “Reflections: Evangelical and Reformed.” I had said: “Of course, the ‘Neo-Evangelical’ movement did not encompass all of evangelicalism, including many African-American Christians and Pentecostals…” The question is: “Explain what you mean! Is this historically accurate?” Here’s my plan: I’m going to dive right in, evade the question, get back to it eventually, and trust you’ve read the earlier piece for context.

Twentieth-century evangelicalism on the whole has had a very complicated relationship with African American Christianity and with Pentecostalism. For the most part, African American Christianity finds its origins in 19th-century evangelical revivalism, when white evangelists proclaimed the Gospel to slaves. But relationships between white evangelicals and African American Christians have not been as close as their common faith might have otherwise allowed, in part due to deficient support for the rights of blacks on the part of white evangelicals, in part because of the way in which slavery and the social conditions of blacks shaped their Christian experience distinctively, and in part because of the distinct practices and forms of worship that resulted from having African origins rather than European origins (for whites). One way the social experience of African Americans has resulted in differences from their white brothers and sisters, is that for African Americans purity of beliefs (doctrine) and passion for social reform are often inherently interwoven, while white evangelicals have struggled to re-integrate what were allowed to become, during the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy, separable aspects of the Gospel. (To oversimplify, fundamentalists reacted against the liberal Social Gospel movement which tended to err in the other direction. Mutual polarization is generally not a healthy thing. But it happens a lot.)

As for Pentecostals, early leaders of the Pentecostal movement in the first part of the twentieth century looked to Moody-era evangelical revivalism (D.L Moody in the late 19th century) as their predecessor movement, so they were indeed an evangelical movement just as African American Christianity was at its origins (and in most cases still is). But heading into the 1920s, “dispensationalism” had a significant impact on major pockets of evangelicalism and these folks were not keen on the Holiness movement, with its “second blessing” and speaking in tongues. So there was something of a rift among evangelicals between the dispensationalists and the Pentecostals (and we’ll not mention all the other “parties” involved, such as the Reformed Presbyterians!).

But I’m still ignoring the question, which is about the relationship between the Neo-Evangelical movement of the mid-twentieth century on the one hand, and African American Christianity and Pentecostalism on the other. The long and short of it is this: “Evangelicalism” was spreading in many ways and through diverse movements in the middle of the twentieth century, and one of those movements was the circle surrounding Billy Graham, and this was called “Neo-Evangelicalism.” (It was a lot more than Billy Graham, but I’ll leave it there for now.) I highlighted it in my earlier piece because it was the most culturally visible of the various movements at that time, but I also wanted to be careful to note that I wasn’t referring to all evangelicalism, because there were many movements that were not much affected by the events and organizations of the network surrounding Billy Graham. Among those other evangelical groups were African Americans and Pentecostals. This is not to say there was no contact or influence, but it was minimal at the time. Let me let a professional summarize it before I muddy the waters anymore:

“Even in its heyday, the Billy Graham network possessed few connections with many other vibrant denominations, groups, and movements whose convictions, practices, and heritages placed them securely within the evangelical tradition. Pentecostals continued to expand in denominations like the Assemblies of God and the Church of God in Christ that were only marginally noticed by members of the Billy Graham entourage….Other evangelical groups not related as directly to the Billy Graham orbit included African-Americans. As mentioned above, black Protestants in North America have always shared many of the personal convictions and religious practices of white evangelicals. But their experiences — at first under slavery and then in a racially segregated society — have been so radically different from white evangelicals that their story is difficult to incorporate in the larger picture” (Mark Noll, American Evangelical Christianity: An Introduction, pp. 20-21).

There you have it. This is not to fault Neo-Evangelicalism. This is to describe how different movements had different spheres of influence. Of course, you realize that dissertations have been written on this!

But nonetheless a couple good historical lessons have emerged: mutual polarization is not a good thing (that is, when one movement emphasizes one good thing so much that they neglect other equally essential things, which provokes a reaction from another group that emphasizes what the other group left out, and leaves out what the other group emphasized!); Christian movements can be predominantly defined by differing theologies (such as dispensationalism) or by differing social origins (such as with African American experience), and in all cases there is some of both; historians like to parse things out endlessly; and we have a lot of work to do in order to overcome those things that often separate us but ought not. We have one faith and one baptism, but we are not of one race. Our life together as Christians ought to reflect that truth. We’ve inherited separations that are generations and generations deep, and overcoming those separations will be a process of equal depth. It begins with owning up to them, then in small and large ways demonstrating that common evangelical faith is fundamental. I found this Christianity Today article from the April issue well worth reading: “All Churches Should Be Multiracial.”