After Evangelical: Reclaiming the Gospel in a New Era
What Do We Mean by "Evangelical"?
Not long ago, I found myself in Washington, D.C., in a room full of church leaders asking, "What comes next after evangelicalism?" It's a compelling question. But before we get there, we need to unpack what we mean when we use the word "evangelical."
Because honestly, it's a word that has taken on so many meanings, depending on the century, the culture, or even just the speaker. And if we're going to move forward with integrity, we need to understand the history that brought us here.
From Europe: Allegiance to the Gospel
The term "evangelical" first gained traction in Europe in the late 1800s. At the time, state churches were closely tied to government power. A new wave of believers began identifying not with the state, but with the gospel itself—the euangelion in Greek.
This distinction gave rise to independent churches, including the Swedish immigrants who came to America and started the Evangelical Covenant Church. They sought a faith unencumbered by institutional barriers and state control—a faith centered on the gospel.
Resisting Empire: Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church
That gospel allegiance would later fuel resistance movements, like the Confessing Church in Nazi Germany. Figures like Dietrich Bonhoeffer stood against a co-opted church that aligned with fascist power. Ironically, although he was a liberal theologian, Bonhoeffer is often embraced by conservative circles today. But his real legacy is his willingness to suffer for a gospel that transcended state ideology.
A Shift to America: Science, Fundamentalism, and Withdrawal
As the story moved across the Atlantic, evangelicalism encountered a rapidly changing world. In the early 20th century, scientific discoveries—especially in geology and evolution—began challenging literal readings of scripture. This sparked anxiety in some Christian circles, leading to the rise of fundamentalism.
Fundamentalists responded by retreating. They built their own schools, seminaries, and subcultures—separate from the "world." They rejected not just scientific findings but also historical-critical approaches to scripture. Their instinct was to protect faith by isolating it.
A Third Way: American Evangelicalism
By mid-century, a new group began to push back against that separatism. Inspired by voices like Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth, these evangelicals wanted to stay engaged with science, politics, and culture. They believed the gospel had something important to say in the public square.
They re-entered universities, engaged in academic discourse, and pursued cultural influence. And it worked. Evangelicals became a significant force in shaping American society.
Influence Becomes Idolatry
But with that influence came a cost. What began as a movement to engage culture slowly transformed into a campaign to dominate it. Evangelicals morphed from cultural dialogue partners into a powerful voting bloc, often defined more by political ideology than gospel commitment.
The irony is striking. A movement that once resisted the fusion of church and state became entangled in the very pursuit of power it originally rejected.
Bebbington's Four Marks
Historian David Bebbington identifies four key traits of evangelicalism post-1950:
Biblicism – A deep commitment to the Bible.
Crucicentrism – The centrality of the cross and Jesus' sacrifice.
Conversionism – The belief in a transformative encounter with God.
Activism – A call to shape the world through faith in action.
These are good things. Really good things. But they have been distorted by the pursuit of cultural control. Activism has sometimes looked more like coercion than compassion. Biblicism has drifted into inerrancy debates. Crucicentrism has often ignored the full breadth of Jesus' life and teachings. And conversionism has been reduced to a formula.
A Church After Evangelicalism
So what does it mean to be a church after evangelicalism?
It means reclaiming the heart of the gospel without clinging to the institutional power structures that have corrupted it. It means being deeply committed to Jesus, curious about scripture, open to science, and present in our culture without needing to dominate it.
At Commons, we are seeing something beautiful happen. The more we talk about Jesus—about his radical love, his invitation to justice, his deep compassion—the more people lean in. The more we treat the Bible as an ancient and sacred text that invites us into conversation with God, rather than a rulebook, the more people are drawn into its wonder.
And the more we engage science, politics, and culture with honesty and humility, the more we find ourselves in meaningful conversations with those who thought faith had nothing left to offer.
What's in a Name?
Some may argue we need to reclaim the word "evangelical." But here's the thing: words don't mean what they used to. They mean what they are used to mean.
Today, "evangelical" is largely understood as a political identity, not a spiritual one. And that matters. Because if we're going to reach people with the story of Jesus, we need language that invites rather than alienates.
So we move forward not to preserve a label, but to carry the story. The story of a God who comes near, of a gospel that heals and reconciles, and of a church that refuses to chase power but chooses to serve.
That's the kind of faith we're building.
That's the kind of church we want to be.
