On May 7th, "The Evangelical Manifesto" was released. It begins with a clear affirmation of evangelical belief and then moves on to say that Evangelicalism has become much too politicized. Most of the manifesto was penned by Os Guinness, though many others were involved in the writing process.

In a recent post on the First Things website, Richard Neuhaus voices many of the problems I had with the manifesto. For Neuhaus, it seems as though cosmopolitan evangelicals are expressing embarrassment about the broader face of evangelicalism. In order to be accepted into elite culture, they are attempting to distance themselves from less thoughtful cohorts. Neuhaus writes, "I have no doubt that some who signed the statement simply wanted to affirm the important truth that evangelical Christianity is defined by the lordship of Christ and not by political partisanship. Issuing what is inevitably perceived as a politically partisan manifesto is an ill-chosen means for achieving that purpose."

In essence, the manifesto is an attempt to publicly redefine the term 'Evangelical," Guinness insists on using the term "reaffirm" rather than "redefine" but most (if not all) people have never heard Evangelicalism 'affirmed' in these terms, so for all practical purposes it is a redefinition. And here is the problem - he reappropriates the term 'Evangelical' to include people who would never use the term for themselves, (Anglicans, Catholics) while disparaging the brand of Evangelicalism which has made the word a household term. When such a major document is released and left unsigned by the most recognizable Evangelicals - James Dobson, Chuck Colson, Rick Warren, etc. - it is highly unlikely that anyone's perception of Evangelicalism will change. If the very people who have made the term so political are unwilling to state that this is a problem, and if these people are the majority, I am quite certain this manifesto will be ineffective. The manifesto could have been a success were a wider range of people to get on board, but the pool of signatories - impressive though they may be - seem to fall in a narrow range between academia and leftist political figures.