In the Spring of 2016, the presidential candidate known for wielding power by forming in-groups and outgroups and pitting them one against the other singled out a man standing in the way of consolidating support among evangelicals. Calling Russell Moore, then President of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), a “terrible representative of Evangelicals” and a “nasty guy with no heart” Donald Trump, revealed his frustration. He unwittingly turned Dr. Moore into a hero of the resistance.
To many of Moore’s fellow evangelical leaders, Trump was a savior. They believed he would keep the enemy of liberalism at bay. But Moore saw his rise to power as evidence that the church had gotten off-mission and was fighting an us/them battle rather than anchoring in the Good News of the Gospel. The struggle came at the same time as reports of church abuse cover-ups and toxic leadership became more frequent.
For several years, Moore continued his fight within the SBC, attempting to be a prophetic voice for repentance and renewal. His opponents called the severe criticism and persecution he endured from inside the organization “psychological warfare.” Eventually, Moore realized that he was propping up an institution unwilling to do the hard work it desperately needed and he stepped down.
Losing Our Religion
Today, as the Editor-in-Chief of the magazine Christianity Today and author of Losing Our Religion: An Alter Call for Evangelical Christians, he brings a fresh take on the challenge facing the church. As Moore explains, “We see now young evangelicals walking away from evangelicalism not because they do not believe what the church teaches, but because they believe the church itself does not believe what the church teaches.” When an organization loses sight of its original purpose, people become disillusioned.
“We see now young evangelicals walking away from evangelicalism not because they do not believe what the church teaches, but because they believe the church itself does not believe what the church teaches.” Russell Moore in Losing Our Religion
As Moore explains, rather than holding fast to Biblical principles and values, many evangelical leaders chose an end-justifies-the-means approach to winning culture wars. They traded wrestling with what it means to be salt and light in a pluralist society with relentlessly pursuing power. In lieu of a call to love our neighbors, they became known for hating the out-party and displaying unwavering loyalty to their own party.
While Moore initially thought he could help get the SBC back on track from within, he realized he was enabling an institution in need of serious reform. He also saw that the problem was widespread in evangelicalism. Thus, he stepped away to pursue a new mission: shaping the narrative at a magazine that had already begun to bring reform after a series of leadership scandals. The team at Christianity Today had been willing to make the hard changes that the SBC was not. They needed a leader with integrity, who could help them chart a new course. With character proven in fire, Moore was the right person for the job.
Abner’s Turning Point
Like Russell Moore, Abner faced a day of reckoning in his role. Years after King Saul’s death, he continued to prop up the late king’s son Ishbosheth as leader of the tribes who had affiliated with Saul. That pitted him against King David’s men as the emerging leader sought to establish a new order.
Tribal loyalty turned Abner into an enabler of a weak leader without any apparent cause besides retaining power.
While Saul was alive, the late king could see David’s potential and popularity. Jealousy compelled him to persecute the up-and-coming leader to the point of obsession. Saul was more relentless in his pursuit of David than the nation’s enemies. Those campaigns were led by Abner. By contrast, David showed integrity and focus throughout his years of persecution, refusing to strike back even when he had the opportunity. He recognized that the real enemy was the Philistines, who threatened Israel’s existence.
Nevertheless, tribal loyalty kept Abner in his position after Saul’s death, rather than aligning with David. That turned Abner into an enabler of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, who was a weak leader without any apparent cause besides retaining power. That loyalty was finally broken when Ishbosheth accused Abner of sleeping with one of his concubines — a treasonous act in that culture. At that point, Abner initiated a defection to David, offering to bring the army with him.
The time Abner spent in service to Ishbosheth, fighting skirmishes with David’s troops under Joab, was time he was not spending bringing peace to Israel by defending the nation against its enemies. He was preoccupied with in-fighting rather than fulfilling a higher calling.
Moving Beyond Futility to Fulfill a Higher Calling
Moore’s energies had likewise been spent on disagreements with SBC leadership that were getting nowhere. They were unwilling to change or consider alternate points of view. They tried to pressure him to endorse Trump for president and “protect the institution” of the church against claims of abuse. Preoccupied with cultural issues, they were willing to overlook character, whether in themselves or Trump.
In Moore’s book, he recalls the words of writer C.S. Lewis, saying, “For some, a culture war is the price to be paid in order to feel Christian, when there’s nothing genuine inside—except shame and guilt and fear and loneliness. ‘It is the magician’s bargain: give up our soul, get power in return,’ C. S. Lewis wrote. ‘But once our souls, that is, ourselves, have been given up, the power thus conferred will not belong to us. We shall in fact be the slaves and puppets of that to which we have given our souls.’” To Moore, relinquishing his soul, along with his integrity, wasn’t worth it.
In a recent interview on The Holy Post podcast, Moore said he realized that the focus on protecting the institution at all costs was a feature, not a bug. His resignation letter to the SBC called out the failure to confront problems of racism and sexual violence, and more. He wrote that he would not defend an institution that was “not willing to confront its sin.”
Moore realized that the focus on protecting the institution at all costs was a feature not a bug.
For Abner, the concern was not about defending sin but about realizing that jealousy and retaining power were the hallmarks of Ishbosheth’s rule. Saul’s son did not have a broader mandate nor did he appear to want one. He simply wanted to maintain his own privilege in the current order. By contrast, King David was establishing a kingdom in obedience to a call from God.
Fighting for a Worthy Cause
As Moore writes in his book, “in a context of performativity, ‘fighting’ can feel to some people almost like morality—it’s a matter of signing up with the ‘moral’ side and blasting the ‘immoral’ side. One can even start to measure one’s morality by the extent of the ‘fight,’ and by having “all the right enemies.” But even assuming you are right in your ‘moral positions,’ is that really the case? Why does the Bible call for church leaders to be ‘well thought of by outsiders.’” The examples of Moore and Abner challenge us to evaluate what exactly we are fighting for and whether the cause is the right one.
“In a context of performativity, ‘fighting’ can feel to some people almost like morality—it’s a matter of signing up with the ‘moral’ side and blasting the ‘immoral’ side. One can even start to measure one’s morality by the extent of the ‘fight,’ and by having ‘all the right enemies.’”
Russell Moore in Losing Our Religion
Abner was so caught up in the fight that it was only when Ishbosheth’s jealousy was turned against him that he realized the futility of his efforts. If we find ourselves increasingly uncomfortable with the organization whose cause we defend, we would do well to take inspiration from Moore and Abner. We are each responsible to stay on mission as expressed in the Bible, not by an institution. In this way, we can enjoy inner peace and confidence in our purpose, even when it is hard.
