Utumishi Blog

There’s a very important article by David Gibson on ‘Beginning with Moses’ called ‘Assumed Evangelicalism’.  It’s well worth reading the whole thing but just to whet your appetite I’ll summarise…  Gibson starts by retelling the stories of two movements – the Mennonites and the UK Student Christian Movement:

The first generation of the Mennonite Brethren movement believed and proclaimed the gospel and thought that there were certain social entailments. The next generation assumed the gospel and advocated the entailments. The third generation denied the gospel and all that were left were the entailments.

In its earliest days the SCM believed and proclaimed the atoning blood of Jesus. The next generation assumed it but did not make it central. The following generations have rejected and denied the apostolic gospel.

Gibson defines ‘assumed evangelicalism’ as a church, organisation or movement which: 

believes and signs up to the gospel. It certainly does not deny the gospel. But in terms of priorities, focus, and direction, assumed evangelicalism begins to give gradually increasing energy to concerns other than the gospel and key evangelical distinctives, to gradually elevate secondary issues to a primary level, to be increasingly worried about how it is perceived by others and to allow itself to be increasingly influenced both in content and method by the prevailing culture of the day.

It’s a subtle and difficult thing to spot but Gibson gives us two helpful questions with which to examine ourselves:

1. To what extent does scandalous and transforming grace dictate our priorities and shape our visions and strategies?  If the gospel is assumed there will be legalism and/or license.  We think that the gospel is just for unbelievers not for believers.  We look for Jesus plus…
2. To what extent do the evangelical distinctives of biblical authority and the Cross dictate our priorities, and shape our visions and strategies?  Are these truths just filed away in a dusty doctrinal basis or they the source of our joy, taught and preached week after week.

Assumed evangelicalism is rife in the West.  What danger does it pose for us in East Africa?  The comments of Gabriel Hertis may be a warning here (I have added the bold emphasis):

Half of Banyarwanda (people speaking the Kinyarwanda language living in Rwanda and in neighbouring countries) have names that testify to a strong belief and faith in the Living God. This is an indelible mark the (East African) Revival left among the Banyarwanda.

* The Rwandan president who was killed in a plane in 1994, an incident which sparked the genocide, was called Juvenal HABYALIMANA (This name, Habyalimana, means in Kinyarwanda that GOD GIVES BIRTH. The full explanation is HABYALIMANA ABANTU BAKARERA meaning that GOD GIVES BIRTH AND PEOPLE RAISE THE CHILDREN). He was born in 1937 in north west Rwanda, just two years after the known start of the revival.

 * The presidential candidate, who challenged current President Paul Kagame in the 2003 election is Faustin TWAGIRAMUNGU (Twagiramungu means WE HAVE GOD, Mungu is the swahili word for God. But actually this name is a statement that says “…We are grateful we have God, otherwise we would not make it…”). He was born in the mid 1940s in the south west of the country.

 * The current president of Burundi is Mr Pierre NKURUNZIZA (Nkurunziza means The Good News or the Gospel “about God or Christ”). He is much younger in his late 40s.

These names are strong statements of faith by the parents of these people. They testify about the beliefs of the parents of these guys and others. I have found only recently that my own name is UWIMANA which means A CHILD OF GOD and I am trying to understand why I was not told that name in my growing up.

The danger is that most Rwandans took these names for granted.

I have decided that I must work on this, by researching the strengths and weaknesses of the revival and encourage rwandans to take back their heritage.