Jesus and John Wayne
Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation
By: Kristin Kobes Du Mez
A provocative title. A damning declaration. It is clear Kobes Du Mez (KDM) is writing to ruffle feathers.
Although feathers need to be ruffled, her writing, dripping with disdain for white evangelicals and all things Christian, and her blatant, contemptuous bias single-handedly discredits to me any important and rightful critiques she makes. Paired with the mystery of what KDM actually believes about the Bible, I’m not sure how much of her worldview I want to ingest.
Her book is not a compassionate, pointed critique of sin, the happening and mishandling of abuse and violence, the falls of the powerful, consumerism, Christian nationalism, or unbiblical prescriptive “gender roles” (whatever this means anymore) nor is it an urging to evangelicals to return to and hold fast to biblical principles (because she never checks in with what the Bible teaches), but rather, Jesus and John Wayne is an accusatory reviling against an entire group of people, condemned by transplanting the sins of “evangelical” leaders and assuming motives and beliefs of “all” their apparent followers—identified distinctly by their ballot in 2016.
She says, “In 2016, many observers were stunned at evangelicals’ apparent betrayal of their own values. In reality, evangelicals did not cast their vote despite their beliefs, but because of them.”
What beliefs, you ask? Well according to KDM’s research and opinion, evangelicals’ core beliefs stem from an obsession with militant masculinity and patriarchy. This phrase is used no fewer than 1000 times in this book. Evangelicals didn’t vote for Trump because of a conviction grounded in Scripture to protect the lives of the unborn or even economic policies that do more than look good on paper; KDM is convinced it’s because Trump represented aggressive manliness just like John Wayne, evangelicals’ ‘ultimate hero.’
She claims evangelicalism is “linked to opposition to gay rights and gun control, the use of excessive force against black Americans in law enforcement situations and to traditionalist gender ideology. White evangelicals have pieced together this patchwork of issues, and a nostalgic commitment to rugged, aggressive, militant white masculinity serves as the thread binding them together into a coherent whole.”
This convoluted grouping and broad-stroke-labeling is the MO of her book. I fear many readers will blindly accept her labeling as truth. Just because she calls something militant or patriarchal or significant, does not mean she is right. Just because she claims something to be a belief held by evangelicals, doesn’t mean it is. Like a review I share below says— accusations are not evidence.
Though the term ‘evangelical’ is an enigma to me at this point, one can’t deny that— like all groups of people— there are blemishes in evangelical history, sins committed, outright abuses, and unbiblical liberties taken in the pursuit of power and money.
But what makes KDM’s book dangerous is that her negatively charged word selection and irresponsibility in representing a fair, complete picture of the background and context surrounding her strategically pulled quotes and accusations make it hard for the general reader to decipher fact from exaggeration, widespread belief from outlying extremism.
Readers who will not think critically of her remarks and skewed presentation or ask further questions are likely to recognize the real grievances done by the leaders she selected to portray and then make the sweeping conclusion: “Christians and the Bible are what’s wrong with the world and I can’t be part of it anymore.”
KDM does nothing to hinder readers from reaching this conclusion and I believe it is to the severe detriment to the Church, if she in fact, calls herself part of it.
She claims a lot of things for “many” people that are misrepresented or simply untrue. And similar to the condemnations found in Divided by Faith, it would seem to both KDM and Emerson, no matter what evangelicals say or do or don’t say or do, it is the epically wrong choice steeped in ulterior racist and male-dominating motives.
I felt similarly when I read Jemar Tisby’s book The Color of Compromise— although, he handled the reporting of historical events and people with far more respectability. Both books seem to lump groups of people together, assume motives, use false equivalence, and leave us with certain questions about what they believe the Bible teaches.
(Sidenote: Tisby, in his book, basically annihilates every single president for being racist so let’s not pretend that suddenly in 2016 we have some sort of historical moral standard for presidents that we have to vote in accordance with.)
In her book KDM points out criticisms the Caner brothers received from the Muslim community when they wrote Unveiling Islam and offers her own take: “...[critics] accusing the brothers of ‘either purposely or ignorantly’ presenting ‘half-truth after half-truth, mischaracterization after mischaracterization and falsehood after falsehood.’ But the book told evangelicals exactly what they wanted to hear.” Ironically, I feel this description could be applied to her own book. I think her accusations are purposefully inflammatory and incomplete yet nonetheless what ‘the masses’ want to hear.
Her snarkiness and overuse of passive-aggressive scare quotes leaves me truly wondering what her beliefs even are- which parts is she condemning? Every last word? If white evangelicals are all that’s wrong in America, what would the “un-fractured” nation even look like?
The Bible stands in opposition of the culture and is foolishness to those who do not believe it. To follow the teachings of the Bible will naturally cause division of beliefs about what is right and wrong.
To her thesis: I believe KDM has failed to present compelling evidence that white evangelicals ‘corrupted a faith’ or ‘fractured a nation.’ Furthermore, her explanation of why evangelicals voted for Trump— “militant masculinity”— is laughably simplistic and not representative.
(Another sidenote: Politics, economics, and morality are a complex combination and it seems glaringly obvious to me that there are hundreds of reasons for why people vote the way they do. I understand that those who vote differently than me do so under deep convictions of what they believe is morally right, justice-seeking, and beneficial for our country. I would hope others would look at my vote the same way. I fail to see how this book benefits us as a country or us as a Christian community.)
Frankly, I’m not going to waste my time detailing all the ways this book is problematic. There are several other reviews that speak many of my feelings and I’ve included them below. Actually many of the mentioned reviewers would even still recommend reading this book after offering their critiques.
I don’t think I do.
I do think KDM has pointed out some very disheartening and horrendous things that deserve to be critiqued and denounced in the church. But there is nothing about her writing style that makes me believe she is qualified to present a fair assessment and proper representation of really anything. I’ll look elsewhere.
Critiques of abuse and sin should be made, yet beliefs that are grounded in Scripture alone should be upheld whether they are countercultural or not.
As Jonathan Leeman says in his book How the Nations Rage: “Until Christ returns, the nations will rage and plot in vain. We, meanwhile, point to the Lord and to his Anointed, both in word and deed. We’re on the right side of history so long as we stand with the Lord of history. His vindication will be our vindication.”
These Goodreads reviews here, here, and here resonated with me.
As did these more comprehensive reviews I pulled excerpts from…
This review by Anne Kennedy on CBMW:
“For Du Mez, it is only “conservatives” who fall prey to marketing and celebrity culture…She is able to see the speck in the eye of the white evangelical Trump supporter, but not the degree to which her provocative and energetic style makes for such a culturally advantageous, if not actually fashionable product.”
“By taking sincerely held theological and ethical beliefs off the table as possible motives for voting habits and replacing them with supposedly toxic masculine consumerism, Du Mez doesn’t have to deal with what many Christians in America actually believe. Nor does she have to grapple with the fact that Mr. Trump (though it was so astonishing) ran as a pro-life candidate and lived up to his campaign promises on that score. Du Mez apparently heard all evangelicals saying that they believed Mr. Trump was an ideal political candidate, whereas many voters — not just evangelical ones — said in plain English that they merely preferred Mr. Trump to Mrs. Clinton.”
“Du Mez said [in an interview] she wanted to be aggressive. She was tired of people privileging a warrior Christ rather than the one that preaches peace. It is a convenient choice. One that, I’m sure, she feels free to make because she will not suffer any loss of social or, tragically, academic credibility. People who believe in a male Christ who died for a Church who is likened to a Bride, who take their theology from a book shaped by a masculinity and femininity so embedded in the text that the words are rendered insensible when it is excised, who humble themselves before an objective Truth that makes claims on their manner of life, their identity, their sexuality, and the darkest parts of their souls, do not have any power right now.”
“The desperation and rage that many Americans felt at the end of eight years of Mr. Obama — not because they were racist, but because marriage as an institution had been blasphemed, because religious protections were eroding right under their very noses, and because the other candidate was someone who was so politically committed to the horrors of abortion that she never once during her campaign equivocated or moderated her view — were willing to take what they could. When all the other better and more logical candidates had left the stage and Mr. Trump was still standing, they went out and voted for him.”
“It would be fair to continue to debate the wisdom of that vote, to have a political discussion that included the economic and moral considerations that evangelicals hold, whether they be good and holy, or tawdry and foolish. Unfortunately for all of us, the existence of this book — and its whole-hearted embrace even by many evangelicals as “explaining everything” — proves that no such discussion will take place.”
This review by Kirsten Sanders on Mere Orthodoxy:
“What role should stories play in the telling of truth? And whose stories should be given epistemic priority? There are ethical obligations to hear not only the stories that correspond with our larger theories or social concerns, but also the ones that are conflicting.”
“KDM reads these smaller examples not as outliers but as evidence. This is a risky method. It is this question of sources that proved troubling to me as a reader, for KDM often chooses not the most prominent individuals or events, but, in my opinion, the most egregious.”
“KDM’s examples are unimpeachable and lamentable. But is this kind of swashbuckling patriotism a feature or a bug? Does evangelicalism generate this on its own, a kind of misogynist machine? Or are these statistically significant errors, aberrations due to sin or formation or culture? Some of these guys are bad dudes. But are they all bad in the same way, for the same reasons?”
“…she announces her verdict a lot, and the book can read like a conclusion in search of evidence. The questions she asks are broad, expansive ones that use words that remain ill-defined.”
“Economic factors are ignored in this book to its peril.”
“…the tendency of Jesus and John Wayne is to flatten “evangelicalism” by stating that voting for Trump (which, keep in mind, does not equal support for Trump) confirms something significant about “evangelicalism” writ large.”
This review by Jamie Carlson on Mere Orthodoxy:
“… she acknowledges at times that trends in evangelicalism corresponded to similar trends in broader American culture, yet she does not show how evangelicals set themselves apart as being uniquely bad in their embrace of these trends. Her citations, then, seem to work against her argument. This places disproportional blame on evangelicals for ills that plague American culture more broadly.”
“…she makes claims about the motives of some leaders without substantiating them.”
“Accusations are not proof, particularly when there are much simpler explanations…”
This review by Garrett O’Hara on Things Above:
“Jesus and John Wayne does a decent job of historically documenting actual problems in American evangelicalism. However, its ideological slant and snide tone get in the way of having a more positive impact, instead choosing to conjure the cheers of a choir which seeks to have its own left-leaning biases confirmed.”
“We later find that ‘For conservative white evangelicals, the ‘good news’ [are these scare quotes?] of the Christian gospel has become inextricably linked to a staunch commitment to patriarchal authority [this is code for complementarianism], gender difference, and Christian nationalism, and all of these are intertwined with white racial identity.’”
This review cites two others, but unique to this review was this statement:
“In 2003, I was part of a Pentagon team tasked by the Secretary of the Air Force to review these allegations [in Colorado Springs]. I spent a year on the investigation, during which we interviewed hundreds of witnesses and examined thousands of pages of documents. I was also one of the principal drafters of the June 2003 report to the Secretary of the Air Force, which was subsequently reviewed by Department of Defense and Congressional investigations. All of this is to say I know something about the circumstances to which Du Mez refers. And her description is both wrong and tendentious.”
AND… Because these topics are too important to only read one book about it:
How the Nations Rage is a fantastic book about the relationship between the church and politics, critiques when the church has been silent and when it has turned politics into a god, and talks through straight line vs jagged line political issues. It also suggests we stop using the phrase ‘culture wars.’
Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth is the best book I’ve read on a proper relationship between Christians and social justice issues, it forces us to ask important questions about what our politics are saying about our faith.
Evangelical Feminism is an excellent defense of complementarianism that fairly represents egalitarians and looks at the implications of the varying ways of interpreting Scripture.
Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus is the story of a man’s journey to Christianity while defending his Islamic faith. He essentially studied in depth the Quran vs the person of Jesus and came to realize things about his religion that he hadn’t known before.
“Fundamentalism” and the Word of God explains the misconceptions of fundamentalists and breaks down what it means and what fundamentalists believe. Much of the earlier history KDM talks about involves fundamentalists and this would be a good clarifier for that buzzword.
What Does the Bible Teach About Homosexuality? is a very good, comprehensive, and easy to understand study of the Scriptural passages that talk about homosexuality and addresses all the common debate issues
A(Typical) Woman is a phenomenal book about biblical womanhood that shows us the diversity and freedom we have in being a woman, not trying to ‘fit in’ to what we think the ‘right woman’ is. God doesn’t call us to be typical- we are called to be faithful. So good!
The Unsaved Christian is a great book that challenges the depth of our faith. This speaks in part against Christian Nationalism as KDM also critiqued and reminds us that politics should not be dividing us as a church.
Before You Lose Your Faith addresses some of the criticisms of the church that has caused people to deconstruct. It does not defend the ways the church has failed but has called the church to be both a place of safety and of truth.
Pin this review to Pinterest!