The Evangelical Dictionary of World Religions

EASTERN ORTHODOXY. Eastern Orthodoxy is made up of fourteen regional churches but is largely in unison in matters of theology and acceptance of the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople. The Orthodox Church is the second-largest Christian church, estimated at more than 225 million members. Within this communion are eight major ecclesiastical jurisdictions—Alexandria, Antioch, Bulgaria, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Moscow, Romania, and Serbia—and the independent churches of Albania, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Georgia, Greece, and Poland. Additionally, some communions that are related to Eastern Orthodoxy are the Oriental Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church, which exists outside Russia but is not in communion with Constantinople. The bishops of the Eastern Orthodox trace themselves back to the apostles through the apostolic succession.

Early History. The Eastern Orthodox Church is able to trace its origins back to the beginning of Christianity, and the church claims ancestry to the apostles themselves through apostolic succession, which is said to begin with the apostle Peter. The church was unified throughout the Roman Empire until the time of the emperor Constantine (AD 272–337) in areas of doctrine, liturgy, and government. The entire church was the “one holy catholic [Greek katholikē, meaning “universal”] and apostolic church.” After the divisions of the church over the centuries, different elements of the church, such as the Roman Catholic Church or the Oriental Orthodox Church, have claimed this title.

Strictly speaking, the growth of the church began in the eastern portion of the Roman Empire. The earliest fathers of the church and the great theological documents, councils, and creeds were in the East. For example, only two bishops of more than four hundred at the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 were from the West. Theologians of the East included men like Origen (ca. 185–ca. 254), Gregory Nazianzus (ca. 330–ca. 389), Athanasius (c. 293–373), Basil of Caesarea (329–79), Gregory of Nyssa (ca. 335–ca. 394), Jerome (ca. 347–420), and John Chrysostom (347–407). Most of the apostolic fathers, such as Justin Martyr (100–165) and Ignatius of Antioch (d. ca. 110), were of the East, and the first theologian of the church, Irenaeus (early second century; d. 202), was from the East, though eventually he was connected with Gaul (France). The major seven councils of early Christianity, between the fourth and eighth centuries, were located in the East. These include the Council of Nicaea (325), the First Council of Constantinople (381, called Nicaea II), the Council of Ephesus (431), the Council of Chalcedon (451), the Second Council of Constantinople (553), the Third Council of Constantinople (680–81), and the Second Nicaean Council (787).

In the next seven hundred years, there were three major schisms involving the Eastern church. The first was in 451, in which churches that are now known as the Oriental Orthodox separated from the Orthodox Church (East and West) because of disagreement with the conclusions at the Council of Chalcedon over the person and natures of Christ. The second schism occurred in the ninth century due to the conflict between Patriarch Photius of Constantinople (ca. 820–91) and Pope Nicholas I (birth date unknown; d. 867). Nicholas opposed the promotion of Photius to his position in Constantinople and supported the deposed Ignatius, though Photius was lawfully promoted. Nicholas attempted to assert the authority of Roman papacy over the entire church rather than accepting his position as the first among equals. Third, in 1054, what is known as the Great Schism occurred. At this time, the Eastern and Western churches developed a serious disagreement regarding the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit, whether he proceeds only from the Father or from both the Father and the Son, the latter doctrine being articulated in the filioque clause of the Nicene Creed: “and [from] the Son.”

With the defeat of Constantinople in 1453 by the Ottoman Turks, matters grew worse for the church of the East. Islamic leaders began to persecute the Orthodox Christians. Because of this, the Orthodox Church began to make alliances with various European countries that blurred the line between the church and the civil authority, so that the church was the most important element within the culture. Also, the Russian Orthodox Church was founded as autonomous from Constantinople in 1448. Later, in the nineteenth century, additional Orthodox churches were established in Greece (1833), Romania (1859), Bulgaria (1870), and Serbia (1879). In view of the fact that these latter Orthodox churches were not the direct result of the efforts of Constantinople, the see of Constantinople has exercised little power over them.

Summary of Beliefs. When one speaks of Eastern Orthodoxy, the reference is to those churches, with their traditions, liturgy, and theology, that date to the Byzantine Empire (ca. 395–1453). As stated earlier, many groups claim to trace their roots and traditions to the earliest beginnings of Christianity and to the apostles, and the Eastern Orthodox Church does similarly. It claims to be the one holy catholic and apostolic church and believes it has a duty to protect the same doctrines and practices that were present in earliest Christianity. The distinction between Eastern Orthodoxy and other branches of Christianity may be defined by four major controversies: First, the Eastern church declares that the insertion of the filioque clause (“and the Son”) into the Nicene Creed by the Council of Toledo in Spain (447) was an error. The Western church affirms that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, while the Eastern Church has maintained that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father only. Second, the Eastern Orthodox Church says that the Roman pope does not have authority over the entire church, and even if accorded highest honor, he is yet one among equals. Third, the Eastern church considers the Roman Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary to be a heresy. Last, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church have many differences on the matter of church liturgy.

Eastern Orthodox Theology. Creation. According to Orthodox belief, God is independent of the universe, free to create it or not. It is simply the act of his free will. His ex nihilo act of creation is due to his love and is the act of all three persons of the Trinity, with the Logos giving to each creature its existence and divine energy. By means of what is called “double movement,” God desires to spiritually join (not in substance) with his creation. Creation at its inception was in harmony with God but, because of the fall, moved away from him. He desires to bring the creation back into participation with him, called deification.

Revelation and Authority. The Eastern Orthodox Church has within it two different approaches to revelation and authority. In the two-source theory, God’s revelation to the church is in two forms, the Scriptures and tradition. Divine revelation in the early church was in the form of oral tradition, which became the basis of the New Testament text. According to Orthodox teaching, neither the New Testament nor the oral tradition is the complete revelation of God, so the church was the custodian of the Word of God, written and unwritten, and both sources are consistent with each other and are legitimate sources of the revelation of God. In contrast, the one-source theory says that the Holy Scriptures are only a part of the larger tradition of the church, so consequently the Bible is not the ultimate authority for church doctrines and practices. In view of this, the church alone is the God-determined interpreter of Holy Scripture, and its teachings are the infallible truth. Through the bishops of the church, both in councils and individually, this truth is disseminated.

According to the Orthodox faith, the doctrine of sola Scriptura is a dangerous teaching because the truth of Scripture cannot be alienated from the traditions of the church that gave rise to them. Also, the Scripture is not for private interpretation but must be within the tradition of the church that created it. The Eastern Orthodox Church considers the Greek Old Testament and the Greek New Testament to be sacred text and also includes Deuterocanonical books rejected by Protestants, but these are not considered to be on the same level with the other books of the Bible.

God. Eastern Orthodoxy believes that God is both three persons and one being, in concert with the historical position of Christianity and the creeds of the church. The divine being is uncreated, immaterial, and eternal, and all of God’s attributes are infinite and shared in common with each of the three equal and distinct persons. God’s absolute nature is only approximately understood by humans through analogy and by his express revelation. God’s being may be seen in three aspects: First is his essence (ousia). Second, the three distinct persons (hypostases) share indivisibly the one divine essence without any overlapping of their persons or modes of being. Third, the uncreated energies (energeiai) of God are used to communicate with his creatures. Regarding the distinct persons, the Father is the fount of the Godhead, with the Son begotten from the Father from all eternity (“God of very God” in the Nicene Creed), and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father eternally. This Triune God alone has self-existence (aseity), and all other beings depend on God for their existence.

Humanity. The intent of God from eternity was that humans would participate in the divine nature (theosis, or deification). Thus God created humans in his image, which consists of rationality and moral freedom, in a quality and degree different from the rationality and freedom given to animals. Humans are therefore like God in that they have the ability to develop and express moral virtue and thereby to be deified. Deification allows humans to have relationship with an infinite but transcendent God. Originally Adam and Eve had a perfect nature but also the capacity to achieve moral and spiritual deification through obedience to, and communion with, God. In view of this, Eastern Orthodox theologians believe that the fall “broke the harmony of God’s good creation” and was a “cosmic catastrophe” (Payton, 98).

Sin. Humans fell into sin because of human limitations, and the current condition of the world, along with humanity’s alienation from God, makes the commission of sin expected. Since the fall, humans are more inclined toward sin than they were before the fall, when all of Adam’s and Eve’s needs were met by God. God had intended for our first parents to gradually move to perfection, but through the work of Satan they chose to disobey God’s commandment and thus became disposed toward sickness and death. Instead of following God, humans began to follow their own perspective, resulting in three basic sins, namely, spiritual ignorance, self-love, and hatred of other people. In contrast with the view of other Christian traditions, in the Eastern view the natural world was largely unaffected by the fall of humanity.

Deification. Because of Adam’s sin, a mortal barricade was built between humans and God. Since humans cannot reconcile with God by themselves, God’s Son entered human existence to make it possible for humans to establish a mystical union with God. Unlike the Protestant view of forensic justification, substitutionary atonement, or redemption, Eastern Orthodox theology focuses on the incarnation as the key to salvation. In the incarnation, God took upon himself, in the person of the Son, our humanity to unite the essence of humanity to the divine nature. To quote a famous Eastern theologian, Athanasius: “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God” (On the Incarnation of the Word 54). In saying this, Athanasius was asserting not that humans actually become the same being as God but that humans are able to share aspects of God’s divine nature that are communicable to humans. The mystical union of God with humanity comes from God giving divine energies through the sacraments of the church, the major channel through which these energies are given. In order to receive these energies, human beings must participate in the process of salvation. In addition to these sacraments, humans must also perform good works, pray, and contemplate God in achieving this mystical union with God.

The Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church believes itself to be the one and only true church that was founded by Christ and his apostles. It remains such by unbroken apostolic succession. Eastern Orthodox Christians are fervent in arguing that they alone have faithfully preserved the faith reflected in their theology and practices.

Future Things. Eastern Orthodoxy believes that Jesus will return to the earth in great power at the end of history to begin the final judgment and refurbish creation to a new heaven and new earth. Those who are righteous—have achieved or sought mystical union—will receive an eternal reward, and the unrighteous will be separated from God in hell by their own choice by repudiation of God. This torture is not divine retribution but a result of human rejection of the love and goodness of God.

Liturgical Worship. The Eastern Orthodox Church has significant liturgy, with the inside of the church full of colorful pictures and stained-glass windows, all based on religious themes. The typical Orthodox religious service includes the burning of incense and candles, priests wearing elaborate clothing, and worshipers venerating icons. One has a complete religious experience in Orthodox worship, with the worshipers having all their senses involved. Worshipers carry the smell of incense on their bodies, their eyes take in beautiful religious imagery, their ears hear the sound of preaching and chanting, their mouths praise God, their hands perform the sign of the cross, and they prostrate their bodies before the icons. Each part of the liturgy has its own meaning and symbolism, and Eastern Orthodox Christians believe that every part of the liturgy is essential. Eastern Orthodox liturgy may be traced to that given by St. John Chrysostom (ca. 347–407).

Icons. The use of icons is very important in Eastern Orthodox theology and worship. They are venerated (not worshiped), and the priests use them in the performance of their rituals. They are viewed not as idols but as a manifestation of God expressed in his incarnation in Christ. Eastern Orthodox churches celebrate the triumph of orthodoxy, an event commemorating the acceptance of icons by the church on March 11, 843, and a rebuke of the iconoclasts who opposed this. Included with this ceremony is a denunciation of all who forbid the use of icons. Interestingly, the Eastern Orthodox, in concert with the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, believe that the gospel can be communicated through the use of icons as well as by reading the Bible.

Bibliography. J. Binns, An Introduction to the Christian Orthodox Churches; V. Lossky, Orthodox Theology: An Introduction; J. M. Neale, A History of the Holy Eastern Church: The Patriarchate of Antioch, repr. ed.; J. R. Payton, Light from the Christian East: An Introduction to the Orthodox Tradition; J. Pelikan, The Spirit of Eastern Christendom; K. Ware, The Orthodox Way, rev. ed.

H. W. House

EFFENDÍ, SHOGHÍ. Shoghí Effendí Rabbání (1897–1957, known simply as Shoghi Effendi) was the spiritual leader of the Bahá’í Faith, and the great-grandson of the Bahá’í founder, Bahá’u’lláh. Effendi assumed headship of the Bahá’í Faith in 1921 at the age of twenty-four, after the death of his grandfather, ‘Abdu’l-Baha, who had instructed in his will that Effendi should assume the role of “Guardian of the Cause of God.” Educated at Oxford, Effendi established himself as an effective communicator and organizer, and under his watch, the Bahá’í Faith rose to international prominence. He focused heavily on evangelism, and one of his primary accomplishments was a translation of the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh into English. Effendi also played a significant role in defining and interpreting Bahá’í doctrines. Various contradictory decrees by Effendi have caused controversy and schism within the Bahá’í Faith, from which it has not recovered. The controversy stems from at least two different named successors, each of whom has followers claiming legitimate authority within Bahá’í and each of whom disparages the other’s claims. This disunity is ironic since the central goal of Bahá’í is unity among all religious belief.

See also BAHÁ’Í; BAHÁ’U’LLÁH

Bibliography. K. Bowers, God Speaks Again: An Introduction to the Baha’i Faith; P. Smith, An Introduction to the Baha’i Faith.

J. P. Holding

EIGHTFOLD PATH. The Eightfold Path is the process formulated by Siddhartha Gautama the Buddha (ca. sixth to fifth century BC) through which he taught that an individual may obtain enlightenment possibly during this life and pass into nirvana at death. The last of the Four Noble Truths proclaimed by the Buddha in his famous deer park sermon (ca. 528 BC), the Eightfold Path constitutes the practical implementation of the Buddha’s theoretical solution to the human condition. The human condition, according to the First Noble Truth, is characterized by dukkha, or the suffering that arises when impermanent things cease to exist. Since the Second Noble Truth diagnoses craving as the cause of dukkha, the Third Noble Truth deductively infers that the way to liberate oneself from dukkha (and hence overcome the human condition) is by eliminating craving. This can be done by following the Eightfold Path, which seeks to transform a person in the successive realms of wisdom, morality, and mental discipline.

Steps One and Two. The cultivation of wisdom comprises the first two steps of the Eightfold Path. Step one, right understanding, designates cognizance of and intellectual assent to the Four Noble Truths. Here a person gains deeper insight into the law of karma, or the cause-and-effect relationship between thoughts, words, and deeds of a certain quality and the generation of karma of this same quality, which if left unchecked will produce situations of that quality in either this or a future life.

In step two, right thought, adherents come to view themselves according to the Buddha’s anthropology of anatman (literally, “no-soul” or “no-self”), where the immaterial entity we perceive as the ego is not a changeless center of self-consciousness but rather an amalgamation of five conditioned and changing spiritual forces known as skandhas, held together by the glue of karma. These skandhas include form (the faculty that attaches to a physical body), sensation (the ability to receive sensory stimuli from the body), reason, volition, and memory. Hence it is these five skandhas, not a soul (Atman) as in Hinduism, that transmigrate from life to life; however, in nirvana the karmic bonds are dissolved, and the skandhas disperse forever.

Steps Three through Five. Steps three through five of the Eightfold Path promote the acquisition of morality. Through step three, right speech, one learns, in recognition of one’s lack of any permanent self, how to speak about others from a selfless perspective, thereby only saying things that would support the well-being and advance the flourishing of other persons. Consequently, one must refrain from gossip, lying, obscenity, and harsh words.

Step four, right actions, entails that individuals keep the five sila (basic moral prohibitions), which forbid, respectively, killing any sentient (conscious) being, deception, sexual misconduct, theft, and the consumption of intoxicants.

Concerning step five, right livelihood, persons take up occupations consistent with the sila. It should be emphasized that occupations where individuals do not themselves violate the sila but cause or pressure others to do so are just as forbidden as occupations where individuals themselves break the sila.

Steps Six through Eight. In steps six through eight of the Eightfold Path, practitioners obtain the necessary mental discipline to make the final break with any remaining desire for impermanent things. While the first five steps of the Eightfold Path can obviously be accomplished by laypeople and religious (i.e., monks or nuns) alike, the last three steps are possible but extremely difficult to perform while living amid job, family, and social obligations. Hence the Theravada insistence on completion of the Eightfold Path for nirvana virtually requires adherents to at least temporarily enter the sangha, or monastic community, whereas Mahayana Buddhism, though promoting the monastic approach, was more accepting to a lay approach.

Step six, right effort, impresses on individuals how precious their time as humans is, for it is only as a human being that one may gain the path; lower forms of life lack the intellectual resources to distance themselves from craving. Because there is no guarantee that an individual will be reincarnated as a human being quickly, right effort insists that this life may be one’s best chance at nirvana for a long time. Therefore, persons must commit to do everything in their power and make whatever sacrifices are necessary for completing the Eightfold Path.

With step seven, right awareness, one realizes that the mind contains two levels: the surface mind, or the stimulus-response level, which perceives all sensory data and constantly devises responses to those data, and the deep mind, which exists in a state of equanimity, unperturbed by the external world. Upon this realization, one learns to tap into the peace afforded by the deep mind by ignoring, rather than fighting against or fleeing from, the distractions generated by the surface mind.

Regarding the eighth and final step, right concentration, the practitioner masters two forms of meditation, dhyana and samadhi. Dhyana occurs when one finds an object (any object suffices) and concentrates on the object to such a degree that one loses consciousness of one’s consciousness of the object. In other words, dhyana is completed when the individual no longer thinks, “I am meditating on the object” but rather simply thinks, “Object.” At this juncture, the individual can advance to samadhi, a state of pure consciousness that has no object. When such independence from the phenomenal world obtains, craving for all objects is destroyed, and the person experiences enlightenment and becomes an arhat (a perfected one who has apprehended the true nature of existence). All nonphysical karmic ties are broken, so that the only thing holding the five skandhas together is the body. Unless one desires rebirth (as does a bodhisattva), at death the skandhas are said to disperse, causing the person to enter into the ineffable state of nirvana, or liberation from all suffering.

Bibliography. R. C. Bush, gen. ed., The Religious World, 3rd ed.; C. Humphreys, Buddhism; D. S. Lopez Jr., The Story of Buddhism; T. A. Robinson and H. Rodrigues, eds., World Religions; Sangharakshita, The Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path, 2nd ed.

K. R. MacGregor

ENLIGHTENMENT. This term defines the acquisition of spiritual knowledge, insight, and/or spiritual experience, generally leading to a sense of peace, self-improvement, and control. It is assumed to provide complete insight into the nature of reality, particularly within Buddhism.

While Buddhism depends historically, ideologically, and experientially on the phenomenon of enlightenment, other religions embracing the concept include Hinduism, Sufism, New Age, and Sikhism, as well as many expressions of occultism, although each understands the concept differently.

The archetypical experience of enlightenment is that of the Buddha’s, occurring, as traditionally believed, under the Bodhi tree around 530 BC. During this event, Buddha supposedly transitioned through five stages, including (1) the confrontation and defeat of various temptations; (2) the experience of intense meditation leading to self-awareness and a sense of peace; (3) self-analysis of all past actions; (4) insight into other people’s predicaments and complexities; and (5) a realization of the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism as well as a realization of the Eightfold Path to end suffering. Final and full enlightenment provides for the passing into nirvana, releasing the mind stream from the cycle of birth and rebirth. Hinduism embraces meditation and other forms of devotion to provide enlightenment, as do, in some form or fashion, other religions. This experience is often identified as being made aware of oneness with the divine.

In New Age thought, enlightenment takes on a different meaning. Enlightenment for a practitioner of New Age spirituality means achieving the realization of oneness with the universe. This is done through various spiritual techniques and may take several lifetimes through reincarnation. Sikhism is similar to New Age spirituality in its view of enlightenment, the difference being that Sikhs attempt to achieve oneness with the one God rather than with an ethereal “force” or “energy,” as with New Age spirituality.

See also BUDDHISM; HINDUISM; SIKHISM; SUFISM

Bibliography. M. Banarsiass, Joyful Path of Good Fortune; J. Davenport, The New Age Movement and the Biblical Worldview: Conflict and Dialogue; J. Singh, “My Thirteen Reasons for Sikhism,” http://www.sikhs.org/art4.htm.

R. P. Roberts

ETERNAL LIFE. Many of the world’s religions believe in eternal life in some form—that is, in a life that continues in some way after physical death. Among these faiths are some forms of Hinduism and Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. However, the teachings within these groups vary greatly. Some sects of Hinduism and Buddhism teach that once a person escapes the cycle of reincarnation, he or she will reside for eternity either as one with Brahma or as a kind of spirit. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity hold that a person who gains eternal life will reside in heaven. Within these three traditions, the idea of heaven varies as well.

In the Bible, eternal life is a gift God gives to those who receive Jesus Christ as Savior (John 3:16–18). Eternal life is not simply an unending existence but the best of all possible existences. Those who receive the gift of eternal life will dwell with God forever (1 Pet. 1:4; Rev. 21:1–4). They possess that eternal life now and also in the future, according to the New Testament.

A number of heterodox groups reinterpret the Bible’s teaching on this subject. Christian Science teaches that life and death are illusory, so that “eternal life” is simply the awakening of a soul from the “dream” of reality. This teaching reflects an Eastern philosophy rather than the biblical portrayal of eternal life. In many cases, it seems, “eternal life” in Christian Science is at least partially a reward for adherence to the teaching of Christian Science. This nullifies the concept of the grace of God (Rom. 11:6).

The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (the governing body of the Jehovah’s Witness organization) teaches that Jesus Christ died on the cross to make it possible for people to prove their own worthiness for eternal life. However, to actually obtain eternal life, one must meet Watch Tower requirements, including at least these four: growing in Bible knowledge, obeying God’s laws (as spelled out by the Watch Tower—including such things as avoidance of blood transfusions and not smoking), being associated with God’s organization (exclusively the Watch Tower), and advocating God’s kingdom to others (spreading the Watch Tower’s message). This conflicts with the Bible’s teaching that human effort is not sufficient to gain eternal life.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church, the Mormons) teaches that Christ’s atonement (accomplished by his suffering in the garden of Gethsemane and his death on the cross) secures resurrection to immortality (“general salvation”) for all humanity but that full or “individual” salvation requires human effort. The LDS Church believes that all people (with a few exceptions, such as apostate Mormons) will have an eternal existence in one of three heavenly kingdoms. Most of the world’s people will go to the “telestial” (bottom) kingdom after a period of chastisement for their sins. Good people (including many Mormons) will go to the next level up, the terrestrial kingdom. However, the highest level, the only one in which fellowship with God the Father can be experienced, will be the celestial kingdom. Faithful Mormons hope to achieve this level on the basis of a combination of faith, repentance, and good deeds. The LDS Church also teaches that those who are completely obedient may attain “eternal life,” the kind of life God has, and actually become gods in eternity and rule over their own worlds. This highly complex and stratified version of eternal life is totally absent from the Bible.

In New Age philosophy, eternal life is held to be the possession of every person, though the definition of that “life” is alien to the biblical teaching of eternal life. Most in the New Age movement hold to reincarnation and a belief that when people die they become one with the impersonal life force they believe in, if they have become sufficiently “enlightened” with whatever knowledge the particular New Age adherent believes is necessary.

Bibliography. L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology; W. Grudem, Systematic Theology; G. Mather and Larry Nichols, “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” in Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult.

E. Shropshire and R. L. Drouhard

EUCHARIST. The Eucharist, also referred to as Holy Communion or the Lord’s Supper, is a Christian sacrament celebrating and commemorating the Last Supper, at which Jesus Christ shared a final meal with his disciples before his eventual arrest and crucifixion. The term Eucharist is taken from the Greek noun eucharistia, from eu, meaning “good” or “well,” and charis, meaning “favor” or “grace.” More often in the New Testament and the Septuagint, the verb eucharisteō is used, which means “to thank.” The institution of the Eucharist is contained in all three of the Synoptic Gospels. Matthew 26:26–29 states,

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

To this instruction from Jesus, Paul adds the following statement from the tradition that he received as a quotation of Jesus: “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:25). There is therefore a tradition early in the New Testament period in which the Eucharist is something that should be practiced by the church. The belief in the Eucharist as being instituted by Christ is a uniting factor practiced by virtually all branches of Christianity (see Erickson, chap. 53).

The Eucharist is referred to as a “sacrament” (means of grace) by Roman Catholics, but many Protestants prefer the term ordinance, referring to the rite as a channel of grace expressing faith. With this in mind, there are three primary views of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. First, there is the Roman Catholic view, called transubstantiation. This takes a very literal view of Christ’s presence in the bread and wine when he said, “This is my body,” and, “This is my blood.” This view is called transubstantiation because it regards the bread and wine as literally changing substance, although all that is accessible to the senses remains the same. Catholic priest and missionary Lawrence Lovasik writes, “The Eucharist is the sacrament which contains the true body and blood of Jesus Christ, together with His soul and divinity, the entire living and glorified Christ, under the appearances of bread and wine” (8). In this view, grace is given to those present ex opere operato, meaning “by the work performed.” Therefore, the measure of grace dispensed is in proportion to the subjective disposition of the recipient of grace. In addition, whenever the Mass is celebrated, the sacrifice of Christ is in some sense repeated. The Catholic Church affirms that the sacrifice of the Eucharist is a real sacrifice, the same sacrifice paid on the cross, having the same Priest and Victim (Jesus Christ), except that the sacrifice of the Mass is offered in an “unbloody manner” (Denzinger, §§938–39). Another aspect of the Roman Catholic view of the Eucharist is sacerdotalism, the idea than an ordained priest must be present in order to consecrate the bread and wine.

There are two primary objections to the Roman Catholic view. First, Jesus often spoke in symbolic terms when referring to himself. For instance, in the book of John, Jesus states, “I am the door” (John 10:9) and “I am the true vine” (John 15:1). Even at the Last Supper, it is doubtful that Jesus’s disciples thought that the bread in Jesus’s hand was actually Jesus’s physical body. Second, this tends to undermine the finality of the completed work of Christ on the cross. The book of Hebrews especially makes it clear that Christ’s atonement for sin on the cross was completed once and need not be repeated (Heb. 1:3; 9:25–28; 10:3, 12).

A second view is the Lutheran view, often called consubstantiation. Luther rejected the Catholic view of transubstantiation but maintained that in some sense Christ’s statement, “This is my body” should be taken literally. Con means “in, with, and under”; and Christ’s presence is therefore in, with, and under the physical bread and wine of the Eucharist. In his Large Catechism, Luther states, “Now what is the Sacrament of the Altar? Answer: It is the true body and blood of the Lord Christ in and under the bread and wine, which Christ’s Word commands us to eat and drink” (111). A foundational text from which Luther formed this doctrine is 1 Corinthians 10:16, which states, “Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?” The primary objection to this view lies in how Christ’s physical body and human nature could be everywhere present. If Christ ascended to the Father and stated he would no longer be in the world, how could his physical presence remain on the earth? In answer to this, Luther taught the ubiquity of Christ’s nature, in which his humanity could be present everywhere. The ubiquity of Christ’s nature has been challenged since Luther’s time as an extrabiblical explanation in order to show consubstantiation as true (Grudem, 994).

A third view is the symbolic view in which Christ’s presence in the Eucharist is a spiritual presence. Although there were differences between them, John Calvin and other Reformers such as Huldrych Zwingli and Heinrich Bullinger argued that the bread and wine are not, nor do they somehow contain, the body and blood of Christ. In a famous debate between Luther and Zwingli, Zwingli referenced numerous scriptural texts in which “this is” more likely means “this signifies” (Blount and Wooddell, 77). Essentially this position affirms that although the body and blood are symbolized by bread and wine, Christ is spiritually present at the Eucharist. An example of this type of presence would be Matthew 18:20, in which Jesus states, “For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.” The symbolic view does not wish to understate the importance of the Eucharist; in fact, John Calvin stated, “Communion (Eucharist) was the culmination of one’s life as a Christian” (Wandel, 140). The primary objection to this view, as explained above, is in the literal understanding of Christ’s statements, when he instituted the Eucharist, that the bread was his body and the wine was his blood.

Bibliography. D. K. Blount and J. D. Wooddell, eds., Baptist Faith and Message 2000: Critical Issues in America’s Largest Denomination; H. Denzinger, Sources of Catholic Dogma; M. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed.; W. Grudem, Systematic Theology; L. Lovasik, The Eucharist in Catholic Life; M. Luther, Luther’s Large Catechism, translated by F. S. Janzow; G. T. Smith, ed., The Lord’s Supper: Five Views; L. P. Wandel, The Eucharist in the Reformation.

T. S. Price

EVANGELICALISM. Within the broader Christian communion is an element of Protestantism known as evangelicalism, a term used of many Protestants, coming from the Greek term euangelion, meaning “good news.” Whereas mainline Protestant churches have decreased in numbers during the last several decades, evangelicals have grown remarkably. This growth in the United States has been studied by the Pew Research Center, comparing the progress of evangelicals from 2007 through 2014 (see Zylstra). The study came to five conclusions. First, the number of evangelicals has remained fairly stable in comparison to other Christian groups in America (evangelicals remained the largest religious group in the US and made up just over 25% of the US population in 2014). Second, approximately half of those who say they are Christians also claim the label of evangelical, in contrast to 44 percent in 2007; over 70 percent of those in historically black Protestant denominations identify themselves as evangelical.

Third, evangelicals have increased their numbers through evangelism and “religious switching” and also retained more of their children than most other Christian groups. It is true that evangelicals have lost individuals from their ranks, but at the same time they have had much growth, for a net gain from 2007 to 2014 of 1.5 percent. Evangelicals retain two-thirds of their children, while Protestants in general retain less than half. Fourth, an interesting finding of the Pew study is that evangelicalism is an increasingly diverse group, with more than one-third of evangelical adults being nonwhite. This feature is also true in non-evangelical Christian denominations in the United States. Fifth, evangelicals tend to marry other evangelicals (75% do so). And in contrast to the national birthrate (2.1 children per couple), and among Christians in general, evangelicals have many more children (2.3 children per couple).

What Does It Mean to Be an Evangelical? The term evangelical is used in at least three different ways. First, it may refer to Christians who share in common four theological perspectives: conversionism, activism, biblicism, and crucicentrism. Conversionism is the belief that a person does not become a Christian due to his ethnic or family background, church association, or belief system. In order to become a Christian, one must be justified before God, which occurs by a change brought about by the work of the Holy Spirit and a person’s belief in the truth of the gospel. The purpose of gospel proclamation is to move those who hear it to believe in the person of Jesus the Messiah and his salvific acts for humanity. The essence of practical teaching relates to spiritual growth that comes from a relationship to Jesus. Activism, in evangelical perspective, is a handmaiden to the spread of the gospel; it means engaging the culture from a Christian worldview and in order to live out the social implications of the gospel. Activism includes a variety of areas, such as the arts, business, economics, law, medicine (including bioethics), philosophy, and politics. The third perspective, biblicism, is that the Bible is the sole Christian authority for faith and practice, setting forth God’s special revelation of himself to humanity, and the infallible standard for the conduct of one’s life. Consequently evangelicals have great respect for the teachings of the Bible and attempt to obey its norms. Last of all is crucicentrism. At the center of evangelical theology are the death, burial, and resurrection of the Messiah. This is true both for its theology and its devotion. Apart from these central truths, there can be neither gospel nor hope of salvation.

Second, evangelical refers to “an organic group of movements and religious traditions” (Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals). Used in this manner, the term speaks of style as much as beliefs, and many Christian groups that are dissimilar in many areas of theology and divergent in manner of worship fit under this umbrella. They include groups as diverse as African American “Baptists, Dutch Reformed Churches, Mennonites and Pentecostals, Catholic charismatics and Southern Baptists” (Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals).

The third meaning of evangelical is as a label that arose after World War II referring to a coalition of Christians. This coalition arose due to the concerns of many Christians about the fundamentalist movement in America. Though there was largely agreement with the theology of fundamentalism, which in turn arose out of the modernist-fundamentalist controversy in the immediately preceding years regarding fundamentals of the Christian faith such as the virgin birth of Jesus and the necessity of the atonement of Christ, there was concern about issues such as anti-intellectualism and separatism. From this coalition arose many prominent Christians in America such as Harold J. Ockenga and Billy Graham, schools such as Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton College, and the National Association of Evangelicals.

Early History. Possibly the term evangelical originated with Martin Luther (1483–1546), who called his embryonic movement the “evangelical church” (evangelische kirche), that is, one that preaches the good news. The more normal use of the term is to refer to those Christian groups in the revival movement of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in the United Kingdom and North America. Important preachers led this movement, namely, Jonathan Edwards (1703–58), John Wesley (1703–91), and George Whitefield (1714–70). The movement as a whole, and the preachers in particular, were committed to the Bible alone as the basis of their methods and the content of their sermons. The long-lasting nature of the revivals in America caused evangelical Protestantism to gain a secure place within the dominant Protestant movement. The focus of the revivalism was an emotional experience (especially with the influence of revivalist Charles Finney and, later, Billy Sunday) and a social and personal change in the converts. In many respects, the social concern of evangelicals influenced important movements of the nineteenth century such as charitable organizations, abolition, women’s suffrage, and prohibition. The influence of evangelism began to wane in the early twentieth century for a number of reasons, including the influx of Roman Catholic immigrants and the confusion in the minds of many between evangelicalism and fundamentalism. Beginning in the 1940s, the distinction between these two became clearer with the prominence of various evangelical leaders, particularly Billy Graham, and important institutions and groups, such as Wheaton College and the National Association of Evangelicals.

Summary of Beliefs. One may recognize evangelical churches by their stress on the preaching of Scripture, personal study of the Bible, and engaging the contemporary culture, in contradistinction to other Christian communions that emphasize sacraments and liturgy. Evangelicals agree that conversion is necessary for being saved and often use the terms born again or born from above to identify this conversion. Moreover, those who wear the name evangelical believe that the Bible gives God’s will to humans and is the sole basis for determining truth and ethics. Additionally, an evangelical embraces the need to share the gospel of Jesus Christ rather than this being only the task of the clergy. Last of all, evangelicals believe that the death of Jesus on the cross was necessary for salvation. In addition, they accept the historical fact of Christ’s miracles; his virgin birth; his crucifixion, burial, and resurrection; and his second coming. In summary, evangelicals hold to the cornerstones of the Reformation, the four solas: sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), sola fide (faith alone), sola gratia (grace alone), and soli Christi (Christ alone). Regarding cultural matters, evangelicals tend to be conservative in their social perspective, to believe that homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage are sinful, and to hold that abortion is murder, though there is a liberal minority within evangelism who differ with the broader movement in these matters.

Evangelical Theology. Creation. Belief in the act of creation out of nothing (creatio ex nihilo) by an omnipotent deity—the God of the Bible—is a standard belief among evangelicals. They differ, however, regarding the manner of this creation. Some hold to six contiguous days of creation several thousand years ago, some believe in a universe of billions of years with the days of creation being long periods of time, while others believe in progressive creation, the days in Genesis being actual solar days but separated by aeons of time in which created living beings developed. And increasing number are advocates of intelligent design. A minority accept the theory of evolution to some degree. Most evangelicals also accept the Noahic flood as literal history, with many and perhaps most holding to a universal flood. Evangelicals believe that knowledge of truth, and God specifically, may be acquired in empirical science and history, as well as in the Bible.

Revelation. Unlike liberal Protestants who believe the Bible has error, and some fundamentalists who believe that the King James Version is uniquely the Word of God, evangelicals believe that the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible are inspired by God, without error (for most) in the original manuscripts, and the final authority for faith, practice, and all matters that it teaches. Though the Bible is verbally and plenarily inspired, so that every word of the original writings is the very word of God, the authors of Scripture write within the limitations of their vocabulary, setting, education, and personality.

God. The God of the Bible is a Trinity; that is, three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—share one indivisible essence. As one God, each distinct but not separate person has all of the attributes of God, though they differ in the manner in which they act in reference to each other—the Father begets, the Son is begotten, and the Spirit proceeds—and to creation. The Father is primarily seen as the sovereign over creation and history, the Son as the one who took upon himself true human nature as the Messiah Jesus, and the Spirit of God as the person who generally works as the unseen expression of God in individuals specifically and in the church in general.

Humanity and Sin. Evangelicals also generally believe that Adam and Eve were historical persons, the first parents of all humanity. Adam was created as both a physical and a spiritual being, with Eve receiving her full humanity from Adam, as does the remainder of the human race. Those first humans were created without sin, but when they sinned, their fall brought them and all their posterity into sin and its effects, bringing all humans under the judgment of God, with the result that all need salvation. Evangelicals differ as to whether humans are incapable in themselves of responding to the grace of God, or whether they have partial ability to respond, divided between Calvinist and Arminian camps.

Salvation. Few among evangelicals differ regarding the absolute necessity of Christ’s death and resurrection to redeem human beings and also the absolute necessity that one has to believe in Christ’s work for personal salvation. There is general agreement that the death of Jesus provided both expiation (forgiveness of human sins) and substitution (taking the wrath of God for humans). Upon believing in Jesus and his work, the believer receives the benefits of expiation and substitution. The resurrection of Jesus is the capstone of the accomplishment of salvation. The Holy Spirit regenerates the individual who believes in Jesus in response to the preaching of the gospel. There are differences among evangelicals regarding the basis of God’s election of humans, the extent of Christ’s atonement, exactly how God’s grace works in bringing about salvation, and whether salvation can be forfeited.

The Church. Differing theories of the polity of the church exist among evangelicals. One may find episcopal, presbyterian, and congregational models, and sometimes a hybrid of these. Evangelicals also differ as to whether the church is a replacement for physical Israel or whether these two are distinguishable in the plan of God, though both are only saved by grace through faith.

Future Things. Evangelicals believe, in agreement with the church of all ages, in the physical resurrection of all humans, the saved to life eternal and the unsaved to everlasting separation from God. Most believe in eternal punishment of the unsaved, but a minority believe in temporal punishment or annihilationism. A variety of views are held in regard to the events of the last days, such as the nature, length, and timing of the return of Christ and of the millennium, and how we should approach the book of Revelation.