Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America

by Barry Hankins

Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984) was probably the single greatest intellectual influence on young evangelicals of the 1960s and '70s. He was cultural critic, popular intellectual mentor, political activist, evangelist, Christian apologist, and the author of over twenty books and two important films. Along with his wife, Edith, he founded L'Abri, a loving community of intellectual and spiritual exploration where visitors ranged from European existentialists to American evangelicals and even some radicals. In America he lectured widely on college campuses, where he encouraged world-wary evangelicals to engage the culture around them. Along the way he attracted a great many admirers, a few critics, many admirers who became critics, and a few critics who learned to admire him. It is, in short, impossible to understand the intellectual world of evangelicalism today without understanding Francis Schaeffer.

Barry Hankins has written a critical but appreciative biography that explains how Schaeffer was shaped by the contexts of his life—from young fundamentalist pastor in America, to greatly admired mentor, to lecturer and activist. Drawing extensively from primary sources, including personal interviews, Hankins paints a picture of a complex, sometimes flawed, but ultimately prophetic figure in American evangelicalism and beyond.

Genres: Biography, History, Religion, Christianity, Church History, Faith, Nonfiction

288 pages, Paperback

First published November 15, 2008

About the author

Barry G. Hankins is Professor of History at Baylor University, as well as a Resident Scholar with the Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR). His publications include Baptists in America: A History (OUP, 2015) and Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism: A Documentary Reader (NYU Press, 2008). Hankins's biography Francis Schaeffer And the Shaping of Evangelical America: Fundamentalist Warrior, Evangelical Prophet (Eerdmans, 2008) was awarded the 2009 John Pollock Award for Christian Biography.

Reviews

[Scott Holstad · Rating 1 out of 5]

If Francis Schaeffer was "the single greatest intellectual influence on young evangelicals of the 1960s and '70s" (and my father reminded me of this weekly for years as he bought me Schaeffer's complete catalog and made sure I read all), I'd wager those not of the evangelical bent ever have anything to worry about -- not that they ever did. The concept of combining the terms "intelligentsia" and "evangelical," despite being both scoff worthy and inaccurate, not only because we're typically talking about theologians as opposed to scholars, but because the entire movement had to follow faux intelligentsia with what is now an industry into itself -- Apologetics, a descriptive term that should bring tears of embarrassment to most anyone in that camp not only because it's intellectually bankrupt, but because it's rather pathetic that the entire movement exists, not to prove points to the heathens, but to prop up the millions of evangelicals suffering from fear, questions, doubts, disbelief, guilt and inabilities to respond to some of the most rudimentary questions and criticisms posed by others in society, regardless of different religious ideology, agnosticism or atheism and ultimately the nerve wracking knowledge that when all is said and done and the facts outweigh the myths, emotional appeals, total inability to reconcile a fraction of the inconsistencies, inaccuracies and total fabrications despite making Olympian efforts to bend anything to support their holy book's innumerable flaws (with most of the faithful not having ever read the damn thing), many evangelicals suspect or know (though won't admit it) that when all is said and done and there are no more rational, logical, factual, confirmable, etc., answers to their very reason for living, then they can only and forever fall back on "faith" as the umbrella answer to everything, or rather nothing at all. Because ultimately what accompanies that are hollow sayings like "the lord works in mysterious ways" or "we can never understand the ways of the lord," etc. Which is tacitly an admission of total failure and which merely serves to continue tormenting the doubting faithful, and thus apologetics. But CS Lewis and Schaeffer and some others lead the intellectual way, right? And with the formidable William Lane Craig serving as the anti-Dawkins, Hitchens, etc., the faithful are in good hands, right? One can read, study, write, debate, etc., and try to feel confident in the arguments made, but ultimately it still all comes down to basically accepting Everything by faith because the splintered church not only can't agree on nearly anything re doctrine or otherwise, but it's apparently done little good because while the faithful have their secret doubts on their future eternal life, at least many of their current leaders give them structure, earthly meaning, reassurance, strength and most importantly, the formerly hidden but no longer concealed reason for current evangelical existence -- Power. Earthly power. American Taliban power. They don't care if they're intellectual frauds or failures or that, more importantly, that they don't give a shit about what their savior Jesus allegedly taught as they proudly do the opposite of what his platform was supposed to be. All they care about seems to be white christian nationalism, i.e., fascism, or ultimately complete power over all Americans and who knows what from there. If you doubt me, I could tell you personal stories dating back many decades about countless times throughout the '70s and early '80s sitting in on or being exposed to a lot of discussions involving strategies for just about everything in the future with an emphasis on "as long as it takes" (Roe). You learn a lot when you're eating lunch or dinner with Jerry Falwell, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, James Dobson, certain other well-known movers and shakers and if it ever was about doing as Jesus commanded, that migrated elsewhere during that time and was replaced by apocalyptic power lust. So Schaeffer? In fairness and to be candid, he WAS much more the intellectual than your average American evangelical was at the time. Despite being more of a fundamentalist, he did study and learn about the life views and philosophies of others, ranging from Hegel to Sartre to Heidegger and while American fundies were banning the Beatles (or in my case, Zeppelin), apparently Schaeffer was known for appreciating things I was banned from, whether the Beatles, yes, or postmodern art, music and literature, etc. Fine. Does that make his ideology right? Well, I don't care how well read he was or how he bantered with philosophers, etc. When you still adhere to the Calvinist Biblical inerrancy dogma, and if he WAS intellectually honest I contend there's no way he could adhere to that for thousands of reasons -- all found in the bible and all demolishing that concept, Schaeffer would have had to make some real changes -- and he DID, in some ways and is given more credit than he's due, in my opinion, because AGAIN, at the end of the day it STILL came down to social/cultural/gender issues (women don't go to seminary to become ordained; they belong in the kitchen/home environment only), his 'Observational Love' thesis never even played out well with his followers of that time (Calvinists not known for much love at all, perhaps?) and just because he allegedly electrified a new generation of evangelicals so that it was now No Longer Necessary To Be Stupid and it was hip to be faux intellectuals, we're still stuck talking about faith. In whatever you're told to, whether it's a magic Fairie in the sky, an omnipotent, omniscient god who -- reading through just the first dozen books of the Bible -- is the greatest bloodthirsty mass murderer in history -- in (despite inerrancy) constantly debating the literal existence of a hell or something that either never existed or has changed meaning somehow, etc., and on and on... We read Thomas Merton and we're hip intellectual christians, right? Okay, many evangelicals would never accept Merton, but that's all the more proof of the extreme limitations surrounding them and how even they know -- despite a Francis Schaeffer -- and Schaeffer? The reputation of his influence still abounds, but like Reagan's being rejected by all of the new quasi-Republicans, I'm not sure Schaeffer would still stand up under the Franklin Grahams and Tony Perkins. They might protest and pay lip service to him, but actions speak louder than words and today's evangelical is not seeking an intellectually engaging, if not superior, religion -- they're too invested in dumbing everything down as they preach hate, racism and in some cases genocide under the fascist Trumps of the world, or perhaps now a DeSantis, and with MTG in Congress, there's no longer any need to hide their real agendas, which I'd assert are much more radical than anything he ever did. A good attempt in this book, but one that can never be supported in ways and means asserted and alleged.

[Glen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Francis Schaeffer was an iconic figure on the evangelical scene when I began my intellectual pursuits. His persona demonstrated how the mind and biblical fidelity could be logically interwoven.

This particular portrayal of Schaeffer evokes a mixed reaction for me. Hankins’ research is commendable as evidence by the voluminous details he cites in the book. The narrative is refreshing to read and befitting his claim to put forth a scholarly effort. Where I find ambivalence is in the way he repeatedly dismisses the intellectual constructs of Schaefer’s apologetics despite speaking fondly of his monumental contributions to evangelical reflection.

The specific points that I found contentious were the unequivocal denunciation of the fundamentalists tendencies in Schaefer’s worldview, — his strident insistence on biblical authority, aggressive calls for social engagement on moral issues and an angular approach to liberal encroachments in evangelical thought. While there are gaps in Schaeffer’s thinking (welcome to everyone’s life), to present someone as a model of intellectual engagement from a faith perspective, only to repeatedly deconstruct many of his concepts, seems too incongruent for me.

Everyone thinker strives against the contextual restraints of their epoch. We all understand this. Yet, here is a man who elevated the dialogue for a generation of evangelical thinkers, provided a schematic for interpreting Western culture through a biblical lens and reached agnostics who frequented L’Abri. To Hankins’ credit, these achievements are amply acknowledged in the book. Yet, you could argue after setting down an otherwise well written work, that your are left with a jaded view of Schaeffer’s intellectual contributions. That, to me, is disappointing.

Maybe we should view Schaeffer as more of a prophetic voice calling an insular branch of the church (i.e., conservative denominations) to brave cultural discourse characterized by both confidence and compassion. In that way, we could use more such spiritual beacons clothed in knickers and goatees.

[LeAnne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Francis Schaeffer and the shaping of Evangelical America by Barry Hankins is not a new book. It was published by Eerdmans in 2008, but Im just now getting to it. It was a hard book to read. Schaeffer profoundly shaped my thinking as a young adult. The love with which the Schaefers received both European and American young people at LAbri (the Shelter) in Huemoz, Switzerland, was as powerful an apologetic for his conservative Christian faith as his tireless teaching. Although I visited LAbri only briefly in 1976 (and that at a time when the by-then-retired Schaeffers were away), I heard him speak several times, most notably at Covenant College in Lookout Mountain, Tennessee. Hankins summary of the contents of Schaeffers trilogy (The God Who is There, Escape From Reason, and He is There and He is not Silent) brought me back to the roots of much of my thinking that I have taken for granted for many yearsthe importance of worldview; the upper and lower stories that divorce faith and reason; the mannishness of man, separating us from the animal kingdom; the need to engage culture if we are going to win a world for Christ.

Schaeffer was at heart an evangelist. I remember seeing him cry as he wrestled with the lostness of those who deny the deity of Christ and uniqueness of his power for salvation. I am not the only young adult of the 60s and early 70s who embraced Christian missions as my counter cultural alternative rather than drugs and sex that led only to emptiness and despair. Schaeffers emphasis on worldview jived with my studies in cultural anthropology that always included a section on how a group views their world and how that affects their material culture. That understanding, not of the answers, but of the question, helped me to keep my American mouth shut and listen to locals in Ethiopia, Brazil, Mozambique and other places where I have lived these past forty years.

Schaeffers push for evangelicals to engage culture and philosophy with a biblical worldview led me to change my major from cultural anthropology to philosophy in 1970. It confirmed what I was hearing from my parents, my church leadership and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, the campus ministry I participated inthe truth doesnt fear questions; its okay to wrestle with your faith; listen to what the world is saying and compare it to the revealed truth of Scripture before you swallow it whole.

I knew that Schaeffer had come out of fundamentalism with its emphasis on separation from, not only the world, but also other Christians who interpret Scripture differently. I didnt realize how much he had returned to those attitudes in his later years. Scholars of my generation who delved into philosophy and culture inspired by him, found weaknesses in his arguments. Although he reached defensible conclusions, the details of the argument often did not fit with the facts of history and were not even consistent in themselves. (And internal consistency was one of Schaeffers main apologetics for Christianity.) According to Hankins, Schaeffer didnt want to hear about it.

By the time of the Battle for the Bible in the 1970s, my husband and I were living overseas where quibbling over the difference between verbal inerrancy and inerrant in all it affirms seemed totally irrelevant to a world that needed to hear God speak. In recent years I have mourned the political polarization that keeps us from being able to talk to each other and work out solutions that address the concerns of both sides. It was painful to me (and I suspect to the author) to see how much my mentor Francis Schaeffer was instrumental in setting us on that road.

Schaeffer died of cancer in 1984. His books and films How Shall We Then Live? and Whatever Happened to the Human Race (with C. Everett Koop) shocked the church into engaging with the pro-life movement. Predictions of euthanasia following abortion as acceptable to the secular world have come true in some states. I shudder to think what Schaeffer would have to say about gay marriage, immigration or the NRA today. I hope that his huge heart and passion for the lost would gentle his speech on the first two issues. Hankins quotes Os Guiness as saying, He reasoned as if reason alone mattered; he loved as if love alone mattered (p. 236). I suspect that Schaeffer and I would come to odds on the NRA. He feared a coming time when democracy would be so compromised by secular humanism that force might be justified to resist evil while I fear a current time when so many people are running around with guns that shoppers, movie goers, reporters and even school children die so that the warped mind of a malcontent might experience a rush of power and moment of false glory.

Like I said, a hard book to read. My hero had feet of clay. Yet I cannot deny the direction his teaching sent me, viewing my world through the lens of Scripture, not what is politically correct. Schaeffer spoke to the issues of his time. His rationality-based teaching does not interest post-modern youth. The way he stumbled on details detracts from his credibilty. Hankins suggests that calling Christians to the important task of worldview formation might be Schaefers signal achievement and most lasting influence (p. 227). It certainly has been in my life.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this biography very absorbing and insightful (and, for the record, I came to it with little-to-no experience with, or opinion of, Shaeffer). Hankins does an admirable job telling the (very interesting!) story of Schaeffer and his family, as well as providing cultural commentary on the decades in which Schaeffer was most active. It's remarkable to see the profound impact left by this man, in areas of evangelical political engagement, and especially cultural and pop-apologetics. As someone who never read Schaeffer directly, I was astounded by how many "Schaeffer-isms" were prominent in my upbringing: his broad portrayal of the trajectory of "Western thought," his singular focus on abortion as a social ill, the phrase "secular humanism" and the culture war-mentality towards "secularists." I put this book down and was astounded to reflect on how much Schaeffer indirectly impacted my formative years, just by virtue of growing up in conservative evangelicalism in the 90s.

I think Hankins also does a great job leveling fair critiques at Schaeffer, and giving a nuanced portrayal of his legacy. All in all, this is a fantastic biography that lends great insight into the way in which American Evangelical culture was formed in our time. I'm really glad I read it.

[Karina Heng · Rating 4 out of 5]

I remember watching reels as a child and pre-teen. This gentleman with white hair and a goatee in 18th century garb. Then about 20 years ago, I read a book about him. But I ended up reading CS Lewis instead. 5 years ago, I revisited Schaeffer. I slipped into the church library and pulled out ‘The God Who is There’. ‘Death in the City’ and ‘L’Abri’ I bought new at a discount book table.

YouTube afforded me ‘How shall we then live?’ And I agreed with Schaeffer.

So reading about his strengths and his flaws is instructive. His fundamentalism I am thoroughly familiar with but his hospitality I hope to enjoy the legacy of...soon.

In the end, I celebrate his life because it was lived with conviction based on the truth of God’s Holy Word.

[Zak Schmoll · Rating 4 out of 5]

Personally, I do not necessarily agree with every characterization the biographer makes about Francis Schaeffer and both evangelicalism and fundamentalism in general, but I do think this book helpfully frames his career in three stages: local pastor, European missionary, American activist. Through these three stages of his career, you can see many consistent elements of his worldview being applied in different ways depending on the context. It is safe to say that Francis Schaeffer is one of the most influential evangelicals of the past century, and I think there is a lot that we can learn from both his life and his ideas.

[Aaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a helpful, in depth, well researched look at the life and thought of Francis Schaeffer. Hankins does a good job of placing Schaeffer in his time and various contexts, citing Schaeffer's correspondence with other evangelical scholars. A balanced approached is presented, offering critiques of Schaeffer's work, will acknowledging his positive influence. That being said, Hankins is clearly not a fan of evangelical political activism, and one wonders where he stands on the great issues such as the inerrancy of Scripture, a major battle in the evangelical/fundamentalist world in the 20th century.

Overall, a well put together book that helps the reader better understand Schaeffer.

[Steve Wegman · Rating 3 out of 5]

A biography of Schaeffer focusing on his ministry. A thorough introduction to him for someone like me who had heard of him, but really knew nothing about him other than that he had a place called L'Abri in Switzerland where lots of young people came. He was complicated.

[Peter Lineham · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really interesting summary of Schaeffer's intellectual contribution including his weaknesses. At times rather laboured summary of points of view with a cautious middle ground but I totally agree that for me the early Schaeffer however flawed was exciting and the later Schaeffer an embarrassment.

[Roger Peters · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent biography on Schaeffer. Well balanced with admiration and critique. Thankful for Schaeffer's influence.

[Mike Horne · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent look into the man who influenced the rise of the religious right (as a political movement). The book is fairly sympathetic, though finds much to criticize about Schaeffer. I remember watching his film How Should We Then Live at church. A must read for those interested in Evangelical America.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hankins, a historian at Baylor University, has provided an excellent, critical, but not unsympathetic, intellectual biography of L'Abri's Francis Schaeffer. We see here the journey of Schaeffer from fundamentalist to cultural critic and back again as he embraced, or rather was embraced by, the Christian Right.

Hankins seems ambivalent towards Schaeffer, on the one hand he recognises the impact he has had on evangelicals in helping them to be more culturally and intellectually aware and on the other he sees the weaknesses in Schaeffer’s position. Schaeffer was good at painting the large picture but was weak and even wrong on some of the key details.

Schaeffer’s strength was that he was a populariser; his weakness was that he was a populariser. This comes through clearly in Hankins biography.

Hankins provides a helpful overview and critical assessment of most of Schaefffer’s works. He shows that “Schaefer's analysis of western history was compelling in its broad outlines, but problematic in its details” p96. Schaeffer’s analysis of the Renaissance didn't acknowledge the difference between the Italian and the northern forms. He was reliant on the now discredited approach, popular at the time, of Jacob Burkhardt's approach to the Renaissance.


Nevertheless, Schaefer struck a chord with modernist Christians. He was the man for that time. But it Is clear that the time for him is not now, as Hankins shows the sales of C.S. Lewis’s far outstrip the sales of Schaeffer’s books today.

Hankins has performed an excellent job of placing Schaeffer in context and showing how he could be so influential and so flawed. The latter comes out clearly in his exchanges with Mark Noll and George Marsden over Schaeffer’s claims in A Christian Manifesto that the US was founded as a Christian country. Hankins insightfully points out:

It seems that for Schaeffer, when a Christian utilised non-Christian thinking [eg Aquinas], the product was sub-Christian, but when a non-Christian [eg Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers] used Christian influences, the product was thoroughly Christian. (p 170).

[Jonathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like many evangelical scholars inspired by Francis Schaeffer, Barry Hankins is obviously ambivalent about the quality of Schaeffer's work. He concludes, for example, that Schaeffer never actually read most of the philosophers he wrote about (getting his information about them instead from the European students he was trying to convert), shows that Schaeffer's books were ghostwritten from his notes and tapes, concludes that there were glaring problems with Schaeffer's logic, and implies that Schaeffer never escaped the gravity of paranoid fundamentalism, falling back into it from a long orbit toward the end of his life. On each of these points, though, Hankins pulls his punches. He also fails to explore a lot of the available literature that is critical of Schaeffer and his work, not least the memoirs of his son Frank(y), who gets just a passing mention or two.

It's clear that Hankins loves Schaeffer for his call to intellectual effort, cultural engagement, and honest listening on the part of evangelicals, and that he considers his call and example as more significant than Schaeffer's intellectual and political faults. This is an attitude that is probably very hard for any intellectual without an evangelical background (especially personal familiarity with fundamentalists) to understand, but it's a pretty common one among evangelical professors in the United States. Hankins, I suspect, never adequately explains to outsiders what all the fuss was about in the first place.

[Freddie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Francis Schaeffer pointed modern evangelicals toward hospitality, reason, and political engagement. Although he accepted the Enlightenment's narrow definition of reason, reason has many more roads than this (as indicated by John 1:1).

Hankins's book is a well-written history that is especially noteworthy for being a product of the evangelical academic culture which Schaeffer inspired, even as he fought with them late in his life. This is the second Hankins history book that I've read and I'll be looking at his history of the evangelical movement next: American Evangelicals: A Contemporary History of a Mainstream Religious Movement. Hankins is a reliable guide to this group, but I would be curious to see him broaden his vision a bit to include impact of evangelical history on Catholics of the same time periods.

[Bob · Rating 2 out of 5]

The point of the book is to examine the life & ministry of Francis Schaeffer. I think the author often misses the point (although I do think he is trying to be fair & balanced)of what Schaeffer was trying to do. If you have read all of Schaeffer & want to know what critics have said this is a good place to pick up on most of the criticism, this book will have a limited audience.

[Becky Hintz · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm amazed that a biography of the fascinating Francis Schaeffer can be so dull. There's a lot of information here, but it's just really, really dry. Most of the book is dedicated either to critical summaries of Schaeffer's works, or to blow-by-blow reports of his controversies with Christian leaders and scholars.

[Tracey]

This seems like a very even-handed bio of Schaeffer. I appreciate the way Hankins moves through the various stages of Schaeffer's life and ministry, and recognizes both the pros and cons of his efforts.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

A respectful and even-handed look at an influential evangelical leader.

[Jeremy]

Dad recommended this, as did Joel Iliff. Hankins is a Baylor prof.

[Benjamin Sauers · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hankins does a wonderful job leading us through Schaeffer's life and thought. A must read for those seeking to understand Evangelicalism in the 21st century.