ABSTRACT
For six years now, both alone and with my colleague Manka Varghese of the University of Washington, I have been conducting research on evangelical Christians working in English language teaching. This research has led to Christian-affiliated colleges training English teachers; to an evangelical Christian literature largely unfamiliar to those outside the evangelical community; to the past, and the history of both evangelical and non-evangelical Christian mission work worldwide; and, perhaps most enlightening of all, to innumerable, fascinating conversations with evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike around the subject of religious beliefs and their place in the lives and work of English teachers around the world. The non-evangelicals I have spoken to tend to be fascinated when the extent and nature of evangelical Christian involvement in TESOL is revealed. The evangelicals, in turn, have frequently expressed their approval of inquiry into the intersection between their religious beliefs and their work. Conference presentations I have given, usually with Manka Varghese, have always provoked lively discussion and debate involving both groups. Yet if I am to be honest, I am still skeptical of the extent to which these discussions constitute genuine dialogue. In the most extensive published report on our work (Varghese & Johnston, 2007), Varghese and I raise doubts about whether dialogue between evangelicals and non-evangelicals is in fact possible. We argue that the underlying assumptions of both sides are so radically different and mutually incompatible that it’s extremely hard to envision how dialogue can take place. Nevertheless, as the preceding paragraphs indicate, in a great number of cases individuals on both sides of the divide have in fact proved willing to talk with one another, and this is a very hopeful sign. The present book is the perfect illustration of this goodwill. In my chapter I’d like to pursue this line of thought and to consider what it would take to make proper dialogue possible. It seems to me that if dialogue is indeed to be enabled, both sides must take certain steps. I present these steps in the form of challenges to both evangelicals and non-evangelicals. I must warn you that at times my tone in addressing both sides will be harsh; I feel I have earned the right to speak in this way. The purpose of my harshness is not to alienate or offend, but to stimulate and invigorate thinking. It seems to me that both sides have lapsed into certain set patterns of thinking and speaking, and that
a rude awakening from this state is necessary if we are to be able to talk to one another. This chapter will take the form of three challenges presented to evangelical Christians, and three challenges presented to non-evangelicals. These challenges concern changes of thinking and of acting that I believe to be essential if we are truly to be able to enter into dialogue. Before this, however, I’d like to spend a few moments considering what I mean by dialogue and why dialogue is necessary in a case such as this one.
