BY JOHN FEA
I have been counseling several former students recently about graduate school. A few of them want to study American religious history but are unsure whether to pursue graduate work in Religion/Religious Studies or American History. I have tried to explain to them that they could write a dissertation on American religious history in either field (depending, of course, on the program and the availability of an advisor in this sub-field), but their coursework, comps, methodology, and job considerations would be quite different depending on which kind of program they choose to pursue. I have also tried to get them to envision what kind of introductory college-level course they would like to teach regularly--a U.S. History Survey course or an Intro to Religion course (or something comparable). Most of them love American Religious History and have not considered that broad training in their discipline is usually in order if they want to land a job.
I know that our readership (and our contributors) include scholars and graduate students in both History and Religious Studies who share a research interest in American Religious History. I am curious to hear if you were faced with the same dilemma that some of my students are now faced with. How did you decide to go with Religion over History or vice-versa?
Rabu, 12 Desember 2007
Selasa, 11 Desember 2007
Christianity's Dangerous Idea
On a busy Tuesday, here's Pastor Bob Cornwall's review of Alister McGrath, Christianity's Dangerous Idea: The Protestant REvolution, a History. Click here for the full review from Bob Cornwall's blog Ponderings on a Faith Journey.
Christianity's Dangerous Idea -- Review
Alister McGrath, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Revolution – A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First. San Francisco: HarperOne, 2007. 552 pages.
What is Protestantism? That’s the question Oxford University historian/theologian and noted Evangelical author Alister McGrath seeks to answer. McGrath is nothing if not prolific. He has written textbooks for the study of theology, historical theology, and other elements of the life of faith. He has been an affective apologist for the faith and respondent to the likes of Richard Dawkins. He has taught in Canada and in England, holds doctorates in biology and in theology. His writing is lucid and light.
It should not be surprising that this book, like many published by HarperOne, is addressed to a broad Christian audience and not just to religious specialists. The information found here isn’t especially new or unique, but the thesis is compelling. One might look elsewhere for a complete history of the Protestant movement, but the idea that Protestantism is not just dangerous but unpredictable as well should be thought provoking. That McGrath is an Evangelical (a British one not an American) might suggest a different tactic, but he’s not interested in defending a “faith once delivered” and defined, but one that is continuously changing and growing as it encounters new cultures and situations.
This is in part a history book. McGrath takes the reader on a journey through the history of this movement born in 16th Century Europe that was just on the cusp of significant political and social change, on through its transplantation to the American context, and beyond to the global south. While history is a component of this book, this isn’t just a history book. In a section entitled “Manifestation,” McGrath explores doctrines and practices of Protestantism (including its interpretation and usage of the Bible), the forms of worship and structures of the churches, its encounter with the sciences and with Western Culture (among others). There is a strong Anglo-American component as well – McGrath seems to know that his primary audience is Anglo-American. The third and final section is entitled “Transformation,” and it is devoted to exploring the trajectories flowing out of the present situation. He writes about the changes in American Protestantism, the developments and implications of global Pentecostalism, the new frontiers of a global south (reminding us that the greatest strength numerically is to be found outside the Anglo-Euro-American axis. With a final look at what might be in the coming generations of Protestantism.
Any book with the title “Christianity’s Dangerous Idea” ought to attract attention. In an age of religious unrest the word dangerous is eye-catching. As already noted, McGrath isn’t just interested in retelling the history of Protestantism; he wants us to understand its purpose. For McGrath, Protestantism is concerned not with a preconceived outcome, but with a method. That method is rooted in the freedom accorded the individual to read and apply Scripture as he or she sees fit. As Luther and Zwingli quickly found out such freedom can easily get out of hand, and so having no Pope they turned to the state to rein in what might be called rogue elements – if you want to call the Radical Reformation a rogue movement. The implication though of this idea is that diversity of practice and perspective is the hallmark of Protestantism.
If one were to ask what the foundational idea within Protestantism is, it’s likely many would answer “justification by faith.” But to answer in this way would be to assume a largely Lutheran perspective. The Radical Reformers would not agree to this, nor likely would Zwingli or Calvin. And so instead, the dangerously foundational principle is that already mentioned freedom to read and apply Scripture. Once the cat is out of the bag, it’s hard to put it back, and the history of Protestantism is the history of what happened once the cat got out of the bag. Nothing would ever be the same again. Because Protestantism doesn’t have an authoritative religious magisterium, the propensity for change and diversity is in the very DNA of the movement.
It’s always helpful to have a couple of foundational principles to define a movement, but as the history of this movement that begins here with Luther and moves on to Zwingli and the more radical reformations of Switzerland, and from there to Calvin and to the English Church, we realize that there is no was no prime root for the movement. Indeed, the movements of Luther and Zwingli were not only quite different but almost simultaneous. Even as their life experiences were considerably different, so were their reform movements. To borrow a biological term (fitting for the author), this could be called a “polygenesis” event. But there a few things held in common. One was the conviction that the Roman Catholic Church needed reforming and that Scripture would be the foundation of that reform. The Radicals might wish to jettison more of the tradition than would Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and Cranmer, but it would be Scripture that guided the reforms. And without a magisterium to decide what is right, a complex set of interpretations of scripture would be driving the bus.
In the closing chapter we discern what is truly present within Protestantism (and it’s important to note McGrath’s background in the biological sciences) is a Darwinian identity. That is, built into Protestantism is the ability to mutate and adapt to the surrounding times and situations. McGrath speaks of the “Darwinian restlessness” of Protestantism. There is no fixed identity, dogma, purpose. It is evolving, renewing and reforming as it goes along. For much of its history the one thing holding Protestantism together was its opposition to Roman Catholicism – which the Catholic Church has significantly changed over recent years (as have the times), this defining purpose has begun to lose its usefulness. Secularism and radical Islam are more significant threats than Catholicism. But while context will influence both practice and look, it is going too far to say that there is no continuity between what is and what was. But, there isn’t an “absolute identity” to be found (p. 461).
This is a lucid and readable book – the educated Christian will find it useful and challenging. It is a book that will raise questions needing further attention. It is also a book with its own set of issues. The Anglo-American angle is one. But so is the focus on more Evangelical movements. That a book would deal with the revolutionary nature of Protestantism but not engage Paul Tillich’s Protestant Principle is interesting. Indeed, while Liberalism is discussed on occasion, there is little depth or even sympathy (for the American story -- try Gary Dorrien's triology). Indeed, while Barth and Niebuhr appear on occasion, Schleiermacher is notable for his absence.
Nonetheless, this is a book to be reckoned with. If for no other reason than the closing chapter, which suggests that the future of Protestantism can’t be predicted but also that it will look different in the future. For it to survive it must and it will mutate and adapt. Change is not just likely it’s required. What drives Protestantism is “its capacity for innovation, renewal, and reform” – a capacity that is “based on its own internal resources” (478). There you have it a Darwinian interpretation of Protestantism laid out by an Evangelical.
Christianity's Dangerous Idea -- Review
Alister McGrath, Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Revolution – A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First. San Francisco: HarperOne, 2007. 552 pages.
What is Protestantism? That’s the question Oxford University historian/theologian and noted Evangelical author Alister McGrath seeks to answer. McGrath is nothing if not prolific. He has written textbooks for the study of theology, historical theology, and other elements of the life of faith. He has been an affective apologist for the faith and respondent to the likes of Richard Dawkins. He has taught in Canada and in England, holds doctorates in biology and in theology. His writing is lucid and light.
It should not be surprising that this book, like many published by HarperOne, is addressed to a broad Christian audience and not just to religious specialists. The information found here isn’t especially new or unique, but the thesis is compelling. One might look elsewhere for a complete history of the Protestant movement, but the idea that Protestantism is not just dangerous but unpredictable as well should be thought provoking. That McGrath is an Evangelical (a British one not an American) might suggest a different tactic, but he’s not interested in defending a “faith once delivered” and defined, but one that is continuously changing and growing as it encounters new cultures and situations.
This is in part a history book. McGrath takes the reader on a journey through the history of this movement born in 16th Century Europe that was just on the cusp of significant political and social change, on through its transplantation to the American context, and beyond to the global south. While history is a component of this book, this isn’t just a history book. In a section entitled “Manifestation,” McGrath explores doctrines and practices of Protestantism (including its interpretation and usage of the Bible), the forms of worship and structures of the churches, its encounter with the sciences and with Western Culture (among others). There is a strong Anglo-American component as well – McGrath seems to know that his primary audience is Anglo-American. The third and final section is entitled “Transformation,” and it is devoted to exploring the trajectories flowing out of the present situation. He writes about the changes in American Protestantism, the developments and implications of global Pentecostalism, the new frontiers of a global south (reminding us that the greatest strength numerically is to be found outside the Anglo-Euro-American axis. With a final look at what might be in the coming generations of Protestantism.
Any book with the title “Christianity’s Dangerous Idea” ought to attract attention. In an age of religious unrest the word dangerous is eye-catching. As already noted, McGrath isn’t just interested in retelling the history of Protestantism; he wants us to understand its purpose. For McGrath, Protestantism is concerned not with a preconceived outcome, but with a method. That method is rooted in the freedom accorded the individual to read and apply Scripture as he or she sees fit. As Luther and Zwingli quickly found out such freedom can easily get out of hand, and so having no Pope they turned to the state to rein in what might be called rogue elements – if you want to call the Radical Reformation a rogue movement. The implication though of this idea is that diversity of practice and perspective is the hallmark of Protestantism.
If one were to ask what the foundational idea within Protestantism is, it’s likely many would answer “justification by faith.” But to answer in this way would be to assume a largely Lutheran perspective. The Radical Reformers would not agree to this, nor likely would Zwingli or Calvin. And so instead, the dangerously foundational principle is that already mentioned freedom to read and apply Scripture. Once the cat is out of the bag, it’s hard to put it back, and the history of Protestantism is the history of what happened once the cat got out of the bag. Nothing would ever be the same again. Because Protestantism doesn’t have an authoritative religious magisterium, the propensity for change and diversity is in the very DNA of the movement.
It’s always helpful to have a couple of foundational principles to define a movement, but as the history of this movement that begins here with Luther and moves on to Zwingli and the more radical reformations of Switzerland, and from there to Calvin and to the English Church, we realize that there is no was no prime root for the movement. Indeed, the movements of Luther and Zwingli were not only quite different but almost simultaneous. Even as their life experiences were considerably different, so were their reform movements. To borrow a biological term (fitting for the author), this could be called a “polygenesis” event. But there a few things held in common. One was the conviction that the Roman Catholic Church needed reforming and that Scripture would be the foundation of that reform. The Radicals might wish to jettison more of the tradition than would Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and Cranmer, but it would be Scripture that guided the reforms. And without a magisterium to decide what is right, a complex set of interpretations of scripture would be driving the bus.
In the closing chapter we discern what is truly present within Protestantism (and it’s important to note McGrath’s background in the biological sciences) is a Darwinian identity. That is, built into Protestantism is the ability to mutate and adapt to the surrounding times and situations. McGrath speaks of the “Darwinian restlessness” of Protestantism. There is no fixed identity, dogma, purpose. It is evolving, renewing and reforming as it goes along. For much of its history the one thing holding Protestantism together was its opposition to Roman Catholicism – which the Catholic Church has significantly changed over recent years (as have the times), this defining purpose has begun to lose its usefulness. Secularism and radical Islam are more significant threats than Catholicism. But while context will influence both practice and look, it is going too far to say that there is no continuity between what is and what was. But, there isn’t an “absolute identity” to be found (p. 461).
This is a lucid and readable book – the educated Christian will find it useful and challenging. It is a book that will raise questions needing further attention. It is also a book with its own set of issues. The Anglo-American angle is one. But so is the focus on more Evangelical movements. That a book would deal with the revolutionary nature of Protestantism but not engage Paul Tillich’s Protestant Principle is interesting. Indeed, while Liberalism is discussed on occasion, there is little depth or even sympathy (for the American story -- try Gary Dorrien's triology). Indeed, while Barth and Niebuhr appear on occasion, Schleiermacher is notable for his absence.
Nonetheless, this is a book to be reckoned with. If for no other reason than the closing chapter, which suggests that the future of Protestantism can’t be predicted but also that it will look different in the future. For it to survive it must and it will mutate and adapt. Change is not just likely it’s required. What drives Protestantism is “its capacity for innovation, renewal, and reform” – a capacity that is “based on its own internal resources” (478). There you have it a Darwinian interpretation of Protestantism laid out by an Evangelical.
Senin, 10 Desember 2007
The State of African American Religious History
BY KELLY BAKER
In lieu of an article for the Fall edition of the North Star, Anthea Butler provides an insightful opinion piece on the state of the field for African American Religious History. She writes:
Since starting graduate school, I have had a reoccurring anxiety dream. I am walking down a staircase into a room that is filled with books that are musty, dreary, and old. I look at the books with awe, and panic all at the same time. And there is a voice that usually chimes in, although the voice seems to be internalized inside of my body. The voice says the same phrase in every dream “Who is going to take care of the black books?”
I am sure many of you could give a rip about my dreams. The dream, however, I think has floated from my subconsciousness to the forefront of my mind. Who is going to take care of the black books, I wonder? Or more specifically, who is going to take care to write the books in African American Religious History? To some of you, this dream and my question may seem far-fetched. Within the last twenty years, many universities and colleges have at least one course in African American Religion, and most of those courses have some type of historical component to them. Books continue to proliferate on aspects of African American Religion, although those that reach back to the eighteenth and seventeenth century are few and far in-between. (one recent and notable exception however, is Rebecca’s Revival: Creating Black Christianity in the Atlantic World by Jon Sensbach) Yet for all of the progress, and writing, there is still, like my dream, something missing. What’s missing is our “foundational” book in African American Religious history, a cohort of younger scholars in the field, and a permanent, in-print journal that exists to further the field. As co-editor of the journal, I believe that the North Star has been and will continue to be a space that is dedicated to both the advancement and permanence of the field of African American Religious History, as well as conduit and custodian for the work of our fellow scholars. In order to live up to the task, we must take a hard look at where we are.
Her article provides a candid look at the state of the field, which proves useful to anyone who works in this area as well as American religious historians generally. What does it mean that there is not a "foundational" book in African American Religious History? Moreover, what does her larger commentary suggest about the place of African American Religious History in the larger field of American Religious History?
In lieu of an article for the Fall edition of the North Star, Anthea Butler provides an insightful opinion piece on the state of the field for African American Religious History. She writes:
Since starting graduate school, I have had a reoccurring anxiety dream. I am walking down a staircase into a room that is filled with books that are musty, dreary, and old. I look at the books with awe, and panic all at the same time. And there is a voice that usually chimes in, although the voice seems to be internalized inside of my body. The voice says the same phrase in every dream “Who is going to take care of the black books?”
I am sure many of you could give a rip about my dreams. The dream, however, I think has floated from my subconsciousness to the forefront of my mind. Who is going to take care of the black books, I wonder? Or more specifically, who is going to take care to write the books in African American Religious History? To some of you, this dream and my question may seem far-fetched. Within the last twenty years, many universities and colleges have at least one course in African American Religion, and most of those courses have some type of historical component to them. Books continue to proliferate on aspects of African American Religion, although those that reach back to the eighteenth and seventeenth century are few and far in-between. (one recent and notable exception however, is Rebecca’s Revival: Creating Black Christianity in the Atlantic World by Jon Sensbach) Yet for all of the progress, and writing, there is still, like my dream, something missing. What’s missing is our “foundational” book in African American Religious history, a cohort of younger scholars in the field, and a permanent, in-print journal that exists to further the field. As co-editor of the journal, I believe that the North Star has been and will continue to be a space that is dedicated to both the advancement and permanence of the field of African American Religious History, as well as conduit and custodian for the work of our fellow scholars. In order to live up to the task, we must take a hard look at where we are.
Her article provides a candid look at the state of the field, which proves useful to anyone who works in this area as well as American religious historians generally. What does it mean that there is not a "foundational" book in African American Religious History? Moreover, what does her larger commentary suggest about the place of African American Religious History in the larger field of American Religious History?
Monday Miscellany: A Christian Like Wills, and a Muslim Like Obama
BY PAUL HARVEY
At Cliopatria, Manan Ahmed discusses Islamophobia and the internet Swift-Boating of Barack Obama (unsuccessful this time, I hope). He writes:
The rumors about Obama's faith, then, are not just manifestations of a post 9/11 Islamophobia or a peculiar xenophobia about his African father. They are, in fact, uniquely American - based on our long history of mis-trust and mis-apprehension of a faith that we associate with our own 'Others.'
Ahmed's post is recommended reading, not least for a thoughtful discussion of the appearance of Islam in American slave codes, and sensationalist reporting on black Islam earlier in the 20th century.
Meanwhile, Patrick Allitt and John Wilson each provide thoughtful reviews of Garry Wills, Head and Heart: American Christianities. An interesting passage from Wilson's review:
I'm dubious about his head-versus-heart schema in any case. Dispensationalists, for example, whose latter-day influence is evident in the "Left Behind" series of books, are archevangelicals in Wills' telling. But a surprising number of the most fervent Dispensationalists I encountered in my youth were engineers, "head people" to a fault, always eager to show you their meticulously prepared charts in which all history was reduced to tidy logical order. I fled from them.
It reminds me of the connection found in academic studies of modernity (more specifically, engineering types), and various fundamentalisms; the findings of some of Scott Appleby's fundamentalism project of years past come to mind. Fundamentalism can present a "tidy logical order" that must, ultimately, speak to the heart of the head types.
At Cliopatria, Manan Ahmed discusses Islamophobia and the internet Swift-Boating of Barack Obama (unsuccessful this time, I hope). He writes:
The rumors about Obama's faith, then, are not just manifestations of a post 9/11 Islamophobia or a peculiar xenophobia about his African father. They are, in fact, uniquely American - based on our long history of mis-trust and mis-apprehension of a faith that we associate with our own 'Others.'
Ahmed's post is recommended reading, not least for a thoughtful discussion of the appearance of Islam in American slave codes, and sensationalist reporting on black Islam earlier in the 20th century.
Meanwhile, Patrick Allitt and John Wilson each provide thoughtful reviews of Garry Wills, Head and Heart: American Christianities. An interesting passage from Wilson's review:
I'm dubious about his head-versus-heart schema in any case. Dispensationalists, for example, whose latter-day influence is evident in the "Left Behind" series of books, are archevangelicals in Wills' telling. But a surprising number of the most fervent Dispensationalists I encountered in my youth were engineers, "head people" to a fault, always eager to show you their meticulously prepared charts in which all history was reduced to tidy logical order. I fled from them.
It reminds me of the connection found in academic studies of modernity (more specifically, engineering types), and various fundamentalisms; the findings of some of Scott Appleby's fundamentalism project of years past come to mind. Fundamentalism can present a "tidy logical order" that must, ultimately, speak to the heart of the head types.
Minggu, 09 Desember 2007
The Not-So-Very-Merry Melding
BY KATHRYN LOFTON
During the dog days of graduate school, a group of Tarheels sat around scheming. Whatever would we do if this plot line came to incompletion? Where would all this data (religious and analytic, holiday and humdrum) be put to admirable devotion?
The plan we landed upon was capitalist: Thresholds. This would be our business. Clients would come to us lost and bifurcated by their intermarriages and agnostic daily lives, seeking combination ritual packages. We would supply coming-of-age parties for boys lacking bar mitzfahs, multi-day marital processes for the Ganesh-worshipping non-Hindu, and time-sharing funeral rites for the man who was baptized Catholic, toyed with Zen, and loved well a Quaker. We would transform our encyclopedic morsels into American assimilative specificity: a made-to-order melting pot.
Unfortunately for consumers everywhere, each member of this fantasizing posse found happy employment and productive situation in the (somewhat) less mercantile academy. Yet, an article in last Thursday’s New York Times reminded me of what an awfully craven and perfectly profitable idea it would have been.
The article, “A Holiday Medley, Off Key,” would make for great end-of-semester talk in American religion classes (if your semesters haven’t ended, or you’re looking for final hour extra credit options), especially if paired with critical studies on the formation of these holidays (Schmidt 1995 or Forbes 2007). Several couples are profiled in their wrestling efforts to offer inclusive December holidays for their gift-seeking spawn. Interfaith experience has never been so combative. Words like “guerrilla”, “revenge”, and “assault” are used to describe wheedling manipulations of Santa Claus, menorahs, and present practices. Even silky-voiced Diana Krall makes a cameo as a crooning Christmas sales(wo)man.
Perhaps most delicious about this just-in-time-for-the-holidays report was the following comment, from Micah Sachs, the managing editor of interfaithfamily.com, a Web site that encourages interfaith couples to observe Jewish traditions: “The world is full of all these symbols: it’s full of Santa, it’s full of trees.”
Such a world, indeed (full of Santa, full of trees)! A world where scholars labor (mightily, for little profit, and much cost) to convey a world of diversity and abundance all while kinda-holy holidays are pressed into “festive” competition. The next time someone tries to sell me on the meaning of seasonal merriment (even you, Charlie Brown!), I am going to tell them the magical tale of the Minata Family’s Nintendo Wii. And to all a good night!
P.S. I'll pause from my humbug to offer one real reason to be merry: Edward Blum's W.E.B. DuBois: American Prophet received honorable mention from from the Gustavus Myers Book Awards. These awards are given to "authors and books that speak with great clarity, insight and creativity about rights and compassionate responsibilities within community." Congratulations, Brother Blum!
Tenured Radical's Advice for Interviewing
BY KELLY BAKER
For those who are anxiously waiting phone calls for job interviews, Tenured Radical provides some great advice, from what questions to ask the search committee to interview etiquette and tips. My favorite part is TR's advice on what to say when you get THE phone call. She writes:
What to ask when you get the call. Let me just say -- all search committee chairs do not know what they are doing. So make sure to get the following information: Does the committee want to see more of your work before the interview? Should it be sent to the same address as the application? How long will the interview be and what other committee members will be there? What topics will the committee want to cover? What hotel will they be in and how will you find their room?
And by the way -- practice this, because when you get the call, your heart will leap and you will become momentarily dazed. What normally happens is the person on the other end says "Hi, this is Dr. Committeechair, and I would like to arrange an interview at the MLAHA," and the breathless candidate says weakly, "Oh -- hi." Try this instead:
"Why, hello, Dr. Committeechair," you say in a firm, confident tone. "I'm so happy to hear from you!" As if you expected to all along.
S0 f0r all interviewing, take a deep breath and show that lucky search committee your talent and skill.
For those who are anxiously waiting phone calls for job interviews, Tenured Radical provides some great advice, from what questions to ask the search committee to interview etiquette and tips. My favorite part is TR's advice on what to say when you get THE phone call. She writes:
What to ask when you get the call. Let me just say -- all search committee chairs do not know what they are doing. So make sure to get the following information: Does the committee want to see more of your work before the interview? Should it be sent to the same address as the application? How long will the interview be and what other committee members will be there? What topics will the committee want to cover? What hotel will they be in and how will you find their room?
And by the way -- practice this, because when you get the call, your heart will leap and you will become momentarily dazed. What normally happens is the person on the other end says "Hi, this is Dr. Committeechair, and I would like to arrange an interview at the MLAHA," and the breathless candidate says weakly, "Oh -- hi." Try this instead:
"Why, hello, Dr. Committeechair," you say in a firm, confident tone. "I'm so happy to hear from you!" As if you expected to all along.
S0 f0r all interviewing, take a deep breath and show that lucky search committee your talent and skill.
The Irony of Romney's Appeal to the Founders
BY JOHN FEA
OK--this will be my last post on Romney's speech, I promise. But I could not resist calling attention to J.L. Bell's analysis of Romney's use of founding-era history at Boston 1775. Bell not only calls Romney out for some historical errors in his speech (and offers a host of other things to think about related to religion and the Continental Congress), but he also notes several ironies in Romney's mention of Sam Adams as a model of interdenominational prayer. It is worth a quick look.
OK--this will be my last post on Romney's speech, I promise. But I could not resist calling attention to J.L. Bell's analysis of Romney's use of founding-era history at Boston 1775. Bell not only calls Romney out for some historical errors in his speech (and offers a host of other things to think about related to religion and the Continental Congress), but he also notes several ironies in Romney's mention of Sam Adams as a model of interdenominational prayer. It is worth a quick look.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)