Today, after a three week trip home and abroad for the inter-semester break, I received my latest edition of the journal Baptist History and Heritage. I've been getting this journal for about five years or so, but this edition was a bit different than the others I've gotten. I was looking forward to this issue because I have an article that they decided to publish.
My latest article looks at a conservative Southern Baptist theologian who was a part of the denominational establishment during the post-WWII era in American history. The article, titled "Social Justice and American Exceptionalism in the Writings of Southern Baptist Statesman H. Cornell Goerner" is very close (basically the same paper) to a paper I read at the Red River Valley History Conference last April. This article shows how Goerner was a conservative evangelical who called for Christianizing the masses and the importance of America in the world, but it also shows how the economic attitudes of many have shifted over the past fifty years or so based upon the writings that Goerner had published through the denominational presses.
This Thursday, I sent over my syllabus for printing. My latest class is a class that I am creating titled "Religion in American Politics and Culture." It will be a hybrid class that incorporates aspects of a lecture-based course and a seminar format. I am hoping to engage students with the important place that religion has had and continues to have on American cultural and political traditions. The course will not be a continuous narrative that attempts to be exhaustive, but will rather choose a few chronological topics to emphasize the importance of religion in American history.
Showing posts with label Southern Baptist Convention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Southern Baptist Convention. Show all posts
07 January 2013
08 June 2012
My Book, Baptists and Calvinist Soteriology, Mormonism, and My Latest Review
My book on a local Grand Forks church officially came out about three weeks ago, but I was out of town for all but about 12 hours of those three weeks, doing some research in Bismarck and visiting family back east. Today, I mosied over to UND's campus to pick up a few copies of my latest (actually, first) book. I was quite impressed with the book's layout and overall look, considering the low, low price of only $4.00. You can get the book for yourself here.
In other news, apparently there has been quite a bit of hubbub recently over the Southern Baptist Convention and the place of a Calvinist soteriology in the Convention. Thanks to Baylor Professor Thomas Kidd for tweeting links of relevance, including this one from SBTS president Albert Mohler on this topic.
The Religion in America blog posted some commentary on the place of anti-Mormonism on both the left and right of the political spectrum, which should be of interest because this year will see the first Mormon candidate fielded by either of the nation's major political parties. The topic of Mitt Romney's Mormonism, as I noted last year on the blog, caused a bit of consternation among evangelicals earlier in the campaign. Now, up against Barack Obama's adherence to liberation theology, evangelicals seem to be getting over their antipathy to Romney to some degree.
Finally, I've been doing a bit of writing on another site to gain a bit more traffic for my writings. I recently posted a review of Mark Valeri's Heavenly Merchandize at that site. This book discusses the evolving opinion that early American Puritans and what Valeri referred to as post-Puritans dealt with issues related to business and profit. The first generation of Puritan settlers would probably not be welcomed by many Americans who claim to revere them today. Find out why by following the link above.
Until next time, have a great weekend.
In other news, apparently there has been quite a bit of hubbub recently over the Southern Baptist Convention and the place of a Calvinist soteriology in the Convention. Thanks to Baylor Professor Thomas Kidd for tweeting links of relevance, including this one from SBTS president Albert Mohler on this topic.
The Religion in America blog posted some commentary on the place of anti-Mormonism on both the left and right of the political spectrum, which should be of interest because this year will see the first Mormon candidate fielded by either of the nation's major political parties. The topic of Mitt Romney's Mormonism, as I noted last year on the blog, caused a bit of consternation among evangelicals earlier in the campaign. Now, up against Barack Obama's adherence to liberation theology, evangelicals seem to be getting over their antipathy to Romney to some degree.
Finally, I've been doing a bit of writing on another site to gain a bit more traffic for my writings. I recently posted a review of Mark Valeri's Heavenly Merchandize at that site. This book discusses the evolving opinion that early American Puritans and what Valeri referred to as post-Puritans dealt with issues related to business and profit. The first generation of Puritan settlers would probably not be welcomed by many Americans who claim to revere them today. Find out why by following the link above.
Until next time, have a great weekend.
25 March 2012
My Next Conference Presentation
On April 13, 2012, the Phi Alpha Theta history society at UND will hold the annual Red River Valley History Conference. I presented a paper at this conference last year, and plan to do so again this year. You can view some of my previous publications and book reviews here. This year, my paper is based upon some research that I began back in 2008. Below is a brief synopsis of my argument and findings.
While at the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives, I was introduced to the work of H. Cornell Goerner, an important figure in the mid-twentieth century Southern Baptist establishment. Alan Scot Willis in his 2004 work All according to God's Plan frequently described Goerner and others like him as progressive. This progressivism related to race, and not theology, however. Goerner supported improved race relations when many in the South did not. I found Goerner interesting because of his involvement in mission work, but during my studies at UND, I began to look at his writings in a different way that was tied to one of the major themes in American church history.
As pointed out in the paper referenced above, one of the topics that I've studied is that of American exceptionalism. From a quick perusal of some of his books (published by the Southern Baptist Convention's publishing arms), Goerner was a major believer in the idea of American exceptionalism. He was glad that America devised the atomic bomb because it was the most Christian nation of the day. In this area, current Southern Baptists would see little difference between his viewpoint and their own. As mentioned above, Goerner's theology was fairly conservative. He was not a fan of the social gospel, and he railed against theological liberalism. He believed that salvation was for the individual, not society. Most Southern Baptists and theologically conservative evangelicals (myself included) would agree with this belief.
The big difference that shows a major change in political discourse, however, is related to the idea of social justice. Today, politically conservative commentators rail against such programs as social security. Glenn Beck argued that pastors who want social justice are closet communists and ties them to Hitler and Stalin. Goerner wrote in the 1940s and 1950s for social justice and was glad for the improved working conditions then prevalent in the United States. The ironic thing about this statement is that it appeared in the same book, America Must Be Christian, in which he stated that it was good that America got the bomb. Goerner had no love for communism, noting that it kept people behind the iron curtain from hearing the gospel. No one would have called him a radical liberal commie at the time. He was part of the Southern Baptist mainstream establishment, and few have ever called the Southern Baptists one of the more liberal denominations in the nation. What is the importance of this writing? It shows that in terms of economic rhetoric, the current discourse is drifting toward that heard in the Gilded Age, rather than the post-war period that most people today seem to think was the most idyllic time in American history.
While at the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives, I was introduced to the work of H. Cornell Goerner, an important figure in the mid-twentieth century Southern Baptist establishment. Alan Scot Willis in his 2004 work All according to God's Plan frequently described Goerner and others like him as progressive. This progressivism related to race, and not theology, however. Goerner supported improved race relations when many in the South did not. I found Goerner interesting because of his involvement in mission work, but during my studies at UND, I began to look at his writings in a different way that was tied to one of the major themes in American church history.
As pointed out in the paper referenced above, one of the topics that I've studied is that of American exceptionalism. From a quick perusal of some of his books (published by the Southern Baptist Convention's publishing arms), Goerner was a major believer in the idea of American exceptionalism. He was glad that America devised the atomic bomb because it was the most Christian nation of the day. In this area, current Southern Baptists would see little difference between his viewpoint and their own. As mentioned above, Goerner's theology was fairly conservative. He was not a fan of the social gospel, and he railed against theological liberalism. He believed that salvation was for the individual, not society. Most Southern Baptists and theologically conservative evangelicals (myself included) would agree with this belief.
The big difference that shows a major change in political discourse, however, is related to the idea of social justice. Today, politically conservative commentators rail against such programs as social security. Glenn Beck argued that pastors who want social justice are closet communists and ties them to Hitler and Stalin. Goerner wrote in the 1940s and 1950s for social justice and was glad for the improved working conditions then prevalent in the United States. The ironic thing about this statement is that it appeared in the same book, America Must Be Christian, in which he stated that it was good that America got the bomb. Goerner had no love for communism, noting that it kept people behind the iron curtain from hearing the gospel. No one would have called him a radical liberal commie at the time. He was part of the Southern Baptist mainstream establishment, and few have ever called the Southern Baptists one of the more liberal denominations in the nation. What is the importance of this writing? It shows that in terms of economic rhetoric, the current discourse is drifting toward that heard in the Gilded Age, rather than the post-war period that most people today seem to think was the most idyllic time in American history.
27 February 2012
New Southern Baptist President?
Recently, I posted some questions about Southern Baptists and their considerations about changing the name of their convention. There is concern that their racist origins still influence the opinion that people have of the SBC. Recently, the convention has made strides in attempting to right their wrongs in relation to race.
Now, it appears that the Convention is about to elect its first African American president. Rev. Fred Luter is a well-known pastor in New Orleans who pastors a church with about 5,000 members. He is currently the First Vice President in the convention, and was involved on the committee that produced the 2000 revision of the Baptist Faith and Message, so it would appear he's no theological liberal. It appears as though Luter will be unopposed in his run for the presidency, but regardless, there is little doubt that his election should be a positive step in race relations for the largest Protestant denomination in the United States.
Now, it appears that the Convention is about to elect its first African American president. Rev. Fred Luter is a well-known pastor in New Orleans who pastors a church with about 5,000 members. He is currently the First Vice President in the convention, and was involved on the committee that produced the 2000 revision of the Baptist Faith and Message, so it would appear he's no theological liberal. It appears as though Luter will be unopposed in his run for the presidency, but regardless, there is little doubt that his election should be a positive step in race relations for the largest Protestant denomination in the United States.
08 December 2011
Southern Baptist Name Change?
Is a big change in the cards for the nation's largest Protestant denomination? A couple of articles I've seen in the past few days indicates that it could be. The Southern Baptist Convention, which is the largest non-Catholic denomination in the United States, is considering changing its name after a poll indicated that 40% of Americans would refuse to go to one of their churches.
In the era of the mega-church, we've seen the influence of marketing strategies and the equivalent of customer satisfaction surveys. Is this just one more attempt to cater to the public at large? Or is it actually, as Convention President Bryan Wright said, just an attempt to remove barriers that turn people away. The association is apparently not removing Baptist from their name, so there will still be a tie to the historical "denomination" (some Baptists don't like being thought of as a denomination).
One of the reason for this consideration is a downward trend in memberships. In the current market-driven environment, it is quite easy for people to just leave a congregation that they don't like and find another. In the days before the Second Great Awakening, this was more difficult. Historian Nathan Hatch emphasized the democratization of American Christianity that this event brought about. With this democratization, and earlier moves to religious toleration, the power of state churches eroded immensely (the Congregational Church remained established in some New England States into the 19th century). This brought the ability for people choose their congregations more easily.
There could be the question of whether this would change the theological and doctrinal stands to which Southern Baptists have traditionally held? Church officials argue that it won't. If so, they probably won't change people's opinion of them with a simple name change. The question then becomes, if they truly hold these offensive beliefs dearly, why would they really want to change?
Please note that I'm not discussing issues related to nineteenth-century opinions about slavery or anything related to race. I'm only concerned with doctrinal/theological issues. Any thoughts or comments are appreciated.
In the era of the mega-church, we've seen the influence of marketing strategies and the equivalent of customer satisfaction surveys. Is this just one more attempt to cater to the public at large? Or is it actually, as Convention President Bryan Wright said, just an attempt to remove barriers that turn people away. The association is apparently not removing Baptist from their name, so there will still be a tie to the historical "denomination" (some Baptists don't like being thought of as a denomination).
One of the reason for this consideration is a downward trend in memberships. In the current market-driven environment, it is quite easy for people to just leave a congregation that they don't like and find another. In the days before the Second Great Awakening, this was more difficult. Historian Nathan Hatch emphasized the democratization of American Christianity that this event brought about. With this democratization, and earlier moves to religious toleration, the power of state churches eroded immensely (the Congregational Church remained established in some New England States into the 19th century). This brought the ability for people choose their congregations more easily.
There could be the question of whether this would change the theological and doctrinal stands to which Southern Baptists have traditionally held? Church officials argue that it won't. If so, they probably won't change people's opinion of them with a simple name change. The question then becomes, if they truly hold these offensive beliefs dearly, why would they really want to change?
Please note that I'm not discussing issues related to nineteenth-century opinions about slavery or anything related to race. I'm only concerned with doctrinal/theological issues. Any thoughts or comments are appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)