The rising influence of white Christian nationalism in some circles of American politics is posing a major threat to the health of our democracy and our culture. This panel will discuss the results of a new PRRI/Brookings survey of more than 6,000 Americans, which establishes new measures to estimate the proportion of Americans who adhere to and reject Christian nationalist ideology. The survey also examines how Christian nationalist views intersect with white identity, anti-Black sentiment, patriarchy, antisemitism, anti-Muslim sentiments, anti-immigrant attitudes, and support for political violence. Additionally, the survey explores the influence Christian nationalism has among our two political parties and major religious subgroups today. PRRI president and founder Robert P. Jones will present the major findings of the study, and a distinguished panel will discuss what the survey results reveal about Christian nationalism, the state of American democracy, and the health of our society.
Annual Meeting 2023 Program Book
While the nineteenth century saw the emergence of self-consciously modern forms of theology, many of these theologies were also undergirded by sophisticated historical narratives reaching back to the Patristic age. Arguably, the broad outlines of doctrinal history that were constructed by major nineteenth-century theologians from Schleiermacher to Baur, Dorner, Ritschl, and Harnack have continued to inform historical theology even where their underlying dogmatic judgments were emphatically rejected. This session considers this fascinating and often overlooked aspect of nineteenth-century theological scholarship and suggests a fresh portrayal of nineteenth-century theology. It highlights how historical and systematic theology worked hand in hand throughout the century offering exemplary analyses of individual figures and broader, diachronic trends.
Papers
This paper maintains that Ferdinand Christian Baur’s seminal retrieval of patristic models of deification (theōsis) functions to make the doctrine newly relevant for modern Christian theology while simultaneously misrepresenting some of its most central features. Specifically, in an effort at bringing ancient Christian understandings in line with a German Idealist model of divine-human union (which had generated considerable interest in the early nineteenth century), Baur portrays patristic figures as advocating essential union between God and humanity. Under a protection of sorts provided by Idealism, then, patristic models of deification are made germane to the most leading-edge theologies of the nineteenth century, even if such a development comes at the cost of distorting patristic views. Crucially, too, even after the collapse of Idealism in the mid-nineteenth century, Baur’s interpretation continues to wield influence beyond the cultural moment that gave rise to it, particularly among Albrecht Ritschl and those in his “school.”
Albrecht Ritschl was the most prominent German theologian of the second half of the nineteenth century. According to Ritschl, modern theology’s task was to draw upon Luther’s chief insights in order to complete the Reformation. Ritschl’s students set out to demonstrate by “scientific” means that Luther’s insights were incompatible with the Christological and Trinitarian dogmas of the Greek Fathers. Ritschlian theologians sought to foster the establishment of a distinctively Germanic form of Christianity free from these dogmas that is intellectually and morally superior to its Latin and Greek predecessors. Toward this end, they invested a great deal of energy into patristic scholarship to show that patristic dogma emerged from a soteriology of deification borrowed from pagan Hellenism rather than the teachings of Jesus. Ritschlian patristic scholarship was motivated in part by German nationalism and the quest to unite Germany. Thus, the teachings of the Greek Fathers and Eastern Orthodox churches serve as a foil against which to demonstrate the superiority of Luther’s theology, German culture, and “scientific” theology.
Adolf von Harnack is often thought of as the “father” of modern church history. But Harnack saw himself as a theologian offering a normative vision. This paper probes the relationship between Harnack’s historical scholarship and his theological and ethical proposals by focusing on his engagements with Augustine of Hippo and how that informed subsequent generations’ engagements with Augustine. I argue that Harnack’s engagements with Augustine reveal an ambivalence within his own scholarly practice that informs the tension between engaging Augustine as a sui generis master of the spiritual life and engaging him as a representative of an entire epoch. Drawing from Ernst Troeltsch and Karl Holl’s works on Augustine, I delineate some post-Harnackian scholarly trends in the study of Augustine, including dispensational frameworks (early vs. late Augustine), evaluative frameworks (good vs. bad Augustine), and methodological frameworks (primary text vs. secondary literature).
2023 marks the 200th anniversary of *Johnson v. M’Intosh*, the first case of the Marshall Trilogy, in which US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall created what we now call “Federal Indian Law.” This is an occasion for us to bring together lawyers and scholars of Native American religious traditions to reflect on the roles that religion has played in the development of Federal Indian Law. Our roundtable discusses the argument that this story is not only about property, but also, importantly, about religion. Our discussion will not be limited to *Johnson v. M’Intosh*, but would also reflect on contemporary cases, such as *Haaland v. Brackeen*, as following the logic of discovery, even as they conceal the theological roots of federal Indian law.
In 2000, JAAR published a special issue titled, “Who Speaks for Hinduism?”, which included a set of ten articles focused on issues, questions, and conflicts seminal to Hindu studies at the turn of the millennium. More than twenty years after JAAR 68.4, as racialized scholars in the field of Hindu studies, we find that while many of the key players in the debate have remained the same, the pressing question of our field is quite different. Our driving question today is not “Who speaks for Hinduism?” but rather: What are the stakes of speaking for, to, and through Hinduism? Our proposed roundtable uses the framework of Critical Race Theory (CRT), Asian American studies, and Feminist Critical Hindu studies to begin a conversation about our experiences as researchers, teachers, and colleagues of color in Hindu studies.
Panelist
From the historic block where San Antonio began to the crown jewel of its skyline, join us for "a few of our favorite things" that exemplify the city's unique character. One of San Antonio's oldest and most regal neighborhoods allows a glimpse into the fascinating twists and turns of people and social issues throughout the city's history. Whether you are a first-time visitor or a longtime local exploring Downtown, you will always find something new to learn and see! $35
Meet your tour guide outside of the Lila Cockrell Theater entrance of the convention center on East Market Street at 12:45 p.m. The tour will depart promptly at 1:00 p.m. Remember to wear comfortable shoes. This tour is rain or shine.
If your schedule no longer allows you to participate in this tour, please email reg@aarweb.org. There are no refunds for tours.
Traditionally, theology is in service to a religious community. Theology Without Walls has an audience, but does it have a community? The SBNRs, Mark Heim noted at our first planning meeting, may be an audience, but are they a community? Can Theology Without Walls be done successfully if it does not have a community? Is there still a purpose for it to serve? Linda Mercadante is conducting a follow-up study to her classic on SBNRs that will shed light on that question. Might Theology Without Walls become at least a theological community? Francis Clooney once remarked that engaging in comparative theology can cause friction with one’s home community, but it also creates something of a new community. This panel will explore these and other related questions.
Papers
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ian Reader and George Tanabe’s Practically Religious (University of Hawai’i Press, 1998) was a groundbreaking work that continues to influence scholars today. While not explicitly written in conversation with scholars in the nascent field of Lived Religion at the time, it was perhaps one of the first and most influential works on what later became known as the study of lived religion in Japan. The book highlights the categories of moral luck and good luck, the marketing of benefits, the confluence between high and low traditions, and the distinction between cognitive and affective belief. Appealing to textual scholars, ethnographers, Buddhologists, and many others, it continues to be cited in contemporary research and is a staple assignment in many courses. In celebration of this seminal work’s 25th anniversary, the Society for the Study of Japanese Religions (SSJR) will host a roundtable of scholars who have benefited from the book.