Scan barcode
A review by socraticgadfly
The Civil War as a Theological Crisis by Mark A. Noll
2.0
Wrongly narrow focus, errors, undercut thesis of book
Noll makes a few errors, mainly, but not entirely, in setting the framework for this book.
Other than a semi-coda chapter on Catholic opinions, he tries to make the "theological crisis" about Protestant Christianity, and more specifically, Reformed Protestant Christianity.
Well, until the Jacksonian Revolution, Episcopalianism supplied much of the national-level political leadership, very much the state-level Southern leadership, and a fair amount of Middle Atlantic states' leadership.
Second, while Methodism in the US might be more influenced by Reformed thought than in the UK, it's not a "Reformed" denomination.
Third, Lutherans had been in American in non-minuscule numbers for a full century before the Methodist, Baptist and Presbyterian splits. Of course, both they and Episcopalians didn't have the same take on "divine providence," or, in general, attempts to read America as the new Israel, as did the three aforementioned denominations. So, it wasn't the same type of crisis, if much of any, for them, or for Catholics.
And, Noll, as a scholar and academic, knows all this.
Per a one-star reviewer, but with a different focus on my part, I would say that he's showing deliberate theological bias.
He also has sociological and economic ignorance, or bias, take your pick. As modern historians like Edward Baptist have shown, the antebellum South was both a full part of the emerging capitalist trade system and, in many ways, was the greatest fuel for that — not New England — as far as American participation in the system. Therefore, his first bullet point on page 74, about a Southern charge that individualistic capitalism was economically dangerous is some mix of naive, ill-informed and biased — not to mention that, per his own attempts to distinguish southern and northern Protestants' appeals to sola scriptura vs. appeals to customary sense, is wrong, because other than "give unto Caesar," the bible says zip about economics.
Finally, per that last sentence above, Noll's use of the phrase "common sense" for what's really "customary sense" is off-putting.
So, unless you're a conservative evangelical Christian today expecting some "confirmation" of your views of the development of American Xianity through the Civil War, take a pass on this book.
Noll makes a few errors, mainly, but not entirely, in setting the framework for this book.
Other than a semi-coda chapter on Catholic opinions, he tries to make the "theological crisis" about Protestant Christianity, and more specifically, Reformed Protestant Christianity.
Well, until the Jacksonian Revolution, Episcopalianism supplied much of the national-level political leadership, very much the state-level Southern leadership, and a fair amount of Middle Atlantic states' leadership.
Second, while Methodism in the US might be more influenced by Reformed thought than in the UK, it's not a "Reformed" denomination.
Third, Lutherans had been in American in non-minuscule numbers for a full century before the Methodist, Baptist and Presbyterian splits. Of course, both they and Episcopalians didn't have the same take on "divine providence," or, in general, attempts to read America as the new Israel, as did the three aforementioned denominations. So, it wasn't the same type of crisis, if much of any, for them, or for Catholics.
And, Noll, as a scholar and academic, knows all this.
Per a one-star reviewer, but with a different focus on my part, I would say that he's showing deliberate theological bias.
He also has sociological and economic ignorance, or bias, take your pick. As modern historians like Edward Baptist have shown, the antebellum South was both a full part of the emerging capitalist trade system and, in many ways, was the greatest fuel for that — not New England — as far as American participation in the system. Therefore, his first bullet point on page 74, about a Southern charge that individualistic capitalism was economically dangerous is some mix of naive, ill-informed and biased — not to mention that, per his own attempts to distinguish southern and northern Protestants' appeals to sola scriptura vs. appeals to customary sense, is wrong, because other than "give unto Caesar," the bible says zip about economics.
Finally, per that last sentence above, Noll's use of the phrase "common sense" for what's really "customary sense" is off-putting.
So, unless you're a conservative evangelical Christian today expecting some "confirmation" of your views of the development of American Xianity through the Civil War, take a pass on this book.