For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery

Christian Century, Nov 15, 2003 by Daniel L. Pals

Whatever the claims of the subtitle, then, this project does not substantively engage the issue of monotheism, whether in one form or in several cross-culturally compared. It is not centered even on Christian monotheism, at least as an isolated doctrine. It offers instead a wide-ranging discussion of Christianity broadly construed as a cultural system (of which the monotheist axiom is one, indirectly relevant feature). What Stark seeks to explain--in the main persuasively--is how the entire Christian religions complex, both institutional and theological, exerted its influence upon certain crucial developments in Western history. Passages that comment specifically on monotheism or nod toward cross-cultural comparison are mostly marginal to this effort.

That issue clarified, thoughtful readers will find much to appreciate in these pages, which are often rich in details of church history, vigorously analytical, and especially instructive on underappreciated themes and connections. To cite a few examples: Stark makes several efforts to frame general principles of religious action, such as the rule that "religions conflict will be maximized where ... a few powerful particularistic religions organizations coexist." Valid or not, this idea prods debate. He offers a perceptive assessment of John Calvin that tightly stresses his work as organizer of secret Protestant missionary agents--a side of the Reformer's career too often overshadowed by the imposing theological achievement of the Institutes. A reappraisal of medieval universities draws on the latest scholarship to suggest they be seen as early nurseries, rather than adversaries, of modern science. An instructive comparison of English, French and Spanish slave codes shows that inhumanity too has its degrees and differences.

Misconceptions also get corrected. To the surprise of some who are familiar with the famous T. H. Huxley-Samuel Wilberforce debate on evolution in 1860, Stark notes that the well-worn tale of the bishop humbled by Darwin's bulldog is historically tenuous, and that Darwin himself judged Wilberforce's published review of The Origin of Species to be among the most telling of the critiques he encountered.

It is true that in getting to these nuggets, one needs to show patience with mannerisms that can easily annoy. Topics get introduced with tightly compressed summaries of earlier scholarship that end with ritually brusque dismissals: "All false": "Not so!"; "Nonsense and outright fabrication." Further, in Stark's prickly reckonings, indictments rain on liberals and secularists, while religious conservatives routinely walk free. Along with Freudians, Marxists and advocates of political correctness, the index of the highly disfavored includes all rationalists who lived in, or now admire, the age of Enlightenment, all scholars with biases too pro-Protestant and progressive or prejudices too anti-Catholic, all secular humanists, theological liberals, moral relativists, scientific atheists, confident Darwinians and sundry similar voices among religion's cultured despisers. It is, to say the least, odd that an author so alert to

 

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement

Content provided in partnership with Thompson Gale