CALENDAR and ASSIGNMENTS
Part I: Introductory
Readings
Main issues: 1) types of challenges from the social
sciences to religion
2) types of responses by religion:
inward-looking vs. outward; universalizing vs. localizing
Wed. Jan 4
Roll call; pictures. General orientation to this CORE
2nd year course.
1. Historical-critical method: excerpts from infancy narratives of Matthew
& Luke (1p)
Note that HANDOUTS are numbered, to help you keep track.
Pre-lectio on "scientific" study of religion, and scientific
"naturalism."
Pre-lection on substantive / interpretive v. functional /
explanatory approaches to religion
The course description
explains that you are to answer briefly on a 4x6 card the "Ques" asked.
Mon. Jan 9
Topic: background history of social science approaches to
religion and religious responses
Pals pp. 3-10 (7pp) on the scientific study of religion
Ques: what did Max Müller mean by a “science of religion”?
Ques: what happened after 1500 that led to this approach to religion?
2. Barnes’ intro (3 pp), on the division of theologies into inward and
outward.
Ques: Explain briefly what this division is.
3. Syllabus of Errors (2pp) and
4. Schultenover (3pp), on the inward in older Catholic thought
Ques: pick an “error” in the Syllabus that you strongly support;
Ques: What future status for the Catholic Church did Leo XIII and Pius X
desire?
5. Historical-critical method (8pp), Prot and Catholic inward responses
to this “scientific” approach.
Ques: identify some things that Martin thinks are wrong with the
historical-critical method.
Ques: distinguish historical from literary criticism and form criticism.
Wed. Jan 11.
Topic: to see Islam struggling with issues similar to those of
Christianity.
6. Juergensmeyer on 2 kinds of muslim theology (10pp)
7. Wright on Islam and Democracy. (6 pp)
8. Porteous on 2 kinds of conservative theologians in Iran
(6pp)
Ques: describe up to 4 kinds of
Muslim theology found in these 3 readings.
Brief introductory lecture and discussion:
Topic: 20th century history of relation between church and
state
Hall in Baum, ch. 1, on Christian theologians and WWI (10pp);
Ques: articulate in your own words why the theologians (some of them)
went wrong.
Ques: identify a position in this chapter on church-state
relations
which is the same or similar to one of the Muslim theologies on this
topic.
Mon. Jan 16 [MLK holiday. No classes today.]
Wed. Jan 18:
9. Cox, excerpts from The Secular City (11pp) – outward looking
Ques: what are the three forms of desacralization Cox finds in Old
Testament thought
10. Milbank, excerpt from Theology and Social Theory (5pp) – inward looking
Ques: explain why Milbank’s position can be called an inward-looking
one.
Cox in Baum, ch. 11, recanting about secularization. (8pp)
Ques: what does Cox think is the most significant indicator of future
trends in religion?
Mon. Jan. 23.
Schreiter in Baum, Ch. 13., on Vatican II . (14pp)
Ques: In what ways does Vatican II theology differ from that of
Pius IX and X?
Ques: How does that fit with the difference between “inward”
and “outward” theology?
11. Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine A post-liberal
(post-modern?) approach. (10pp)
Questions:
a. Describe what Lindbeck means by calling religion a
“cultural-linguistic” reality.
b. According to Lindbeck what is the process by which a person becomes
religious?
c. How much of an adult person’s life can be lived with only a “first
intentionality”?
d. Explain the relation Lindbeck sees between experience and language.
e. Explain how Lindbeck might be used to support an "inward" position.
Wed. Jan . 25.
12. Marsden handout, describing fundamentalism and evangelicalism
Ques: How do these two differ, according to
Marsden?
Ques: How does fundamentalism fit with inward or
outward theology?
13. Hargrove handout
Ques: What does Hargrove claim are the underlying
motivations behind fundamentalism?
Ques: How does her analysis point to an inward or
outward approach in fundamentalism?
Mon. Jan 30. Review day for exam next class. Bibliographies due for paper (10 points).
Wed. Feb. 1 First
Exam. Exam question.
Discuss the reactions of religious leaders and thinkers to the emergence
of “scientific” approaches to religion as part of the development of
"modernity."
Include the following in your discussion: 1) the place of rationalism; 2) the general difference between inward and outward responses; 3) the nature of the historical-critical method in scripture interpretation, and reasons given in the readings why this is dangerous ; 4) the type of responses of the Popes in the late 19th and early 20th century; 5) problems from the close relation of theologians to their cultural and/or social context; 6) how similar issues appear in Muslim thought and reactions; 7) the different responses of Cox in the 1960s and Milbank in the 1990s to the secular; 8) how Vatican II and Cox in 2000 see the near future of religion in a secular world; 9) how the response of fundamentalism is similar to or different from any of these other responses.
Part II:
Anthropology, religious studies, and theology.
Theories of the nature of religion, of primitive religion, & of the
evolution of religion; with theological responses.
Basic issue throughout: can religion be “reduced” entirely to some
purely natural causes?
Mon. Feb. 6
Readings from Pals and excerpts from original sources. To be discussed
on 3
Pals: Ch. 1 on Tylor and Frazer. You may skip pp. 21.6-23, 32-34, 39-43.
14-15.
Handout excerpts from Tylor and Frazer.
Questions re Pals ch. 1:
1. What was Max Müller’s theory of the origin of Indo-European religion?
2. What is the difference between philology and ethnology?
3. What does Tylor mean by the word “animism”? For example?
4. To Tylor what is the relation between animism and modern science?
5. How does Frazer differ from Tylor on the relation between religion
and magic?
6. Does Frazer agree with Tylor on Question #4 here?
7. From the section called “Analysis” list items on which Tylor and
Frazer agree.
8. From the “Critique” section describe the 3 criticisms directed
against the theories of Tylor and Frazer
General assignment: do Pals’ descriptions fit well with the actual words
of Tylor and Frazer?
Wed. Feb. 8
Readings from Pals, ch. 6, on Evans-Pritchard, and
16. an excerpt from E-P.
Topic: Still on the nature of religion, primitive religion, the
evolution of religion.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. What is E-P’s attitude toward theories of cultural evolution? What
reasons does he give?
2. How does Levy-Bruhl characterize primitive thought?
3. Describe Zande beliefs about witchcraft in some detail.
4. What does E-P think about the intelligence of the Azande?
5. What is the relation of Kwoth to other gods in Nuer beliefs?
6. Does the Nuer notion of soul fit with Tylor’s theory?
7. What is the difference between group rites and personal sacrifices?
8. How does E-P criticize reductionist and evolutionary theories of
religion?
9. Analysis section: what does it mean to say that E-P shows belief in
magic can be rational?
10. Critique section: How does Pals criticize E-P’s use of the “if I
were a horse” argument;
and how does Pals suggest there is indeed a “primitive” mind?
Do E-P’s word in the excerpt fit with Pals’ interpretation?
Mon. Feb. 13
Readings from Pals, ch. 5, on Eliade (skip pp. 171-178) and
17. an excerpt
from Eliade.
Topic: A “phenomenological” approach to understanding religion.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. What are Eliade’s two basic axioms? Explain what they mean.
2. In what ways does Eliade agree with Otto on the nature of religion?
3. What is an “axis mundi”?
4. What is the role of reason in the use of symbol and myth, according
to Eliade?
5. What does it mean to say that Judaism made religion historical?
[recall Cox].
6. What is “historicism” according to Eliade
7. Analysis section: does Eliade praise or condemn “archaic” thought?
Explain.
8. Critique section: How precise and consistent is Eliade in defining
“sacred”?
Does the excerpt from Eliade fit with Pals’ description of Eilade’s
position?
Wed. Feb 15
Reading from Pals, Ch. 7 on Geertz. Read pp. 240.6 to263.
18, Reading from Geertz
Topic: to see an anthropologist seek to avoid functionalist
reductionism
but also to toy with a case of the evolution of religious
thought.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Does Geertz entirely reject “explanation” in favor of “understanding?
2. What is the purpose for seeking a “thick description” of a culture?
3. What does it mean to say that religion is a “cultural system”?
4. What is the difference between traditional and rationalized religion?
5. What is the “scripturalist revolt” in Islam?
6. Critique: does Geertz’ approach really make anthropology
unscientific?
7. In the excerpt from Geertz, what is meant by "religious
rationalization"?
8. Why are the educated Bali leaders trying to "rationalize" their
tradition?
Mon. Feb. 20
##19-22
Readings from Barnes, on primitive religion (problems in defining 6pp
+ dangers 2pp and on the evolution of religion (8pp) + page of Human
Commonalities Feb. 17.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Describe a major difference between Tylor and Levy-Bruhl on whether
primitive practices are religious (from “problems in defining primitive
religion”).
2. What is Barnes’ argument that primitive culture is primitive
(“dangers of . . ..").
3. Describe differences among the 4 stages of cultural/religious
evolution according to Barnes.
4. Give examples of each of the cognitive styles as they appear in the
U.S. today.
Part III. Sociological interpretations of religion
Basic issue remains: can religion legitimately be reduced to a
fully naturalistic reality.
Wed. Feb 22
Readings from Pals, Ch. 3, on Durkheim. Skip from mid-93 to bottom
of p. 98
23. Durkheim excerpt.
Topic: theories about the social origins and function of religion;
theological responses.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. What is the sacred and how does it differ from the supernatural?
2. Describe fully Durkheim’s theory of the role of the totem in
Australian Aboriginal society.
3. What is the “soul” according to Durkheim?
4. What is a “negative” cult, a “positive” cult and a “piacular” cult?
5. Analysis section: Why can it be said that Durkheim is a
functionalist?
6. Critique section: What evidence from anthropology conflicts with
Durkheim’s ideas about the sacred, supernatural, and profane? Is
Durkheim’s theory reductionist about religion?
7. Do Durkheim’s own words fit well with Pals’ interpretation of
Durkheim
Mon.
Feb. 27.
24.
Readings from Peter Berger, The Sacred Canopy (and finish Durkheim).
Topic: to see a broader and universalizing theory of the sociological
function of religion.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Be able to describe the major aspects of Berger’s dialectical
interpretation of culture — externalization, objectification,
internalization.
2. What is it about humans that makes in necessary but difficult to
maintain a nomos
3. Describe the role of religion in maintaining the nomos.
4. Does Berger’s theory seem to be a functionalist reductionism?
Explain.
Wed. Mar. 1
Review for exam #2
Exam #2. Monday, March 6. This exam is the most difficult because it covers both
Part II and Part III.
Each of the theories covered has something to say about the origin,
nature, and development of religion. Some of these theories are
reductionistic (thoroughly naturalistic); some are supportive of
religion, however.
Exam, in two parts:
A.
Anthropological part: explain what the various theories of cultural and
religious evolution have in common and where they differ in any
significant way. (Use the 2 x 2 grid from class to categorize) Explain
which are more sympathetic to religion and how this sympathy is
expressed. Describe and evaluate Barnes' evolutionary
analysis of religious thought.
B.
Sociological part (this can be much shorter than Part A): explain how Durkheim and Berger are alike and how
they differ in their interpretation of the sociological function of
religion. Offer a theological (non-reductionist) response to each.
Wed. March 8. Papers due.
Bring two copies, one for a peer-critique and one for Barnes.
[This is the last class before mid-term break]
Part IV. Psychological and political theories of religion and
theological responses.
Mon. Mar. 20
Reading: Pals, ch. 4, on Marx (skip 124-136, 148-152),
25. Excerpts from Feuerbach and Marx.
Topic: religion as an expression of self-alienation based on
psychological needs.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. For Marx, what is the base of any society’s moral superstructure?
2. What does “ideology” mean?
3. To what does Feuerbach attribute belief in God? (See the excerpt
also.)
4. According to Marx what does religion offer to the oppressed? (See the
excerpt also.)
5. What does it mean to say that religion expresses human
self-alienation?
6. Analysis section: explain how Marx’s ideas are a reductionistic
functionalist approach.
7. Critique section: does Marx’s theory apply to primitive religion? If
not, so what?
Wed. Mar. 22
Reading in Pals, Ch. 2, Freud (you may skip 60-65, 74-77)
26. Excerpts from Freud.
Topic: what characteristics of the human psyche might account for
religion?
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Describe Freud’s explanation in Totem and Taboo of where religion
originated.
2. Describe Freud’ explanation in The Future of an Illusion of why
people hold on to religion.
3. How does Freud differentiate between “illusion” and “delusion”?
4. Analysis: What is Feuerbach’s analysis of religion; explain why his
and Freud’s position is a functionalist reductionism.
5. Critique: What is the problem of circularity to which Pals points?
Mon. Mar. 27
Readings: Reiss article;
28. Fowler handouts; I-E-Q studies (in class)
Topic: some empirical studies of religion and psychology.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Summarize Reiss’ conclusion about what motivates religiousness in
people. Does this show that Freud was wrong?
2. Think of some current examples for each of the five stages of faith
of Fowler.
3. [in class: what might the I-E-Q studies imply about religiousness in
people?]
Wed. Mar. 29
Readings: Baum, ch. 5 by Sweitzer.
29. Social Gospel handout.
Topic: various effects of Marxism in relation to theology: A Protestant
instance.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Explain what is meant by the “social gospel” and identify some major
proponents. (Handout)
2. Ch. 5. What led Niebuhr to take a socialist position; what then led
him to reject/modify it?
3. Ch. 5. In what way was the Canadian FCSO a response to Marx?
4. What critique did the FCSO offer of capitalist individualism?
5. How did Niebuhr and the FCSO differ on what can be hoped for in
history?
Mon. Apr. 3
Reading in Baum, ch. 9 by Elizondo, &
30. Hennelly handout on Liberation Theology.
Topic: other effects of Marxism on theology: Catholic liberation
theologies.
Questions to guide your reading:
1. Describe Hennelly's view of the future.
2. How good has the effect been of missionary activities, to the world
and specifically to Latin America, according to Elizondo?
3. Sum up the impact of the Medellin conference of bishops in 1968.
4. Give an example of an issue of concern for the All India Seminar of
1969 and of an issue for the African General Synod of Evangelization of
1974.
5. Name something in religion that is distinctively “Asian” according to Elizondo.
6. What is good and what is bad about globalization, according to Elizondo? How should the Catholic Church deal with a plurality of
cultures?
Wed. Apr. 5 STANDER SYMPOSIUM. No regular classes.
Mon. Apr. 10
Readings: Susan Ross in Baum, ch. 15.
31. Elizabeth Johnson excerpt. April 5.
Topic: changed social consciousness concerning women has lead to a
change in theology
1. According to Ross what virtue did Valerie Saiving say women needed to
develop, and why?
2. Briefly list the 4 “streams” of development in theology as part of
the women’s movement.
3. In what ways did the women’s movement affect “theological
anthropology”?
4. In her "critique of speech about God" what does Elizabeth Johnson say
are the 3 major problems in the use of masculine images of God?
5. According to Johnson, "an idol comes into being" when something
happens to images of God. What is that something that happens?
Wed. Apr. 12
Review course theme : inward-outward theologies. Preview exam #3.
32. Sample readings from Tracy
and von Balthasar].
Early student presentations on their papers (3 or 4)
Mon. Apr 17 = part of Easter Break
Wed. Apr. 19
Exam #3.
Both Marx and Freud interpret religion as a mistake that arises because
of certain human conditions or needs. Explain the basic theories of each
and show how they differ. Use the article by Reiss to show the limits of
Freud’s theories. Describe the social gospel movement and the reponses
of both Niebuhr and the FCSO to it, as well as liberation
theologies -- both Hispanic (as in Elizando and Hennelly) and feminist
(as in Ross and Johnson) -- and explain how they might be called positive responses to
Marx. Discuss the degree to which various positions tend more to
an outward or an inward approach (various positions = FCSO and Nieburh,
accepting studies by Fowler or Reiss, liberation theology and feminist
theology)
Mon. Apr. 24. Return exams. Student 5-minute
presentations on their papers
Wed. Apr. 26. Student presentations on their papers.
Evaluation of course.
Final version of the paper due Monday, May 1 by 5:45. Bring to
Barnes' office, HM 347.
This page was last changed on March 29, 2006