Auswahl der wissenschaftlichen Literatur zum Thema „Society of Christian Brethren in Harvard University“

One hundred and seventy years ago, on 17 July 1816, the Society for the Promotion of Theological Education in Harvard University was established, thus beginning a process that led to the founding of a “faculty of theology” or Theological Seminary at the University. Undergraduate education at Harvard College had by this time moved quite far from the founders' original concern to provide a literate ministry to the churches. By the beginning of the nineteenth century Harvard men were educated in a broad curriculum oriented more toward liberal education than professional training. So the theological faculty was created in order to provide specialized training for those preparing to enter the Christian ministry

Background/Context: This research is framed by both the historical lineage of the New Civics and the legacy of educational and curricular debates in the United States. It contributes to the literature on mid-20th century education. Purpose and Research Questions: This study explores the relationship between religion, civics, and education through the lens of university and faculty leaders at Harvard, Princeton, and Yale Universities in the mid-20th century. Research questions include (a) What were some of the major trends in curricular reform before totalitarianism emerged as an idea or concept, and how were they related to questions of freedom? (b) In the mid-to-late 1930s, how did the presidents of Harvard, Princeton, and Yale view the idea of totalitarianism/authoritarianism and its potential impact on these earlier reform efforts? In addition, what role did trustees, students, faculty, and other constituents play in these conversations? (c) What educational proposals were offered as solutions or counterattacks to totalitarian ideas? (d) What lessons can we draw today from these debates about educating for freedom? Research Design: This study utilized a historical case study design based on intellectual, educational, and cultural history. I examined more than 30 archival collections at Harvard, Princeton, and Yale; my focus was on curricular meeting minutes, presidential papers, dean’s papers, and individual manuscripts. Findings/Results: Most literature on 20th-century American education and civics focuses on secularization. My research instead emphasizes the dynamic relationship between religion and education, including the ways in which educational practices became religious in form and purpose. I illuminate the ways in which, even after World War II, Christian supernaturalism and secular facts were thought by a coterie of faculty and university leaders to be interconnected. Educators at Harvard, Princeton, and Yale referenced Christian Humanism—a fusion of supernatural and secular—as being highly relevant to their time.

Daniel T. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings. Social Politics in a Progressive Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 634 pp., $36.95, ISBN 0-674-05131-9.Axel R. Schäfer, American Progressives and German Social Reform, 1875–1920 (Stuttgart: Steiner, 2000), 252 pp., €37.00, ISBN 3-515-07461-9.Nancy Stieber, Housing Design and Society in Amsterdam. Reconfiguring Urban Order and Identity, 1900–1920 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 386 pp., $45.00, ISBN 0-226-77417-1.Christian Topalov, ed., Laboratoires du nouveau siècle. La nébuleuse réformatrice et ses réseaux en France, 1880–1914, (Paris: Éditions de l'École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, 1999), 574 pp., €38.00. ISBN 2-7132-1323-1.

This article considers how, impelled by confessional divisions caused by the Reformation, a general sense of pan-Protestant community grew across Europe, and its members launched a long battle against Roman Catholicism far beyond the 16th century. Indeed, it continued into the mid-18th century, the so-called Age of Reason. If it cannot necessarily be described as an open war of religion like the Thirty Years War, it was at least a cold war. From their points of view, the Protestant minorities threatened by the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation, such as the Waldensians in northern Italy and the Lithuanian Calvinists, stood on the front line in this war. Thus, financial support was regularly offered by the Protestant churches in Great Britain and Ireland to their distressed brethren across the continent, university scholarships were set up for students from Catholicdominated areas, and plans were drafted for a Protestant union in Europe, from a military level to an ecclesiastical one. It is in this context that we must understand how apparently strange a phenomenon as British support for the translation of the Bible into Lithuanian developed. The author sees Chylinski’s activities in the tradition of learning and charity exhibited in the 1650s by the three leading members of the Hartlib philosophical circle, namely, Samuel Hartlib (originally from Elbing), Jan Amos Comenius (from Moravia), and John Dury (born in Edinburgh, he spent his early life in various places in northern Europe), who were, in a sense, Protestant refugees to England from north-central Europe. After Chylinski, British support for Lithuanian Protestants did not end. She traces the work of Robert Boyle and the foundation of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (1699), which organised relief for Žemaitijan Calvinists in the early 1730s.

During the Second World War, the integration of science and humanities, as well as the integration of Guoxue (Traditional Chinese Studies) and Western learning, became a central issue in academia in China. With the support of the Harvard–Yenching Institute, Christian universities such as Cheeloo University, Ginling College, Nanking University, West China Union University, and Yenching University, which had gathered in Huaxiba in Chengdu during the war, were committed to bridging the gap between science and Guoxue. They founded the “East-West Cultural Studies Society” with the aim of attracting scholars from both domestic and international backgrounds, facilitating dialogue and the convergence of Chinese and Western academic traditions. Pioneering a novel approach that infused traditional Guoxue with scientific inquiry, they established the Bulletin of Chinese Studies, which swiftly rose to a distinguished position within Guoxue research amid the tumultuous wartime milieu. This article endeavors to, within the diverse context of the modern evolution of the origins of and changes in Guoxue research, undertake a comprehensive examination of the objectives and scope of the Bulletin of Chinese Studies through a nuanced perspective that fuses globalization and localization. The overarching goal is to delve into the profound significance of Guoxue research within Christian universities, with a central focus on propelling substantial progress in the potential fusion of Chinese and Western academic disciplines.

David G. Myers received a BA in chemistry, magna cum laude from Whitworth College and an MA and PhD in psychology from the University of Iowa. Since 1982 he has been the John Dirk Werkman Professor of Psychology at Hope College. He is best known for his authorship of Psychology (2004), now in its 7th edition, and Social Psychology (2005a), now in its 8th edition. He is also the author of The Pursuit of Happiness: Who Is Happy—and Why (1992), Intuition (2002), and What God Has Joined Together: A Christian Case for Gay Marriage (2005b). With his wife Carol, he endowed the American Psychological Society Fund for Teaching and Public Understanding of Psychological Science. Harold L. Miller, Jr. received a BS degree in psychology from Arizona State University and a PhD in experimental psychology from Harvard University. He joined the psychology faculty at Brigham Young University (BYU) in 1975, where he is professor of psychology and associate chair. He has served as dean of General and Honors education at BYU and is an associate editor of the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.

Background. At the beginning of the 1920’s, after establishing the borders of the restored Polish State, its eastern territories were dominated by the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian populations, and in the western part, a significant percentage were Germans. Accordingly, the state faced the problem of developing a constructive policy towards national minorities. Purpose. The article analyzes the attitude of the Polish intellectual elite to the prob-lem of national minorities, whose opinions were partially reflected in a poll conducted in July and August 1924 by the liberal Warsaw newspaper “Kurjer Polski”. The discussion intensified, in particular, due to the expiration of the government’s commitment to give Eastern Galicia autonomy, the preparation of a government law on education (known as Lex Grabski). Results. The opening of a Ukrainian university was a part of the problem. At the request of the government, the academic community of the Jagiellonian University expressed its views in June, which generally welcomed the idea of opening a separate Ukrainian university in Lviv, Warsaw or Krakow. “Kurjer Polski” published reflections of intellectuals representing different regions of the country and political currents: socialists (A. Śliwiński – Warsaw), nationalists (S. Bukowiecki – Vilno), conservatives (Fr. Bossowsky, T. Dembowsky – Vilno; E. Hauswald – Lviv ). The basis for solving the problem at that time, most authors called the provisions of the March 1921 Constitution on the main democratic rights of citizens, unanimously called for creating opportunities for cultural and national development of national minorities, hoping for the consolidation of the state. It was emphasized the need to take into account the individual characteristics of each minority and regional specifics. In particular, E. Hauswald considered the experience of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy of the early twentieth century as an example of solving the problem (Moravian Compensation 1905 and The Bukovinian Compromise 1910). Quite controversial about the essence of Belarusian (Belarusians are not a nation that encompasses all segments of society, but only the mass of the peasantry is devoid of any political ambitions; Belarusian language is a set of dialects that makes a gradual transition from Russian to Polish; literary Belarusian lan-guage is artificially created, the population does not understand it) and Ukrainian (did not deny the existence of political ambitions, but emphasized the significant differences in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia and dependence on external support) national movements were the reflections of Fr. Bossovsky, who, however, supported the idea of granting national minorities freedom of cultural development. Lviv lawyer J. Makarewicz (representative of the Christian Democrats) called for a policy of state assimilation towards Ukrainians and Belarusians, tactics of “state indifference” towards Jews, Russians and Germans. However, despite the existence of such ideas in the Polish intellectual environment, government circles have chosen the concept of a unitary mono-national state. As early as July 1924, a law on education was passed, many articles of which were aimed at discriminating against national minorities. And further changes in the political life of the country only exacerbated the problem, which was not solved throughout the interwar period. Keywords: Fr. Bossowski, S. Bukowiecki, T. Dembowski, interwar Poland, E. Hauswald, Kurjer Polski, J. Makarewicz, national question, A. Śliwiński. A never-extinguishing volcano, 1924. Kurjer Polski, May 31, р.2. (In Polish) Announcement of the National Electoral Commission on November 24, 1930, s. 1. [online] Avialable at: http://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/ WMP19302720369/ O/M19300369. pdf [Accessed 15 march 2021]. (In Polish) Baran, Z., 1998. On the question of the agrarian policy of the governments of interwar Poland towards Western Ukraine. Visnyk of the Lviv University, 33. Series History. Lviv, pp.146–153. (In Ukrainian) Baran, Z., 2011. Julian Makarevich’s socio-political views. In: Historical sights of Galicia. Proceedings of the fifth scientific conference on local history, 12 november 2010. Lviv, рр.188–198. (In Ukrainian) Bezuk, O., 2019. The reaction of the Western Ukrainian and world community to the death of Olga Levitska-Basarab. In: The modern movement of science: theses add. VII In-ternational Scientific and Practical Internet Conference, 6–7 june 2019. Dnipro, pp.75–81. (In Ukrainian) Bojarski, Р., 2015. Piłsudski’s May Coup in commentaries of “Dziennik Wileński” journalists. The Scientific Journals of the Learned Society of Ostrołęka, 29, рр.101–114. (In Polish) Bohachevsky-Chomiak, М., 1981. The Ukrainian university in Galicia. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 5(4). Published by Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, pp.497–545. (In English) Bossowski, F., 1924. Any irritating policy must be abandoned. Kurjer Polski, August 24, р.3. (In Polish) Bukowiecki, S., 1922. The policy of independent Poland. Essay of the program. War-saw: Ignis S.A. (In Polish) Bukowiecki, S., 1924. Providing cultural development for minorities unites them with the State. Kurjer Polski, July 4, р.2. (In Polish) Czekaj, К., 2011. Artur Śliwiński (1877–1953). Politician, publicist, historian. Warsaw. (In Polish) Dąbrowski, P., 2020. Belarussian and Jewish issues in the political and legal thought of polish groups in Vilnius in the first years of independence – selected issues. Studia juridica Lublinensia, 29(4). Pomeranian University in Slupsk, pp.59–70. (In English) Dembowski, T., 1924. May everyone in Poland be fine. Kurjer Polski, August 10, р.4. (In Polish) Do you know who it is?, 1938. S. Łozа, ed. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Głównej księgarni wojskowej. [online] Avialable at: https://prokuratoria.gov.pl/index.php?p=m&idg=m3,113 [Accessed 23 march 2021] (In Polish) Hauswald, Е., 1924. It is necessary to adhere to the principles of fairness and compre-hensive tolerance. Kurjer Polski, August 7, р.2. (In Polish) Hud, B., 2018. From the history of ethnosocial conflicts. Ukrainians and Poles in the Dnieper region, Volhynia and Eastern Galicia in the XIX–first half of the XX century. Harkiv: Akta. (In Ukrainian) Holzer, J. 1974. Political mosaic of the Second Polish Republic. Warsaw: Książka і Wiedza. (In Polish) Jászi, O., 1929. The Dissolution of the Habsburg Monarchy. Chicago–Illinois: The University of Chicago Press. [online] Avialable at: https://ia801603.us.archive.org/33/ items/in.ernet.dli.2015.151077/2015.151077.The-Dissolution-Of-The-Habsburg Monar-chy.pdf [Accessed 15 march 2021]. (In English) Kakareko, A., 2002. To restore the state myth: reception of the Jagiellonian heritage in the environment of the Club of Tramps Seniors in Vilnius in the 1930s. In: Poles and neighbors – distances and the interpenetration of cultures: a collection of studies, part 3. R. Wapiński, еd. Ostaszewo Gdańskie: Stepan design. (In Polish) Krykun, M. and Zashkilnyak, L., 2002. History of Poland. From ancient times to the present days. Lviv: Ivan Franko National University in Lviv. (in Ukrainian). Krzywobłocka, B., 1974. Christian Democrats 1918–1937. Warsaw: Książka і Wiedza. (In Polish) Kurjer Polski, 1924a. May 21. (In Polish) Kurjer Polski, 1924b. May 23. (In Polish) Kurjer Polski, 1924c. July 4. (In Polish) Makarewicz, J., 1924. Minorities. Lviv: Chrześcijańska Spółka Wydawnicza, 1924. (In Polish) Malycka, K., 1924. About Olga Levitsky Bessarabova. Dilo. February 23. (In Ukraini-an) Minutes of a conference held 11–12 july 1924, at the polish Ministry of Religions and Education, 1981. In: Bohachevsky-Chomiak, М., 1981. The Ukrainian university in Gali-cia. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 5(4). Published by Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, doc.3, pp.524–527. (In Polish) More than independence, 2001. Polish political thought 1918–1939. J. Jachymek and W. Paruch, ed. science. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej. (In Polish) Mudryj, V., 1948. Ukrainian University in Lviv in 1921–1925. Nurenberg: Czas. (In Ukrainian) National-State Union, 1922. Program declaration. June 28. [online] Avialable at: https://polona.pl/item/deklaracja-programowa-inc-polska-jako-narod-ani-na-chwile-nie-przestawala-istniec,NjIxNjY2NzE/0/#info:metadata [Accessed 15 march 2021]. (In Polish) Orman, E., 1989–1991. Rosner Ignacy Juliusz (1865–1926). Polish Biographical Dictionary, Vol.32. Romiszewski Aleksander – Rudowski Jan. Wrocław: National Institute of Ossolińskich – Publishing House of the Polish Academy of Sciences, рр.106–110. [online] Avialable at: https://www.ipsb.nina.gov.pl/ a/biografia/ignacy-juliusz-rosner [Ac-cessed 3 december 2021] (In Polish) Renner, K., 2005. State and nation (1899). In: National Cultural Autonomy and its Contemporary Critics. Ephraim Nimni, ed. London and New York: Routledge, рр.13–40. (In English) Reports of the faculties at the Jagellonian about the plans for Ukrainian university studies, 1981. In: Bohachevsky-Chomiak, М., 1981. The Ukrainian university in Galicia. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 5(4). Published by Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, doc.2, pp.521–524. (In Polish) Shabuldo, F.M., 2004. The Union of Horodło 1413. Encyclopedia of History of Ukraine: Vol.2: G-D. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. [online] Avialable at: http://www.history. org.ua/?termin=Gorodelska_uniya_1413 [Accessed 15 march 2021] (In Ukrainian) Shvaguliak, M., 2013. Historical studies. Ukrainians at the crossroads and sharp turns of history (second half of the XIX – first half of the XX century). Lviv: Triada plus. (In Ukrainian) Smith, A. D., 1994. National Identity. Translate from English by P. Tarashchuk. Kyiv: Osnovy. (In Ukrainian) Stourzh, G., 2019. Equality of nationalities in the constitution and public administration of Austria (1848–1918). S. Paholkiv, ed. Lviv: Piramida. (In Ukrainian) Śliwiński, А., 1924. Nationalist chauvinism is the greatest obstacle to solving the matter. Kurjer Polski, August 19, р.4. (In Polish) The results of the census, 1910. Vom 31. In the Kingdoms and Countries represented in the Imperial Council – The summary results of the census. [online] Avialable at: https://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/anno-plus?aid=ost&datum =0001&page=168 [Ac-cessed 12 april 2021]. (In German) Zashkilnyak, L., 1997. Genesis and consequences of the Ukrainian-Polish normaliza-tion in 1935. In: Poland and Ukraine – the Alliance of 1920 and its aftermath. Materials from the scientific conference “Poland and Ukraine – the Alliance of 1920 and its after-math”. Toruń, on November 16–18, 1995. Toruń, рр.431–454. (In Ukrainian)

RESUMENEl estudio histórico de la religiosidad islámica se ha encontrado tradicionalmente con el problema de la escasez de fuentes. Además, siempre se ha estudiado a partir de las fuentes islámicas, obviando las cristianas. Si es cierto que para la Edad Media las fuentes cristianas no ofrecen demasiada información y están además viciadas por su carácter polémico, también lo es que para la Edad Moderna, con el surgimiento de un tipo de literatura sobre el islam que está alejado de la tradición polémica, disponemos de un buen número de importantes fuentes cristianas que merecen ser tenidas en cuenta en cualquier análisis histórico de la religiosidad islámica. Es el caso especialmente de la Topographía e Historia general de Argel (1612), cuyas descripciones y observaciones resultan de una riqueza sin precedentes.PALABRAS CLAVE: Edad Moderna, cinco pilares del islam, religiosidad, España, Argel.ABSTRACTTraditionally, the historical study of Islamic religiosity has been faced with the problem of the scant amount of sources. Moreover, it has always been approached on the basis of Islamic sources, disregarding the Christian ones. If for the Middle Ages Christian sources do not present much information about the subject and this is tainted by its polemical character, for the Early Modern Age, with the emergence of a new kind of literature about Islam that does not belong to the polemical tradition, we have at our disposal a good number of sources of information. This is particularly thecase of the Topographía e Historia general de Argel (1612), with descriptions and observations of an unprecedented quality. It is an evident indication that, from the sixteenth century onwards, there are Christian sources that must be taken into account in any historical analysis of Islamic religiosity.KEY WORDS: Image of Islam, early modern Spain, five pillars of Islam, religiosity. BIBLIOGRAFÍAAfricanus, L., Descripción general del África y de las cosas peregrinas que allí hay, traducción y edición de S. Fanjul, Barcelona, Lunwerg, 1995.Alfonso, P., Diálogo contra los judíos, traducción de E. Ducay, Zaragoza, Instituto de Estudios Altoaragoneses, 1996.Berkey, J. P., The formation of islam: religion and society in the Near East, 600-1800, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003.Berque, J., Al-Yousi: problémes de la culture marocaine au XVIIème siècle, Paris, Moutin & Co., 1958.Bunes Ibarra, M. Á. de, La imagen de los musulmanes y del norte de África en la España de los siglos XVI y XVII: los caracteres de una hostilidad, Madrid, CSIC, 1989.Camamis, G., Estudios sobre el cautiverio en el Siglo de Oro, Madrid, Gredos, 1977.Cardaillac, L., Moriscos y cristianos: un enfrentamiento polémico (1442-1560), 2ª ed., Madrid, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2016.Constable, O. R., “Regulating religious noise: the Council of Vienne, the mosque call and Muslim pilgrimage in the late medieval Mediterranean world”, Medieval Encounters, vol. 16, núm. 1 (2010), pp. 64–95.Cruz Hernández, M., El islam de al-Andalus: historia y estructura de su realidad social, 2ª ed., Madrid, AECI, 1996.Cruz Palma, Ó. de la, “Las cinco oraciones islámicas diarias (Salawat) en las fuentes latinas medievales”, en Martínez Gázquez, J. y Tolan, J. V. (eds.), Ritus infidelium. Miradas interconfesionales sobre las prácticas religiosas en la Edad Media, Madrid, Casa de Velázquez, 2013, pp. 133-149.— Machometus: la invención del profeta Mahoma en las fuentes medievales, Bellaterra, Institut d’Estudis Medievals, 2017.Daniel, N., Islam and the West: the making of an image, Oxford, Oneworld Pub., 1993.Eckhart, A., “Le cercueil flottant de Mahomet”, en Mélanges de philologie romane et de littérature offerts à Ernest Hoepffener, París, Les Belles Lettres, 1949, pp. 77-88.Eisenberg, D., “Cervantes, autor de la Topografía e historia general de Argel publicada por Diego de Haedo”, Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America, vol. 16, núm. 1 (1996), pp. 32-53.Evans, R. J. W. y Marr, A. (eds.), Curiosity and wonder from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment, Abingdon y Nueva York, Routledge, 2016.Fierro, M., “Prácticas y creencias religiosas en al-Andalus”, Al-Qantara, vol. 13, núm. 2 (1992), pp. 463-474.Garcés, M. A., Cervantes en Argel: historia de un cautivo, Madrid, Gredos, 2005.— “Introduction”, en Sosa, A. de, An early modern dialogue with Islam: Antonio de Sosa’s Topography of Algiers (1612), Notre Dame, Ind., University of Notre Dame Press, 2011, pp. 1-78.García-Arenal, M., Inquisición y moriscos: los procesos del Tribunal de Cuenca, 3ª ed., Madrid, Siglo XXI, 1987.García Sanjuán, A., “La celebración de la navidad en al-Andalus y la convivencia entre cristianos y musulmanes”, en Miura, J. M. (ed.), Te cuento la navidad: visiones y miradas sobre las fiestas de invierno, Sevilla, Aconcagua, 2011, pp. 43-49.Gonzalbes, C., “Un ensayo para la catalogación de los amuletos de plomo andalusíes”, Boletín Arqueológico Medieval, 12 (2005), pp. 7-17.González de Clavijo, R., Embajada a Tamorlán, edición de F. López Estrada, Barcelona, Castalia, 2017, pp. 188-189.Halevi, L., Muhammad’s grave: death rites and the making of Islamic society, Nueva York, Columbia University Press, 2007.Hammoudi, A., The victim and its masks: an essay on sacrifice and masquerade in the Maghreb, Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1993.Höfert, A., “The order of things and the discourse of the Turkish threat: the conceptualisation of Islam in the rise of Occidental anthropology in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries”, en Höfert, A. y Salvatore, A. (eds.), Between Europe and Islam: shaping modernity in a transcultural space, Bruselas, PIE-Peter Lang, 2000, pp. 39-70.Ibn Battuta, A través del islam, traducción, introducción y notas de S. Fanjul y F. Arbós, Madrid, Alianza Ed., 2005.Ibn Yubayr, A través del oriente (Rihla), estudio, traducción, notas e índices de F. Maíllo, Madrid, Alianza Ed., 2007.Irwin, R., For lust of knowing: the orientalists and their enemies, Londres y Nueva York, Penguin, 2007.Jiménez de Rada, R., Historiae minores. Dialogvs libri vite, edición y estudio de J. Fernández Valverde y J. A. Estévez Sola, Turnhout, Brepols, 1999.Kaptein, N. J. G., Muhammad’s birthday festival: early history in the central Muslim lands and development in the Muslim west until the 10th/16th century, Leiden, Nueva York y Colonia, Brill, 1993.Maliki, S., “Religiosidad y alteridad: una aproximación a la imagen del musulmán en la Topografía e Historia general de Argel de Antonio de Sosa”, ‘Ossour al-Jadida, 19-20 (2015), pp. 66-82.Montecroce, R., Reprobación del Alcorán, Sevilla, por dos alemanes compañeros, 1501.Parreño, J. M., “Experiencia y literatura en la obra de Antonio de Sosa”, en Sosa, A. de, Diálogo de los mártires de Argel, Madrid, Hiperión, 1990, pp. 9-23.Pascual, P., Sobre la se[c]ta mahometana, edición y estudio de F. González Muñoz, Valencia, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2011.Rodríguez Mediano, F., “Santos arrebatados: algunos ejemplos de maydub en la Salwat al-anfas de Muhammad al-Kattani”, Al-Qantara, vol. 13, núm. (1992), pp. 237-256.— “Religiosidad en al-Andalus: el hombre santo en el islam occidental”, Revista de Dialectología y Tradiciones Populares, 54 (1999), pp. 145-168.Sahin, K., “Staging an Empire: an Ottoman circumcision ceremony as cultural performance”, American Historical Review, vol. 123, núm. 2 (2018), pp. 463-492.Said, E. W., Orientalismo, 2ª ed., Barcelona, Debolsillo, 2003.Salah, M. M., El doctor Sosa y la Topografía e historia general de Argel, tesis doctoral, Departamento de Filología Española, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, 1991.Salicrú, R., “Entre la praxis y el estereotipo: vivencias y percepciones de lo islámico ibérico en las fuentes archivísticas y narrativas bajomedievales”, en MartínezGázquez, J. y Tolan, J. V. (eds.), Ritus infidelium. Miradas interconfesionales sobre las prácticas religiosas en la Edad Media, Madrid, Casa de Velázquez, 2013, pp. 99-111.Shoshan, B., Popular culture in medieval Cairo, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1993.Sola, E., “Renacimiento, Contrarreforma y problema morisco en la obra de Antonio de Sosa”, en Sosa, A. de, Diálogo de los mártires de Argel, Madrid, Hiperión, 1990, pp. 27-52.— “Antonio de Sosa: un clásico inédito amigo de Cervantes (Historia y Literatura)”, en Actas del I Coloquio Internacional de la Asociación de Cervantistas, Barcelona, Anthropos, 1990, pp. 409-412.Southern, R. W., Western views of Islam in the Middle Ages, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1962.Tolan, J. V., Saracens: Islam in the medieval European imagination, Nueva York, Columbia University Press, 2002.Tóth, J., “Topography of a society: Muslims, dwellers, and customs of Algiers in Antonio de Sosa’s Topographia, e Historia general de Argel”, en Birnbaum, M. D. y Sebok, M. (eds.), Practices of coexistence: constructions of the other in early modern perceptions, Budapest, Central European University Press, 2017, pp. 103-142.Touati, H., Entre Dieu et les hommes: lettrés, saints et sorciers au Maghreb (17e siècle), París, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, 1994.Tuy, L. de, Crónica de España, edición de J. Puyol, Madrid, Tip. de la RABM, 1926.Varthema, L., Itinerario del venerable varon micer Luis patricio romano en el qual cuenta mucha parte de la Ethiopia, Egipto, y entrambas Arabias, Siria y la India, Sevilla, Jacobo Cromberger, 1520.Viaje de Turquía (la odisea de Pedro Urdemalas), 6ª ed., a cargo de F. García Salinero, Madrid, Cátedra, 2010.Waardenburg, J. J., “Official and popular religion in Islam”, Social Compass, vol. 25, núms. 3-4 (1978), pp. 315-341.Wiegers, G., “Ibadat”, en Martin, R. C. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim world, 2 vols., Nueva York, Macmillan Reference USA, Thomson/Gale, 2004, vol. 1, pp. 327-333.Zaragoza, E., “Abadologio del monasterio de Ntra. Sra. de la Misericordia de Frómista (1437-1835)”, Publicaciones de la Institución Tello Téllez de Meneses, 71 (2000), pp. 135-158.

RÉSUMÉLe principal objectif de cet article est d’encourager une approche plus large, supraconfessionnelle, du mariage et de la famille à l’époque moderne. La conjugalité a été “désacralisée” par les réformateurs protestants du 16e siècle. Martin Luther, parmi d’autres, a refusé le statut de sacrement au mariage, tout en valorisant celui-ci comme une arme contre le péché. En réaction, le concile de Trente a réaffirmé avec force que le mariage est bien un des sept sacrements chrétiens. Mais, promouvant la supériorité du célibat, l’Église catholique n’a jamais beaucoup insisté sur les vertus de la vie et de la piété familiales avant le 19e siècle. En parallèle, les historiens décèlent des signes de “sacralisation” de la famille protestante à partir du 16e siècle. Leurs conclusions doivent être relativisées à la lumière de recherches plus récentes et plus critiques, centrées sur les rapports et les représentations de genre. Elles peuvent néanmoins inspirer une étude élargie et comparative, inexistante dans l’historiographie traditionnelle, des réalités et des perceptions de la famille chrétienne au-delà des frontières confessionnelles.MOTS-CLÉ: Époque Moderne, mariage, famille, protestantisme, Concile de TrenteABSTRACTThe main purpose of this paper is to encourage a broader supra-confessional approach to the history of marriage and the family in the Early Modern era. Wedlock was “desacralized” by the Protestant reformers of the 16th century. Martin Luther, among others, denied the sacramental status of marriage but valued it as a weapon against sin. In reaction, the Council of Trent reinforced marriage as one of the seven sacraments. But the Catholic Church, which promoted the superiority of celibacy, did little to defend the virtues of family life and piety before the 19th century. In parallel, historians have identified signs of a “sacralization” of the Protestant family since the 16th century. These findings must be relativized in the light of newer and more critical studies on gender relations and representations. But they can still inspire a broader comparative study, non-existent in traditional confessional historiography, of the realities and perceptions of the Christian family beyond denominational borders.KEY WORDS: Early Modern Christianity, marriage, family, Protestantism, Council of Trent BIBLIOGRAPHIEAdair, R., Courtship, Illegitimacy and Marriage in Early Modern England, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1996.Beaulande-Barraud, V., “Sexualité, mariage et procréation. Discours et pratiques dans l’Église médiévale (XIIIe-XVe siècles)”, dans Vanderpelen-Diagre, C., & Sägesser, C., (coords.), La Sainte Famille. Sexualité, filiation et parentalité dans l’Église catholique, Problèmes d’Histoire des Religions, 24, Bruxelles, Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 2017, pp. 19-29.Bels, P., Le mariage des protestants français jusqu’en 1685. Fondements doctrinaux et pratique juridique, Paris, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1968.Benedict, P., Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed. A Social History of Calvinism, New Haven/London, Yale University Press, 2002.Bernos, M., “Le concile de Trente et la sexualité. La doctrine et sa postérité”, dansBernos, M., (coord.), Sexualité et religions, Paris, Cerf, 1988, pp. 217-239.Bernos, M., Femmes et gens d’Église dans la France classique (XVIIe-XVIIIe siècle), Paris, Éditions du Cerf, Histoire religieuse de la France, 2003.Bernos, M., “L’Église et l’amour humain à l’époque moderne”, dans Bernos, M., Les sacrements dans la France des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Pastorale et vécu des fidèles, Aix-en-Provence, Publications de l’Université de Provence, 2007, pp. 245-264.Bologne, J.-C., Histoire du mariage en Occident, Paris, Lattès/Hachette Littératures, 1995.Burghartz, S., Zeiten der Reinheit – Orte der Unzucht. Ehe und Sexualität in Basel während der Frühen Neuzeit, Paderborn, Schöningh, 1999.Calvin, J., Institution de la Religion chrétienne (1541), édition critique en deux vols., Millet, O., (ed.), Genève, Librairie Droz, 2008, vol. 2, pp. 1471-1479.Carillo, F., “Famille”, dans Gisel, P., (coord.), Encyclopédie du protestantisme, Paris, PUF/Quadrige, 2006, p. 489.Christin, O., & Krumenacker, Y., (coords.), Les protestants à l’époque moderne. Une approche anthropologique, Rennes, Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2017.Corbin, A., Courtine, J.-J., et Vigarello, G., (coords.), Histoire du corps, vol. 1: De la Renaissance aux Lumières, Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2005.Corbin, A., Courtine, J.-J., et Vigarello, G., (coords.), Histoire des émotions, vol. 1: De l’Antiquité aux Lumières, Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2016.Cristellon, C., “Mixed Marriages in Early Modern Europe“, in Seidel Menchi, S., (coord.), Marriage in Europe 1400-1800, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2016, chapter 10.Demos, J., A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony, New York, 1970.Flandrin, J.-L., Familles. Parenté, maison, sexualité dans l’ancienne société, Paris, Seuil, 1976/1984.Forclaz, B., “Le foyer de la discorde? Les mariages mixtes à Utrecht au XVIIe siècle”, Annales. Histoire, Sciences sociales (2008/5), pp. 1101-1123.Forster, M. R., Kaplan, B. J., (coords.), Piety and Family in Early Modern Europe. Essays in Honour of Steven Ozment, St. Andrews Studies in Reformation History, Aldershot, Ashgate, 2005.Forster, M. R., “Domestic Devotions and Family Piety in German Catholicism”, inForster, M. R., Kaplan, B. J., (coords.), Piety and Family in Early Modern Europe. Essays in Honour of Steven Ozment, St. Andrews Studies in Reformation History, Aldershot, Ashgate, 2005, pp. 97-114.François W., & Soen, V. (coords.), The Council of Trent: Reform and Controversy in Europe and Beyond, 1545-1700, Göttingen, Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 2018.Gautier, S., “Mariages de pasteurs dans le Saint-Empire luthérien: de la question de l’union des corps à la formation d’un corps pastoral ‘exemplaire et plaisant à Dieu’”, dans Christin, O., & Krumenacker, Y., (coords.), Les protestants à l’époque moderne. Une approche anthropologique, Rennes, Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2017, pp. 505-517.Gautier, S., “Identité, éloge et image de soi dans les sermons funéraires des foyers pastoraux luthériens aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles”, Europa moderna. Revue d’histoire et d’iconologie, n. 3 (2012), pp. 54-71.Goody, J., The Development of the Family and Marriage in Europe, Cambridge, 1983; L’évolution de la famille et du mariage en Europe, Paris, Armand Colin, 1985/2012.Hacker, P., Faith in Luther. Martin Luther and the Origin of Anthropocentric Religion, Emmaus Academic, 2017.Harrington, J. F., Reordering Marriage and Society in Reformation Germany, Cambridge, 1995.Hendrix, S. H., & Karant-Nunn, S. C., (coords.), Masculinity in the Reformation Era, Kirksville, Truman State University Press, 2008.Hendrix, S. H., “Christianizing Domestic Relations: Women and Marriage in Johann Freder’s Dialogus dem Ehestand zu ehren”, Sixteenth Century Journal, 23 (1992), pp. 251-266.Ingram, M., Church Courts. Sex and Marriage in England 1570-1640, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1987.Jacobsen, G., “Women, Marriage and magisterial Reformation: the case of Malmø”, in Sessions, K. C., & Bebb, P. N., (coords.), Pietas et Societas: New Trends in Reformation Social History, Kirksville, Sixteenth Century Journal Press, 1985, pp. 57-78.Jedin, H., Crise et dénouement du concile de Trente, Paris, Desclée, 1965.Jelsma, A., “‘What Men and Women are meant for’: on marriage and family at the time of the Reformation”, in Jelsma, A., Frontiers of the Reformation. Dissidence and Orthodoxy in Sixteenth Century Europe, Ashgate, 1998, Routledge, 2016, EPUB, chapter 8.Karant-Nunn, S. C., “Une oeuvre de chair: l’acte sexuel en tant que liberté chrétienne dans la vie et la pensée de Martin Luther”, dans Christin, O., &Krumenacker, Y., (coords.), Les protestants à l’époque moderne. Une approche anthropologique, Rennes, Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2017, pp. 467-485.Karant-Nunn, S. C., The Reformation of Feeling: Shaping the Religious Emotions in Early Modern Germany, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010.Karant-Nunn, S. C., “The emergence of the pastoral family in the German Reformation: the parsonage as a site of socio-religious change”, in Dixon, C. S., & Schorn-Schütte, L., (coords.), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe, Basingstoke, Palgrave/Macmillan, 2003, pp. 79-99.Karant-Nunn, S. C., “Reformation Society, Women and the Family”, in Pettegree, A., (coord.), The Reformation World, London/New York, Routledge, 2000, pp. 433-460.Karant-Nunn, S. C., “Marriage, Defenses of”, in Hillerbrand, H. J., (coord.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, vol. 2, p. 24.Kingdon, R., Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva, Harvard University Press, 1995.Krumenacker, Y., “Protestantisme: le mariage n’est plus un sacrement”, dans Mariages, catalogue d’exposition, Archives municipales de Lyon, Lyon, Olivétan, 2017.Le concile de Trente, 2e partie (1551-1563), vol. XI de l’Histoire des conciles oecuméniques, Paris, (Éditions de l’Orante, 1981), Fayard, 2005, pp. 441-455.Les Decrets et Canons touchant le mariage, publiez en la huictiesme session du Concile de Trente, souz nostre sainct pere le Pape Pie quatriesme de ce nom, l’unziesme iour de novembre, 1563, Paris, 1564.Luther, M., “Sermon sur l’état conjugal”, dans OEuvres, I, Paris, Gallimard/La Pléiade, 1999, pp. 231-240.Luther, M., “Du mariage”, dans Prélude sur la captivité babylonienne de l’Église (1520), dans OEuvres, vol. I, édition publiée sous la direction de M. Lienhard et M. Arnold, Paris, Gallimard/La Pléiade, 1999, pp. 791-805.Luther, M., De la vie conjugale, dans OEuvres, I, Paris, Gallimard/La Pléiade, 1999, pp. 1147-1179.Mentzer, R., “La place et le rôle des femmes dans les Églises réformées”, Archives de sciences sociales des religions, 113 (2001), pp. 119-132.Morgan, E. S., The Puritan Family. Religion and Domestic Relations in Seventeenth-Century New England, (1944), New York, Harper, 1966.O’Reggio, T., “Martin Luther on Marriage and Family”, 2012, Faculty Publications, Paper 20, Andrews University, http://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/church-history-pubs/20. (consulté le 15 décembre 2018).Ozment, S., When Fathers Ruled. Family Life in Reformation Europe, Studies in Cultural History, Harvard University Press, 1983.Reynolds, P. L., How Marriage became One of the Sacrements. The Sacramental Theology of Marriage from the Medieval Origins to the Council of Trent, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016/2018.Roper, L., Martin Luther. Renegade and Prophet, London, Vintage, 2016.Roper, L., The Holy Household: Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg, Oxford Studies in Social History, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1989.Roper, L., “Going to Church and Street: Weddings in Reformation Augsburg”, Past & Present, 106 (1985), pp. 62-101.Safley, T. M., “Marriage”, in Hillerbrand, H. J., (coord.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, vol. 3, pp. 18-23.Safley, T. M., “Family”, in Hillerbrand, H. J., (coord.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, vol. 2, pp. 93-98.Safley, T. M., “Protestantism, divorce and the breaking of the modern family”, dans Sessions, K. C., & Bebb, P. N., (coords.), Pietas et Societas: New Trends inReformation Social History, Kirksville, Sixteenth Century Journal Press, 1985, pp. 35-56.Safley, T. M., Let No Man Put Asunder: The Control of Marriage in the German Southwest. A Comparative Study, 1550-1600, Kirksville, Sixteenth Century Journal Press, 1984.Seidel Menchi, S., (coord.), Marriage in Europe 1400-1800, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2016.Stone, L., The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500-1800, New York, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1977.Strauss, G., Luther’s House of Learning, Baltimore/London, 1978.Thomas, R., “Éduquer au mariage par l’image dans les Provinces-Unies du XVIIe siècle: les livres illustrés de Jacob Cats”, Les Cahiers du Larhra, dossier sur Images et Histoire, 2012, pp. 113-144.Vanderpelen-Diagre, C., & Sägesser, C., (coords.), La Sainte Famille. Sexualité, filiation et parentalité dans l’Église catholique, Problèmes d’Histoire des Religions, 24,Bruxelles, Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 2017.Walch, A., La spiritualité conjugale dans le catholicisme français, XVIe-XXe siècle, Paris, Le Cerf, 2002.Watt, J. R., The Making of Modern Marriage: Matrimonial Control and the Rise of Sentiment in Neuchâtel, Ithaca, 1992.Weis, M., “La ‘Sainte Famille’ inexistante? Le mariage selon le concile de Trente (1563) et à l’époque des Réformes”, dans Vanderpelen-Diagre, C., & Sägesser, C., (coords.), La Sainte Famille. Sexualité, filiation et parentalité dans l’Église catholique, Problèmes d’Histoire des Religions, 24, Bruxelles, Éditions de l’Université deBruxelles, 2017, pp. 31-40.Westphal, S., Schmidt-Voges, I., & Baumann, A., (coords.), Venus und Vulcanus. Ehe und ihre Konflikte in der Frühen Neuzeit, München, Oldenbourg Verlag, 2011.Wiesner, M. E., Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge, 1993.Wiesner, M. E., “Studies of Women, the Family and Gender”, in Maltby, W. S., (coord.), Reformation Europe: A Guide to Research, Saint Louis, 1992, pp. 181-196.Wiesner-Hanks, M. E., “Women”, in Hillerbrand, H. J., (coord.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996, vol. 4, pp. 290-298.Williams, G. H., The Radical Reformation, (1962), 3e ed., Truman State University Press, 2000, pp. 755-798Wunder, H., “He is the Sun. She is the Moon”: Women in Early Modern Germany, Harvard University Press, 1998.Yates, W., “The Protestant View of Marriage”, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 22 (1985), pp. 41-54.

SCIENCE UNDER FIRE: Challenges to Scientific Authority in Modern America by Andrew Jewett. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2020. 356 pages. Hardcover; $41.00. ISBN: 9780674987913. *John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White's role in fueling popular ideas about conflict between the primarily natural sciences and religion has been often studied. It is now well known that their claims were erroneous, prejudice laden (in Draper's case against Roman Catholicism), and part of broader efforts to align science with a liberal and rationalized Christianity. In Science under Fire, Boston College historian Andrew Jewett recounts a similarly important but lesser-known tale: twentieth-century criticism of the primarily human sciences as promoting politically charged, prejudice laden, and secular accounts of human nature. *Jewett is an intellectual historian who focuses on the interplay between the sciences and public life in the United States. Science under Fire follows up on his 2012 Science, Democracy, and the American University, which explored the role of science (or, more precisely, science-inspired thinking associated with the human sciences) as a shaper of American culture from the mid-nineteenth through the mid-twentieth century. As with that previous work, Science under Fire illustrates how science can be practiced as a form of culture building and leveraged for sociopolitical ends. While Science, Democracy, and the American University explored how various ideas about science came to displace the then-dominant Protestant understandings of morality in the late nineteenth century, Science under Fire considers how a variety of critics reacted to the growing influence of those sciences. *Throughout both historical periods, members of the public, politicians, and many social scientists did not view science as offering a neutral or unbiased account of the nature of humans and their behavior. Rather, they practiced, appropriated, and criticized various accounts in order to advance particular visions about how society should be organized. These visions were not primarily driven by scientific data but by philosophical precommitments, including some which led their proponents to deny the validity of the Protestant and humanist values which previously anchored American public life. So, Science under Fire addresses religious and politically conservative apprehension over "amoral" psychology and the teaching of evolution in schools. However, its story is much broader. The secular and religious liberals and conservatives, libertarians and socialists, humanities scholars and social scientists all at times lamented the dehumanizing effects of technology or worried that scientists were unduly influenced by selfish motives. *Science under Fire begins with a twenty-three-page summary of the book's main themes. This is followed by two chapters that explain the cultural developments which fostered apprehension about science's role in society. By the 1920s, some thinkers were calling on Americans to adopt "modern" scientific modes of thought, in part by dismissing religion as a source of objective values (chap. 1). Their efforts were resisted by humanities scholars, Catholics, and liberal Protestants, who focused on lambasting naturalist approaches in psychology (e.g., by Freud and John Watson) as pseudoscientific and offering classical or religious values as a bulwark against the excesses of capitalism and consumerism (chap. 2). *In the 1930s and 40s, these critiques were given new impetus as worries arose over social scientists' role in shaping Roosevelt's New Deal as well as mental associations between amoral science and Japanese and German totalitarianism (chap. 3). Post-World War II fears over science grew to encompass concerns about "amoral" scientists such as B. F. Skinner, Benjamin Spock, and others engaging in "social engineering" by training children to value social conformity at the expense of traditional religious or humanist moral guidance (chap. 4). The increasingly vehement religious opposition to scientists' attempts to address questions of morality was partly driven by opposition to "atheist" communism and featured a broad coalition of Protestant and Catholic critics decrying the effects of "scientism" (chap. 5). *There was also a postwar resurgence in interest in the humanities, as well as efforts by thinkers such as C. P. Snow, to position the social sciences as a humanist bridge between "literary" and "scientific" cultures (chap. 6). In the United States, Snow's call for greater prominence for the sciences was challenged by New Right conservatives, who regarded it as dangerously opening the door for liberal academic social scientists to portray their ideologically charged views as objectively scientific. Their efforts included supporting conservative social scientists' research, intervening in academic politics and research funding, and, somewhat 'justifiably, 'complaining about the persecution of conservative scholars (chap. 7). *Nevertheless, postwar criticism of scientism was couched in flexible enough terms to appeal to politically and theologically diverse thinkers associated with various institutes and literary endeavors (chap. 8), ultimately including many in the iconoclastic New Left counterculture of the 1960s and 70s (chap. 9). By that time, movements critical of science included religious opposition to evolution and psychology; neoconservative criticism of the "welfare state"; and feminist, Black, and indigenous critiques of science as a tool for justifying an oppressive status quo (chap. 10). *In the Reaganite era, science was targeted by pluralist, postfoundationalist, poststructuralist, and postmodern thinkers; religious conservative challenges to evolution and "secularism" in science; tighter budgets and a downgrading of blue-sky research; and worries over the implications of artificial intelligence and genetic engineering (chap. 11). After a short evaluative conclusion, sixty-two pages of endnotes help flesh out Jewett's argument. *Science under Fire helps illuminate how science and religion have interacted as culture-shaping forces in American public life. Readers will learn how debates that are prima facie about science and religion are really about values and cultural authority, and will discover the origins of some of the assumptions and strategic moves that shape popular science-faith discourse. They will also be invited to enlarge their repertoire of science-faith thinkers (e.g., John Dewey, Reinhold Niebuhr, B. F. Skinner) and topics (behaviorism, debates over Keynesian economics as a backdrop, and how science's value-free ideal was invented and leveraged). *Nevertheless, readers should be aware that Jewett's near-exclusive focus on sweeping intellectual tendencies and the social sciences (with occasional forays to reflect on genetic technology and the atomic bomb) means that Science under Fire is not an entirely balanced account of science, politics, and religion in America. Some chapters focus on major streams of thought to the point that the story of individual movements, thinkers, and their interactions with one another is lost. Fundamentalist and conservative evangelical reactions to scientism are treated relatively perfunctorily compared to liberal Christian responses (e.g., the Institute for Religion in an Age of Science is mentioned while the American Scientific Affiliation is not). A bias toward sociological explanations occasionally leads to a degree of mischaracterization. For example, Thomas Kuhn is mentioned only in connection with the 1960s counterculture, and the Vietnam-era Strategic Hamlet Program is characterized as an attempt to "make proper citizens out of Vietnamese peasants" rooted in modernization theory (p. 181), without mentioning it as a counterinsurgency strategy inspired by Britain's successful use of "New Villages" in the Malayan emergency. Finally, although most of the book is lucid, it is occasionally meandering, repetitive, and convoluted. This is particularly true for the introduction, which readers might consider skipping on the first read. *These criticisms are not meant to be dismissive. Science under Fire is a unique and uniquely important book. Those who are willing to mine its depths will be rewarded with a treasure trove of insight into the social and political factors that continue to shape conversations about science, technology, and faith in the United States today. *Reviewed by Stephen Contakes, Associate Professor of Chemistry, Westmont College, Santa Barbara, CA 93108.

The Soul of the American University Revisited traces the role of Protestantism in shaping American higher education from the founding of Harvard in the 1630s to the present. It offers a critical analysis of the changing ways in which Protestantism intersected with collegiate life, intellectual inquiry, and broader cultural developments. In accounts that have been edited and somewhat abridged for this second edition, it looks at pace-setting colleges and universities as they coped with modern society, post-Darwinian science, new secular philosophies, and increasing diversity in American life. Until the mid-twentieth century most leading American schools remained nominally Protestant, but their Protestantism was typically of a liberal variety that emphasized the broad ethical ideals of the Western and Judeo-Christian heritage. After the attacks in the 1960s on the “WASP” privilege, the vestiges of that establishment in higher education were soon largely dismantled. By the late twentieth century exclusive secular viewpoints were often considered the normative standard in higher education. Originally published in 1994 as The Soul of the American University, this new edition carries the story into the twenty-first-century culture. In the disarray and diversity of the intellectual life of this arguably “postsecular” age there is increasing room in the academy for varieties of intellectually responsible religious viewpoints. Indeed, as a concluding chapter recounts, more traditionalist Christian scholars and institutions, Protestant as well as Catholic, have developed substantially in recent decades.