Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Careers, Workplace and Religion
The innovation of the early American church

The innovation of the early American church

Last updated on: August 1, 2016 at 10:06 am by Guest Contributor

The innovation of the early American church 2016-07-28T20:14:37-05:00 Guest Contributor

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

lightbulb-801941_960_720

Although it is commonplace today for Christians to create organizations that tackle social problems, that approach was an innovation in the American Protestant church, says one of the nation’s top church historians. This post is reprinted from Faith & Leadership.

The American Protestant church’s great innovation was its voluntary organization, but organization alone did not guarantee success. The real key to thriving is focus on mission, said Mark Noll, the Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame.

In the 1800s, Christians created hundreds of groups to address important issues, and “it was very new,” Noll said. “It was innovative, and the scale in which it was carried out in the United States really did transform the public landscape as well as the landscape for the churches.”

But as American Christians developed a voluntary form of church, the institutional structures were less important than a focus on doing Christ’s work in the world, he said.

Noll Noll, who is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, is one of the foremost scholars of American religious history. He received the National Humanities Medal in 2006 and co-founded the Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals when he was a professor at Wheaton College.

His many books include “America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln,” “God and Race in American Politics: A Short History” and “The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.” He is currently working on a book about the Bible in American history.

Noll spoke to Faith & Leadership while at Duke University to give the 2012-2013 David C. and Virginia Steinmetz Lecture, which is on iTunesU.

Q: You’ve described the United States as a “biblical civilization.” What do you mean by that, and is this different from the question of whether America is a Christian nation?

The Christian nation question is very complicated, and it means bringing to the table a standard by which the question should be answered. So that’s one question.

The other question, about a Bible civilization, is a problem that’s worked out historically and objectively.

What were the shapers of the language? By any stretch of the imagination, the one great shaper of the language of Americans for the first 100 or more years of national history was the King James Version of the Bible.

This was true for all Protestants who spoke English. It became true for Protestants who didn’t speak English when they began to speak English, and became true for Catholics, who used actually a different translation but often, when they talked about the Bible in public, would use the language of the King James Version.

It was true for the first Jewish Bible translations in America, which sounded an awful lot like the King James Version.

In the 1850s, there wasn’t any television. There wasn’t any radio. There wasn’t any Internet. People read, and what they read was almost always, in some way, influenced by the King James Bible.

And I’ve studied the way in which the national schism that led to the American Civil War was a schism over how to interpret the Bible.

From the early 1830s onward, there was a strong abolitionist attack against slavery, and those attackers drew liberally on the Bible. That attack generated a response. The respondents drew liberally on the Bible.

All the sides to the debate brought the Scriptures to bear. It wasn’t the only authority or the only warrant that was brought to bear on this issue, but it was … by far the most often-cited authority.

Q: Did the argument over slavery introduce the notion that the Bible could be used in different ways?

The debates over slavery were not the first time that serious Christians had differed on how they interpreted the Bible, but for American history, it was the decisive one.

It’s really in the early 1830s that [the slavery debate] begins, and it lasts for 30 and more years.

Q: How did that change the way that Americans viewed the Bible?

Well, the argument that I tried to develop is that this public disagreement, extended over a long period of time, over how to interpret the Bible actually affected a number of elements in the broader American society.

One of the elements was changing opinions on what the Bible itself really was. There was a substantial group of people who felt that if the Bible could be used to defend slavery, it was necessary to have a new conception of the Bible.

I think also a second result was that there were people who continued to believe very deeply in a traditional Bible but realized that putting that traditional belief out in public to be debated had not been helpful.

And then a third is that, having not succeeded in bringing a unified biblical testimony on the question of slavery, it was harder and harder to bring a unified biblical testimony to any major social problem.

Q: You’ve written about the innovation of voluntary religion in the United States. Is that a particularly American way of going about being a Christian?

The way in which Christian believers in the United States have voluntarily joined together to create organizations to do specific tasks is not unique to the United States, but the United States is a place in the world where that way of operating has developed most extensively.

The separation of church and state that was national from the 1790s and then came to all the states by the 1830s was almost unprecedented in the world. All of the European places where the church people came from had some kind of a church establishment where the institutions of government and institutions of church were interwoven.

European Christian believers looked at America and said, “We will have a democratic mob ruining the Christian tradition.” But they were wrong.

In fact, what happened was that the church people adjusted to a situation where the state was not telling the churches what to do and the churches were not, by and large, telling the state what to do.

They adjusted and then adopted this pattern of forming churches by voluntary activity, voluntary support, voluntary patterns of naming leaders, and then other organizations. That was a real innovation.

In the United States from 1800 onward, there’s just a plethora of groups like the American Bible Society, the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, the American Sunday School Union, the American Anti-Slavery Society and philanthropic groups aimed at prison reform.

There were hundreds of them formed by people who didn’t wait around to say, “Well, what’s the government going to do?” Or didn’t wait around to say, “What’s my denomination going to do?” But they said, “We’ve got a problem; we need to band together and solve it.”

Now that seems like just what everybody does all the time, because that’s still an American way of doing things, but it was very new. It was innovative, and the scale in which it was carried out in the United States really did transform the public landscape as well as the landscape for the churches.

I would put it this way: it was the adaptation of traditional Christianity to a new social structure, new social forms. The adaptation was successful from one angle, because churches figured out how to organize without relying on the state.

The difficulty was that there was little motive to bring these energies together. So you had free space, and people took advantage of it and did wonderful things.

But as the Christian disputes over the American Civil War showed, if these self-created, self-funded, self-motivated groups disagreed, and they disagreed on an issue that you could only choose one or another, then you had a real problem.

If you disagreed that you should print the Bible and pass it out without the Apocrypha or you should print the Bible and pass it out with the Apocrypha, the United States was big enough that groups could choose to do either one. That is an example that happened.

But with the question whether to extend slavery into the territories or not, there was no mediating ground. An informal, voluntary, ad hoc way of organizing was just not really able to handle that particular problem.

Entrepreneurship

History of Work and Vocation

Previous Post

July 30, 2016

Why the Path to Business Success Should Include a Nice Nap

Next Post

August 2, 2016 Your Hands Are Covered With Blood: A Response to Wayne Grudem

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Art Audio posts Bible and Work Book Review Books Budgeting Calling Common Good Community Development Conferences Discipleship Economics Entrepreneurship Ethics Faith and Family Faith and the Marketplace Faith and the Workplace faith and work History of Work and Vocation Leadership Local Church Meaning New Blogger News Prayer Relationships Seminaries Theology of Work Uncategorized Video posts Vocation Worship Resources

Select a Month April 2026 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 April 2025 January 2025 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 May 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 August 2023 July 2023 April 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 May 2022 April 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 June 2021 May 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 December 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 April 2018 March 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What four things does the Pale Horse in Revelations bring upon the earth?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Wrath, power, redemption, and judgment Storms, earthquakes, floods, and darkness Sword, famine, plague, and wild beasts Silence, fire, blood, and pestilence