Kaitlyn Schiess

As someone who watches politicians use and abuse the Bible in ways and settings that feel absolutely contrary to my own faith (ex. Ted Cruz praying at Uvalde then planning to attend the NRA meeting that week), I was curious what Schiess might add to the discussion. She reviews several key periods from US history and the ways that the Bible was wielded publicly in each. This was not new info to me, but might be helpful to others. I wish there was a bit more of the "where do we go from here" because that is the real issue in my mind. Heaven help us, in this the election year of 2024.… (mais)

I feel the author gives a balanced review of the political use of the Bible and Biblical language in American history. This includes example of usage by “both sides” to justify their actions, such as both Union and Confederate in the Civil War, and both Patriot and Loyalist in the Revolutionary War. In some cases, you find that both sides use the same Bible passage, just interpret it differently. Where appropriate, as part of the discussion, some non-American voices are heard, such as Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, and John Calvin. This helps to give context, as the Americans cited were not operating in a vacuum. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in delving deeper into the relationship of religion, specifically Christianity, with politics.… (mais)

I'm a bit behind on this one. I found it a somewhat challenging read and I am at fault for that. It's rather clinical and academic. That's never a problem but some readers should be aware of that. She likes the word "hermaneutics." I like it too, ever since I learned about Alan Sokal's prank paper "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", a nonsense paper submitted to and published by a prestigious journal without peer review, after which he revealed the hoax. Great word. But to use it throughout? Okay.

And, one should know where the author comes from. She has a ThM from Dallas Theological Seminary. I did not know that when I requested the book (I received a review copy from the publisher through LibraryThing). The title and subtitle are what caught my attention, though I admit I was expecting a different answer to "where we go from here." And that was clear to me when Ms. Schiess said this in her introduction: "That raises an important question at theheart of this book: How should Scripture inform our political beliefs?" (Her italics.) And I'm in the corner Should the bible inform political beliefs? No that's not being naive. I've read the book at the heart of this book. And I think there is far too wide a range of hermeneutics out there. Ms. Schiess does address how things can be - and are- twisted easily to fit the narrative, as well as how they are cherry-picked. I did like that.

So, who is this for? Christians willing to think about what she has to say. The prominent (and quite numerous) abusers won't read it, and would only double down on their positions, but then reason doesn't work on them. Perhaps Christians looking for an intellectual defense of their positions. If you are not a Christian, or still can't fathom how deeply rooted this subject is in American politics despite knowing the history, I'm not sure you'll learn much new. You will, however, read well-researched points with well-crafted analyses that are well-annotated. (I am a two-bookmark reader - I like notes in the main body.)

A few of my many flagged parts:

[on applying what may or may not be known of the historical details (disputed, of course) to understanding context when interpreting]
"While the historical situation is certainly relevant, many of these arguments should not be given too much weight: they often particularize the instructions to the point of meaninglessness for modern readers."

[on cherry picking]
"Perhaps no lesson is more salient from history than this: when it comes to interpreting the Bible in politics, we all cherry-pick verses."
{Cherry-picking is not limited to politics. Pretty much every interpretation to pull a single point is cherry-picked. This is not a surprise given the inconsistency and often contradictory messages. I'm cherry-picking statements from this book; can't be helped}

[on presidents]
"... Reagan is the president within recent memory who took on a unique mythology that excused his various sins and deviations from the conservative Christian norm."
{I became of voting age when Reagan came in. She's right about the mythology (read Will Bunch's book) and incongruity of how they reconciled Reagan with that norm. I mark 1980 as the start of a long slide backwards from progression. Oh, and she does talk about the former guy in his own chapter. That one flies in the face of any reason (though she does try to offer some.)}

[on Revelation, and how it is used in politics]
"Allan A. Boesak, South African pastor and anti-apartheid activist, wrote a commentary on Revelation that called the book a form of 'underground protest literature.'"
{I've learned from different reading that Revelation is a protest. It is a specific apocalypse chosen from many - of perhaps hundreds - extant at the time of choosing and the text, cryptic hallucinogenic visions aside (seems most of the existing ones are as wild), was a protest against the Roman rule.}

[conclusion]
"One difficulty with examining biblical arguments in American political life is the blurry line between direct reference and vague invocation of popular biblical language. [...] politicians, spiritual leaders, and government officials [...] don't have to quote a verse to invoke a kind of transcendence, divine authority, or shared religious experience."
{Ms. Schiess acknowledges shortly after that that the biblical language is watered down to a political talking point, but that nevertheless, it is still everywhere and that means people must want it and whatever message they want it to give them (my words, interpreting and summarizing.)… (mais)

Schiess delivers a reasonably thorough history (for a small book) of the evolution of political engagement, or lack thereof, & approaches to biblical interpretion by Christians and the church in America; from Winthrop's 'city on a hill' to the sin of slave-holding warping "our moral intuition and biblical interpretation" and on through the 20th century to today.
Schiess compares various issues of contention between political parties and Christians across the spectra of politics, culture, and faith. She councils striving to take in the "whole council of Scripture informing our political theology." Schiess' writing is clean and precise, and she has clearly considered the level of knowledge and limitations of a reasonably well-read Christian laity.
The sections on hermeneutics of small gov't & biblical eschatology in the Cold War were particularly informative & insightful.
However, I was already hooked by the first 30-40 pages.
The 'where to go' promised in the subtitle was not as detailed or extensive as I would hope. But the direction described, along with the key points laid out in this work seem sufficient as a jumping-off point for thoughtful Christians to enter into dialigue about where we go now.
All in all, a very insightful & satisfying read. Os.… (mais)