Picking up my copy of The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement for the first time in months, I remembered how I had first searched in vain for two entries that must have been there, but aren’t:
1. There’s no article on The Spiritual Sword. This is one of those glaring omissions, especially in a reference work that includes entries for journals like “Integrity” and “Mission.” Putting aside one’s religious persuasions and sensibilities, objective assessment would conclude that “The Spiritual Sword” has carried as great or greater an influence--albeit in the opposite direction--than the other two journals. Not to mention that of the three, the Sword is the only one still being published. (“Mission” last appeared in 1987. “Integrity” was last published in 2002).
2. Nor is there an article for Thomas B. Warren (1920-2000). I never met “Brother Warren,” as he’s often been called. But I’ve heard a lot about him.
At different times in his career as an educator, Warren taught at Abilene Christian College, served as the chairman of the Bible Department at Freed-Hardeman College, and was a professor at Harding Graduate School of Religion, where he exerted a tremendous influence on the best and brightest Church of Christ preachers of the post-war generation. Among them was, for example, a young man named Rubel Shelley.
From 1969-1989, Warren was the editor of “The Spiritual Sword.” He was also a staff writer for “Gospel Advocate” magazine. He also wrote and edited a number of books that were widely circulated among people in the Church of Christ.
Warren was also a significant religious debater of the mid-20th century. Most notably, he debated the question of the existence of God against the well-known British philosopher and atheist Antony G. N. Flew.
I still think The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement is a fine reference work. I just think it would be even better if it included entries under the two omissions I’ve named here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
T. B. Warren had the accidental misfortune of being alive when the list of articles was prepared, and therefore excluded; and being dead by the time it came out, and being therefore, apparently, overlooked.
Isn't the spiritual sword cuased a bunch of mess within the Stone-Cambell Movement. Should something that cuased so much harm be given attend? I don't know much about Thomas B. Warren but doesn't the gospel advocate have a slant and have been know to announce whom they thought false teachers as well. Was wineskins mentioned in the Encyclopedia? Was restoration quarter?
Frank thank you for keeping us informed. God bless you brother.
Carisse,
I'm glad you passed along that explanation regarding Warren. Thanks!
Preacherman,
I can't speak for them, but I suspect that the editors of The Spiritual Sword might say that they didn't cause a mess, but rather helped to stem the tide against what they deemed was a mess of religious liberalism being fed to the Churches of Christ.
I've not always agreed with or liked everything I've read in the Sword (one reason why I decided years ago to publish some of my own work in that journal). :-)
Nice try, Carisse. You're an intelligent and insightful person as well as an outstanding researcher and editor.
Here's a different attempt to objectify such discretionary decisions. Per the index to the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE STONE-CAMPBELL MOVEMENT (EOSCAM), Rubel Shelly is referenced on seven different pages. The treatment, nonetheless, is balanced, mentioning Shelly's editorship of the SPIRITUAL SWORD the same number of times as Thomas B. Warren's editorship thereof---to wit, zero. The question of who was dead, and who wasn't, was not the sole gatekeeping factor; the index gives Shelly's date(s) as "b. 1945," nothing more, thus still breathing.
The reasons, IMHO, why one is in, and the other not, have to do with the difference between empirical and interpretive subject areas. If EOSCAM set about to describe chemistry but omitted one of the elements from the periodic table, then surely analysts and critics would convincingly point to the conspicuous absence. But a topic so qualitative and nebulous as the history of a religious movement presents a far more daunting task, the elasticity of which renders the subject never quite altogether encompassed no matter how big the book becomes.
EOSCAM is still impressive not only in its eclectic compression of so much information into under a thousand pages but also in the Herculean achievement of the editors just in making such a volume exist, especially in view of the departures, fractures, and animosities which interfere with examining the common heritage.
In all fairness, because you are a very fair and well meaning person, one should know that you and the others who are close to the EOSCAM project are making notes of recommendations about EOSCAM in case it ever goes into a second edition.
---Dave
PS: Over on www.preachermike.com today, SPORT ILLUSTRATED's omission of Nolan Ryan in baseball's greatest pitchers is inexplicable regardless of the subject matter. That one must have been as obvious as the nose on the editor's face.
Point taken, Dave.
The ECM is both an amazing piece of scholarship and also, at times, frustrating. First I recognize that it is pure and simple a work of love on the part (especially of Foster). Second that fact that something like this could be pulled together and have a publisher like Eerdmans put it before the public is nothing short of historic. I have had mine on my desk for ready reference for over a year now and sometimes I will simply pick it up and read through a few pages.
It is frustrating also at times because of what is NOT in the book (especially when I see what did make it in). I am sure each "branch" of the SCM has had the same reaction as I have (i.e. scratching of the old head). Here is a list of items that I am surprised did not warrant even a small entry:
1) Harding Graduate School of Religion (I was utterly shocked by this ommision . . . it is mentioned in a paragraph under Harding University. Brite Divinity gets a seperate entry from TCU though)
2) No mention is made of David E. Harrell's CoC's in the 20th Century in the essay on historiography
3)Southern Christian University
4)International Bible College (which is interesting because Wayne Kilpatrick has several smaller articles in the volume)
5)J.N. Armstrong has no independent entry (mentioned with Harding College)
6)T.M. Allen
7) James Challen
8) Claude Witty (nor the Murch-Witty Unity Meetings)
9) J.D. Thomas is missing
10)Yater Tant
11) L.S. White (he is easier to justify than Tant)
12) Jesse P. Sewell
13) Spiritual Sword
14) C.R. Nichol (R.L. Whiteside made it in only through a series of seredipitous events)
15) T. W. Brents (I have been amazed at this one)
16) Magnolia Bible College
17) Lockney Christian College (not even in the index)
18) N.L. Clark (a glowing omission in my estimation)
19) William Webb Freeman
20) The American Bible Union has no independent entry though the movement was heavily involved in this enterprise in the 1840s and 50s.
My list could grow. Most of these deserve a small entry. A few deserve a longer one. Brents, Clark and Tant certainly do.
These are all seen in hindsight. I am not critical of Foster and his cadre of editors but I do scratch my head as to why "Gay and Lesbian Rights" gets nearly two pages but Harding Grad got zero.
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
I've had the Stone-Campbell E. for several years. (Though I admit, I have not spent a great deal of time with it). I am amazed to look at Bobby's list as well as what Frank mentioned regarding what was left out. I suppose it would be interesting to hear the rationale for some of these omissions.
Post a Comment