Religious Dissenters as Drivers of Religious Freedom
Review of Stephen J. Stein's "Communities of Dissent." (2003)
Stephen J. Stein, Communities of Dissent: A History of Alternative Religions in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), pgs. 159.
In this rather short and interesting narrative, historian Stephen Stein (1940-2022), a former professor of religion and history at the University of Indiana and President of the American Society of Church History, tackles the role of dissenting religious movements in the United States from the seventeenth century through the twenty-first century. Well written and built on a solid secondary source background, this book is strong in arguing that scholars need to take seriously the religious motives of actors in the past and in describing dissenting movements fairly. However, there are several areas that weaken the strength of Stein’s book and leave more questions than answers for the reader.
Stein’s central thesis is that dissenting religious groups in the United States grew out of the protection of religious freedom found in the First Amendment and helped make religious liberty a core pillar of American society. It was the dissenters’ efforts that made it possible for religious plurality and the freedom of belief associated with the United States. Stein draws on groups across a vast temporal space, including groups such as the Shakers (18th/19th centuries), Roger Williams (17th century), UFO cults (21st century), and even spiritualists (19th/20th centuries) into his narrative. Stein is quick to note that he left out numerous groups, but argues that his history fits well for these groups despite their lack of inclusion in his narrative. Stein is sympathetic, often noting that both lay people and academics fail to engage with the religious ideas that drive a dissenting movement. Because of his concern to take seriously religious thinking, the result is a rich text that helps readers see that many dissenters saw the world through faith and viewed their efforts as essential for their salvation.
Stein has several useful insights for scholars both in and outside of religious history. First, he notes that violence and ridicule are often the lot of dissenters. He notes that this has been an ongoing tradition in American society, however, unlike many scholars who will look to political, cultural, or economic reasons for why people react violently, Stein suggests that these conflicts come from fear of changing deeply valued religious views that often are inculcated as a child. Stein largely ignores other factors and instead presents groups through their religious, rather than secular views. Another strength of Stein’s work is his noting throughout his work that times of crisis, such as revolutions, social upheavals like the Civil War and World War I, and times of societal change, such as the 1970s often result in the explosion of dissenting groups. Times of uncertainty thus lead people to questions and embrace new ideas and movements, rather than remain in their status quo.
While Stein should be commended for his ability to trace the broader historical narrative of dissenters, there were some areas that were lacking. One of the first issues is Stein’s reliance on an “either-or” attitude with magic in the early modern world. Stein frames early modern magic as in conflict with Christianity, citing the Salem Witch trials as evidence of this. However, any reader of the Bible knows that the occult is scattered across the pages of holy writ. Old Testament prophets battle false prophets, some of whom perform wonders. In the New Testament, Jesus Christ casts out devils and faces a literal adversary. While certainly this world view has been extinguished in much of the Western world today, the way in Stein frames the conflict of occult and religion I believe fail to account for the fact that Christianity was not inherently incompatible with a magic world view. When looking through the suggested readings, Jon Butlers Awash in a Sea of Faith caught my eye. Butler maintains that Christianity wins post revolution by stamping out a magic worldview. I disagree, as do countless other scholars who have upended many of Butler’s arguments, even by the time that Stein was writing (I am thinking of Mark Noll as one example). This overreliance on Butler’s framework of magic vs. Christianity is far from accurate and should be dismissed.
Another area of concern was Stein’s brief one paragraph development of the entire story of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Their omission, despite the fact that many Americans still consider “Mormons” a cult, was surprising. In many ways, Latter-day Saints mirror some of the trends of other dissenting groups, but in others offer a richer and more complicated story of a group that bridged countless aspects of the early modern and ancient world. Instead, Stein’s only mention suggests that many radical groups had to change to fit in and not be crushed, which he cites Latter-day Saints as being a prime example, another area in which I disagree. While certainly Stein is within his purview to avoid this group, it was surprising given how long lasting the movement has proven and the impact that it has had on the development of the West. However, I could not help but think that in many ways, Latter-day Saints do not fit within the argument of pushing America towards greater liberty. Latter-day Saints were murdered, driven out, jailed, beaten, attacked, demonized, dehumanized, and yet still retained much of their original ideas and doctrines. Rather than enshrine more rights, Latter-day Saints have seen again and again the government fail to protect their rights. Perhaps Stein decided this was beyond the scope of this relatively short work. Regardless, more can be done here to engage with Stein’s work and scholars of religion.
Overall, this was an interesting read, one which offers those interested in a brief trip through dissenting groups (some of which would be classified as cults) in the United States. While more could have been done to connect dissent to European tradition, treat seriously the theological angst of those attacking dissenters (for example, Mather of course would have disagreed with dissenters as he saw them as leading friends and family off to hell), and rely less on Butler’s framework of religion versus magic, this book over all can be recommended both for academic and non-academic audiences.
Robert Swanson
As always, feel free to comment and ask questions!