Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change
To all intents and purposes, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Brethren of Gamrie, and the Orange Order each claim a monopoly over theological truth, believing that they are right and that everyone else is wrong. Such a position is hardly exceptional – strong versions of pluralism take p...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Australian journal of anthropology 2022-12, Vol.33 (3), p.360-382 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 382 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 360 |
container_title | The Australian journal of anthropology |
container_volume | 33 |
creator | Webster, Joseph |
description | To all intents and purposes, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Brethren of Gamrie, and the Orange Order each claim a monopoly over theological truth, believing that they are right and that everyone else is wrong. Such a position is hardly exceptional – strong versions of pluralism take precisely this same monopolistic stance, calling, in effect, for a rejection of anything that rejects anything. Through an examination of such exceptionalist logics, this article seeks to provoke the anthropology of religion to ask certain questions about the social life of theological truth claims. Importantly, by asking anthropological questions (what makes a truth claim ‘stick’; what difference does it make in the world?), the anthropologist of religion is likely to encounter theological questions posed in response. Where does truth come from? What makes it true? What does such truth demand? While answering a question with another question is not always very revealing, this article suggests that in this case it might be, especially if some genuine attempt is made to answer the latter theological questions as a route to answering the former anthropological ones. More specifically, this article argues that anthropology might learn something about the nature of religious change, and changes to religious beliefs, if it first attempts to makes sense of (in this case, Protestant Fundamentalist) theological critiques of doctrinal change. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/taja.12448 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2765320104</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2765320104</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3378-788036625c8ff218dd995be766b465ecc7e07a746614de72e3d7cb0557f2f3e53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMlOwzAQhi0EElXphSeIxA0pxUu8lFtUsaqCSzlbjuMkroJdbFdV356EII7MZUYz32w_ANcILtFgd0nt1BLhohBnYIY45TmjBT8fYkhoLgRCl2ARo60gxERgDPEMyDcfstip2h8z32TpEJx17X1WutQFv_e9b61WfRZM0xudrHcx8y5Lnfkr6WCT_TqYOA6ovU7BujHdKdeaK3DRqD6axa-fg4_Hh-36Od-8P72sy02uCeEi50JAwhimWjQNRqKuVytaGc5YVTBqtOYGcsULxlBRG44NqbmuIKW8wQ0xlMzBzTR3H_x4S5I7P_wyrJSYM0owRLAYqNuJ0sHHOPwk98F-qnCSCMpRQzlqKH80HGA0wUfbm9M_pNyWr-XU8w2ekHR-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2765320104</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Webster, Joseph</creator><creatorcontrib>Webster, Joseph</creatorcontrib><description>To all intents and purposes, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Brethren of Gamrie, and the Orange Order each claim a monopoly over theological truth, believing that they are right and that everyone else is wrong. Such a position is hardly exceptional – strong versions of pluralism take precisely this same monopolistic stance, calling, in effect, for a rejection of anything that rejects anything. Through an examination of such exceptionalist logics, this article seeks to provoke the anthropology of religion to ask certain questions about the social life of theological truth claims. Importantly, by asking anthropological questions (what makes a truth claim ‘stick’; what difference does it make in the world?), the anthropologist of religion is likely to encounter theological questions posed in response. Where does truth come from? What makes it true? What does such truth demand? While answering a question with another question is not always very revealing, this article suggests that in this case it might be, especially if some genuine attempt is made to answer the latter theological questions as a route to answering the former anthropological ones. More specifically, this article argues that anthropology might learn something about the nature of religious change, and changes to religious beliefs, if it first attempts to makes sense of (in this case, Protestant Fundamentalist) theological critiques of doctrinal change.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1035-8811</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1757-6547</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/taja.12448</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Answers ; Anthropology ; Anthropology of religion ; exceptionalism ; Monopolies ; Presbyterian churches ; protestant fundamentalism ; Religion ; Religious beliefs ; Scotland ; Social life & customs ; Theology ; Truth</subject><ispartof>The Australian journal of anthropology, 2022-12, Vol.33 (3), p.360-382</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Anthropological Society.</rights><rights>2022. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3378-788036625c8ff218dd995be766b465ecc7e07a746614de72e3d7cb0557f2f3e53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3378-788036625c8ff218dd995be766b465ecc7e07a746614de72e3d7cb0557f2f3e53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3840-5033</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Ftaja.12448$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Ftaja.12448$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,33751,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Webster, Joseph</creatorcontrib><title>Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change</title><title>The Australian journal of anthropology</title><description>To all intents and purposes, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Brethren of Gamrie, and the Orange Order each claim a monopoly over theological truth, believing that they are right and that everyone else is wrong. Such a position is hardly exceptional – strong versions of pluralism take precisely this same monopolistic stance, calling, in effect, for a rejection of anything that rejects anything. Through an examination of such exceptionalist logics, this article seeks to provoke the anthropology of religion to ask certain questions about the social life of theological truth claims. Importantly, by asking anthropological questions (what makes a truth claim ‘stick’; what difference does it make in the world?), the anthropologist of religion is likely to encounter theological questions posed in response. Where does truth come from? What makes it true? What does such truth demand? While answering a question with another question is not always very revealing, this article suggests that in this case it might be, especially if some genuine attempt is made to answer the latter theological questions as a route to answering the former anthropological ones. More specifically, this article argues that anthropology might learn something about the nature of religious change, and changes to religious beliefs, if it first attempts to makes sense of (in this case, Protestant Fundamentalist) theological critiques of doctrinal change.</description><subject>Answers</subject><subject>Anthropology</subject><subject>Anthropology of religion</subject><subject>exceptionalism</subject><subject>Monopolies</subject><subject>Presbyterian churches</subject><subject>protestant fundamentalism</subject><subject>Religion</subject><subject>Religious beliefs</subject><subject>Scotland</subject><subject>Social life & customs</subject><subject>Theology</subject><subject>Truth</subject><issn>1035-8811</issn><issn>1757-6547</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMlOwzAQhi0EElXphSeIxA0pxUu8lFtUsaqCSzlbjuMkroJdbFdV356EII7MZUYz32w_ANcILtFgd0nt1BLhohBnYIY45TmjBT8fYkhoLgRCl2ARo60gxERgDPEMyDcfstip2h8z32TpEJx17X1WutQFv_e9b61WfRZM0xudrHcx8y5Lnfkr6WCT_TqYOA6ovU7BujHdKdeaK3DRqD6axa-fg4_Hh-36Od-8P72sy02uCeEi50JAwhimWjQNRqKuVytaGc5YVTBqtOYGcsULxlBRG44NqbmuIKW8wQ0xlMzBzTR3H_x4S5I7P_wyrJSYM0owRLAYqNuJ0sHHOPwk98F-qnCSCMpRQzlqKH80HGA0wUfbm9M_pNyWr-XU8w2ekHR-</recordid><startdate>202212</startdate><enddate>202212</enddate><creator>Webster, Joseph</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3840-5033</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202212</creationdate><title>Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change</title><author>Webster, Joseph</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3378-788036625c8ff218dd995be766b465ecc7e07a746614de72e3d7cb0557f2f3e53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Answers</topic><topic>Anthropology</topic><topic>Anthropology of religion</topic><topic>exceptionalism</topic><topic>Monopolies</topic><topic>Presbyterian churches</topic><topic>protestant fundamentalism</topic><topic>Religion</topic><topic>Religious beliefs</topic><topic>Scotland</topic><topic>Social life & customs</topic><topic>Theology</topic><topic>Truth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Webster, Joseph</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Collection</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The Australian journal of anthropology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Webster, Joseph</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change</atitle><jtitle>The Australian journal of anthropology</jtitle><date>2022-12</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>360</spage><epage>382</epage><pages>360-382</pages><issn>1035-8811</issn><eissn>1757-6547</eissn><abstract>To all intents and purposes, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Brethren of Gamrie, and the Orange Order each claim a monopoly over theological truth, believing that they are right and that everyone else is wrong. Such a position is hardly exceptional – strong versions of pluralism take precisely this same monopolistic stance, calling, in effect, for a rejection of anything that rejects anything. Through an examination of such exceptionalist logics, this article seeks to provoke the anthropology of religion to ask certain questions about the social life of theological truth claims. Importantly, by asking anthropological questions (what makes a truth claim ‘stick’; what difference does it make in the world?), the anthropologist of religion is likely to encounter theological questions posed in response. Where does truth come from? What makes it true? What does such truth demand? While answering a question with another question is not always very revealing, this article suggests that in this case it might be, especially if some genuine attempt is made to answer the latter theological questions as a route to answering the former anthropological ones. More specifically, this article argues that anthropology might learn something about the nature of religious change, and changes to religious beliefs, if it first attempts to makes sense of (in this case, Protestant Fundamentalist) theological critiques of doctrinal change.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/taja.12448</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3840-5033</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1035-8811 |
ispartof | The Australian journal of anthropology, 2022-12, Vol.33 (3), p.360-382 |
issn | 1035-8811 1757-6547 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2765320104 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Answers Anthropology Anthropology of religion exceptionalism Monopolies Presbyterian churches protestant fundamentalism Religion Religious beliefs Scotland Social life & customs Theology Truth |
title | Nor shadow of turning: Anthropological reflections on theological critiques of doctrinal change |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T21%3A05%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Nor%20shadow%20of%20turning:%20Anthropological%20reflections%20on%20theological%20critiques%20of%20doctrinal%20change&rft.jtitle=The%20Australian%20journal%20of%20anthropology&rft.au=Webster,%20Joseph&rft.date=2022-12&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=360&rft.epage=382&rft.pages=360-382&rft.issn=1035-8811&rft.eissn=1757-6547&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/taja.12448&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2765320104%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2765320104&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |