Why the Disciplines and No Apologetics? Part 1: The Collapse of Schaefferan Apologetics

Why the Disciplines and No Apologetics? Part 1: The Collapse of Schaefferan Apologetics

Image: An image of Francis Schaeffer, http://www.pcahistory.org/images/schaeffer01.jpg on the Wikipedia entry site.

INTRODUCTION

 

James Fodor, Unreasonable Faith: How William Lane Craig Overstates the Case for Christianity (Hypatia Press, 2018) is a very generous critique towards the Christian apologist. Foder is making the argument for me on how apologetics completely miss the wider disciplinary critiques. For Fodor and me, faith is not the target, but an in-principle argument that apologetics does not achieve what it seeks to accomplish: a convincing argument for the knowledgeable non-believer. In Fodor’s case he takes the best case of Christian Apologetics in William Lane Craig, and as the book title states, demonstrates it has not made the case for Christianity. Foder often shows that this because many of the arguments are not on historical Christianity per se, but rather presents other related targets for skeptics; arguments which are fallaciously abusive in exclusivist claims for faith. The abuse (for me as I interpret the arguments, not necessarily as Fodor’s specific references) is the cherry-picking of apologetics and taking the claims away from the context of wider scholarly debates in history, sociology, philosophy, and other disciplines. What students of apologetics failed to be taught are that apologetic arguments commonly misunderstands comprehensive fields of knowledge as scholars understand them today. Against common sense prejudice, the advocates in the disciplines of knowledge have not decided that it is a free catch-bag in the way apologetics works. Apologetics, if it is a field of knowledge, is rhetoric: the field which teaches tricks of defeating an opponent in an argument without regard to the complexity of truth (propositional knowledge). This is not education, and it is not learning in faith.

 

This blog article is part of a series in argument that demonstrates that Apologetics does not establish a convincing case for Christian faith, and the only solution for evangelicals is to engage in the disciplines proper. It should be noted that there are already theists/Christians who are doing just that and reject the apologetics pathway. In principle, Apologetics places defence before an open questioning of faith, and continually defers to “orthodoxy imitation” (as a characteristic in the social psychology). This is not education and does not mean a necessary abandonment of faith. All that is expected in the argument is the continual challenging of the disciplinary reasoning with the multi-layering of multi-disciplinary thinking. In that process there is a place for the traditional concept of “the apology” within disciplinary discourses, but it is very different to the practice of modern apologetics.

 

This blog article, as part of a series, demonstrated that much of Christian Apologetics is intellectual nonsense and focuses on the apologetics of Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984). If you do not know who Francis Schaeffer is, I suggest you click the link to the Wikipedia entry. This a central linkpin in the series of blog articles because, as the intellectual mapping graph on Francis Schaeffer demonstrates, Schaeffer linked most, if not all of the thematic failures in Christian Apologetics, as it is debates in the mainstream disciplines; even as this promotion (“PR”) of Christian Orthodoxy, declares all of its positioning across intellectual themes as “correct belief” in Lord Jesus Christ. The final conclusion is that the “Christian Apologetic” is nothing more than of a dominion theory, which is a majority thinking of American evangelical believers (i.e., right-wing and where the American left-wing evangelical positioning is the minority), BUT a small fundamentalist minority in the Christian world. To those who label themselves “Neo-Evangelical” and disagree with my own positioning in the argument, I would ask you consider the weight of evidence in this blog article, and be open to the suggestion that you may have not understood the story of the “Neo-Evangelical rebellion” from fundamentalist orthodoxy, as shown in the historiography of George Marsden and Mark Noll. The historiography starts the analysis as discipline learning, but it then proceeds into seven other sub-disciplinary areas.

 

The Evangelical Ultimate Concern: “Authority”

 

In 1987, George M. Marsden, in Reforming Fundamentalism: Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism, pointed out several factors about the life and role of Francis Schaeffer to give members of the Neo-Evangelical movement concern.[1] In the 1940s Schaeffer was a keen defender for the Carl McIntire’s Bible Presbyterian movement. Marsden notes Schaeffer’s historical reading of American and global events was in terms of the fundamentalist theology of McIntire and J. Gresham Machen, and Schaeffer was influenced in this way from connections with the evangelist Wilbur Smith. Schaeffer was part of the National Association of Evangelicals fold because he could play somewhat, in the naive popular view, between the fundamentalist’s ‘Bible as inerrant’ and the neo-evangelical’s ‘Bible as infallible’, but for Schaeffer they were different concepts, and although he dressed his historiography in more moderate language of a “liberal” anti-modernist stance, his anti-modernism was fundamentalist through and through. One reviewer put it, “Schaeffer feared such a softening of fundamentalism allowed the victory of modernism.”[2] Today, the fundamentalist agenda of Schaefferan apologetics should not be doubted.[3] But the history is simply ignored in the evangelical argument over theological authority. It is so strange to the historiographer working in disciplinary knowledge, and not in apologetics. George Marsden’s Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925 (1980) had explained so well what Neo-Fundamentalism of the late twentieth century had become, and it seem not understood in Christian college’s apologetics programs.

 

The ultimate concern here is of evangelicals is “Authority” where the semantics can be read in such different ways. Molly Worthen’s Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism (2014) tells the story.[4] Schaeffer was a fundamentalist believer. His historiography was known as the “line of despair.” Schaeffer had convinced Pat Robertson to abandon his early resistance to political involvement and assume a leading role in the Religious Right (called, ‘New Christian Right’; NCR). Schaeffer forged the 1980s NCR consensus. Schaeffer anticipated the apologetic design of the Christian schooling movement in the 1990s. Schaeffer was able to work-in his apologetics with the premillennial evangelicals, such as Hal Lindsay, even though, his political vision was postmillennial. Schaefferan apologetics is pseudo-intellectualism. Today, his ‘academic’ followers, such as Ronald Wells, water-down the intellectual problems in Schaeffer’s thinking. The authority which Worthen referred to is often less than concepts of biblical authority than of evangelical politics. Worthen is correct.

 

The chief fallacy is that Schaeffer represented a centrist position, and the idea came from Schaeffer explaining his own apologetics as a middle path between evidentialism and presuppositionalism. However, as the analysis of the eight wide sub-disciplines shows that Schaeffer was well out of his depth in the disciplines of modern scholarship. The complexity of the nuanced arguments as political theology should not deflect the central problem here. For example, Nord (2001) in raising issues from the educationalist discipline, and reviewing Fritz Detwiler’s Standing on the Premises of God: The Christian Right’s Fight to Redefine America’s Public Schools (1999) writes:[5]

 

“While Detwiler locates the Right historically in American fundamentalism, he places Dutch Calvinism at the heart of his narrative, and he argues that Francis Schaeffer (“the single most important figure in the development of the contemporary Christian Right”

) and Rousas John Rushdoony give the Right its identity (p. 24). (He makes only the slightest of passing references to Rushdoony’s desire to apply the death penalty to enough offenses to curdle the blood of most members of the Christian Right; see p. 251.) In fact, Detwiler may well place too much emphasis on Schaeffer and Rushdoony and, toward the end of his book, he acknowledges that Dutch Reformed theology cannot unify the Right – and this poses something of a problem for it (p. 239; also see p. 130).”

 

It is true that no single theological or ideological analysis defeats the apologetics of Francis Schaeffer, but together an intelligent evangelical believer must see the utter nonsense and wonder why the evangelical institutions keep the fallacies of Schaeffer going.

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Discipline of Historiography

 

Evangelicals, and others, as historiographers, began with a very charitable view of Francis Schaeffer’s positioning. In this regard, it was too charitable to Schaeffer’s fundamentalism, and it has continued into the new century.[6] Mark Noll (1994) in the classic work, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, merely points out that Schaeffer had drew attention to “the theological meaning of general cultural developments”.[7] From recent reviews of the literature, Noll (2015) does not seem interested to be drawn into the argument about the nature of Schaeffer’s apologetics, but Noll neither entertains Schaeffer’s nonsense historiography; deferring to those American historians who are harshly critical of Schaeffer’s pretence to accurate historical analysis.[8]

 

Looking at the history of the Carter administration, Freedman (2005) stated that “Jerry Falwell and Francis Schaeffer argued a similar case from a conservative perspective” as the liberal theologian Reinhold Niebuhr had on Christians participating in politics. Falwell’s interest in Schaeffer, though, was very un-Niebuhrian, that the modern ‘monolithic consensus’ would mean “…art, music, drama, theology, and the mass media, values [would have] died.”[9] It was an anti-modernist polemic unfit in the thinking of the liberal Niebuhr brothers. Still, from recent works of the late decade of institutionalised evangelical believers, there has been trouble in capturing the significance of the Falwell-Schaeffer connection.[10]

 

In fairness it was Freedman’s passing remark, and he had cited others who offered a much more nuanced view:

 

“[Susan Friend] Harding [2000] argues that this process of secularization among fundamentalists made the religious right possible. In the 1970s and 1980s, Falwell and fundamentalist theologian Francis Schaeffer ‘pared essence’, down to its ecclesiastical essence, arguing that Christianity was best served through ministry in a broad sense. A logical conclusion was that Christians could use politics as a form of ministry.”

 

Grams (2007) also took this modest and charitable view too far, repeating the view of Schaeffer’s apologetics as it may have been in the 1970s counter culture.[11]  Troubling is the way the views of Schaeffer, Arthur Glasser and David du Plessis, and Ronald Sider, are taken as the same whole in transformative mission dialogue. There is no capacity to discern very different semantics.

 

Scott Appleby (2002) is able to describe the fundamentalist imagination in the Schaefferan historiography.[12] “Their different settings, beliefs, and goals notwithstanding, Jewish, Christian, and Islamic fundamentalists interpret the history of the modern period, especially the twentieth century, in remarkably similar ways,” pointing out, “ ‘The bottom line,’ concluded the influential Christian thinker Francis A. Schaeffer, who have been speaking for the disgruntled Jews of Israel or the Muslims of Egypt, that at a certain point there is not only the right, but the duty, to disobey the state.” The imagination is of rebellion. Appleby goes on:

 

“The treachery of supposedly orthodox co-religionists is another fundamentalist history. Christian ideologues such as Schaeffer and Tim LaHaye point to the Christian foundations of the American republic and lament their erosion the hands of secularized Christians. Jewish extremists see the peace movement in Israel as expressive of the fragmentation of Orthodox Judaism and the confusion wrought by that crisis. And Muslim extremists, whose reading of history-and plans to alter its course-have captured our attention in dramatic fashion since September 1, 2001, have their own distinctive litany of traitors and of heroes.”

 

The sub-discipline of historiography today has a wide and deep analysis on the subject of historical imagination of which Christian apologists completely miss.

 

It was Butler (2004) who clarified the problem for evangelical historians who were willing to listen, and doing so makes the evangelical connection to Catholic neo-conservativism:[13]

 

“It would belabor the point to stress that theological ideas have helped propel the new Christian Right from the 1970s to the present. But the political scientist Michael Lienesch has described the importance of Francis A. Schaeffer’s 1976 book, How Should We Then Live? Schaeffer is not well known to historians, but his denunciation of ‘secular humanism’ heralded the vast literature that fueled conservative Christian activism after 1970 and shaped the style of cable television and radio talk that have expanded the movement since the mid-1980s. Patrick Allitt’s dissection of conservative Catholicism after World War II reminds us that religiously motivated political conservatism was not ubiquitously evangelical or Protestant. Participants in the intellectually pungent world surrounding William Buckley’s National Review always understood their movement as embodying a Catholic world view that could inform modern America. At the same time, National Review conservatives found it possible to support more secular conservatives such as Barry Goldwater, who favored the ‘the primacy of moral initiative” but from a more political than religious foundation.”

 

George Marsden is the best American historiographer for evangelical belief and American ideology. His The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: The 1950s Liberal Belief, provides a fair assessment in the decline of American liberalism from the perspective of Marsden’s traditional conservative beliefs:[14]

 

“[Marsden]… show[ed] how America moved quickly into a state of intellectual fragmentation. Mass culture became subject to impassioned debate while such authors as David Riesman, Erich Fromm, William H. Whyte, and Betty Friedan condemned a conformist mentality. Walter Lippmann called for a return to nature law, Reinhold Niebuhr advanced ‘Christian realism,’ and Daniel Bell and Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. expounded a non-dogmatic relativistic pragmatism that eschewed any quest for first principles. None, however, offered clear solutions to the country’s fragmentation. All this time mainline Protestantism was going into rapid decline, giving way to secularism and rightist fundamentalism. The author’s own sympathies lie most strongly with Martin Luther King’s call to honor a higher moral law, expressed in King’s 1963 ‘Letter from a Birmingham Jail.’ Drawing upon Dutch Calvinist theologian and prime minister Abraham Kuyper, Marsden, realizing that the consensus of the fifties is no longer possible, seeks a fully inclusive pluralism respectful of a variety of Christian and non-Christian worldviews.”

 

It is then clear that Marsden’s Reformed theological interpretation of Kuyper greatly differs to that of Schaeffer’s covenant theology. Marsden sets out the historiographical application of the Kuyperian theology, but showed no desire to condemn other worldviews from David Riesman, Erich Fromm, William H. Whyte, Betty Friedan, Reinhold Niebuhr, Daniel Bell and Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. Indeed, aligning with King’s ‘Letter from a Birmingham Jail’ (1963) puts Marsden in conflict with Schaefferan apologetics, given most black theologians are in conflict with the NCR Schaefferan worldview. Swartz (2011) points to the divergent pathways in Left evangelicalism of the 1970s, referencing authentic black evangelical theology, “one that was biblical, grounded in ‘concrete sociopolitical realities,’ and that did not ‘merely blackenize the theologies of E. J. Carnell, Carl F. H. Henry, Francis Schaeffer, and other White Evangelical ‘saints.’”[15] Obery M., Hendricks Jr. in Christians Against Christianity: How Right-Wing Evangelicals are Destroying our Nation and our Faith (2021) clearly condemns white evangelical NCR theology, such that it is a wonder that white liberal evangelical can formally continue to fellowship with and acknowledge the advocates of Schaefferan apologetics.

 

Furthermore, the Kuyperian theology is difficult to translate if it is not historized, and that is a methodology Schaeffer rejected. Intellectual historians who specialise in the Dutch Reformed tradition debate these type of connections, and cannot be delivered in the art of apologetics.[16] Groothuis (2013) explained what Schaeffer got from the Kuyperian theological perspective:[17]

 

“For Kuyper, being a Calvinist meant far more than accepting the sovereignty of God with respect to predestination, although [Richard J.] Mouw [2011] addresses this important dimension of thought in the first chapter. God’s sovereignty was in addition God’s claim to the ultimate authority and normativity for all of life. As he famously stated, ‘There is not a thumb’s width over creation about which Christ does say, ‘Mine.’  Theologian, philosopher, and social critic Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984) made this theme central to his life and work.”

 

However, Groothuis denied the theocratic interpretation:

 

“But Kuyper was no theocrat, as Mouw emphasizes. He taught that Christ Lord over every sphere of life and that no sphere should overstep its domain. The church is not over the state; nor is the state over the church. Rather, are under the sovereignty of God and both should develop philosophies practices proper to their callings—all based on biblical revelation as well as truths known by common grace.”

 

That maybe well for Kuyper and Mouw, but it is very difficult to draw common grace in Schaeffer as he increasingly lashed out at ‘secular’ ideologies and those persons caught up in his blunt attacks. How well Schaeffer interpreted Kuyper via Herman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977), and Dooyeweerd’s follower, Hans Rookmaaker, is an open question here and beyond the scope of the research. However, Keene (2016) states that Schaeffer shared Dooyeweerd’s prejudice against synthesis and held only antithesis.[18] Keene says that the “espousal of antithesis needs to be set in the context of common grace just as with Kuyper.” Common grace, on the other hand, would seem would need to be synthetic to a measure; however, we stray beyond our purpose here.

 

 

Still the moderate evangelical apologist remains confused on Francis Schaeffer’s endpoint and claim him as among the critics of ‘Christian nationalism.’[19] Schaeffer’s critique of ‘Christian nationalism’ was directed towards a cultural Christian view of ‘Manifest Destiny’, but for Schaeffer it was only that the providence was not manifest in Americanism. Rather it was providential that the ‘Church of Lord Jesus Christ’ would reign, not merely as a promise, but an active fulfilment of the postmillennial hope.[20] Members of the Kingdom of God needed to seize what opportunity providentially prevailed, and the Church would trump the State. As Perlstein (2006) put it:[21]

 

“The evangelical theologian Francis Schaeffer preached the doctrine that Jesus would never come back until iniquity was conquered on earth. Newly politicized evangelicals joined in coalition with Catholics for whom intervention in worldly public affairs was second nature – and who now more and more identified themselves, in an increasingly liberalized culture, as conservatives. Both groups increasingly identified with a Republican Party more and more defining itself, with the aid of national leaders like Ronald Reagan and Jesse Helms, with what now became known as the ‘religious right.’ The pieces were in place for these social movement stirrings to begin to reconfigure the American political landscape. The organizational capacity of right wing social movements continued to grow.”

 

Perlstein here has articulate the postmillennial strategy.  This is what Schaeffer’s ‘Christian Manifesto’ comes as the endpoint, in the exact same spirit of Karl Marx’s ‘Communist Manifesto’. Several conservative evangelical reviews of Worthen’s critique fail to get the point, as if orthodoxy authority is beyond serious and probing questions.[22]

 

Why is Schaeffer’s historiography difficult for many evangelical believers to discern? One answer is the poor biographies and hagiographies.[23] As Ingersoll (2009) asks:

 

“Was the ‘real’ Schaeffer the leader of the open-minded conversations at L’Abri, the Schaeffers’ retreat in Switzerland for young, searching evangelicals (a hippie, as his son, Frank, has described him), or the fundamentalist of the 1950s, or the religious Right leader of the 1980?”

 

The reference to Frank Schaeffer indicates the issue of the new generation reinterpreting the legacy of their parents. However, Barry Hankins’ Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America (2008) has been able to generate a consistent mega-historiographical position; and with many reviews of the book, it has only reinforced an argument that Schaefferan apologetics overstep the evolution in knowledge from the disciplines into fallacious thinking and misinformation. Hankins’ main contention is “the tension between Schaeffer and his contemporary ‘Christian historians,’ George Marsden, Nathan Hatch, and Mark Noll.”

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Discipline of Studies-in-Religion

 

Whether the failure of the apologetic approach is discussed in the congregations or college classroom, sometimes the religious institutions recognise the Worthen critique. Doenecke laid out the intellectual history in a concise summary:[24]

 

“Worthen offers an engaging road map through evangelical thought. Almost encyclopedic in nature, her book ably captures its richness and variety, and polarization as well. She begins her narrative with profiles of such intellectual evangelicals as J. Gresham Machen, Carl Henry, and Harold Ockenga, whose theology found fruit intellectually in Christianity Today and institutionally in the National Association of Evangelicals and Fuller Theological Seminary. Her narrative ends with the establishment of the Christian Right, as manifested in such figures as Jerry Falwell and Tim LeHaye [sic]. Certain sections of Worthen’s account are particularly fascinating, among them the debates over plenary inspiration of the Bible, relation to Roman Catholicism, and the Anabaptist renaissance spearheaded by John Howard Yoder and the Holiness one led by Mildred Bangs Wynkoop. Worthen presents the much-touted work of Francis Schaeffer as bordering on charlatanry and the ‘biblical ethics’ propounded by Reconstructionist Rousas Rushdoony as being downright bizarre. At the same time, she writes appreciatively of Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, and Notre Dame historian Mark Noll.”

 

The religion of American evangelicalism, outside the liberal framings of such believers, cemented in the 1970s with the Fuller reactionary neo-conservatives:[25]

 

“Events in the 1970s limited the reach of these non-Reformed reformers, however. Henry’s successor at Christianity Today, Harold Lindsell, published the polemical Battle for the Bible in 1976, charging anyone who did not affirm biblical inerrancy with apostasy. Reformed, inerrantist evangelicals used the context of the emerging ‘culture wars’ to clarify the boundaries of evangelicalism. Francis Schaeffer became the most visible of the ‘evangelical experts,’ as he expounded on ‘historic Christianity’ in lectures and books that reified the marks of true believers. Increasingly, those marks included commitment to the fights against abortion, liberalism, and secular humanism. This politicization of evangelicalism worried many non-Reformed evangelicals, especially Mennonites. But a greater number joined the fight against liberalism, convinced by Schaefer and other ‘idea men’ that they were charged with nothing less than the survival of historic Christianity, Western culture, and America itself.”

 

Those in the studies-in-religion discipline have no doubt that Schaefferan apologetics is skewed in cultural and orthodox bias.

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Disciplines of Law and Political Studies: The Church-State and Civil Society Debates

 

The Schaefferan apologetics in the context of NCR operated on a narrow view and argument of the ‘public square’.[26] It is a legal perception on what ‘a Christian nation’ ought to expect. On the view of the Christian State, Ahdar (1998) points out, Francis A. Schaeffer, in  A Christian Manifesto  (1981: 121), rejected “The whole ‘Constantine mentality’ from the fourth century up to our day [and it was] was a mistake. … Making Christianity the official state religion opened the way for confusion till our own day”.[27] However, that semantics for centralists evangelicals of the 1980s and 1990s was confusing thinking, in that for Schaeffer it was a rejection of ‘secular’ statism. As it was articulated as one interpretation by Ahdar, as an argument against a Christian State, a militant theocracy:

 

“If establishment is good for society, is it nonetheless good for Christianity itself? Certainly, the strongest form of establishment, theocracy, is a form of government firmly rejected by several influential Christian thinkers. Church and state are viewed by some Christians as two separate realms not to be confounded.”

 

That is, though, one interpretation, and Ahdar’s remarks suggest another. Ahdar cites Schaeffer in the footnote but has confused the semantics of Schaeffer’s references which are, one hand, the old covenant of the Old Testament theocracy, and, on the other hand, the new covenant in a postmillennial promise of a literal theocracy. Given a fundamentalist reading, which has to be politically literal, with the two covenants in semantic agreement, the centrists are shocked by the discovery of the more forth-right Schaefferan theocratic statements in the context of the New Christian Right.

 

The Christian rightists had, in the 1980s and 1990s taken the moderate Christian apologists as fools. In the new century one still finds the naïve references to Schaeffer, Krabbendam (2011):[28]

 

“… Schaeffer was one of the rare fundamentalists who analyzed modern culture instead of rejecting it. The middle part of his life, from 1955 to 1970, was his most creative and rewarding period. He built a consistent worldview avoiding the division of reality in a realm of grace and of nature. This discovery broadened his cultural horizon and liberated him to explore contemporary culture. This made him address the immorality of race relations, economic injustice, and of abuse of creation, and opened his eyes for appreciation of art. These issues made him a unique progressive voice in the traditional Christian America.”

 

Many American progressivist evangelical believers would simply find these comments bizarre. It is quite clear that Schaefferan Apologetics is entangled in the schema of the New Christian Right.[29] At a forum in 2017 on ‘Studying Religion in the Age of Trump’ Schaeffer was labelled “the intellectual godfather of the Religious Right”.[30]  Jerry Falwell and Francis Schaeffer were interlinked into a political program that, if centrists were able to look straightforward at the apologetics in wider disciplinary thinking, the apologetics would be seen as far too compromised for faithfully thinking of the neo-evangelical semantics.[31]

 

Furthermore, it is the entanglement of legal semantics which is the biggest problem that Schaefferan apologetics provides. Kersch (2016) demonstrates the confusion that a series of works brought to the understanding of the American legal system: John W. Whitehead’s The Second American Revolution (1982), R. J. Rushdoony’s Christian Reconstructionism (1973), and Francis Schaeffer’s A Christian Manifesto (1982).[32] Francis Schaeffer explained that:

 

“The government, the courts, the media, the law are all dominated to one degree or another by [the] elite. They have largely secularized our society by force, particularly using the courts. . . . If there is still an entity known as ‘the Christian church’ by the end of this century, operating with any semblance of liberty within our society here in the United States,” he writes, “it will probably have John Whitehead and his book to thank…”

 

The association with R. J. Rushdoony’s original The Institutes of Biblical Law (1973) would have also provided little doubt of Schaeffer’s rebellion theocratic turn. Quite simply, in this evangelical worldview there was only the current pagan laws of the American state and a call for instituting biblical law.

 

It could not be clearer that Schaefferan apologetics in relation to church-state analysis is opposed to disciplinary knowledge, but if it needs to be clearer look to what Worthen (2008) herself said:[33]

 

“The Christian reconstructionist movement – defined by theologians who explicitly assent to reconstructionism’s distinctives and are actively publishing and debating – is largely dead. Riven by internal schism, a distaste for politics or compromise, and an utter disdain for anyone who dared disagree, the movement imploded in the mid-1990s. In Ventrella’s view, this was the best thing that could have happened for Christian reconstructionism – for now that no one is worried about keeping to the party line or claiming credit, its ideas are at liberty to filter into America’s cultural bloodstream. ‘The ideas get diffused, and the better ones get traction,’ he said. ‘It’s like Francis Schaeffer said: worldviews are more often caught than taught. And you see the evidence of Rushdoony’s influence everywhere, from the homeschooling movement to proponents of Intelligent Design.”

 

So, from Worthen, we get the view that reconstructionism of Schaefferan apologetics is intellectually dead from the 1990s, and yet it continues as college and homeschooling programs.

 

One other civil religion issue should be ought to be noted. Schaeffer was never known as a racist. In recent times there has been a body of literature which has challenged, not racism of the evangelical world, but the appeasing reading in evangelical historiography which whitewashed racism; Jesse Curtis’s The Myth of Colorblind Christians : Evangelicals and White Supremacy in the Civil Rights Era (2021) is a formative example. Although Kristin Kobes Du Mez  in Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation (2020) has nothing to say on Schaeffer himself, De Mez does index Schaeffer with the NCR which De Mez see as the educational expression of white evangelical thinking.[34] This is why institutionalised evangelical believers miss the point: an inability to read the different semantics in the unfair charge of racism and the fair critique of white evangelical appeasement.

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Discipline of Political Studies: The Cold War Debates

 

Schaeffer for nearly half a century after his death in 1984 set the pace of evangelical politics on the American domestic landscape.[35] “Late in his life, Schaeffer’s cultural engagement morphed into the apocalyptic culture-war politics”, stated Hamil-Luker and Smith (1998). From the early days, Schaeffer worked from his belief of “the mutual dependence of Christian virtue and political liberty.”[36] It created something very intellectually foul in the evangelical world. The historical details linking Schaefferan apologetics, dominionistic theology and politics and all the leading NCR organisation players together could not be clearer, and references need to be made than Weinberg (2021) is a good start.[37] The principle became the pathway in the transformation and electoral power of the American Republican Party since Ronald Reagan.[38]  The connections are quite apparent to Noll (2015).[39]  Ethicists studying closely religious ethics see the problematic nature of the connections.[40] As Northcott (2012) stated:

 

“Under the influence of Jerry Falwell, Francis Schaeffer, and the Christian Right more broadly, appeals to faith in public policy have become mainstream for conservative Protestants and Catholics. They produced the ambiguous fruit of the ‘faith-based’ projects of George W. Bush as governor of Texas, and then as President (Northcott 2004). But the positions Christian conservatives have promoted in their political interventions—against abortion, homosexuality, and taxes, and for capital punishment, foreign military interventions, and Israeli expansion—are so contrary to those of Christian progressives that the progressives have turned on the conservatives and suggested that ‘religion and politics do not mix’ (Hauerwas 2001b, 463). This dissension underlines the problem that afflicts both conservatives and progressives in their attempts to interpret or influence American politics: both lack a shared Christian moral compass because they are shaped more by the American way of life, and the ‘tyranny’ of individual autonomy writ large in the totalizing institutions of capitalism and the strong state, than by their shared identity as those called to follow the crucified Christ.”

 

Northcott’s remark ought to provide an evangelical believer the most devastating critique of Schaefferan apologetics.

 

Pierard (1995), even before the new century, had taken the analysis much further in the concept of civil religion.[41] “The religious right’s civil religion offensive was particularly apparent in two areas,” stated Pierard,  “the assault on separation of church and state and the rewriting of history to prove that the United States is a Christian nation.” The issue of Christian nationalism raises the question how the “Cold War politics” might have gone beyond the domestic concerns to the Cold War politics of Americanism proper.[42] Here it seems that Schaefferan apologetics was once rooted in the Cold War of the 1950s before turning to the moralistic domestic concerns in the 1970s. Ruotsila (2013) identifies Schaeffer as part of the 1950s fundamentalist critics who attack Christian mainline’s thinking, and “regarded neo-orthodoxy as but ‘the new modernism’.”[43] Ruotsila cited the forgotten work of Schaeffer’s The New Modernism (1950). In this regard, it demonstrates the historical forgottenness of the Evangelical world when it is politically convenient.

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Discipline of Political Studies: The Abortion and Family Values Debates

 

The politics in the American debate on abortion and what is described as “family values” is extremely entangled in fallacies and misinformation. The discipline of political studies and general philosophy does it best. Most of the literature cannot, though, be any more than descriptions, such as when Anthony Fauci (2014) provided an obituary for C. Everett Koop and made the connection to Francis Schaeffer.[44] The most informative side of these debates are not in the literature of political studies but in the literature of epistemology and ethics.

 

During the 1970s and early 1980s, Schaeffer was highly-visible in a public globalising stand against abortion, infanticide, and euthanasia. For those who had different sets of ethic thought, such as Hamil-Luker (1998),  Schaefferan apologetics had set a barrier: “fundamentalists have historically erected subcultural barriers behind which to preserve the purity of their faith.”[45] The outcome is an entanglement casted as an internalist projection on the interior of the worldview. As Weinberg (2021) well-described the projected outlook of the NCR:[46]

 

“[Pat] Robertson hailed the wisdom of the nation’s founders who created a country ‘under God.’ He bemoaned the state of America, which in the previous quarter-century had strayed from ‘our historic Judeo-Christian faith.’ Public schools had replaced moral absolutes with ‘values clarification’ and ‘situation ethics.’ They had replaced the ‘Holy Bible’ with the familiar pantheon of communist and evolutionary evil: Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and John Dewey. Young people were learning that ‘if it feels good, do it.’ For conservative Christians paying attention to the warnings of Francis Schaeffer, Tim LaHaye, and the like, the ‘whirlwind’ of immoral consequences was also familiar: one million teenage pregnancies and four hundred thousand abortions each year; a massive number of sexual assaults; and an epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS.”

 

The ‘fundamentalist’ error is the presumption that their ideological analysis in any way fits as well-connected worldview in relation to disciplinary knowledge. The irony is that the Schaefferan apologists today seek to flip the argument as an ideological critique which they misbelieve is nuanced. In the review criticism of Elizabeth Mensch’s and Alan Freeman’s The Politics of Virtue: Is Abortion Debatable? Steffen (1995) had pointed out:[47]

 

“While I am relating the Mensch and Freeman analysis in broad strokes, the detail of their picture of what lies behind the move toward absolutist discourse is intriguingly made. Good historical detail is provided on, for instance, various divinity schools (e.g., Princeton) and on the Randall Terry and Jerry Falwell influence of Francis Schaeffer. What becomes more problematic in their analysis is the way in which the authors adopt a point of view towards the secular, for in their effort to dissociate themselves from the rhetoric of the conservative critique of secularism (i.e., ‘secular humanism’), the authors still manage to attach to ‘secular’ a negative charge that conservatives will find laudable (Furthermore, I would  never gloss over the ‘death of God’ movement as cavalierly as they do, especially and feminist theology.)”

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Disciplines of Philosophy and Literature: Hermeneutics

 

It was not until Burton (1996) that modest educated evangelicals began to understand that the hermeneutics of the traditional approach of C.S.  Lewis and of the neo-con radical Francis Schaeffer was poles apart to be different belief systems.[48] Schaeffer’s approach was mostly non-philosophical bound to scripture, committed to fundamentalist concept of inerrancy, using largely the hermeneutic framework of Cornelius Van Til, in ‘old-time’ (mostly nineteenth century Hodgean thinking) historiographical methodology, restricted to the correspondence theory of truth, and anti-Hegelian into philosophically ridiculous polemics. In one frame is hermeneutics about opposing all historical idealism, disregarding of any philosophic validate reasoning for different versions of historical idealism, and for that matter, an equal disregard for forms of historical realism. Contrast to the old form of apologetics from C.S. Lewis, Lewis thought that the American preoccupation with verbal inspiration was a theological red herring.[49] Lewis could work between historical idealism and realism but that is because most of his pop paperbacks were not apologetic in the semantic sense of American evangelicalism. Lewis was not concerned to defend exclusivist  faith but only to defend an idea of basic Christianity in the context of the ecumenical mid-century.

 

The problem of apologetic hermeneutics, though, goes much deeper philosophically, to refusing to honestly engage in the “secular” schemas which are rejected with a mere preposition or cherry-picked evidential reference. As Davies (1997) stated on covenantal hermeneutics:[50]

 

“Lundin [Roger Lundin’s Culture of Interpretation: Christian Faith and the Postmodern, 1993] writes in what must surely be a tone of shocked incredulity (‘Can you believe it?’), for he makes no effort to answer or refute these poststructuralist claims. Instead, he writes as though it were sufficient merely to identify the scandalous scope of deconstruction – tracing the Enlightenment’s roots to the origins of Western thought – in order to summarily to reject it. Lundin assumes that the absurdity of the absurdity of such an audacious project should be self-evident to his readers. Such a project, however, will seem neither novel nor absurd for anyone who has worked through Herman Dooyeweerďs formidable A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, or Lev Shestov’s Athens and Jerusalem , or even Francis Schaeffer ‘s numerous books, for he or she would already have encountered it from within Christian thought itself. Why should we not want to subvert ‘conceptions of truth and transcendence that have grounded Western experience since well before the time of Christ,’ since those very origins of Western thought are unbiblical and idolatrous? Why stop with the Enlightenment? Why is it so unthinkable to Lundin that the Enlightenment is a development out of fundamentally classical roots, that in it we see the logical unfolding of ideas that had been held in an uneasy syncretistic embrace through the many years of medieval Christendom? And, finally, why should we ‘desire to recover or restore those practices and beliefs,’ if they contain within them the very germs of Enlightenment thought?”

 

Davies’ critical analysis of Lundin is stuck in the nineteenth century American Revivalist Tradition (ART) reading of old-time historiography; an anti-modernist positioning which is not to be found in the credible history discipline today. Schaffer’s hermeneutic worked, though, on the principle that “something could be historically false and religiously true.”[51] I recall back in the early 1980s my teacher in Christian Thought, Ian Gillman, faced with the bubble thinking of Schaefferan apologetic students, pointed out Schaffer’s historiographical account had completely missed engaging with Kant. On the subject of historiography, Schaefferan apologetics is full of cognitive holes.

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Disciplines of Philosophy and Sociology

 

The critiques of Schaefferan apologetics from the wide disciplines of philosophy and sociology goes beyond the hermeneutic problem. Often the criticisms relay the failed aesthetic sensibilities of Schaeffer: “Elsewhere, FitzGerald describes Francis Schaeffer’s critique of Renaissance art as ‘a triumph of ideology over the sight of what was in front of him- and a perfectly philistine position that viscerally he did not feel’ (pp. 352-353).”[52]

 

While there is a mass of literature in and of evangelical sociology, very little has been done on the sociology of evangelicalism which picks the significant place of Schaefferan apologetics. Lindsay (2008) is a significant example of what has been achieved.[53] Lindsay’s Figure 1. Social-Spatial Diagram of Evangelical Structural Coincidence and Cohesion in Four Sectors, 1976 to 2006 (n = 142) is important.

 

 

  1. Critiques with the Whole Sub-Disciplines of Philosophy, Ethics, and Language Studies

 

Several sources identified Schaeffer’s radicalisation in the American anti-abortion, pro-life, movement. Intellectually, it was a turn into moralism after the counter-culture period of the  L’ Abri communitarian ethics.  That moralism was centred in the virtue concept of “family value”.[54] Since Schaeffer took an inerrant view of biblical language where there was no room for compromise in ethical theory. Morals were absolute. Laws needed to be as absolute as possible but recognising the political convenience of taking what one could get in the legislative and court processes. Here what theory survives the anti-theory approach of Schaeffer is reduced to divine command (theory). It is the morals of a theocracy but could not truly be said to be ethics in respects to the subject (moral subjectivism), persons (personalism), or existential choice (ethical existentialism). Schaeffer does make rhetorical appeals to the concept of a person and subjects of the state, but his anti-humanism with no Christian humanist respect belies his moralistic positioning.

 

Philosophical-aware historians have picked up that the moralism  of the Schaefferan-shaped NCR is driven by historically bare ideas in the obsession with sexuality and sexual reproduction. Moreton (2009) does well to identity the utterly and historically confused language in the Schaeffer and Koop argument:[55]

 

“In 1979, Christian surgeon – and later United States surgeon general –  C. Everett Koop teamed up with the prolific antiabortion crusader Francis A. Schaeffer to produce Whatever Happened to the Human Race? Under this title, a book, a five-part video sequence, and a traveling workshop laid out the winning argument against abortion for Christians who had previously shown little formal concern: rational Enlightenment values – ‘secular humanism’ in the authors’ argot – could not distinguish between vulnerable, unproductive, non-contributing members of the human race and any other drag on maximum efficiency. With the machine as its supreme being, the argument went, perverse, pitiless reason could define people as expendable.”

 

You would expect to find no such flimsy argument of the NCR in a credible university course on ethics.

 

Mapping Schaefferan Apologetics in relation to the disciplines

 

The cross-over disciplinary analysis from academic literature demonstrates that the Schaefferan apologetics and historiography has failed to catch anyone other than the uneducated in the disciplines. The literature is so large (53 articles for this research work alone) that to make the point further the following are others citations, apart from what has already been referenced, and listed as follows:

 

  • “The Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization in 1974 was the largest global gathering of evangelical Christians in the latter half of the twentieth century. Lausanne was significant, in part because of the struggle between two sets of evangelical leaders: those, led by the US, who wanted to retain a focus on ‘evangelism,’ and the young radicals, led by Latin Americans, who demanded a broader attention to ‘social concern.’ This essay traces the impact of the liberalizing faction, while also following the ‘evangelism-first’ movement and its role in the rise of the religious right in the US in the 1980s.”[56]

 

  • “Fundamentalism provides a strong system of social support and a sense of purpose to its participants. An analysis of apostate surveys identified the primary positive attractions of fundamentalism as friendship and family, a sense of  purpose, a sense of belonging, a sense of community, and a sense of certainty.”[57]

 

  • [As an Islamic scholar’s critique] “ ‘3. Assault on Liberalism by portraying Secular Humanism as a Religion. The fundamentalists had lost to the modernists at the beginning of the 20th century on the intellectual grounds. Their main problem was that they challenged modern science on the basis of biblical facts as the ultimate truth. In the second half of the 20th century they changed the strategy and instead argued that the liberal ideologues actually believed in secular humanism as a religion. This meant that the liberal worldview and paradigm were actually drawn from the philosophical foundations of secular humanism. This implied that the secular humanism played the same role in liberal thought as religion. This attack on liberalism inspired titles for publications, like The Christian Beacon; Essentialist; Crusader’s Champion; King’s Business; Conflict; Defender; and Dynamited.’ The main architect of this intellectual position was Francis Schaeffer.”[58]

 

  • “Hankins [2008] is fully aware of the overarching trope established by Mark Noll in his now-classic The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994). The point is that the Evangelical movement did not forget to think; rather, it was a movement meant to do without ideas. Thus, for the subject of the biography, Francis Schaeffer, to try to shape an ‘Evangelical mind’ would be to try to climb a mountain as high as his beloved Swiss Alps, where he labored for many years.” …The author shows Schaeffer as both memorable and problematic in three areas: as a fundamentalist who created fairly narrow boundaries to defend the purity of the church; as a guru of the Christian Right in the United States after about 1980, in which he tried to galvanize a return to America’s putative Christian roots; and as a daring intellectual generalizer who took ideas seriously enough to provide a broad interpretation and critique of Western society… Nevertheless, I join many others in celebrating Francis Schaeffer for getting us underway toward intellectual goals we would probably not have imagined without him. While most of us later transcended his initial vision, it would be churlish of us not to acknowledge with gratitude how we began our journeys…Hankins does mention the dark and unappealing side of Schaeffer’s life (bouts with depression, temper fits, and alleged physical abuse of his wife). The author wisely, in my view, distances his analysis from the tawdry, almost embarrassing, story that has been written about so flamboyantly by Schaeffer’s son, Frank, in his tell-all (and one means all) memoir, Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back (Cambridge, MA: De Capo Press, 2007).”[59] [To the discipline critic, the reading of the reviewer seems like he wanted it both ways: salvaging Francis Schaeffer in history and yet the Schaefferan historiography must fall].

 

  • “Moore [2015] opens and concludes his book with a brief critical engagement with the Christian America claims of David Barton, Glenn Beck, and Francis Schaeffer. The main body of the book, however, is set in the past. Founding Sins focuses on the Covenanter variety of Presbyterianism and its influence on American politics. As such, it provides a helpful survey of the Covenanter movement, starting in Scotland, then making its way to the United States. Along the way, the reader is treated to Presbyterian church history, political intrigue of the English monarchy, American colonial history, and a fascinating look at the often contradictory nature of nineteenth-century moral and social activism.”[60] [b. contradictory because of contemporary reading and belief in the nineteenth century historiography and ART]

 

  • “A well-functioning democracy is dependent on truth itself. Trump’s efforts to undermine the press, undermine the availability and credibility of truth, threatens the foundations of American democracy. As previously stated, the Fourth Estate exists outside the dominion of the Executive Branch to prevent this very phenomenon from paralyzing the nation. Through his calculated disregard of object truth, he has managed to further polarize the opposite ends of the political spectrum. … It seems that now political discussion has regressed so far that Democrats and Republicans cannot even manage to get on the same page about basic facts. When the truth is made out to be “liberal conspiracy theories,” all constructive dialogue begins to break down.”[61] [not directly related to Schaeffer, but Schaeffer’s apologetics is caught up in the semantics of the observation]

 

In Kevin Schilbrack’s paper, ‘The Study of Religious Belief after Donald Davidson’ (2002) is a demonstration that Christian apologetics is far too removed from the philosophy discipline to make any sense today (outside of populist ignorance).[62] As Schilbrack explained, Davidson famously argued for the incoherence of what he calls scheme/content dualism.  What is criticised is the view that thought can be divided into two parts: a conceptual system that our mind or our language provides and the preconceptual content that the world provides. Davidson argument targets the Kantian concept of noumena, and this might trouble propositions of liberal Christianity; that is contested. What is not contested is that Schaefferan apologetics has no capacity to deal with Davidson. Liberal Christianity may or may not be defeated in such an argument, but certainly evangelicalism which relies on conservative thought is. It is simply not that Schaefferan apologetics is a Wittgenstein ladder that can be kicked away for evangelical apologetics to continue as if it can ignore wider debates in the disciplines. And for this reason, evangelical believers need to abandon apologetics and return to the disciplines. The better evangelical scholars, such as George Marsden, Mark Noll, and Alvin Plantinga, always have and they three are distinctive as the evangelical scholarship associated with Notre Dame University.

 

For the institutional rest, the intellectual problems illustrated as reference in the Buch’s Mapping the World of Schaefferan apologetics (as apologetics, not disciplinary knowledge; distinguishing roles of Plantinga, who appears on the graph, between the philosopher and used in apologetics).

 

 

There are many others who are in that world but are not listed here, such as Udo Middelmann, the President of the Francis A. Schaeffer Foundation. The point of the graph is that Schaeffer’s thinking is directed through several disciplinary filters and connects up to American activists and public intellectuals. Before his death in 1984, Schaeffer shaped their thinking, and they Schaeffer’s. Many are NCR players, but several important figures are not. Other figures, such as Cornelius Van Til, demonstrate the role of pre-propositional apologetics.[63] The commonality is the lost credibility in, or of Schaefferan historiography. In Schaefferan historiography, nearly all philosophic schemas are lost; Plantinga’s Warrant Belief and proper function maybe an exception, but it is not enough to save apologetics. The argument of warrant belief and proper function is the epistemic glue in the argument for abandoning apologetics for discourse in disciplinary knowledge. So, what went wrong? Schaefferan historiography is based in the thinking of Empiricalistic-Institutional driven school of history which had existed at the time of the Biblicalist Charles Hodge (1797-1878). In Schaeffer’s anti-modernism critical-thinking historiography was lost to him.

 

REFERENCE LIST

Publication List: Recent back to the Buch ART Thesis in 1994-1995.

 

Miller, Paul D. (2022). The Religion of American Greatness: What’s Wrong With Christian Nationalism, IVP Academic.

 

Curtis, Jesse (2021). The Myth of Colorblind Christians: Evangelicals and White Supremacy in the Civil Rights Era, New York University Press.

 

Hendricks Jr., Obery M. (2021). Christians Against Christianity: How Right-Wing Evangelicals are Destroying our Nation and our Faith, Boston: Beacon Press.

 

Weinberg, C. R. (2021). Trees, Knees, and Nurseries. In Red Dynamite: Creationism, Culture Wars, and Anticommunism in †America (pp. 202–246). Cornell University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctv310vk3m.10

 

Weinberg, C. R. (2021). The Nightcrawler, the Wedge, and the Bloodiest Religion. In Red Dynamite: Creationism, Culture Wars, and Anticommunism in †America (pp. 247–270). Cornell University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctv310vk3m.11

 

Du Mez, Kristin Kobes (2020). Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation, New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation

 

Brooke McPherson, & Helen McGowan. (2020). The Reality of Fake News, A Study of Donald J. Trump’s Free Press Violations [Documents]. https://jstor.org/stable/community.28786802

 

Miller, S. P. (2019). [Review of The Evangelicals: The Struggle to Shape America, by F. FitzGerald]. The North Carolina Historical Review, 96(4), 449–450. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45286369

 

Wilson, J. C., & Hollis-Brusky, A. (2018). Higher Law: Can Christian Conservatives Transform Law Through Legal Education? Law & Society Review, 52(4), 835–870. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45093945

 

MCALISTER, M. (2017). The Global Conscience of American Evangelicalism: Internationalism and Social Concern in the 1970s and Beyond. Journal of American Studies, 51(4), 1197–1220. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26803498

 

Coffman, E. (2017). [Review of Saving Faith: Making Religious Pluralism an American Value at the Dawn of the Secular Age, by D. Mislin]. The Journal of Religion, 97(4), 576–578. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26544108

 

Balmer, R., Bowler, K., Butler, A., Farrelly, M. J., Markofski, W., Orsi, R., Park, J. Z., Davidson, J. C., Sutton, M. A., & Yukich, G. (2017). Forum: Studying Religion in the Age of Trump. Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, 27(1), 2–56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26419415

 

Hankins, B. (2016). [Review of American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism, by M. A. Sutton]. The Journal of Religion, 96(4), 581–582. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26543598

 

Dowland, S. (2016). Making Sense of Twentieth-Century American Evangelicalism [Review of The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years; American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism; Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, by S. P. Miller, M. A. Sutton, & M. Worthen]. Reviews in American History, 44(1), 152–159. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26363998

 

Keene, T. (2016). Kuyper and Dooyeweerd: Sphere Sovereignty and Modal Aspects. Transformation, 33(1), 65–79. https://www.jstor.org/stable/90008856

 

Kersch, K. I. (2016). Constitutive Stories about the Common Law In Modern American Conservatism. Nomos, 56, 211–255. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26387884

 

Doenecke, J. D. (2015). [Review of The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: The 1950s and the Crisis of Liberal Belief; Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, by G. M. Marsden & M. Worthen]. Anglican and Episcopal History, 84(4), 496–498. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43685184

 

Harp, Gillis J. Church History 84, no. 3 (2015): 701–4. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24537399.

 

Noll, M. A. (2015). [Review of The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years, by S. P. Miller]. The American Historical Review, 120(2), 674–675. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43696800

 

Kidd, T. S. (2015). [Review of Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, by M. Worthen]. Church History, 84(1), 276–278. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24537327

Doenecke, J. D. (2015). [Review of The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: The 1950s and the Crisis Liberal Belief; Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, by G. M. Marsden & M. Worthen]. Anglican and Episcopal History, 84(1), 93–95. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43685088

 

Nijhoff, R. (2015). [Review of Neo-Calvinism and Christian Theosophy. Franz von Baader, Abraham Kuyper, Herman Dooyeweerd, by J. G. Friesen]. Philosophia Reformata, 80(2), 236–240. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24709980

 

Moore, Joseph S. (2015). Founding Sins: How a Group of Antislavery Radicals Fought to Put Christ into the Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press.

 

Worthen, Molly (2014). Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, Oxford University Press.

 

Marsden, George M. (2014). The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: The 1950s Liberal Belief, New York: Basic Books.

 

Fauci, A. S. (2014). C. Everett Koop: 14 October 1916 · 25 February 2013. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 158(4), 455–460. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24640191

 

Lempke, M. A. (2014). So Long, Jerry Falwell: Reconsidering Evangelical Public Engagement [Review of The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age; Moral Minority: The Evangelical Left in an Age of Conservatism, by R. J. Stephens, K. W. Giberson, & D. R. Swartz]. Reviews in American History, 42(1), 174–180. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43663494

 

Ruotsila, M. (2013). “Russia’s Most Effective Fifth Column”: Cold War Perceptions of Un-Americanism in US Churches. Journal of American Studies, 47(4), 1019–1041. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24485873

 

Fea, J. (2013). Using the Past to “Save” Our Nation: The Debate over Christian America. OAH Magazine of History, 27(1), 7–11. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23489627

 

Groothuis, D. (2013). [Review of Abraham Kuyper. A Short and Personal Introduction, by R. J. Mouw]. Church History and Religious Culture, 93(4), 638–640. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23923543

 

Ruotsila, M. (2012). Carl McIntire and the Fundamentalist Origins of the Christian Right. Church History, 81(2), 378–407. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23253819

 

Northcott, M. S. (2012). READING HAUERWAS IN THE CORNBELT: The Demise of the American Dream and the Return of Liturgical Politics. The Journal of Religious Ethics, 40(2), 262–280. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23251026

 

Swartz, D. R. (2011). Identity Politics and the Fragmenting of the 1970s Evangelical Left. Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, 21(1), 81–120. https://doi.org/10.1525/rac.2011.21.1.81

 

Krabbendam, H. (2011). [Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, by B. Hankins]. Church History and Religious Culture, 91(3/4), 606–608. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23922883

 

Lofton, K. (2010). [Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America. Library of Religious Biography Series, by B. Hankins]. Church History, 79(4), 983–985. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40962918

 

Wells, R. A., & Hankins, B. (2010). [Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America]. The Journal of Religion, 90(3), 417–419. https://doi.org/10.1086/654862

 

Ingersoll, J. (2009). [Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, by B. Hankins]. The Journal of American History, 96(2), 611–611. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25622435

 

Dowland, S. (2009). “Family Values” and the Formation of a Christian Right Agenda. Church History, 78(3), 606–631. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20618754

 

Moreton, B. (2009). Why Is There So Much Sex in Christian Conservatism and Why Do So Few Historians Care Anything about It? The Journal of Southern History, 75(3), 717–738. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27779035

 

Worthen, M. (2008). The Chalcedon Problem: Rousas John Rushdoony and the Origins of Christian Reconstructionism. Church History, 77(2), 399–437. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20618492

 

Lindsay, D. M. (2008). Evangelicals in the Power Elite: Elite Cohesion Advancing a Movement. American Sociological Review, 73(1), 60–82. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472514

 

Adam, R. (2008). Relating Faith Development and Religious Styles: Reflections in Light of Apostasy from Religious Fundamentalism. Archiv Für Religionspsychologie / Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 30, 201-231. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/23907899

 

McGreevy, J. (2007). Catholics, Democrats, and the GOP in Contemporary America. American Quarterly, 59(3), 669–681. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40068445

 

Grams, R. G. (2007). Transformation Mission Theology: Its History, Theology and Hermeneutics. Transformation, 24(3/4), 193–212. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43052710

 

Perlstein, R. (2006). Thunder on the Right: The Roots of Conservative Victory in the 1960s. OAH Magazine of History, 20(5), 24–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25162080

 

Freedman, R. (2005). The Religious Right and the Carter Administration. The Historical Journal, 48(1), 231–260. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4091685

 

Butler, J. (2004). Jack-in-the-Box Faith: The Religion Problem in Modern American History. The Journal of American History, 90(4), 1357–1378. https://doi.org/10.2307/3660356

 

ZAKAULLAH, M. A. (2003). The Rise of Christian Fundamentalism in the United States and the Challenge to Understand the New America. Islamic Studies, 42(3), 437–486. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20837287

 

Carpenter, J. (2003). [Review of The Book of Jerry Falwell: Fundamentalist Language and Politics, by S. F. Harding]. The Journal of Religion, 83(1), 124–125. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1205452

 

Jerry Falwell. (2003). Our Dying Values [Documents]. https://jstor.org/stable/community.32095064

 

Appleby, R. S. (2002). History in the Fundamentalist Imagination. The Journal of American History, 89(2), 498–511. https://doi.org/10.2307/3092170

 

Schilbrack, Kevin (2002). The Study of Religious Belief after Donald Davidson, Method &# 38; Theory in the Study of Religion, ingentaconnect.com, https://www.academia.edu/1964361/The_Study_of_Religious_Belief_after_Donald_Davidson

 

Nord, W. A. (2001). [Review of Standing on the Premises of God: The Christian Right’s Fight to Redefine America’s Public Schools, by F. Detwiler]. The Journal of Religion, 81(3), 471–472. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1206420

 

Jeffrey, D. L. (2000). C. S. Lewis, the Bible, and Its Literary Critics. Christianity and Literature, 50(1), 95–109. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44298997

 

Hamil-Luker, J., & Smith, C. (1998). Religious Authority and Public Opinion on the Right to Die. Sociology of Religion, 59(4), 373–391. https://doi.org/10.2307/3712123

 

Ahdar, R. J. (1998). A Christian State? Journal of Law and Religion, 13(2), 453–482. https://doi.org/10.2307/1051480

 

Davies, L. (1997). Covenantal Hermeneutics and the Redemption of Theory. Christianity and Literature, 46(3/4), 357–397. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44312553

 

Burson, S. R. (1996). A Comparative Analysis of C. S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer — The Most Influential Apologists of Our Time. The Lamp-Post of the Southern California C.S. Lewis Society, 20(2), 4–29. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45348286

 

Appleby, S. (1996). [Review of Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right, by M. Lienisch]. Church History, 65(1), 168–169. https://doi.org/10.2307/3170573

 

Steffen, L. (1995). [Review of The Politics of Virtue: Is Abortion Debatable? by E. Mensch & A. Freeman]. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 63(4), 910–914. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1465491

 

Pierard, R. (1995). Civil Religion Critically Revisited. Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte, 8(1), 203–219. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43096664

 

Noll, Mark A. (1994). The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermans Publishing Company.

 

Lienisch, Michael (1993). Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina.

 

Marsden, George M. (1987). Reforming Fundamentalism. Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermanns Publishing Company.

 

Marsden, George M. (1980). Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925, New York. Oxford University Press.

FOOTNOTES

 

[1] Marsden, George M. (1987). Reforming Fundamentalism. Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermanns Publishing Company, Pages 44, 100n16, 105n32, 111, 113.

 

[2] Lofton, K., 2010, Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, Church History, Issue 79, 983–985. Cited page 984.

 

[3] Ruotsila, M., 2012, Carl McIntire and the Fundamentalist Origins of the Christian Right, Church History, Issue 81, 378–407. “Jerry Falwell was greatly influenced by the eventual embrace of Mclntire style civil disobedience by Francis Schaeffer—who, of course, was Mclntire’s old student and protege, the first pastor ordained in the Bible Presbyterian Church and the ACCC’s chief European representative in the late 1940s and the early 1950.” Page 394.

[4] Worthen, Molly, 2014, Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, Oxford University Press. Pages 209-19, 212, 228-9, 231, 240, 251, 260,  311n18.

 

[5] Nord, W. A., 2001, Review of Standing on the Premises of God: The Christian Right’s Fight to Redefine America’s Public Schools, The Journal of Religion, Issue 81, 471–472. Quotation page 472.

 

[6] Freedman, R., 2005, The Religious Right and the Carter Administration, The Historical Journal, Issue 48, 231–260. Quotation page 234. Susan Friend Harding (2000). The book of Jerry Falwell: fundamentalist language and politics, Princeton, NJ.

 

[7] Noll, Mark A., 1994, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, page 223.

 

[8] Noll, M. A., 2015, Review of The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years, The American Historical Review, Issue 120, 674–675. See the description page 674.

 

[9] Jerry Falwell., 2003, Our Dying Values [Documents]. Email from Jerry Falwell, dated 2 July 2003.

 

[10] Lempke, M. A., 2014, Review of The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age, Reviews in American History, Issue 42, 174–180. Cited page 179.

 

[11] Grams, R. G., 2007, Transformation Mission Theology: Its History, Theology and Hermeneutics, Transformation, Issue 24, 193–212. Specially page 97.

 

[12] Appleby, R. S., 2002, History in the Fundamentalist Imagination, The Journal of American History, Issue 2, 498–511. Quotations on pages 503-4, and 505.

 

[13] Butler, J., 2004,  Jack-in-the-Box Faith: The Religion Problem in Modern American History, The Journal of American History, Issue 4, 1357–1378. Quotation page

[14] Doenecke, J. D., 2015, Review of The Twilight of the American Enlightenment: The 1950s and the Crisis of Liberal Belief, Anglican and Episcopal History, Issue 84, 496–498. Quotation page 497.

 

[15] Swartz, D. R., 2011, Identity Politics and the Fragmenting of the 1970s Evangelical Left, Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, Issue 21, 81–120. Quotation pages 88-89.

 

[16] For example, Nijhoff, R., 2015, Review of Neo-Calvinism and Christian Theosophy. Franz von Baader, Abraham Kuyper, Herman Dooyeweerd, Philosophia Reformata, Issue 80, 236–240.

 

[17] Groothuis, D., 2013, Review of Abraham Kuyper. A Short and Personal Introduction, by R. J. Mouw. Church History and Religious Culture, 93, Church History and Religious Culture, Issue 93, 638–640. Quotation page 639.

 

[18] Keene, T., 2016, Kuyper and Dooyeweerd: Sphere Sovereignty and Modal Aspects, Transformation, Issue 33, 65–79. Cited page 69.

[19] Fea, J., 2013, Using the Past to “Save” Our Nation: The Debate over Christian America, OAH Magazine of History, Issue 27, 7–11. Specifically, page 9.

 

[20] Some in the literature put Schaeffer in the premillennial camp, such as Worthen, Molly, 2014, Apostles of Reason, 304-5n32. But that it hard to comprehend when premillennialism is essentially the escaping worldly affairs at the Return of Christ. It would be proper to describe Schaefferan apologetics postmillennial since as Perlstein (2006) stated, “that Jesus would never come back until iniquity was conquered on earth,” a clearly postmillennial position.

 

[21] Perlstein, R., 2006, Thunder on the Right: The Roots of Conservative Victory in the 1960s, OAH Magazine of History, Issue 20, 24–27. Quotation page 27.

 

[22] For example, Kidd, T. S., 2015, Review of Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, Church History, Issue 84, 276–278. Kidd refers to the movement and its anxieties it raises.

 

[23] Ingersoll, J., 2009, Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, The Journal of American History, Issue 96, 611–611. Barry Hankins (2008). Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Citations pages 611

 

[24] Doenecke, J. D., 2015, Review of Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, Anglican and Episcopal History, Issue 84, 93–95. Quotation page 94.

 

[25] Dowland, S., 2016, Review of The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years, Reviews in American History, Issue 44, 152–159. Quotation page 156.

[26] Wilson, J. C., & Hollis-Brusky, A., 2018, Higher Law: Can Christian Conservatives Transform Law Through Legal Education? Law & Society Review, Issue 52, 835–870. Cited page 843.

 

[27] Ahdar, R. J., 1998, A Christian State? Journal of Law and Religion, Issue 2, 453–482. Quotation on pages 464 and 467.

 

[28] Krabbendam, H., 2011, Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, Church History and Religious Culture, Issue 91, 606–608. Quotation page 607.

 

[29] Appleby, S., 1996, Review of Redeeming America, Church History, Issue 1,  168–169. “Lienisch recognizes that the NCR is a social movement complex intellectual and moral claims at its core. Intellectual historians appreciate his refusal to subordinate beliefs and values other reliable but overplayed markers of social identity. This approach raises a formidable theoretical challenge, however, in assuming tease out a coherent worldview from the several, often somewhat ambivalent opinions, theologies, and historical various personalities normally identified with the movement. To complicate things further, Lienisch rightly included not only politicized preachers (Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell), preachy politicians (Jesse Helms), celebrity evangelicals (Anita Bryant and in-house movement intellectual (Francis Schaeffer) – but also the dozens of lesser-known (to outsiders) but influential ideologues such David Chilton, George Grant, John Eidsmore, and Rousas John Rushdoony.” Appleby 1996: 168. Lienisch, Michael (1993). Redeeming America: Piety and Politics in the New Christian Right. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina.

 

[30] Balmer, R., Bowler,  et al., 2017, Forum: Studying Religion in the Age of Trump. Religion and American Culture, Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, Issue 1, 2–56. Cited on page 6.

 

[31]  Carpenter, J., 2003, Review of The Book of Jerry Falwell: Fundamentalist Language and Politic, The Journal of Religion, Issue 1, 124–125. “With the help of the Calvinist preacher and apologist Francis Schaeffer, Falwell gets his world-fleeing fundamentalists to imagine a greater role in God’s grand economy as world transformers. The immediate object of their reforming witness is America it.” Pages 124-5.

 

[32] Kersch, K. I., 2016, Constitutive Stories about the Common Law in Modern American Conservatism, Nomos, Issue 56, 211–255. Cited pages 227-8, 250. Rushdoony, Rousas John (1973). The Institutes of Biblical Law, Nutley, NJ: P&R (Craig Press)

 

[33] Worthen, M., 2008, The Chalcedon Problem: Rousas John Rushdoony and the Origins of Christian Reconstructionism, Church History, Issue 77, 399–437. Quotation page 435.

 

[34] Du Mez, Kristin Kobes, 2020, Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Frac-tured a Nation, Liveright publishing Corporation. Cite page 78.

 

[35] Hankins, B., 2016, Review of American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism, The Journal of Religion, Issue 96, 581–582. Quotation page 582.

 

[36] Harp, Gillis J., 2015, Review of Republican Theology: The Civil Religion of American Evangelicals, Church History, Issue 84, 701-4. Cited page 703.

 

[37] Weinberg, C. R., 2021, Trees, Knees, and Nurseries, in Creationism, Culture Wars, and Anticommunism in †America, Cornell University Press. Specially, pages from 204 to 232.

 

[38] McGreevy, J., 2007, Catholics, Democrats, and the GOP in Contemporary America, American Quarterly, Issue 59, 669–681. Cited page 672.

 

[39] Noll, M. A., 2015, Review of The Age of Evangelicalism: America’s Born-Again Years, The American Historical Review, 120, 674-675. Cited 674.

 

[40] Northcott, M. S., 2012, Reading Hauerwas in The Cornbelt: The Demise of the American Dream and the Return of Liturgical Politics, The Journal of Religious Ethics, Issue 40, 262–280. Quotation page 264.

 

[41] Pierard, R., 1995, Civil Religion Critically Revisited, Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte, Issue 8, 203–219. Quotation page 216.

 

[42] Miller, Paul D., 2022, The Religion of American Greatness: What’s Wrong With Christian Nationalism. Pages 21-22, 143, 148-9.

 

[43] Ruotsila, M., 2013, “Russia’s Most Effective Fifth Column”: Cold War Perceptions of Un-Americanism in US Churches, Journal of American Studies, Issue 47, 1019–1041. Quotation page 1028. 8); Schaeffer, Francis. (1950) The New Modernism, Philadelphia: The Independent Board of Presbyterian Foreign Missions.

 

[44] Fauci, A. S., 2014, C. Everett Koop: 14 October 1916-25 February 2013, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Issue 158, 455–460.

 

[45] Hamil-Luker, J., & Smith, C., 1998, Religious Authority and Public Opinion on the Right to Die, Sociology of Religion, Issue 59, 373–391. Quotation page 387.

 

[46] Weinberg, C. R., 2021, Trees, Knees, and Nurseries, in Creationism, Culture Wars, and Anticommunism in †America, Cornell University Press. Quotation page 250.

 

[47] Steffen, L., 1995, Review of The Politics of Virtue: Is Abortion Debatable? Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Issue 63, 910–914. Quotation page 913.

 

[48] Burson, S. R., 1996, A Comparative Analysis of C. S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer, The Lamp-Post of the Southern California C.S. Lewis Society, Issue 2, 4–29. References are pages 14-18.

 

[49] Jeffrey, D. L., 2000, C. S. Lewis, the Bible, and Its Literary Critics, Christianity and Literature, Issue 50, 95–109. Cited page 97.

 

[50] Davies, L., 1997, Covenantal Hermeneutics and the Redemption of Theory, Christianity and Literature, Issue 46, 357–397. Quotation pages 367-8.

 

[51] Lofton, K., 2010, Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, Church History, Issue 79, 983–985. Cited page 984.

 

[52] Miller, S. P., 2019, Review of The Evangelicals: The Struggle to Shape America, The North Carolina Historical Review, Issue 96, 449–450. Quotation page 449. FitzGerald, Frances (2017). The Evangelicals: The Struggle to Shape America, New York: Simon and Schuster.

 

[53] Lindsay, D. M., 2008, Evangelicals in the Power Elite: Elite Cohesion Advancing a Movement, American Sociological Review, Issue 73, 60–82. Reference pages 70-1.

 

[54] Dowland, S., 2009, “Family Values” and the Formation of a Christian Right Agenda, Church History, Issue 78, 606–631. “Schaeffer concluded that ‘we must stand against the loss of humanness in all its forms.’ He saw abortion as murder of innocents, and his book popularized that interpretation among conservative Protestant.” Page 613.

 

[55] Moreton, B., 2009, Why Is There So Much Sex in Christian Conservatism and Why Do So Few Historians Care Anything about It? The Journal of Southern History, Issue 75, 717–738. Quotation page 723.

 

[56] McAlister, M., 2017, The Global Conscience of American Evangelicalism: Internationalism and Social Concern in the 1970s and Beyond, Journal of American Studies, Issue 51, 1197–1220. Quotation page 1197.

 

[57] Adam, R., 2008, Relating Faith Development and Religious Styles: Reflections in Light of Apostasy from Religious Fundamentalism, Archive for the Psychology of Religion, Issue 30, 201-231. Quotation page 208.

 

[58] Zakaullah, M. A., 2003, The Rise of Christian Fundamentalism in the United States and the Challenge to Understand the New America, Islamic Studies, Issue 42, 437–486. Quotation page 460.

 

[59] Wells, R. A., & Hankins, B., 2010, Review of Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America, The Journal of Religion, Issue 90, 417–419. Quotation page 419.

[60] Coffman, E., 2017, Review of Saving Faith: Making Religious Pluralism an American Value at the Dawn of the Secular Age, The Journal of Religion, Issue 4, 576–578. Quotation page 578. Moore, Joseph S., 2015, Founding Sins: How a Group of Antislavery Radicals Fought to Put Christ into the Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press.

 

[61] Brooke McPherson; Helen McGowan (2020), The Reality of Fake News, A Study of Donald J. Trump’s Free Press Violations. Quotation page 13.

 

[62] Schilbrack, Kevin (2002). The Study of Religious Belief after Donald Davidson, Method &# 38; Theory in the Study of Religion, ingentaconnect.com, https://www.academia.edu/1964361/The_Study_of_Religious_Belief_after_Donald_Davidson

[63] Worthen, Molly, 2014, Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, 286n24,

 

 

 

RESEARCH NOTE: ANGLO-AMERICAN MAJOR BELIEF-DOUBT SYSTEMS

RESEARCH NOTE: ANGLO-AMERICAN MAJOR BELIEF-DOUBT SYSTEMS

 

 

 

This is a research note to preserve copyright and notice to this new and substantive thesis of the Anglo-American major belief-doubt systems, since the seventeenth century, which at the end of that century expanded, and transformed, the power of the English monarchy to a new entity known as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The constitutional and national development coincided with the securing of the fledging English colonialism in North America, with entry, in the next century (18th) into the waters and landmass of the Asia-Indian-Pacific spheres. The concept of colonialism is not limited nor unique to the English-speaking worlds. However, in both threatening and beneficial ways, it produced Anglo-American belief systems, and both for the powerful colonisers and the disempowered colonised.

 

These belief systems, which includes its necessary skepticism (doubt), have usually been 1) called ‘ideology’, and 2) boxed as categories of ‘religion’ and ‘secularity’. Both these outlooks are problematics and are based on gross intellectual misunderstanding. First, ‘ideology’ is commonly used as a swearword to dismiss systems thought: out-of-hand, as (to be frank) a ‘blood-minded’ and ignorant defence mechanism. So, to be clear, references to ‘ideology’ and ‘ideological’ are used here merely as references to systems thought, either for good or bad. Secondly, the studies-in-religion field, more than half century, has clearly demonstrated that the hard categorisation between references to ‘religion’ and ‘secularity’ are false. Those who continue in that ‘categorical mistake’ (Gilbert Ryle, The Concept of Mind, 1949) are usually culture-history warriors.

 

The structure of the research to 1) identify a basic worldview, 2) describe a model of that worldview which usually ties the evolutionary thread to a global university school or college or networked institutes. From those two steps is a selection of one key example in 3) the historic Evangelical World and one in 4) the (‘secular’) Corporate World, usually in a dual sense of a singular institute or school of thought and an industry or corporate grouping. In this way, a web of belief can be both described and explained.

 

There are six basic socio-political worldviews. The descriptors identify a cultural reference, the usual ‘socio-political’ name, its usual status as either a political party or a social institute, describing the worldview as a tradition, and the usual tag as a common language by-word (in that order of the descriptive phrase):

 

  1. The (British) Tory (Party) ESTABLISHMENT
  2. The (American) Republican (Party) Tradition RIGHT POPULISM
  3. The (British) Radical (Party) Tradition HOLISTIC DISSENT Dissonance
  4. The (American) Democrat (Party) Tradition LEFT POPULISM
  5. The (English) Colonial (‘institutes’) Tradition MISSION AND APOLOGETICS
  6. The (Dutch-American) Reformed (‘institutes’) Tradition EVANGELICAL ESTABLISHMENT

 

 

 

 

  1. (British) Tory (Party) Tradition. ESTABLISHMENT.

 

The conservative tradition in the English-speaking world is best expressed by the ‘British Tory Party’: a descriptor for organisations such as the Conservative Party UK or the Conservative Party of Canada. Political organisations do not align perfectly with ideology, so Toryism is like any other social science model, a genealogical method (as in philosophical term of Nietzsche and Foucault), and, as Bernard William describes it, an origin-type fiction, paralleling the concept of myth, which broadly structures out the non-fiction truth (truthfulness propositions); thus, having accuracy but not the logical accuracy of mathematical truth  (Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, 2002). “The Conservative Mind” (Russell Kirk, 1953) appears to continually to trip-over with this misunderstanding of social science, in its rejection of the thought propositions within the outlook of modernity; ironically, the modernist propositions of  hard  scientific humanism (in the mid-century) led to a neo-conservative outlook to reject the Nietzschean genealogical method since mythology could not be taken as accurate scientifically. This is done in employing the fallacy of cherry-picking details and failing to understand the mythological or constructivist’s  point; or to employ another metaphor, chopping down one tree (or even a few) and think that the concept of the forest has been destroyed; or extending the metaphor: being deaf to the forest in chopping down the tree. Starting with the concept of tradition, the new conservatism, particularly Americanised neo-conservatism (William F. Buckley Jr., God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom”, 1951), has ended up in the cognitive trap of scientism. This has meant that “The Conservative Mind” had the incapacity to see its own ideological faults, in terms of the political and social critiques, and, indeed, the overall ideological critique in terms of systems analysis.

 

The historical criticism (historiography) of Toryism does the best in plain English terms to demonstrate the shortfall in the thinking. Historically seen, retrospective in time, Tories were monarchists, engaged in a high church Anglican religious heritage, and were opposed to the liberalism of the Whig party. The Conservative model was only ‘recently’ changed – mid-century – with is usually described as ‘Neo-Conservativism’ – the works of Kirk and Buckley Jr., as well as Daniel Bell, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Irving Kristol. There is then a disjunction between Toryism and the new conservative model, with neo-conservative writers strangely disparaging modern liberal thinkers of having Tory attitudes; in the same twisted logic of Buckley Jr., in accusing academics of having “supernaturalism”. In terms of critical thinking, it does not take much logical understanding to see that the new conservativism is an argument made of fallacious thinking, and is historically a replay of the ancient Roman “language game” of rhetoric to bewilder the public in accepting the false arguments of the  modern industrial/post-industrial “The Power Elite” (C. Wright Mills, 1956).

 

The Oxford College Model is based on the Oxford University Commissioners’ Report of 1852: “The education imparted at Oxford was not such as to conduce to the advancement in life of many persons, except those intended for the ministry.” It is a model of the power elite in the way that the liberal sociologist C. Wright Mills  (1956) described it in the American mid-century. Historically, the Oxford College Model has been tied to the Torys’ high church Anglican religious heritage. The link here with the Evangelical world is ambiguous but the intellectual thread is connected in what was called the “Clapham Cabinet” or ‘Sect’ and the history of the Bible Society (‘EHA’ thesis, Piggin & Linder 2018; Lake 2018). The Clapham Sect (technically not a sect but as much part of the established Church of England), or Clapham Saints, were a group of social reformers associated with Clapham in the period from the 1780s to the 1840s. Stuart Piggin & Rob Linder (2018) use the term, Clapham Cabinet, which was made up of its organisational leadership, across Oxbridge and the London Anglican base.  The reformers were partly composed of members from St Edmund Hall, Oxford and Magdalene College, Cambridge, where the Vicar of Holy Trinity Church, Charles Simeon had preached to students from the university, and were encouraged by Beilby Porteus, the Bishop of London, himself an abolitionist and reformer, who sympathised with many of their aims. The  British and Foreign Bible Society and the Church Missionary Society were associated with the reformers. The Bishop of Oxford in this period (1816-1827) was Edward Legge, Warden of All Souls College, Oxford, from 1817. Catholic emancipation was a long road with strong Puritan and Evangelical opposition, with the markers of the Papists Act 1778, the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1791, the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1793, the removal of the Sacramental Test Act in 1828, and the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829, followed by “the Tithe War” of the 1830s (the last of legal anti-Catholic discriminations were not removed until the 1920s). In a three-way political competition, the Anglo-Catholic Bishops and Evangelical reformers, stood together in opposition to any appeasement to Roman Catholics; in the same way, in the mid-century Cold War, that American fundamentalists stood together with American neo-conservatives in opposition to any appeasement to global socialists (and in the ideological language of the Americans, “communist”).

 

The ambiguity, part from cross-institutional connections, was also that the Claphamites, from about the 1830s, often exemplified Nonconformist conscience with many ended up as the Methodists and the Plymouth Brethren thinkers in a broader socio-political movement against Catholic emancipation. The bigot attitude was part and parcel of the growth of evangelical Christian revivalism in England, which had direct links through Anglo-American revivalists, particularly in the American colonial experience of John Wesley, to the American Revivalist Tradition (ART; Buch 1995). Intellectually, at the time, Evangelical Protestant thought necessitated a conspiratorial evaluation of Catholic thought, aided in the growth of American nationalistic thinking. The liberal historiographical critique of mid-century to late century, among the Anglo-American historians, have developed this critique of ART (including Neo-Evangelical scholars). Yet otherwise excelling Evangelical historians continue to “paper over” the intellectual problem – the too high emphasis on doctrine and inability to conceive the ‘dogma’ problem fully in these histories of evangelicalism. It has to be noted that younger “neo-evangelical” scholars, and older scholars in the field are driving the critique (such as the author, Buch, Lucas, 3:1, June 2023, and forthcoming).

 

The Oxford College Model is historically linked to English Conservativism because of the university’s role during the English Civil War (1642–1649), as the centre of the Royalist party. From the beginnings of the Church of England as the established church until 1866, membership of the church was a requirement to receive an Oxford BA degree from the university and Protestant dissenter were only permitted to receive the Oxford MA in 1871. In contrast, historically, Cambridge University, has been closely associated to radical thought, although the intellectual history is (again) ambiguous. The history of Cambridge is well-associated with several important “anti-establishment” thinkers or mavericks to conventional thought:  Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, Oliver Cromwell, John Milton, Lord Byron, Charles Darwin, Vladimir Nabokov, John Maynard Keynes, Jawaharlal Nehru, Bertrand Russell, Alan Turing, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Stephen Hawking. It is a far-too simple, and thus false, to set up an Oxford and Cambridge University Model comparison, but if main collegial networks are the truthful point as several important references to the ‘Oxford School’ or the ‘Cambridge School’, the modelling holds (Randall Collins, The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, 1998). Outside of the intellectual history, what made Cambridge distinct, in the terms social organisational history, was the Cambridge Apostles, founded in 1820. Stephen Toulmin, the philosopher of thinking in this research, was a member, so was Alfred Tennyson, Bertrand Russell, G. E. Moore, and John Maynard Keynes. The Soviet spies Anthony Blunt, Guy Burgess and John Cairncross, three of the Cambridge Five, and Michael Straight were all members of the Apostles in the early 1930s, which would also explain intellectual tensions that had existed with the Oxford establishment.

 

In the Studies-in-Religion field, there is a strong Cambridge-Birmingham-Lancaster network (English north-west direction) with Ninian Smart, John Hick, and Don Cupitt. The Oxford-Cambridge distinction, however, is even stronger in historiography. Historically, a major network thread in the “Oxford School” has been the conservative ‘Great Man’ tradition, originated in the multi-volume Dictionary of National Biography (which originated in 1882 and issued updates into the 1970s); it continues to this day in the new Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. On the other hand, there is a significant connection between radical thought and the “Cambridge School” of historians. Again, this is ambiguous truthfulness (not straightforward): at Oxford, Christopher Hill, Rodney Hilton (though, moved to Birmingham) but at Cambridge,  G. M. Trevelyan, E. P. Thompson, and Eric Hobsbawm. Other places and centres of English radical thought was much closer to Cambridge than Oxford: Dona Torr at University College London and John Saville at Hull University. The work of the American Peter Novick’s, That noble dream: The ‘objectivity question’ and the American historical profession (1988) was published by Cambridge University Press, and can be contrast to the anti-communist liberal historiography of Oxford’s Isaiah Berlin. Indeed, the strength of Berlin’s history of ideas approach was the benefits in “the Oxford idealism”, a much more clearcut set of critiques of ideas in the Continental tradition, which is seen as too highbrow by social historians in the English radical tradition. These historians of a Cambridge bent were not adverse to systems thought but their ideological criticism rode on a perceived social realism from the social historical context in history-from-below. The Cambridge History of Latin America is eleven volume treatment which is much more honest and open to criticisms on Spanish, Portuguese, English Colonialism.

 

Other fields also reflected in this approach to more contextual and informal logical modes of thought. Stephen Toulmin developed his basic argument of informal logic at Cambridge: the dissertation as An Examination of the Place of Reason in Ethics (1950), where he was influenced by contact with Ludwig Wittgenstein, whose examination of the relationship between the uses and the meanings of language shaped much of Toulmin’s own work. The Toulmin model of argumentation is a diagrammatic six interrelated components used for analysing arguments (The Uses of Argument 1958), and led to “the good reasons approach”  a meta-ethical theory that ethical conduct is justified if the actor has good reasons for that conduct, developed in the thinking of Stephen Toulmin, Jon Wheatley and Kai Nielsen. The good reasons approach is not opposed to ethical theory per se, but is antithetical to wholesale justifications of morality and stresses that our moral conduct requires no further ontological or other foundation beyond concrete justifications. The thinking was brought to Oxford when Toulmin was appointed University Lecturer in Philosophy of Science at Oxford University (1949-1954). Toulmin also brought the thinking to Australia when he was Visiting Professor of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Melbourne (1954-1955). The English modern social and theoretical science has a stronger association with Cambridge.

 

The Toulmin model of argumentation

 

There are also important economic developments associated with the paradigm of Anglo-American conservative thought, but there is very little distinction between universities, except for the London School of Economics. The economic thinking coming out of Oxford is seen as conservative or conventional, but that is due to the comparison to the history of the London School, which has always been “radical” in both Left and Right semantics. Indeed, while Oxford desires an overall stable historiography (“conventional wisdom”), London expresses the seesawing between 19th century Free-Market Capitalism (Right), Keynesian “Middle-of-the-Road” Regulation (Left), and Neoliberalism (Right). These cognitive risings and falls take place over decades. The neo-liberal thinking as theoretical works came into being during the 1970s. The Adam Smith Institute, a United Kingdom–based free-market think tank and lobbying group  that formed in 1977, was a major driver of the neoliberal reforms. The 1980s saw Thatcherism and Reaganism. Then the economic thinking could not be divorced from shifts in international development theory and trade interest from theorists in the United States. In the 1990s there was the neo-liberal politics of Alberto Fujimori in Peru, and the North American Free Trade Agreement. In the culture-history war since the collapse of communist states (1989-1993), the neoliberal turn was much more about the ideological attack of the neo-conservatives upon the social thinking of mid-century liberals like Walter Reuther or John Kenneth Galbraith or Arthur Schlesinger, than the statistical obscure economic models. The Oxford Institute for Economic Policy was founded (2004), and has been for the last 20 years an independent and non-profit think tank focused on analysis, discussion and dissemination of economic policy issues. However, globally it is still unclear what new economic vision will emerge, but it will, and the historiographical spiral will turn Left in a new way.  Unfortunately, the social damage has been done, most significantly in the creation of “The (British) Contemporary Higher Education Corporations”. The damage is significant because a common economic complaint, and the new mantra,  are the loss of many specific sub-fields of the humanities and social sciences once taught and researched within the universities, creating a skills shortage for global communities, seeking out a new vision. This will be seen in the third section, examining the Cambridge College Model in further details.

 

 

  1. (American) Republican (Party) Tradition. RIGHT POPULISM.

 

A basic worldview of the Republican Party (United States), founded in 1854,  is difficult to sum up as an accurate summative account, but usually read as the ideology of traditional conservativism. The evidence of the ‘shift thesis’ demonstrated that today’s contextual hermeneutics has made this idea of conservatism a false proposition. The ‘shift thesis’ is a widely held view by American historians that the successes of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, meant that the Republican Party’s core base shifted to the Southern states (and intellectually, the  Post-1950: “Southern Institutes”), and as the Northeastern states increasingly Democratic (and intellectually reflected the outlook of Pre-1950: “Northern Institutes”). The Republican Party has become the party of right-wing social reaction.

 

There are several “Southern Institutes” which could be mentioned as closer to the Republican Party, however, because of Buckley Jr.’s 1951 thesis (God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom), universities are marginalised in Republican discussions. Republicans have either attacked the university sector of higher education, or created a new college sector which reflected the traditional conservative curriculum, and often called, “Christian”. In the social reality, but as most cases, these colleges are not ‘traditional conservative’ but the powerhouse of American neo-conservatism. The analysis has to say, “most cases”, as an increasing number of evangelical college communities are fighting back at the colonialisation of “religion” by the Republican Party. Indeed, the excelling evangelical scholars have been, more than half a century back, critics of “American religion”. The smaller but more powerful colleges for the Party are still thinking in terms of neo-fundamentalism, i.e., centralising every argument on the biblical inerrancies. The challenge is that many good evangelical scholars have yet to realise that the modern evangelical apologetic movements of Bill Bright, Chuck Colson (very politically directed under a theological mask for the contemporary Republican ideology) James Dobson, D. James Kennedy, C. Everett Koop, Francis Schaffer, and R.C. Sproul, are eroding the Neo-Evangelical movement in the uncreditable, invalid, and unsound biblical inerrancy claims.

 

In the middle of this mess of the American South is the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC; the neo-conservative thesis, Miller 1958, Smith 1965, Marty 1970, Handy 1977, Szasz 1982, Buch 1995). I have already explained the role of the SBC in the American neo-conservative thinking in previous publications, but to again recap: Sydney Alhstrom sees anti-intellectualism as a corollary of American revivalism in A Religious History of the American People (1972), and recounted that large elements of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), in their opposition to higher education, worked havoc in the academic program of Southern Theological Seminary in Kentucky. The SBC has had a history of forcing academics out of their seminary positions, often due to academics critical study of the scriptures and Church history. It was under these circumstances that Dr. Crawford Howell Toy was pressured to resign from Southern Baptist Seminary in 1879. Martin Marty (1970) saw Toy’s downfall as a pattern that is typical of southern churches. William H. Whitsett, professor of Church History, also at Southern, had the same fate as Toy nineteen years later (1898). When Whitsett condemned the populist Landmark theory, sectarian Baptists, for whom Landmarkism was a sacred doctrine, threatened to withdraw financial support for the seminary.

 

Such interference in the academic standards of Southern Baptist seminaries has also been evident in the post-1945 period. In 1962, Professor Ralph H. Elliot was dismissed from his position at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary when his published book, The Message of Genesis (1962), was deemed ‘liberal’. It is important to note that anti-intellectualism does not pervade all areas of the American Revivalist tradition (ART), but is only a common characteristic of the majority which articulate American revivalism. In the case of Neo-Calvinist and Neo-Evangelical scholarship, it is not a matter of anti-intellectualism, but a matter of pseudo-intellectualism, flawed or out-dated scholarship which continues to avoid relevant contemporary criticism of its assumptions. This is why otherwise many good evangelical scholars are blind-sighted to the intellectual problems in their midst, and what the contemporised Republican Party represents. Much of that comes from a vehement anti-liberal populism. The history of the Convention has only pushed further in this direction in recent years.

 

Apart from the Republican Party and the Southern Baptist Convention and likeminded colleges, it is difficult to say what educational entities are that generates the worldview in a singular institute or school of thought. This is due, as indicated, that the anti-liberal populism is also anti-intellectual and anti-education in the full understanding of the concept of education. One of the important historical marker as an institutional shaper is “The (American federal) Senate’s Southern Caucus (1964)” in a fight against “Civil Rights” being legislated. The type of thinking has been carried through into the new century with the Tea Party movement (2009) and the House Freedom Caucus (2015), and developing into the ideology of Trumpism (2016-).

 

There is a link here between the contemporised information technology thinking in relation to social visions of the future, cemented into the mythology of the American Dream, or in cynical disappointment, creating its dystopian mirror vision. These are the conversations and rhetoric of the “The (American) Contemporary Informational and Data Corporations”. There are only a few works which makes the linkages clear, historically Jacques Ellul (1964): the original and formative in a strange but effective Neo-Calvinist and Reformed-Marxist mixture of thought. Nevertheless, the cyber-capitalism is well documented, even if few works described the intellectual relationships with concepts of culture, history and nations.

 

 

  1. (British) Radical (Party) Tradition. HOLISTIC DISSENT Dissonance.

 

English Radicalism or “classical radicalism” or “radical liberalism” had its earliest beginnings during the English Civil War with the Levellers and later with the Radical Whigs, as the retrospective reading of the history in and around the English Civil War. From that development we have, not merely an outdated Whiggish historiography of the 19th century, but the emergence of the new 20th century Progressivist historiography. The new framework is currently evolving in the Postmodern phase. It is not a tradition which will disappear, since philosophically, we can say that somethings are better than others, and since policy says we should not make the better an enemy of the perfect, but the demand for ideological purity is the enemy of social improvement. Hence English Radicalism, or radical parties  have been sociologically negative: against the purity of social conservatism, arguing for taking on risks for social change, in the way conservatives continually resist social change to the point of zero (ideologically purity). It is thus ironical that conservatives, still today, accuse the reformist Left of being ‘ideological’. Certainly ‘radicals’ are “ideological” in different variants of: liberalism, republicanism, modernism, secular humanism, antimilitarism, civic nationalism, abolition of titles, rationalism, secularism, redistribution of property, freedom of the press, ‘left-wing causes’, and etc. The ongoing agendas of reforms is what the conservative negatively charge as “being political” with the presumption that most areas of life are generally, on principle, “pre-political”. This is the cause in Conservative blind-side to their own locked-in ideological thinking. Nevertheless, Anglo-American radicalism has its own blind-side.

 

When conservatives tend to be highly logical in their intellectualism (bubble thinking of logicism), radicals suffer from what I describe as “ Holistic Dissent Dissonance”. The problem is not in taking a holistic approach per se. Nor is the problem in dissenting from convention, or even dissenting from the school of perennial philosophy. It is that there is too frequently cognitive dissonance in the way the poorer radical scholars articulate a positioning of equalitarian holism or any other positioning of radical dissent. Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency to function mentally in the real world, from his works, When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World (1956) and A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957). Festinger goes on to say that a person experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance, this then leads to a person justifying the stressful behaviour, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance (rationalization) or by avoiding circumstances and contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance (confirmation bias). More simply, persons avoid admitting mistakes in their thinking, and either rationalise what is poorly rational or blocks emotions by removing the thinking from the situation (context). Psychological dissonance affects the conservatives – the avoidance of admitting mistakes – by the logicism which is something like rationalising in Aristotelian universal spirals (adding cycles upon cycles Infineum). Radicals do not have the traditional recourse and  so, despite its universality, the argumentations became fragmented and only signal holism without substantiation. For conservative and radical thinker, none of this is pre-determined, and the solution is the model of communicative rationality (Jürgen Habermas, Communication and the Evolution of society,  1979). In its post-metaphysical model, the argument is:

 

  1. called into question the substantive conceptions of rationality (e.g., “a rational person thinks this”) and put forward procedural or formal conceptions instead (e.g., “a rational person thinks like this”);
  2. replaced foundationalism with fallibilism with regard to valid knowledge and how it may be achieved;
  3. cast doubt on the idea that reason should be conceived abstractly beyond history and the complexities of social life, and have contextualized or situated reason in actual historical practices;
  4. replaced a focus on individual structures of consciousness with a concern for pragmatic structures of language and action as part of the contextualization of reason; and
  5. given up philosophy’s traditional fixation on theoretical truth and the representational functions of language, to the extent that they also recognize the moral and expressive functions of language as part of the contextualization of reason.

 

The model comes out of post-1945 German radicalism, as the school of Critical Theory. Which is to say that the Anglo-American belief systems of radical and conservative thought could fairly engage, even overlap, before 1945, but after 1945 there was a great disjunction, and this uncoincidentally coincided with the bitter reaction of American neo-conservatism.

 

It explains the disjunction in the Evangelical World. The European influence in the American Neo-Evangelical movement was to fallibilism from the Barthian reading of Kant. This is directly opposed to the positioning of the American (neo-) fundamentalist movement linked into the American neo-conservatist’s ideological purity (e.g., the purity of Americanism and biblical inerrancy).

 

The Cambridge College Model has been described above as the contrast with the Oxford Model, however, it might be further suggested that Cambridge had more significant ties to Continental Philosophy than Oxford. That is seen in a Cambridge thinker like Wittgenstein, however, Bernard Williams is better to be said to be an Oxbridge thinker, the philosopher who overcame useless divide between the Anglo-American analytic tradition and the European continental tradition. Williams was able to do that by making links between the Cambridge Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language and Frankfurt Habermas’ philosophy of language, all in a deep historiography influenced by Oxford Berlin’s history of continental ideas.

 

In the Anglo-American evangelical world, the role of the Cambridge Inter-Collegiate Christian Union provided something of the radical influences from both Anglo-American and German thinking. In the former is the Protestant dissenter’s Arminianism, the Reform’s opposition to the deterministic and highly-doctrinaire classic Calvinism. The latter is more British with the links of Hegelian idealism in liberal evangelicalism, before the American variant of Neo-Orthodoxy killed it, for the United States, from its anti-liberal biases. In the Australian evangelical variant, Piggin & Linder tied the Cambridge outlook to the Keswick movement and the suspicion towards doctrinal fundamentalism in the ranks (2018: 449, 501; 2020: 304). Here is the same link to Protestant dissenter’s Arminianism. I refer this historical description as the Sydney Anglican or Moore College’s thesis. It is a fair institutional self-criticism in the history, particularly as the “Sydney Anglican” historical phenomena. Nevertheless, it misses the deeper layer of the intellectual history, particularly framed in Critical Theory.

 

The historical debates go to what was sustainable in the intellectual framing. On a wider canvas, ‘secular’ (?), we can look at the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (1989). It has been for thirty years examining the same intellectual questions for high-end businesses and technology corporations. (https://www.cisl.cam.ac.uk/). Hence, there is a wider ‘secular’ framework in “The (British) Contemporary Ideas and Consultancy Industries”.

 

 

 

 

  1. (American) Democrat (Party) Tradition. LEFT POPULISM.

 

Many of the descriptions of the American Democrat (Party) tradition and American radicalism are the same as described above for English radicalism. There are important differences. As in the ‘shift thesis’ for the Republican Party, the Democrat Party was not in the camp of “social justice” until the late twentieth century, Kennedy-Johnston politics. Democrat Party has to be remembered as the party of carpetbaggers of the 19th century.  Something of the legacy lingers in the Party room. Neither can populist American radicalism escape charges of cognitive dissonance, the same cases of English Radicalism. Historian Gordon S. Wood articulated the differences for American Left Populism and Establishment Democrats from their English counterparts in the 1993 Pulitzer Prize book, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (Vintage Books). The American revolution was a completely different to the English Civil War, and has some, but not all, overlap in the concept of a Puritan Revolution. Wood argues that the American colonists appropriated Whig absolute ideals of ‘liberty,’ different to the articulations of the English Civil War. The American variant ultimately came to represent the unity of personal liberty and public liberty, and a residue of representation in a ‘natural aristocracy’. Differences are drawn out by writers like Henry James. The difference is subtle but go to a power play on informal (America) and formal (British) characteristics.

 

Most significant, is that these differences are moral characteristics. The question is who was more respectable? The practical informality of the Americans, which the British saw as coarse (disrespectful), or the ancient  formality of the British, which the Americans saw as hypocrisy (disrespectful). The question arose from the emergence of the Harvard College Model. Daniel Walker Howe (1970) articulated the tradition of Harvard Moral Philosophy in connection to the Unitarian ‘revolution’ at Harvard (The Unitarian Conscience, Harvard University Press). That ‘revolution’ of thought is the rejection of orthodoxy and dogma for informal logic, or as said today, critical thinking. This kind of thinking was reflected in the short-lived Harvard Institute for International Development (1974-2000). Liberal organisations have been plagued on the American scene from anti-liberal biases which arises from the culture(s).

 

This is what we have today in the crisis of Americanised evangelicalism. ‘The battle of bible’ of the 1970s and 1980s was only the shaper end, theologically, of intellectual framings, which goes to, one side, outside of traditional evangelicalism, Unitarian-Universalist Thought, and the other side, a hard-driven Calvinistic (neo) fundamentalist thinking, all within the United States. This research began as the doctorate of the current author (‘ART’ thesis, Buch 1995). The current crisis of evangelicalism extends back in a history to the 1960s, and also back to the American neo-conservative paradigm of the Cold War 1950s. There are three ART groupings (American Revivalist Tradition, Buch 1995). American revivalism is expressed by the three distinct characteristics of the American Revivalist tradition; biblicalism, anti-intellectualism, and mechanisation of the Christian faith. Biblicalism is the ideology which gives the biblical canon an exalted authority over the life of the believer.

 

All aspects of belief, doctrine, thought is expected to conform to precepts that biblicalists claim are recorded and supported by the 66 books of scripture. Biblicalism is based on the belief that the whole biblical canon is a harmonious revelation of God, the Word of God. Although most biblicalists would claim that there are areas of scripture that are vague in their meaning and may be given differing interpretations, the fact that the biblicalists make themselves the interpreters of the divine Word of God means biblicalism, like all sacred book traditions, ends up being the tyranny of the believers over themselves. The believer is locked into a cyclical existence where belief is said to come from the Word of God which is itself the belief of the believer. In such an existence, the process of hermeneutics is avoided.

 

Anti-intellectualism is the second characteristic present in the American Revivalist tradition. Anti-intellectualism is a state of mind which suspects complex and abstract concepts in favour of dogmatic and poorly-constructed beliefs. It has generally involved the slander, censorship, or prohibition of certain academics and their writings. Richard Hofstadter identifies anti-intellectualism as a significant part of the American culture in Anti-intellectualism in American Life (1966). American anti-intellectualism frequently appeared through the use of American apocryphal stories which were recorded in denominational periodicals, as well as the over-the-top criticism of non-evangelical paradigms in literature (usually paperbacks, tapes, and then digital podcasts) of the Apologetics Industry.

 

Mechanisation of the Christian faith is the third characteristic of the American Revivalist tradition. The American Revivalist tradition sought to implement various techniques to bring about a ‘revival’, and in the process, reduced the Christian life to a series of techniques in evangelism and discipleship. In this way, the Christian faith was merely mechanical, the elements of faith (belief, prayer, worship, etc.) all locked into a machine-like plan. In the post-1945 period, American revivalism became consumed by searching out revivalistic techniques in the form of evangelistic methodologies. There were many American evangelical writers who claim to have discovered the “techniques” that Jesus used with his disciples. To understand the technological nature of the American Revivalist tradition, one needs to turn to the sociological works of Jacques Ellul,  Professor of History and Sociology of Institutions at the University of Bordeaux, and a European evangelical in the Calvinist tradition. Ellul formed the thesis that the predominant characteristic of the contemporary human condition is, in the French definition of the word, technique. Technique, once a tool developed for science, is now a mindset that dominates the affairs of humanity; a mindset where the question of “How it works” becomes all important while the question of “Why it is so” becomes increasingly irrelevant. Method is valued more than content.

 

In the 21st century, then, “The (American Evangelical/Pentecostal) Contemporary Megachurch Incorporations” has become the expression of the paradigm. The current research analysis is based on a large volume of American liberal historiography during the twentieth century, hovering between the consensus and conflictual schools, with a focus on Richard Hofstadter (1963, 1965). It demonstrates that a megachurch can only exist as a business organisation, with membership growth as the prime reason for that existence.

 

That the megachurch problem is sourced in the history of the American culture, and some might disagree, having described the Australian Pentecostalism as indigenous. The ‘indigenous’ view is supported by Rocha & Hutchinson (2020: 3-4; 2002: 26), Barry Chant (1999: 39), Byron Klaus (Klaus in Dempster, Klaus & Petersen 1999: 127), and Philip Hughes (1996: 3). It is posited that Australian Pentecostalism is local rather than sourced from overseas missions. However, the American history described and explained the phenomenon of the global megachurch. In Australia, the local megachurch phenomena of the 1970s and 1980s were a product of the American revivalist tradition (Buch 1994). The tradition is a historical series of parochial mass movements which shaped the American ideological narrative, and then exported as Americanism (as in American modernism).  Mark Hutchinson and John Wolffe (2012) attempt to link the new direction of the ‘indigenous’ view in the era of 1870-1914 with what they describe as a ‘New Global Spiritual Unity’. There is some bearing here, but it is more accurate to say that it was a vision of world mission undergirded by western cultural values rather than being a true vision of global unity. That new vision had to wait for the mid-twentieth century sociology revolution. Sam Hey’s recent works (2011, 2016) has greatly helped to understand the Australian experience of megachurch in the sociologies of Peter L. Berger (1973), Rodney Stark and William S. Bainbridge (1987), Robert Wuthnow (1988), Wade C. Roof (1999), and Scott Thumma and Travis Dave (2007). The new sociology of religion has done much to have shaped the understanding of and for the megachurch, which for the large part is American, and framed in the American culture.

 

 

 

  1. (English) Colonial (‘institutes’) Tradition. MISSION AND APOLOGETICS.

 

In popular fiction – novels, television, films – the landscape of London is the signifier of colonialism. This is true as references to “London Institutes”. The “London Missionary Society” (the traditional Protestant mission thesis, Piggin & Linder 2018: 107-15) is at the top of the list. Piggin and Linder refer to the ‘triumphalist spirit of the missionaries’ (110). The ‘religious’ adjoins to the ‘secular’ in City and Guilds of London Institute (Imperial College, 1878). The Institute is an educational organisation in the United Kingdom. Founded on 11 November 1878 by the City of London and 16 livery companies – to develop a national system of technical education, the institute has been operating under royal charter (RC117), granted by Queen Victoria, since 1900. Today, one of it main historical functions is as a registered charity, thereby funding itself as the awarding body for City & Guilds and ILM qualifications, offering many accredited qualifications mapped onto the Regulated Qualifications Framework (RQF).

 

Here is another great social problem of our times,  “The (Anglo-American) Contemporary Public Relations Businesses”. The world of charities and higher education have succumbed to the great mistakes of public relations thinking: 1) dumbing down the narrative of a singular message, 2) engage criticism as unintelligent Apologetics, the system of defence by diverting criticism into fallacious propositions, and 3) produce neo-colonial arguments:

 

1.0. The Dumbing Down Thesis is well-established, and yet there are ‘religious’ and secular’ readers who act as if it is a surprising new thesis. However, the literature is volumes and sharper to the accurate point than the dismissive institutional apologetics:

 

1.A. On higher education there is Kenneth Minogue, emeritus professor in political science at the London School of Economics, Alan Smithers, professor of education at Liverpool University, and Frank Furedi, writer and sociologist at the University of Kent, Canterbury (Where Have All The Intellectuals Gone? Continuum, 2004);

 

1.B. On Secondary Schooling: John Taylor Gatto’s Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling (1991, 2002), where for 30 years there has been nothing new in the criticism of the conventional institutional outlook:

 

      1. It confuses the students. It presents an incoherent ensemble of information that the child needs to memorize to stay in school. Apart from the tests and trials, this programming is similar to the television; it fills almost all the ‘free’ time of children. One sees and hears something, only to forget it again.
      2. It teaches them to accept their class affiliation.
      3. It makes them indifferent.
      4. It makes them emotionally dependent.
      5. It makes them intellectually dependent.
      6. It teaches them a kind of self-confidence that requires constant confirmation by experts (provisional self-esteem).
      7. It makes it clear to them that they cannot hide because they are always supervised.

 

1.C. The Sociology from Below: in the well-known sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s (1930–2002) book, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (1979), proposed that, in a society in which the cultural practices of the ruling class are rendered and established as the legitimate culture, said distinction then devalues the cultural capital of the subordinate middle- and working- classes, and thus limits their social mobility within their own society.

 

1.D. Sociology from Above: the social critic Paul Fussell touched on the same themes but speaks of “prole drift” in Class: A Guide Through the American Status System (1983) and focused on them specifically in BAD: or, The Dumbing of America (1991). The difference here is that Fussell’s work can be read as a critique of the ruling class thinking or as the ruling class thinking apologetics: the American neo-conservatism.

 

2.0. The author has already began a series researched essays on the great problem of unintelligent Apologetics and the Apologetics Industry in our social narratives. The first essay is here: “Why the Disciplines and No Apologetics? Part 1: The Collapse of Schaefferan Apologetics”. In James Fodor’s Unreasonable Faith: How William Lane Craig Overstates the Case for Christianity (Hypatia Press, 2018), Foder shows that many of apologetic arguments are not on historical Christianity per se, but rather presents other related targets for skeptics; arguments which are fallaciously abusive in exclusivist claims for faith. “Christian Apologetic” is nothing more than of a dominion theory, which is a majority thinking of American evangelical believers (i.e., right-wing and where the American left-wing evangelical positioning is the minority), BUT a small fundamentalist minority in the Christian world. To those who label themselves “Neo-Evangelical” and to dismissively disagree with the positioning of others in the argument, the call is to consider the weight of evidence in the critical works against Apologetics, not merely for any ‘religion’, but as a ‘secular’ characteristic of the linguistics , and be open to the suggestion that one may have not understood the story of the “Neo-Evangelical rebellion” from fundamentalist orthodoxy, as shown in the historiography of George Marsden and Mark Noll. The historiography starts the analysis as discipline learning, but it then proceeds into seven other sub-disciplinary areas.

 

3.0. Neo-Colonial Narratives, which is a reference to the debate of the narrative(s) itself (apologetics) and the criticism of the narrative(s) (critical theory). Neocolonialism is the continuation or reimposition of imperialist rule by a state (usually, a former colonial power) over another nominally independent state (usually, a former colony). Neocolonialism takes the form of economic imperialism, globalization, cultural imperialism and conditional aid to influence or control a developing country instead of the previous colonial methods of direct military control or indirect political control (hegemony). That the roots of City and Guilds of London Institute was in Imperial College (1878) is not coincidence but expresses the correlation between technical forms of education and colonialism. In 1907, Imperial College London was established by royal charter, unifying the Royal College of Science, Royal School of Mines, and City and Guilds of London Institute. Here the ethos of scientism and concept of tékhnē is clear.

 

 

 

  1. (Dutch-American) Reformed (‘institutes’) Tradition. EVANGELICAL ESTABLISHMENT.

 

The wider neo-colonial criticism of ‘Anglo-American Major Belief System 5’ goes to the historical heart in the broad and various sub-sets of the Dutch Reformed Tradition (‘6’). However, since Charles Hodge of the Princeton-Westminster College Model, in the 19th century, that Dutch Reformed Tradition was reshaped as American Neo-Colonialism. Since the 1960s, the Dutch-American Reformed Tradition has become the intellectual powerhouse of the American Evangelical Establishment, since the Left-Wing Evangelicalism has had to contend with its own cognitive dissonance. Neo-Calvinism works better as system thought because of its tight logic, but that logicism is the means in the loss of critical thinking. The American Evangelical Establishment is neocolonialism in the evangelical world, but now there is a revolt against American evangelical institutions and politics from the Europeans, Brits, Australians, Pacific Islanders, the Africans (ethnic and national variants), groupings of the Middle East (ethnic and national variants), and Central-South-East Asians (ethnic and national variants). The world has had enough of Americans mistaking their own “national culture” for the economic superpower and its neo-colonial agenda. On the ground in the United-States, and overflowed into Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, this can be documented in the ‘Networked L’Abri-Regent College and the (American) Christian Study Center movement’ (the post-1970 ‘Reformed’ thesis, Cotherman 2020; Marsden 1980, 1987). Added to the network, as the American Evangelical intellectual engines, are Fuller (California) and Wheaton (Illinois) Colleges, as the top historic American evangelical intellectual hubs. Furthermore, the great neo-colonial distributors have been “The (Anglo-American) Contemporary Book-Digital Format Publishers (e.g. IVP as the leading example)”.

 

Concluding remarks

 

Recently I had to correct an observation on the ‘disbelieving’ ‘Sunday Assemblies’ movement from an evangelical scholar, linking the observation that the movement declined faster than mainline Christian fellowships in the last five years, and all but disappeared while most evangelical groups at least limp on. There was a misunderstood conclusion of the ‘disbelieving’ movement’s telos, ethos, and mission for non-evangelical organisations. The idea of observing “play church without all that Jesus-talk” is another example of completely misunderstanding the telos, ethos, and mission here. There is a distinction between “Jesus-talk” and “God-talk”. A wide gap in the western intellectual histories since the Reformation. Dominic Erdozain’s (2016) The Soul of Doubt: the religious roots of unbelief from Luther to Marx (Oxford University Press) is an excelled treatment why the evangelical criticism is utterly wrong.

 

It is another great example that Anglo-American evangelical colleges have dropped the ball very badly in missing and substantive fields of the intellectual histories. But then again, such arrogant evangelical leadership — as with the whole arrogance in the Anglo-American belief systems — rejected systems thought ignorantly in succumbing to the faulty thinking of American pragmatism. What “works” is measured by the frameworks of “ideas” (idealism), but if you fail to scope out sufficiently, the thinking is lost in a smaller bubble.  Having read Charles Cotherman’s To Think Christianly (2020) this is very clear to me, comparing the bubble scoping of the Americanised Christian study center movements to wider intellectual frameworks.

 

 

The Readings which have Developed The Multi-Thread Worldview(s) of this Researched Multi-Layered Critique

Ahlstrom, Sydney E (1972). A Religious History of the American People, New Haven/London. Yale University Press.

Almond, P. (1983). Wilfred Cantwell Smith as Theologian of Religions. The Harvard Theological Review, 76(3), 335-342. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1509527

Almond, Philip C. (2016). The devil: a new biography. I.B. Tauris, London

Almond, Philip C. (2018). God : A new biography, I.B. tauris, London

Apter, E. (1997). Out of Character: Camus’s French Algerian Subjects. MLN, 112(4), 499-516. Retrieved May 22, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3251325

Arcus, M. E. (1980). Value Reasoning: An Approach to Values Education. Family Relations, 29(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.2307/584067

Barcan, A. (2007). Whatever Happened to Adult Education? AQ: Australian Quarterly, 79(2), 29-40. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20638464

Bashford, Alison (2007) World population and Australian land: Demography and sovereignty in the twentieth century, Australian Historical Studies, 38:130, 211-227, DOI: 10.1080/10314610708601243

Beaumont, Joan (2015). Remembering Australia’s First World War, Australian Historical Studies, 46:1, 1-6, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2015.1000803

Berger, Peter L (1973). The Social Reality of Religion, Harmondsworth, Penguin.

Berlin, Isaiah (1958). Two Concepts of Liberty, Lecture, at the University of Oxford on 31 October 1958.

Berlin, Isaiah; with Bernard Williams (1994).  ‘Pluralism and Liberalism: A Reply’ (to George Crowder, ‘Pluralism and Liberalism’, Political Studies 42 293–303), Political Studies 42 (1994), 306–9.

Binnion, Denis (1997). What’s New in Course Programming? A Brief Analysis of WEA Course Programs 1917-1976, Australian Journal of Adult and Community Education, 37:1, 27–32.

Binnion, Denis (2013). One Hundred Years of the WEA, Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 53:30, 478–481.

Blackstock, A., & O’Gorman, F. (Eds.). (2014). Loyalism and the Formation of the British World, 1775-1914. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK; Rochester, NY, USA: Boydell & Brewer. doi:10.7722/j.ctt5vj7dp

Borghesi, Massimo (2021). Catholic Discordance: Neoconservatism vs. the Field Hospital Church of Pope Francis, Collegeville: Liturgical Press Academic

Bosworth, R.J.B. (2011) The Second World Wars and their Clouded Memories, History Australia, 8:3, 75-94, DOI: 10.1080/14490854.2011.11668389

Bourdieu, Pierre (1979). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Routledge.

Bourdieu, Pierre (with Jean Claude Passeron, 1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Bourke, Paul (1976) Politics and ideas: The work of Richard Hofstadter, Historical Studies, 17:67, 210-218, DOI: 10.1080/10314617608595548

Brown, David S. (2006). Richard Hofstadter: An Intellectual Biography, University of Chicago Press.

Bruner, Jerome S. (1977). The Process of Education, Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

Bruner, Jerome S. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Buccola, Nicholas (2019). The Fire is Upon Us: James Baldwin, William F. Buckley Jr., and the Debate over Race in America, Princeton University Press.

Buch, Neville (1994). American Influence on Protestantism in Queensland since 1945, Ph.D. thesis, Department of History, University of Queensland, August. (Awarded April 1995)

Buch, Neville (1995). ‘Americanizing Queensland Protestantism’, Studying Australian Christianity 1995 Conference, Robert Menzies College, Macquarie University, July.

Buch, Neville (1995). The Significance of the American Invasion for Australian Churches: A Preliminary Examination, War’s End Conference (Queensland Studies Centre, Griffith University), University Hall, James Cook University, July.

Buch, Neville (1997). ‘‘…many distractions confronting the Church’: The Responses of Protestant Religion to Popular Culture in Queensland 1919-1969,’ Everyday Wonders Popular Culture: Past and Present’, 10th International Conference, Crest Hotel, Brisbane, June.

Buch, Neville (2007). Religion Remain a Problem. The Skeptic. Summer.

Buch, Neville (2017). Hearts Lifted Up with the Spirit of Seton. A History of Seton College, Mount Gravatt East, Queensland, November 2017.

Buch, Neville (2018). Small is Big: Scaling the Map for Brisbane Persons and Institutions 1825-2000. ‘The Scale of History’ AHA Conference, Australian National University, 4 July 2018.

Buch, Neville (2019). The Australian Literary Setting of the ‘Queensland Character’ and Mid-Twentieth Century Philosophy: The Philosophical Development of Jack McKinney and the Problem of Knowledge 1935-1975. Revolutions & Evolutions in Intellectual History Conference. International Society for Intellectual History, University of Queensland, 6 June 2019.

Buckley Jr., William F. (1951). God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom”, Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing.

Buckley, William F. (1959, 2016). Up From Liberalism, Martino Fine Books

Burns, A. (1962). Australia, Britain, and the Common Market: Some Australian Views. The World Today, 18(4), 152-163. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/40394180

Burns, A. L.  S. Encel & D. E. Kennedy (1969) The political sciences: A symposium, Historical Studies, 14:53, 73-79, DOI: 10.1080/10314616908595408

Carr, Helen and Suzannah Lipscomb (edited, 2021). What is History Now? How the Past and Present Speak to Each Other, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, UK.

Carter, Sarah (2018) Book Review: Building Better Britains? Settler Societies in the British World 1783–1920, Australian Historical Studies, 49:2, 277-278, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2018.1454269

Carwardine, Richard (1978). Trans-Atlantic Revivalism: Popular Evangelicalism in Britain and America 1790-1865, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Chant, Barry (1999), ‘The spirit of Pentecost: Origins and development of the Pentecostal movement in Australia, 1870–1939’, PhD thesis, Macquarie University.

Cherrington, E. (1923). World-Wide Progress toward Prohibition Legislation. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 109, 208-224. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1015011

Chomsky, Noam (2004; edited by Donaldo Macedo). Chomsky on Mis-Education, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield

Collins, Randall (1998). The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, Harvard University Press.

Collins, Randall (1999). Macrohistory : essays in sociology of the long run. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif

Collins, Randall (2005). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. ; Oxford

Collins, Randall (2008). Violence A Micro-sociological Theory, Princeton University Press

Collins, Randall (2019). The Credential Society:  An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification, Columbia University Press.

Corning, P. (2008). Holistic Darwinism: The New Evolutionary Paradigm and Some Implications for Political Science. Politics and the Life Sciences, 27(1), 22-54. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/40072944

Cotherman, Charles E. (2020). To Think Christianly, IVP Academic

Crawford, John (2019) Book Review: Race and Imperial Defence in the British World, 1870–1914, Australian Historical Studies, 50:3, 394, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2019.1633049

Crawford, R. M. (1945) History as a science, Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 3:11, 153-175, DOI: 10.1080/10314614508594856

Crawley, Rhys (2015) Marching to the Beat of an Imperial Drum: Contextualising Australia’s Military Effort During the First World War, Australian Historical Studies, 46:1, 64-80, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2014.994540

Crozier-De Rosa, Sharon (2019) Book Review: You Daughters of Freedom: The Australians Who Won the Vote and Inspired the World, Australian Historical Studies, 50:3, 389-390, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2019.1633042

Cupitt, Don (2008). The Meaning of the West: An Apologia for Secular Christianity, SCM Press

Cupitt, Don  (2009). Jesus and Philosophy, SCM Press

Curtis, Jesse (2021). The Myth of Colorblind Christians : Evangelicals and White Supremacy in the Civil Rights Era, New York University Press

Dadswell, Gordon (2005). The Workers’ Educational Association of Victoria and the University of Melbourne: a Clash of Purpose? Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 45:3, 331–351.

Dadswell, Gordon (2007). From Idealism to Realism: the Workers’ Educational Association of Victoria 1920-1941, History of Education Review, 36:2, 61–73.

Davey, Gwenda Beed (2016) Book Review: Children, Childhood and Youth in the British World, Australian Historical Studies, 47:3, 496-498, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2016.1208721

Davis, Michael (2017)  Book Review: Climate, Science, and Colonization: Histories from Australia and New Zealand, Australian Historical Studies, 48:1, 125-126, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2016.1273047

de Beauvoir, Simone  (1972). All Said and Done: The Autobiography of Simone de Beauvoir 1962-1972, Paragon House.

Dempster, Murray A, Klaus, Byron D & Petersen, Douglas (edited, 1999), The Globalization of Pentecostalism: a religion made to travel, Regnum, Oxford.

De Sousa Santos, B. (1992). A Discourse on the Sciences. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 15(1), 9-47. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/40241211

Dewey, John (1909). Moral Principles in Education, Boston : Houghton Mifflin

Dewey, John (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, London: Macmillan and Co. Limited.

Dewey, John (1938). Experience and Education, New York: Simon and Schuster.

Dilthey, Wilhelm; Rudolf A. Makkreel and Frithjof Rosi (2019). Wilhelm Dilthey: Selected Works, Volume VI: Ethical and World-View Philosophy, Princeton University Press

Donnelly, Kevin (edited 2022). Christianity Matters: In These Troubled Times, Melbourne: Wilkerson.

Du Mez, Kristin Kobes (2020). Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation, New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation

Dymock, Darryl (2001). ‘A Special and Distinctive Role’ in Adult Education, WEA Sydney 1953-2000, Allen & Unwin, State Library of NSW Mitchell Library.

Echenberg, M. (2002). Pestis Redux: The Initial Years of the Third Bubonic Plague Pandemic, 1894-1901. Journal of World History,13(2), 429-449. Retrieved May 22, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20078978

Edwards, Lee (2019). William F. Buckley Jr. : The Maker of a Movement, ISI Books

Elliot, Ralph H. (1962). The Message of Genesis,  The Bethany Press

Ellul, Jacques (1964).  The Technological Society. Translated from the French by John Wilkinson. With an introd. by Robert K. Merton  Knopf New York

Ellul, Jacques (1973). Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes, New York:

Erb, F. (1916). The Development of the Young People’s Movement. The Biblical World, 48(3), 129-192. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3142079

Erdozain, Dominic (2016). The Soul of Doubt: the religious roots of unbelief from Luther to Marx,  Oxford University Press

Fanon, Frantz  (1963). The Wretched of the Earth, Penguin, London, UK.

Faye, Esther (1998). Growing up ‘Australian’ in the 1950s: The dream of social science, Australian Historical Studies, 29:111, 344-365, DOI: 10.1080/10314619808596077

Fisher, Helen (2019). Anatomy of Love: A Natural History of Mating, Marriage, and Why We Stray,  WW Norton & Co.

Festinger, Leon (1956). When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World, New York : Harper & Row

Festinger, Leon (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University

Fodor, James (2018). Unreasonable Faith: How William Lane Craig Overstates the Case for Christianity, Hypatia Press, US.

Frankfurt, Harry G. , Translated by  Michael Bischoff (2014). Bullshit,  Suhrkamp Verlag AG

Freeman, Mark (2013). ‘An Advanced Type of Democracy’? Governance and Politics in Adult Education C.1918-1930, History of Education, 42:1, 45–69.

Freire, Paulo. (1970a). Cultural Action and Conscientization, Harvard Education Review, 40, (3), 452-477.

Freire, Paulo. (1970b). Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Seabury Press.

Freire, Paulo. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness, New York: Seabury Press.

Freire, Paulo. (1976). Education, the Practice of Freedom, London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative.

Freire, Paulo. (1985). The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation, South Hadley: Bergin & Garvey.

Freire, Paulo. (1994). Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Continuum.

Freire, Paulo. (1998b). Politics and Education, Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

Freundlieb, Dieter & Hudson, Wayne & Rundell, John F (2004). Critical theory After Habermas. Brill, Leiden ; Boston

Friesen, G., & Taksa, L. (1996). Workers’ Education in Australia and Canada: A Comparative Approach to Labour’s Cultural History. Labour History, (71), 170-197. doi:10.2307/27516453

Fukuyama, Francis (2012). The End of History and the Last Man (Twentieth anniversary edition). London Penguin Books

Furedi, Frank (2004). Where Have All The Intellectuals Gone? Continuum

Fussell, Paul (1983). Class: A Guide Through the American Status System,  Simon & Schuster

Fussell, Paul (1991). BAD: or, The Dumbing of America, Summit Books

Garrison, J. (1995). Deweyan Pragmatism and the Epistemology of Contemporary Social Constructivism, American Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 716-740.

Gatto, John Taylor (1991, 2002). Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, New Society Publishers

Gert, B. (2005). Moral Arrogance and Moral Theories. Philosophical Issues, 15, 368–385. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27749850

Giovanni B. Sala & Spoerl, J (1994). Intentionality versus Intuition (pp. 81-101) in  Doran R. (Ed.), Lonergan and Kant (pp. 81-101). University of Toronto Press. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/10.3138/j.ctt2tv28t.8

Goldberg, S. C. (2016). Arrogance, Silence, and Silencing. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 90, 93–112. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26780423

Graham, Elaine (2013). Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Public Theology in a Post-Secular Age, SCM Press

Gray, John. Berlin. Fontana, 1995

Grayling, A.C.  (2022). For the Good of the World : Is Global Agreement on Global Challenges Possible? Oneworld Publication

Griffiths, Tom (1989) ‘The natural history of Melbourne’: The culture of nature writing in Victoria, 1880–1945, Australian Historical Studies, 23:93, 339-365, DOI: 10.1080/10314618908595818

Haack, Susan (1993). Evidence and Inquiry: Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology, London: Wiley-Blackwell.

Habermas, Jürgen  (1991). Knowledge and Human Interests, Polity Press

Habermas, Jürgen  (1991). The Theory of Communicative Action : Lifeworld and Systems, a Critique of Functionalist Reason, Volume 2, Polity Press

Habermas, Jürgen  (1997). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Polity Press

Habermas, Jürgen (1992). Communication and the Evolution of Society, Polity Press

Habermas, Jürgen (2010). Legitimation Crisis, Polity Press

Hammonds, E. (2011). Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture (Krimsky S. & Sloan K., Eds.). New York: Columbia University Press. doi:10.7312/krim15696

Handasyde, K. ., & Massam, K. (2022). Introduction to the Special Issue: Dialogues of Secular and Sacred: Christianity in Mid-Twentieth-Century Australian Culture. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 35(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.22399

Handy, Robert T. (1976). A History of the Churches in the United States and Canada, Oxford at the Clarendon Press.

Handy, Robert T. (1977). A Christian America: Protestant Hopes and Historical Realities, New York. Oxford University Press.

Hardcastle, V. (1993). The Naturalists versus the Skeptics: The Debate Over a Scientific Understanding of Consciousness. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 14(1), 27-50. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43853732

Harris, F. (2007). Dewey’s Concepts of Stability and Precariousness in His Philosophy of Education, Education and Culture, 23(1), 38-54.

Heuer, Ulrike and Gerald Lang (eds., 2012). Luck, Value and Commitment: Themes from the Ethics of Bernard Williams, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hey, Sam (2011). God in the Suburbs and Beyond: The Emergence of an Australian Megachurch and Denomination. Ph.D. thesis, School of Humanities, Griffith University.

Hey, Sam and Geoff Waugh (2016). Megachurches: Origins, Ministry and Prospects. Morning Star Publishing.

Hoffer, Eric (2002). The True Believer : thoughts on the nature of mass movements (First Perennial Modern Classics edition). Harper Perennial Modern Classics, New York

Hoffer, Peter Charles (2014). Clio among the Muses: Essays  on History and the Humanities, New York University Press

Hofstadter, Richard (1955, re-issued 1988). The Age of Reform: From Bryan to f.d.r.,  New York: Random House USA Inc.

Hofstadter, Richard (1963). Anti-intellectualism in American Life, New York: Random House USA Inc.

Hofstadter, Richard (1965; rev. edition, 2008) The Paranoid Style in American Politics, and Other Essays, New York: Random House USA Inc.

Holifield, B. (2010). Who Sees the Lake? Narcissism and Our Relationship to the Natural World. Jung Journal: Culture & Psyche, 4(1), 19-31. doi:10.1525/jung.2010.4.1.19

Hook, Sidney (1971). Illich’s De-Schooled Utopia, Encounter 37 (4), 53-56.

Horne, Donald. (1964; 2009). The Lucky Country, Penguin Random House Australia

Horne, Donald  (1976). Death of the Lucky Country, Penguin Books Australia

Horne, Donald  (2022). The Education of Young Donald Horne Trilogy, NewSouth Publishing

Howe, Brian & Hughes, Philip,  et al. (2003). Spirit of Australia II : religion in citizenship and national life. ATF Press, Hindmarsh, SA

Howe, Charles (1999). Clarence R. Skinner: Prophet of New Universalism, Boston: Skinner House Books

Howe, Charles (2005). The Essential Clarence Skinner: A Brief Introduction to His Life and Writing, Boston: Skinner House Books

Howe, Daniel Walker (1970). The Unitarian Conscience: Harvard moral philosophy, 1805-1861, Harvard University Press

Howe, Neil and William Strauss (2007). Millennials Go to College, LifeCourse Associates

Howe, Renate (1980) Protestantism, social Christianity and the ecology of Melbourne, 1890–1900, Historical Studies, 19:74, 59-73, DOI: 10.1080/10314618008595624

Hudson, Wayne  (1997). Constructivism and history teaching. Griffith University, Brisbane, Qld.

Hudson, Wayne (2016). Australian Religious Thought, Monash University Publishing

Hughes, Philip (1996). The Pentecostals in Australia, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT.

Huntington, Samuel (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Simon & Schuster.

Hutchinson, Mark & Wolffe, John (2012). A Short History of Global Evangelicalism,  New York: Cambridge University Press

Jackman, S. (1994). Measuring Electoral Bias: Australia, 1949-93. British Journal of Political Science, 24(3), 319-357. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/194252

James, Henry (1916, 2004). The Ivory Tower, Introduction by Alan Hollinghurst, Essay by Ezra Pound, New York Review Books.

Jiang, J. (2017). Character and Persuasion in William James. William James Studies, 13(1), 49-70. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/26203815

Kant, Immanuel (1781, 2007). Translated by Marcus Weigelt. Critique of Pure Reason, Penguin Books.

Kohn, Rachael  (2003). The New Believers: Re-Imagining God, Harper Collins

Lake, Marilyn (2019). Progressive New World: how settler colonialism and transpacific exchange shaped American reform. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts ; London, England

La Nauze, J. A.  (1965) Hearn on natural religion: An unpublished manuscript, Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 12:45, 119-122, DOI: 10.1080/10314616508595314

Lake, Marilyn (2013) British world or new world? History Australia, 10:3, 36-50, DOI: 10.1080/14490854.2013.11668478

Lake, Marilyn (2014) Challenging the ‘Slave-Driving Employers’: Understanding Victoria’s 1896 Minimum Wage through a World-History Approach, Australian Historical Studies, 45:1, 87-102, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2013.877501

Lake, Meredith (2018). The Bible in Australia: A cultural history, Sydney: New South.

Law, Stephen (2007). The War for Children’s Minds, London: Routledge.

Leaves, Nigel  (2004). Odyssey on the Sea of Faith: The Life & Writings of Don Cupitt, Polebridge Press, Farmington, MN.

Lindvall, T., & Quicke, A. (2011). The Studio Era of Christian Films. In Celluloid Sermons: The Emergence of the Christian Film Industry, 1930-1986 (pp. 116-143). NYU Press. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qfkzh.9

Lowenthal, David (1996). The Heritage Crusade and the spoils of history. Viking, London

Lowenthal, David (2015). The Past is a Foreign Country – revisited (Revised and updated edition). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ; New York

Lowenthal, David (2019). Quest for the Unity of Knowledge. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, London ; New York

Macintyre, Stuart (2009) The Poor Relation: Establishing the Social Sciences in Australia, 1940–1970, Australian Historical Studies, 40:1, 47-62, DOI: 10.1080/10314610802663019

Ma, W. (2008). Review of Miller & Yarmamori’s Global Pentecostalism  in Transformation, 25(4), 274-276. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43052748

Macklin, Michael (1972). To Deschool Society, Cold Comfort, December 1972.

Macklin, Michael (1975).  Those Misconceptions are not Illich’s, Educational Theory, 25 (3), 323-329

Macklin, Michael (1976). When Schools are Gone: A Projection of the Thought of Ivan Illich, St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.

Macklin, Michael (1986). Education in and for a Multicultural Australia, Australian Teachers Federation Conference, Sydney, October 1986.

Maddox, M. (2003). God, Caesar & Alexander. AQ: Australian Quarterly, 75(5), 4-39. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20638202

Maddox, M. (2015). Finding God in Global Politics. International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale De Science Politique, 36(2), 185-196. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/24573460

Maddox, Marion (2001). For God and Country: Religious Dynamics in Australian Federal Politics, Canberra: Parliament of Australia

Maddox, Marion (2005). God Under Howard: The Rise of The Religious Right in Australian Politics, Sydney: Allen & Unwin

Maddox, Marion (2014). Taking God to School: The End of Australia’s Egalitarian Education, Allen & Unwin

Magee, Bryan (1997).  Confessions of a Philosopher: A Personal Journey through Western Philosophy from Plato to Popper, New York: The Modern Library.

Mander, Jerry (1978, 2002). Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, HarperCollins.

Mandik, P. (2011). Supervenience and neuroscience. Synthese, 180(3), 443-463. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/41477566

Marsden, George M. (1980). Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925, New York. Oxford University Press.

Marsden, George M. (1987). Reforming Fundamentalism. Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermanns Publishing Company.

Marti, Gerardo (2020). American Blindspot: Race, Class, Religion, and the Trump Presidency, London: Rowman & Littlefield.

Marty, Martin E. (1970). Righteous Empire. The Protestant Experience, New York: The Dial Press.

Martyn Lyons (2010) A New History from Below? The Writing Culture of Ordinary People in Europe, History Australia, 7:3, 59.1-59.9, DOI: 10.2104/ha100059

Massam, K. (2022). ‘All Our Time’: Catechetics, Cardijn and the Jesus of Everyday Discipleship. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 35(1), 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.22396

Mays, C. (2013). Who’s Driving This Thing, Anyway?: Emotion and Language in Rhetoric and Neuroscience. JAC, 33(1/2), 301-314. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43854552

McCutcheon, Russell T & Walter de Gruyter & Co (2018). Fabricating Religion: fanfare for the common e.g. De Gruyter, Berlin ; Boston

McKinney, Jack Philip (1971). The Structure of Modern Thought, London, Catto & Windus.

McLoughlin, William G. (1957). Modern Revivalism: Charles Grandison Finney to Billy Graham, New York. Ronald Press. 1957.

McLoughlin, William G. (1960). Billy Graham: Revivalist in a Secular Age, New York. The Ronald Press Company. 1960.

McLoughlin, William G. (1987). Revivals, Awakenings and Reform: An Essay on Religion and Social Change in America 1607-1977, The University of Chicago Press.

McGilchrist, Iain (2009). The Master and his Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, Yale University Press

Meyer, Birgit (2005.) Religion, Media, and the Public Sphere, Indiana University Press

Michael Crozier (2002). Society economised: T.R. Ashworth and the history of the social sciences in Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 33:119, 125-142, DOI: 10.1080/10314610208596205

Milana, Marcella, et al. “The Role of Adult Education and Learning Policy in Fostering Societal Sustainability.” International Review of Education, vol. 62, no. 5, 2016, pp. 523–540.

Miller, D. (1943). G. H. Mead’s Conception of “Present”. Philosophy of Science, 10(1), 40-46. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/184881

Miller, Donald E.  and Tetsunao Yamamori (2007). Global Pentecostalism: The New Face of Christian Social Engagement, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Miller, J. M., Saunders, K. L., & Farhart, C. E. (2016). Conspiracy Endorsement as Motivated Reasoning: The Moderating Roles of Political Knowledge and Trust. American Journal of Political Science, 60(4), 824–844. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24877458

Miller, Joshua L. (2011). Accented America : the cultural politics of multilingual modernism. Oxford University Press, Oxford ; New York

Miller, Paul D. (2022). The Religion of American Greatness: What’s Wrong With Christian Nationalism, IVP Academic

Miller, R. (1939). Is Temple a Realist? The Journal of Religion,19(1), 44-54. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1197939

Miller, R. (1985). Ways of Moral Learning. The Philosophical Review, 94(4), 507-556. doi:10.2307/2185245

Miller, Robert M. (1958). American Protestantism and Social Issues 1919-1939, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. 1958.

Miller, Seumas, “Social Institutions”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/social-institutions/>.

Morris, Roger K (2013). The WEA in Sydney, 1913 – 2013: Achievements; Controversies; and an Inherent Difficulty, Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 53:3, 487–498.

Mozley, Ann (1964) The history of Australian Science, Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 11:42, 258-259, DOI: 10.1080/10314616408595282

Murphy, Patrick D., & Hoffman, Michael J.(1992). Critical essays on American modernism. G.K. Hall ; Toronto : Maxwell Macmillan Canada ; New York : Maxwell Macmillan International, New York

Myers, Benjamin (2012). Christ the Stranger: The Theology of Rowan Williams, t & t Clark.

Nagel, Thomas (1986). The view from nowhere. Oxford University Press, New York

Naugle, David K. (2002). Worldview: The History of a Concept, William B. Eermann Publishing Company

Nelson, Eric S. (2019; edited). Interpreting Dilthey: Critical Essays, Cambridge University Pres

Newton, Michael (2013). A Century of Learning: WEA Sydney 1913-2013, Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 53:3, 482–486.

Newton, Michael, et al (1997). In Touch with a New World: Celebrating Adult Learning at WEA Sydney, State Library of NSW   Mitchell Library.

Noddings, Nel  (2013). Education and Democracy in the 21st Century, Teachers’ College Press

Noddings, Nel (1984). Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Noddings, Nel (1996). Stories and affect in Teacher Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 26 (3).

Noddings, Nel (1999). Justice and Caring: The Search for Common Ground in Education, Teachers College Press, New York.

Noddings, Nel (2005). Identifying and Responding to needs in Teacher Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 35 (2).

Noll, Mark A. (1994). The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermans Publishing Company

Northrop, F. S. C. (1946). The Meeting of East and West: An Inquiry Concerning World Understanding, The Macmillan Company

 

 

O’Connor, Peter J. (2007) The mediation of temperament by character in the prediction of workplace outcomes. PhD thesis, The University of Queensland.

Orwell, George (1949). 1984, Penguin Books.

Ozernov, Marina L (2010). John Dewey’s Cultural Naturalism: Culture in Terms of Language, Experience, and Continuity, Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Texas at Dallas.

Pals, Daniel (2022). Ten Theories of Religion, Oxford University Press.

Parsons, F. (1904). Australasian Methods of Dealing with Immigration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 24, 209-220. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1009847

Piaget, Jean (1977). The Grasp of Consciousness: Action and concept in the young child, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Piggin, Stuart (1996). Evangelical Christianity in Australia: Spirit, Word and World, Oxford University Press.

Piggin, Stuart  and Robert D Linder (2018). The Fountain of Public Properity: Evangelical Christians In Australian History, 1914-2014, Monash University Publishing.

Stuart Piggin; Robert D Linder (2020). Attending to the National Soul: Evangelical Christians In Australian History, 1914-2014, Monash University Publishing.

Postman, Neil (1985, 2005). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, Penguin Books.

Powell, S. (2008). The World’s Participation in God’s Trinitarian Life. Process Studies, 37(1), 145-165. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/44797245

Rademaker, Laura; Noelani Goodyear-Ka’opua, April K. Henderson (2022). Found in Translation : Many Meanings on a North Australian Mission, University of Hawai’i Press.

Rauscher, Frederick, “Kant’s Social and Political Philosophy”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/kant-social-political/>.

Rawls, John (1971). A Theory of Justice, Belknap Press

Raz, Joseph (2003). The Practice of Value, edited and introduced by R. Jay Wallace, with commentaries by Christine M. Korsgaard, Robert Pippin, Bernard Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Ringma, Charles; Remy Chadwick (2017). Three graces for a word of truth. The church’s calling in a troubled world: the grand design and fragile engagement. Hawthorn, VIC: Zadok Institute for Christianity and Society.

Ringma, Charles (2018). Chase Two Horses: Proverbs and Saying for an Everyday Spirituality, Piquant.

Ringma, Charles (2023). In the Midst of Much-Doing: Cultivating a Missional Spirituality, Langham Publishing.

Rocha, Cristina; Mark Hutchinson, (edited, 2020). Australian Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements: arguments from the margins. Brill, Leiden ; Boston

Roelofs, H. (1935). The Predicament of Naturalistic Empiricism. Mind, 44(175), 300-316. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/2250158

Roof, Wade C. (1999). Spiritual Marketplace: Baby boomers and the remaking of American religion, Princeton University Press.

Rush Rhees (edited D.Z. Phillips; 2003/2005). Wittgenstein’s On Certainty: There — Like Our Life, Blackwell Publishing

Salmon, J. H. M. (1962) European history in Australian Universities: Comments on Professor I. Schoffer’s article (Historical Studies, No. 37), Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 10:38, 222-223, DOI: 10.1080/10314616208595225

Sen, Amartya (2006). Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny, Allen Lane.

Singh, Sarva Daman (2018). Understanding Gandi: A Mahatma in the Making 1869-1914, New Delhi: Vij Books India.

Smith, Jonathan Z. (1982). Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, The University of Chicago Press

Smith, Ted A. (2023). The End of Theological Education, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company

Smith, Timothy L. (1965). Revivalism and Social Reform: American Protestantism on the Eve of the Civil War, New York: Harper & Row.

Spearritt, G. (1995). Don Cupitt: Christian Buddhist? Religious Studies, 31(3), 359-373. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20019757

Spector, Matthew, Habermas: an intellectual biography, Cambridge University Press, 2010

Sprigge, T. L. S. (2006). The God of Metaphysics: being a study of the metaphysics and religious doctrines of Spinoza, Hegel, Kierkegaard, T.H. Green, Bernard Bosanquet, Josiah Royce, A.N. Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne, and concluding with a defence of pantheistic idealism. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Spring, Dawn (2018) Book Review: Behind Glass Doors: The World of Australian Advertising, Australian Historical Studies, 49:3, 430-432, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2018.1495155

Stanley, W., & Smith, B. (1956). The Historical, Philosophical, and Social Framework of Education. Review of Educational Research,26(3), 308-322. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1169364

Stark, Rodney and William S. Bainbridge (1987).  A Theory of Religion, New York, Peter Lang.

Strauss, William  and Neil Howe (1991). Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069, Harper Perennial

Strauss, William and Neil Howe (2000). Millennial Rising: The Next Great Generation, Vintage Books

Sullivan, Rosemary (2022). The Betrayal of Anne Frank. A Cold Case Investigation, Harper Collins Publishers.

Sutton, W., & Kolaja, J. (1960). Elements of Community Action. Social Forces, 38(4), 325-331. doi:10.2307/2573042

Sweet, William Warren (1965). Revivalism in America, Gloucester: Peter Smith.

Szasz, Ferenc Morton (1982). The Divided Mind of Protestant America 1880-1930, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press.

Tacey, David (2000). ReEnchantment: The New Australian Spirituality, Sydney: Harper Collins

Tacey, David (2004). The Spirituality Revolution: The emergence of contemporary spirituality, London: Routledge

Tacey, David (2015). Religion as Metaphor: Beyond Literal Belief, London: Routledge

Tacey, David (2020). The Postsecular Sacred: Jung, Soul and Meaning in Age of Change, London: Routledge

Tanesini, A. (2016). ‘Calm Down, Dear’: Intellectual Arrogance, Silencing and Ignorance. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 90, 71–92. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26780422

Tatz, C. (1963). Queensland’s Aborigines: Natural Justice and the Rule of Law. The Australian Quarterly, 35(3), 33-49. doi:10.2307/20633893

Tauber, Zvi. (2006). Aesthetic Education for Morality: Schiller and Kant. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40(3), 22-47. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/4140178

Thumma, Scott & Travis Dave (2007). Beyond Megachurch Myths: What we can learn from America’s largest churches, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tiberius, V., & Walker, J. D. (1998). Arrogance. American Philosophical Quarterly, 35(4), 379–390. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20009945

Tittle, C. R. (2004). The Arrogance of Public Sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1639–1643. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3598451

Tosh, J. (2014). Public History, Civic Engagement and the Historical Profession in Britain. History, 99(2 (335)), 191–212. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24429936

Toulmin, Stephen (1950). An Examination of the Place of Reason in Ethics, Ph.D. Dissertation, Cambridge University.

Toulmin, Stephen (1958). The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press

Troughton, Geoffrey (2016) Book Review: Methodism in Australia: A History (Ashgate Methodist Studies) / Anglican Clergy in Australia, 1788–1850: Building a British World (Studies in History), Australian Historical Studies, 47:2, 335-337, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2016.1162686

Truman, T. (1971). A Critique of Seymour M. Lipset’s Article, “Value Differences, Absolute or Relative: The English-Speaking Democracies”. Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue Canadienne De Science Politique, 4(4), 497-525. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3235536

Turnbull, Paul (2010) Historians, Computing and the World-Wide-Web, Australian Historical Studies, 41:2, 131-148, DOI: 10.1080/10314611003713629

Unnamed. (1998). Kantian Christianity. The Wilson Quarterly, Autumn, 129-130.

Valerie Wallace (2014) Book Review: Empire, Migration and Identity in the British World, Australian Historical Studies, 45:1, 148-149, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2014.877797

Vearncombe, Erin, and Brandon Scott, and Hal Taussig (2021). After Jesus Before Christianity, Harper Collins (and Westar Institute).

Veracini, Lorenzo (2019) Book Review: Progressive New World: How Settler Colonialism and the Transpacific Exchange Shaped American Reform, Australian Historical Studies, 50:3, 388-389, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2019.1633048

Vick, Malcolm (1992) Community, state and the provision of schools in mid‐nineteenth century South Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 25:98, 53-71, DOI: 10.1080/10314619208595893

Wade, Stephen. “’The Glory of Education’: One Hundred Years of The Workers’ Educational Association.” Contemporary Review, vol. 283, no. 1654, 2003, pp. 285–288.

Walker, David; with Julia Horne and Martyn Lyons. Books, Readers, Reading, Australian Cultural History. No 1992. SLQ S 994 028

Wallis, Jim (2005). God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It, Harper Collins.

Williams, Bernard (1981). Moral Luck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Williams, Bernard (1985). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, London: Fontana

Williams, Bernard (1995). Making Sense of Humanity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Williams, Bernard (1995). World, Mind, and Ethics: Essays on the ethical philosophy of Bernard Williams, J.E.J. Altham and Ross Harrison (eds.), with “Replies” by Bernard Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Williams, Bernard (2002). Why Philosophy Needs History, London Review of Books, October 17, 7–9.

Williams, Bernard (2002): Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Williams, Bernard (2005). Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Williams, Bernard (2005). The Sense of the Past: Essays on the History of Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Williams, Bernard, ‘Berlin, Isaiah (1909–97)’, in Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (London and New York, 1998: Routledge), vol. 1, 750–3

Williams, G.I (1964). The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes, Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company

Williams, Stafford. (1986). R.E. lesson plans for secondary schools. Youth Concern Ltd, Gold Coast, Qld. Select

Winter, S. (2022). On Splitting Wood and Lifting Stones: Finding Jesus in Australia. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 35(1), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.22420

Wood, Gordon S. (1993). The Radicalism of the American Revolution, Vintage Books

Wuthnow, Robert (1988). The Restructuring of American Religion: Society and Faith since World War II, Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.

Wyatt, T. (2009). The Role of Culture in Culturally Compatible Education. Journal of American Indian Education, 48(3), 47–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24398754

Yong, Amos (2005). The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the Possibility of Global Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic

Yong, Amos (2010). In the Days of Caesar: Pentecostalism and Political Theology, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermans Publishing Company

Yong, Amos (2014). The Future of Evangelical Theology: Soundings from the Asian American Diaspora, Downers Grove: IVP Academic.

Featured Image: Collage of Images as (left to right, top to bottom) —

Vision, education people concept – displeased red haired teenage student girl in glasses and checkered shirt l showing thumbs down over grey background. Photo 143161962 © Syda Productions | Dreamstime.com

Girl sleeping with holding a sign with the word Help. Photo 134669606 © Sevak Aramyan | Dreamstime.com

A close up shot of a little boy at school who looks distant and upset. Photo 57218706 © Liquoricelegs | Dreamstime.com

Grunge image of a stressed overworked man studying. Photo 39431170 © Kmiragaya | Dreamstime.com

Stressed college student for exam in classroom. Photo 68713779 © Tom Wang | Dreamstime.com

Worried young woman using laptop, teenager feeling nervous passing online exam or distance graduation test on web, f grade, anxious girl stressed by bad news in email, biting nails, looking at screen. Photo 101334378 © Fizkes | Dreamstime.com

 

SBSF Submission as Feedback on Kurilpa Sustainable Growth Precinct

SBSF Submission as Feedback on Kurilpa Sustainable Growth Precinct

 

Minister for State Development, Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (the Planning Minister)
PO Box 15009, City East, Queensland 4002

 

Submission as Feedback on Kurilpa Sustainable Growth Precinct Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 (Brisbane City Council) – DSDILGP

Dear Stephen Miles [Planning Minister],

cc. Environmental Minister

cc. Health Minister

 

Please accept this document as our submission to Queensland Government, as well as the Brisbane City Council as their LOCAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT NO.1 OF 2023.

 

The argument backbone of the submission is an analytic literature review of 44 scholarly works in the last 20 years (2003-2023), which demonstrates that the Council and State Government is globally out of touch with the current best thinking and practice for urban design, urban planning, the housing demand (crisis), suburban sustainable living and population management.

 

1.0        Community Opposition to Density Planning

 

The overall argument is of historical-sociology, important, since the bureaucrats who prepared The Kurilpa Sustainable Growth Precinct Temporary Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 (Brisbane City Council) seem to suffer history blindside-ness. There is considerable contemporary urban sociology criticism of short-visioned town/city/urban planning, or the process of de-planning in ideologically neo-conservative-committed municipal governance, explained in this document. The instrument of Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 is effectively an argument of totalitarian free-market governing de-planning. It will not open up a housing market to relieve the housing crisis in the way that the political argument of Council promises. This will become clear as the community opposition to (hyper) density planning is explained, and why the free-market de-planning approach that Council is seeking is not the view of the wider sets of communities in Brisbane, but simply allows construction developers a free-hand in their preferred business model.

 

First, though, some history in urban sociology needs to be referenced, and other historical references will be throughout the document. Mace (2016: 243) referenced the early opposition to 20th-century mass suburbanisation in the United Kingdom from the architect Ian Nairn (1955[1]) and social commentators Gordon and Gordon (1933[2]), and later in the 1960s, Lewis Mumford (1968[3]). The problem identified was the link between the growth of mass-consumption and mass movement into suburban areas, creating a de-functional kind of community, generally unlistened and misunderstood in the governance process. The distinction between the intercity suburbs and the city’s suburbs “proper” in the conversations-debates was artificial. The intercity suburbs have always been suburbs and the pattern of suburbanisation was always the same: releasing of land as estates by government and private residential developments. All suburbanisation happened in the presence of industry – rural and manufacturing – and the pattern only changes as the suburban sprawl moved outwards in distance. The distinction then that the intercity suburbs gained has been as a gateway to the CBD district for suburbs further out. Quoting Mumford, Mace points out the mass movement of suburbs, “caricatured both the historic city and the archetypal suburban refuge: a multitude of uniform, unidentifiable houses, lined up inflexibly, at uniform distances, on uniform roads, in a treeless communal waste, inhabited by people of the same class, the same income, the same age group, witnessing the same television performances, eating the same tasteless pre-fabricated foods, from the same freezers, conforming in every outward and inward respect to a common mold …” (Mumford, The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects, p. 486).

 

City planning has long involved real estate interests opposing regulation and wide and intelligent planning, and this false narrative of real estate has degenerated in the opposition between the dynamics of social housing construction and private housing densification processes in the suburbs, with a few ignored methods being proposed for resolution (Maleas 2018:73). McCabe (2016:137) articulated the historical opposition to good urban planning in the context of the Plan of Chicago where the false narratives abound from real estate developers and planners, claiming that best-practice municipal planning is esoteric or impractical: “The conversion of the real estate interests to city planning is the crux of the whole movement.” The false narrative which the Brisbane City Council has picked up in the purpose of Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 is to develop into an emphasis on the  growing internal diversity of suburbs and inner-city gentrification (Moos, et al. 2015: 84). On this exact point, Moos (2015) sees “the lack of congruence between largely suburban constituencies and the promotion of what are still seen in some quarters as planner-driven urban lifestyles” (Preville 2011, Sewell 2009).

 

As Raynor, Mayere, & Matthews (2018a:1058) stated:

 

“Australian urban consolidation policy has employed a similar set of rationales to smart growth and focuses on managing rapid population growth and compromising higher density housing provision with a historical preference for suburban, detached housing (Newton and Glackin, 2014). Despite international policy support for consolidation strategies, urban consolidation remains contentious and often inspires ‘almost systemic’ community opposition (Searle and Filion, 2011: 11).”

 

In the Rationale critical thinking diagram,  it is in black and white, evidenced and unmasked, and yet the Council and State Government remain deaf, to the electorate, and eventually facing the political backlash. And yet the Council and State Government remain deaf.

 

Figure 1: Rationale critical thinking diagram, Mind Map: Why the Local Planning Instrument No. 1 of 2023 fails.

 

 

As Shasore  (2018:189) explains, as the skewed and historic bubble thinking, there is still:

 

“Dissatisfaction at [the UK] ministry and with the methods of the housing division perhaps helps to explain [Arthur Trystan] Edwards’s use of a voluntary association as a vehicle for housing reform, free from covert politicking and internal lobbying [mid-century]. He bitterly recalled, for instance, that when ministry officials expressed doubt about the twelve dwellings per acre limit, ‘[Raymond] Unwin whipped up his parliamentary henchmen to make a protest against the suggested abandonment of the humane standards of life which after years of propaganda housing reformers had succeeded in establishing’.”

 

Thwarting best-practice municipal planning is not new from councils and governments; and the bureaucrats and the politicians are fools if they think that, after a century, and more, of such tactics and strategies, the educated population will tolerate it anymore, especially with the clear evidence of climate change and Europe and North American burning before our eyes.

 

The same tactics and strategies are, though, being practice by Australian municipal authorities. Troy (2018: 1339) notes of Sydney’s politics of urban renewal: “Meriton was heavily criticised for not only trying to maximise their development potential by pushing design boundaries, but also maximise returns by building as cheaply as possible, with the inevitable outcome being the construction of poor-quality buildings.” This is exactly the nature of the Brisbane City Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023, and the state government should not continue to buy into the false narratives. Poor quality buildings have implications with disruptions to community, and increased energy and water consumption and usage, thus exacerbating the regions health problems, economic costs and schedule blowouts to government department budgets and operations.

 

There are five technical arguments of urban sociology in this document: the climate-change (and related health issues) agenda, the spatial scoping, the sufficient  and comprehensive policy, the sufficient  and comprehensive planning, and the community valuing as the general valuing and ethos of our historical timing in the 2020s (i.e., we no longer tolerate the institutional ‘bullshit’ – a technical term in applied philosophy, see Harry G. Frankfurt’s infamous essay, Bullshit, Princeton University Press, 2005).

 

Overall, the climate-change argument here is that, on top of the problem of rezoning for laxing height restrictions, changes in the building codes, and to create new codes (Gurran, & Phibbs 2016: 63), were aimed to ameliorate the changes in global climate, and increasing height in buildings will only work against those meagre climate change and health efficiency service measures: increasing shadows and the cold in periods of dramatic lower temperatures, and increasing hot airflows between larger buildings and increase airconditioned energy needs in periods of dramatic higher temperatures. There is a clear policy’s argument which effectively and comprehensively tie together all of the other arguments. Everything is tied together as policy failure (and thus the solution) in the final cost to the community, and government and council simply bulwarking what communities want and need. Legal battle between the leaders of a community of low-income families that wanted to construct an affordable housing project and local government that tried to resist the construction are well-known (Mc Cawley 2019: 596n34). What is also well-known are municipal game-playing on the truth about policy failures in many national context (Philifert 2014: 73). The stated policy might be effective and comprehensive but the loss of integrity is seen in the planning stages and implementations. There are simply, but perhaps legally corrupt, laxation of plans and failure to implement publicly-stated policies ( Gurran, & Phibbs 2016: 63; Mc Cawley 2019: 596n34; Philifert 2014: 73). The terms of politically democratization by the community,  “refers to changes in the system of power and decision-making procedures that resulted in a ‘pluralisation’ of power relations and relations to power that opened spaces of freedom and places of debates while expanding the possibilities of conflict management’” (Philifert 2014:73, citing Béatrice Hibou 2011, p. 2). March (2010:115) sums up the problem of the Australian policy historical setting from Melbourne:

 

“The widespread emergence of the new form of medium density housing divided planning academics, activists and practitioners. A small but influential group of modernists, mainly from architectural backgrounds, believed good design would solve both social issues and desires to provide high quality family housing. On the other side of this divide stood opposition to redevelopment of ‘slums’ via demolition of existing housing stock, and the supporters of the suburbs (Yule, 2004: 161). Yet another group were the staunch supporters of planned suburban development as the ideal Australian housing form (Stretton, 1971). Even today, debate about the suburbs versus higher density living continues (Gleeson, 2006).”

 

The false narratives of governments and councils (as mentioned above) are the attempt of these governing entities to mask themselves from public scrutiny that they are out of ideas and have become the victims of the unscrupulous developers’ game-playing. To get around the problem of the political narrative, there has been abusive employment of consensus theory. As Ormerod & MacLeod (2019: 320) stated:

 

“Contributions to this body of thought [political rhetoric] have undoubtedly disclosed some limits to consensus models of planning and formal political engagement while also revealing seemingly neutral practices like ‘good governance’ to be deeply politicized (Brown, 2015; MacLeod, 2011; Swyngedouw, 2009). Nonetheless, adhering to a post-political narrative in turn risks positing a troubling binary between consensus and conflict: one that envisages places to be governed through a ‘police order’ in opposition to ‘proper political’ undertakings that disrupt this very order. These disruptions are often viewed to foreshadow the potential for a more progressive democracy (cf. Dikeç and Swyngedouw, 2017; Rancière, 1999; Swyngedouw, 2011). Such a binary suffers ‘… from an overly limited definition of what counts as politics proper, as well as a failure to understand consent as fundamentally political. In so doing, it undermines its own ability to understand how consensus is won and whose interests it serves.’ (Mitchell et al., 2015: 2636)”

 

There is also the spatial argument in the other overlapping arguments to which is significantly connected to community costs and rental affordability. The community’s argument here is for the state and municipal authorities to share its effective and comprehensive valuing. As Sager (2018: 456) argued:

 

“Intentional communities have a permanent need to stress their otherness. Consequently, when spatial planning is part of their defence strategy, the plans are likely to demonstrate difference from mainstream society. This makes intentional community planning agonistic by nature. Strife must be continuing to underline opposition to conventional living (Pløger, 2004). The combination of hybridity and non-conformity is the reason why planning by intentional communities can contribute something new to planning theory.”

 

It should be straight forward for the State Government Minister to understand; strife is how the urban-suburb community is feeling (see figure 1). Further comments are to follow in relation to the climate-change agenda, the spatial scoping, the sufficient  and comprehensive policy, the sufficient  and comprehensive planning, and the community valuing, and applied to two specific problems which arise from the Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 – (1) higher (hyper) density residential building, and (2) the future and well-predictable flooding in the riverside neighbourhood (un)planned area. Added to the examination are the true valuing in (3) community design excellence, (4) community land use strategies, and (5) community urban planning.

 

1.1 Higher density residential buildings

 

Ideologically, outside the vested-interest of an elite wealthy, the community argument is against higher (hyper) density residential buildings. Raynor, Matthews, & Mayere (2017: 1520), speaking to the Brisbane scene, cites Dodson and Gleeson (2007) and Ruming and Houston (2013) on the issue of urban consolidation, and relating genuine fears of “diminished quality of life, neighbourhood character and property values once densification occurs”. Raynor, Matthews, & Mayere (2017) concern is for “social representations employed by city shapers to understand, promote and communicate about urban consolidation”. The article reads as a lesson on critiquing urban propaganda, and they state, “…that urban consolidation debates and justifications diverge significantly from stated policy intentions and are based on differing views on ‘good’ urban form, the role of planning and community consultation and the value of higher density housing”; and [We] “conclude that there is utility and value in identifying how urban consolidation strategies are influenced by the shared beliefs, myths and perceptions held by city shapers.” The problem is that academics in this narrow field of urban sociology do not appreciate the depth of the political criticism from wider fields of social science, such as political studies, studies-in-religion and historiography. Hence, whether meaning to or not, Raynor, Mayere, & Matthews (2018b: 1057) have come across a little too sympathetic to political needs of government and council rather than that of Queensland communities to which they argue they understand but do not have the voice of the community; although their academic ‘neutral’ rhetoric did somewhat depart in referring to “Understanding these narratives and their influence is fundamental to understanding the power-laden manipulation of policy definitions and development outcomes.” This document makes a stronger argument and cites those urban sociologists who refer to the stronger economic critique masked by government and council, such as from Troy (2018: 1329):

 

“Australia has long had a deeply speculative housing property market. Arguably this has been accentuated in recent years as successive governments have privileged private-sector investment in housing property as the key mechanism for delivering housing and a concurrent winding back of direct government support for housing. This has occurred through a period in which urban renewal and flexible planning regulation have become the key focus of urban planning policy to deliver on compact city ambitions in the name of sustainability. There has been a tendency to read many of the higher density housing outcomes as a relatively homogenous component of the housing market. There has been a comparative lack of critical engagement with differentiated spatial, physical and socio-economic outcomes within the higher density housing market. This [Troy’s] paper will explore the interactions between flexible design-based planning policies, the local property market and physical outcomes. Different parts of the property development industry produced distinctive social and physical outcomes within the same regulatory space. Each response was infused with similar politics of exclusion and privilege in which capacity to pay regulated both access and standard of housing accessible, opening new socio-economic divisions within Australia’s housing landscape.”

 

Again, can the Minister ignore what is so publicly understood in dealing with the Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023. This is particularly true with the climate-change argument. The link between environmental sustainability and low-density suburban development is not lost on the leading urban sociologists (Newton 2010:82). Newton’s work (2010) is very technical and is able to draw out the planning limitations for greenfield, brownfield and greyfield development but none of it supports at all the arguments of the Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023. Newton is rationally and wisely hopeful that the society can create a “transitions arena of stakeholders (institutions and communities) to formulate a new model for greyfield precinct regeneration that can help redevelop those existing but poorly performing neighbourhoods of Australia’s major cities into more sustainable places?” This is hopeful if government and council does not remain deaf. As Wright (2010: 1) points out the:

 

“Consolidation of the urban fabric is seen as a means to reduce energy consumption and thus greenhouse gas emissions. However, the relationship between high-density housing and low energy use is not automatic. Although urban consolidation can lead to lower transport energy use, research shows that planners, designers and policy makers may not have sufficiently taken into account built-form energy use by different housing types.”

 

 

The return of affluent population groups into gentrifying inner urban areas, the market for higher (hyper) density residential buildings, is rationalised on good public transport accessibility in a spatial sense, but this has only been seen for such neighbourhoods with other extending problems, such as street parking, and the planned transport alleged solutions are distributed into other suburbs usually at a greater distance from metropolitan centres (Scheurer Curtis, & McLeod 2017: 912). It does not at all improve public transport accessibility in a spatial sense in the way that Brisbane City Council promises. This is one of many policy failure around the argument for higher (hyper) density residential buildings. Planning intentions from such de-regulated policies might be originally good (Nethercote 2019: 3394), but they become closed-minded when planning goes wrong, such as the case of creating isolated, heat-attracting, and unattractive and unused “islands” in the form of enclosed, large, courtyards not well-maintained (Patel, Shirish Alpa Sheth, & Neha Pancha 2007: 2725). The urban heat island effect referenced in Australia’s State of the Environment 2021 Report, officially released in 2022, https://soe.dcceew.gov.au/urban/pressures/climate-change.

 

The policy failure is largely driven by the market demand of the affluent population groups, as opposed to a vision of integrated communities and it recognizes the importance of affordable housing to such a vision. The latter was the Victorian government’s housing policy a few decades ago (Wood, Berry, Taylor, & Nygaard (2008: 274).

 

1.2 Flooding riverside neighbourhood plan area

 

The most severe ideological criticism of government and council is in the sphere of flood and water management and that has had a long legacy in the history of Brisbane. Water engineering (surface water management to control flash flooding and protect underground aquifers) is a very important element in  Greenstructure planning (Beer,  Delshammar, & Schildwacht 2003: 133-4). Dr Cook (2019:72-75) has challenged the effective use of the Council powers to manage flood risk, even as the Council is powerful as a kind of modern city state. Cook (2022) has well-demonstrated that the continual policy of the Brisbane City Council extends to the extremely poor thinking in water management across governance in Australia. The Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 is another example of the extremely poor thinking in that the Council has yet to respond to Cook’s challenge that higher (density) building will only make the Brisbane River flooding worse. Ignoring the challenge puts the government and the council on the wrong side of history as evidence in the climate-change argument are dramatically increasing. In fact, we as a society are supposed to be beyond the debate and should be participating in what is expertly seen as a global emergency. Allowing The Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 to pass would be a great policy and de-planning failure.

 

1.3 True community design excellence

 

This document submission does offer positive suggestions. There are projects which have become successful and sustainable as community design excellence. They are draw from principles of ‘civic design’ (Shasore 2018: 175). However, here having sufficient knowledge of design and construction principles means going much deeper in the historical sociology to see where assumptions built into principles have led into problematic outcomes (Moos et al 2015: 69). To the horror of poor, uncritical, thinkers, it necessitates a deep examinations of common presumptions in matters of gender, “race”, ethnicity, and wealth, in relation to workspace and the space for sustainable suburban living. Indeed, it  goes to criticism of the precognitive “miserable science”: economics and its presumptions. We need to be aware that the knowledge-base that may have solutions is also the same knowledge-base that led us into the problems in the first place. We need not, though, repeat the cognitive mistakes. When we have been substantively told the truth, Minister, we cannot plea ignorance for when policy or implementation failures occur. From the Canadian perspective, Moos et al (2015: 64-5) expresses well what we what we already should know and act upon in historical sociology:

 

“Suburbs that developed in metropolitan Canada post-World War II have historically been depicted as homogeneous landscapes of gendered domesticity, detached housing, White middle-class nuclear families, and heavy automobile use. We find that key features of this historical popular image do in fact persist across the nation’s contemporary metropolitan landscape, particularly at the expanding fringes and in mid-sized cities near the largest metropolitan areas. The findings reflect suburbanization into new areas, point to enduring social exclusion, and recall the negative environmental consequences arising from suburban ways of living such as widespread automobile use and continuing sprawl. However, the analysis also points to the internal diversity that marks suburbanization today and to the growing presence of suburban ways of living in central areas. Our results suggest that planning policies promoting intensification and targeting social equity objectives are likely to remain ineffective if society fails to challenge directly the political, economic and socio-cultural drivers behind the kind of suburban ways of living that fit popular imaginings of post-World War II suburbs.”

 

 

Figure 2: Necessary Scoping in Thought for Urban Planning and Sociology

Again, across the document, the truth could not be plainer for the Minister’s reading. The argument is repeated across the volumes of scholarly literature which draw the same broad conclusion and that conclusion goes to what design excellence is in the 2020s, and what it is not. Troy (2018: 1329) stated:

 

“There has been a tendency to read many of the higher density housing outcomes as a relatively homogenous component of the housing market. There has been a comparative lack of critical engagement with differentiated spatial, physical and socio-economic outcomes within the higher density housing market. This paper [Troy’s] will explore the interactions between flexible design-based planning policies, the local property market and physical outcomes. Different parts of the property development industry produced distinctive social and physical outcomes within the same regulatory space. Each response was infused with similar politics of exclusion and privilege in which capacity to pay regulated both access and standard of housing accessible, opening new socio-economic divisions within Australia’s housing landscape.”

 

Nelson (2009: 40) points out the problem of the singular political messaging of “The new urbanism [which] would design neighbourhoods so that households of all life stages have the option of living in a single neighbourhood.” Randall & Baetz,  (2015: 361) described this singular messaging as the “”Proponents of smart growth and neo-traditional design models of development purport that these characteristics will lead to residential development that is more sustainable than the conventional suburban model.” However, the design models are being critical re-examined in its reported successes. In the last 20 years academics have made similar criticism of the Queensland case, but the criticism is too bland and lacks the sharp philosophic critical statements of the sociological problem in Queensland politics; to which is being drawn out in this document. In the critique of Raynor, Mayere, & Matthews (2018a: 1059), in relation to the statutory South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009–2031, and with the Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 in mind, only conclude that  despite political rhetoric that in keeping with community-based policy outcomes (Frew et al., 2016)., the Queensland government urban policies are “…often criticised for not achieving the benefits it purports to deliver, for instance by lowering the standards of building regulation and by reinforcing the general climate and consequences of neoliberal reform (Frew et al., 2016).”

 

The language, however, has to be put much stronger in philosophical terms on the political cognition when it comes to the critical problems identified in the climate-change argument. The list of problems includes those from Coutts, Beringer, & Tapper (2007: 477):

 

“Alterations to the natural environment, resulting from the physical structure of the city and its artificial energy and pollution emissions, interact to form distinct urban climates (Bridgman et al. 1995). These urban climates can often be undesirable, causing increases in air pollution and aiding the formation of urban heat islands (UHI). Urban warming can have substantial implications for air quality and human health (Stone and Rodgers 2001). Factors generating the UHI are believed to include emissions of atmospheric pollutants that increase longwave radiation from the sky and/or increased absorption of shortwave radiation (depending on the pollutant), anthropogenic heating, reduced horizontal airflow due to increased friction, absorption and retention of energy from solar radiation due to canyon geometry, reduced longwave loss due to limited sky-view factor, and reduced evapo-transpiration from vegetation removal, which is a natural cooling mechanism (Tapper 1984; Oke 1982; Stone and Rodgers 2001). Urban structure, intensity of development, and type of building material can also influence UHI intensity, which suggests that UHI may be more a product of urban design rather than, as commonly assumed, the density of development (Stone and Rodgers 2001).”

 

Ensuring urban design leads the planning and development is offered as a solution to counter UHI and promote environmental outcomes for health, economic and recreational/tourism benefits. This has been identified in the “We the peoples declaration of South East Queensland” following a series of roundtables structured on the world leading united nations Habitat 3 framework and alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

 

The climate-change argument clearly demolishes the Council’s argument for higher (hyper) density building in Kurilpa area, as elsewhere.

 

Since the QUT Kelvin Grove higher (hyper) density residential development, the university’s academics have been the principal advisors for the Queensland Department of Housing in the thinking on the construction of a mix of educational, research, commercial and community buildings in the decade 2005-2015 (Hammonds 2005: 1). That has been extremely poor because the academics have been caught in the narrow boxes of technical specialisation, since they lack the wider and deeper multidisciplinary education in other fields of sociology, philosophy, and history. The machine, technical, thinking skews the outlook of the academics. There needs to be a re-reading of the basic issue in the way Nankervis (2003: 315) demonstrates:

 

“ A basic issue in measuring anything is to identify, describe or define the concept or object. It is here that the problem begins. In the broad conceptual sense, planning is simply making decisions about how to act in the future, generally with the implication that a series of actions will be coordinated towards a particular end. One dictionary definition notes planning or a plan as ‘(noun); tabulated statement or scheme; project, design or way of proceeding’. Or; ‘(verb, transitive); arrange beforehand’. The inclusion of the concept ‘town’ or ‘urban’ (or regional), merely locates the decisions in space, though town planning is not exclusively about space. As Badcock (1984) argued, we need to ‘put space in its place’, and so town planning should not focus on space, but the human activities taking place within space.”

 

As Cheshire (2018: 10) stated, “the first problem with the British planning system: it has no rules.” Ormerod & MacLeod (2019: 319) also confirms the existence of the philosophical problem: “In recent decades, and drawing lessons from the critique of high modernism (Dear, 1986), scholars of urban planning have been motivated to formulate conceptual approaches facilitating a deeper involvement of the public in actively planning and designing places (Fainstein, 2000; Healey, 1996).” The criticism refers to the unplanning in the Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023. Other parts of the literature speak to the urban poor who need to participate in formal planning processes (Galuszka 2019: 144). However, from the current government and council perspective the issue remains narrowly one of land usage and zoning. A result of this is where an economic success for one government department, such as local planning, will have negative and economic blowouts in other government departments, such as the government departments of environment & science, water, and health. Hence is this really an economic success for the state and local governments outright.

 

1.4 True community land use strategies

 

Outside of the power-hold of government and council, the wider community has its own solutions. Allen (2011: 358) points to CIAM urbanism (Californian institutional architectural management?) which is not pure abstract modernism but successfully demonstrated commitments to local natural landscape during 1950s and 1960s in general, in Berkeley’s plans and the Francisco Bay Area. Historically, Meen, & Nygaard (2011: 3107-8) argue that the rigours of the land use planning system means that supply is inelastic, particularly, “…where states that face the most stringent zoning regulations (notably the coastal states) experience low supply elasticities and more price volatility (Glaeser et al , 2008; and Goodman and Thibodeau, 2008). This is not an argument for de-regulation nor de-planning, but according to Meen, & Nygaard (2011: 3108):

 

“In summary, history and geography may have strong effects on local inequalities in development, but it is not clear whether or not they exert a stronger or weaker impact than planning policy, although the two are not entirely distinct at the local level. Yet, given that national policies are common to all areas, local markets can be analysed to examine whether differences in supply elasticities are partly attributable to differences in existing land use patterns, which may have been laid down over many years.”

 

What is inferred is an uneven political competition between developers and the interests of the broader-but-local community in land use strategies for housing. Even in the ICT networked Mega-City which was supposed to ameliorate climate-change threats, the prospect of new stage development is “…characterized by suburbanization [and] could signify for multifunctional land-use deurbanization” (or, as Van den Berg, 1982, in planning of such a Mega-City-Region, term it, ‘desurbanization’; Priemus & Hall 2004: 339). Hilber & Schöni 2016: 291) concluded from the literature that:

 

“The United States is characterized by fiscal federalism and an enormous variation in the tightness of land use restrictiveness across metropolitan areas. The key policy concern across the country is homeownership attainment and the key policy to tackle this issue is the mortgage interest deduction (MID). This policy backfires in metropolitan areas that are prosperous and where land use is tightly regulated— “superstar cities”—because, in these places, the policy-induced demand increase mainly pushes up house prices. The MID increases homeownership attainment of only higher-income households in metropolitan areas with lax land use regulation.”

 

Again, the argument for the Minister not to approve the Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023 could not be clearer. In this argument there is no binary between intercity zoning and outer suburb concerns, that is a complete false narrative and is all parcelled into the same residential land termed urban sprawl (Kulmer, Koland, Steininger,  Fürst, & Käfer 2014: 57). There are no secrets here. The public call has been made by urban sociologists.

 

Murdoch (2004: 52-3) in a precise argument called, “Putting Discourse in Its Place: Planning, Sustainability and the Urban Capacity Study”, rejected the

 

“…‘predict and provide’ approach to planning for housing [a phrase first popularized by the Planning for the Communities of the Future, Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE),  UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR 1998)]. It also emphasized the need to increase the responsibility of regional and local planning authorities in deciding how to best meet housing needs in each region. In undertaking this task, these authorities should look closely at the allocation of previously developed sites and the scope for a ‘sequential’ and ‘phased’ approach to the provision of new housing. All these proposals had recently been advocated by the CPRE in the hope that localistic pressures for the preservation of green land would gain greater influence in the planning process.”

 

The failure of the UK approach is precisely the same characteristics of Queensland’s statutory South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009–2031. As Arias, Draper-Zivetz, & Martin (2017: 98) examined in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Puget Sound region in Washington State, and the Minneapolis-Saint Paul, Minnesota, the “…efforts [of planning authorities] did not add up to a comprehensive community engagement strategy, especially as compared with other case study regions.” And as D’Apolito (2012:xx) stated, “a truly comprehensive regionalism would address the interrelationships between land use, transportation, and other features of the infrastructure, and concomitant social and economic disparities… Land use and education are [the] issues” (emphasis added; D’Apolito cited Basolo and Hastings 2003: 450, and Norris 2001). The Minister’s decision, again, could not be clearer based on the evidence.

 

1.5 True community urban planning

 

The whole document here has shown what true community urban planning details in opposition to the Council’s Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023. There is no shortage of information and data to make wise and intelligent decisions on behalf of the substantive local community interest. For example, Lenth, Knight & Gilgert,  (2006: 1445), who detail issues on conservation value: (1) densities of songbirds, (2) nest density and survival of ground-nesting birds, (3) presence of mammals, and (4) percent cover and proportion of native and non-native plant species. This is nothing new after a century or more in urban planning, and there are many global examples of community-initiative planning: Baltimore Plan (Leclair-Paquet 2017: 517n2); City Quay scheme (1979-81), the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland Silver Medal for Housing, “greatly loved by its house-proud tenants” (McManus 2011: 280).

 

The Queensland government appears (to date) to ignore the historical sociology argument. This has led to ignorance – whether wilful or not – of mistakes made in the United Kingdom decades ago in housing policies (Barker 2019:69). This decade of 2020s goes to deeper problems of food security and climate change. Basso (2018: 111) only a few years ago stated:

 

“Only recently, however, the way in which food-related policies and strategies could renew the themes and tools of public space design and, more generally, of open spaces, has been questioned. From this point of view, is it possible for us to put forward another research question: can the “food system” help define new fields for urban design? Some scholars have already pointed out that, since 2005, urban agriculture has progressively shifted from being only a policy subject to being a design subject, too (Viljoenet et al., 2015). There are many instances confirming this trend. To date, for example, the Carrot City website (https://www.torontomu.ca/carrotcity/) has collected more than 100 design experiences related to urban agriculture, highlighting the wide variety of proposed solutions: from community initiatives, housing, and rooftops up to the designing of individual ‘components’ that can enrich and diversify open space configurations and uses.”

 

In this light, Dr Cook’s (2019: viii) call for a rethink on the riverine territory more in line with the indigenous outlook is not outlandish.

 

First, however, government and council need to re-think and re-design community education. The UK mistakes in the housing policy were generated in the public square through a set of false narratives on measuring and modelling the impact of planning and other public interventions for economic outcomes (Bramley, & Leishman 2005: 2213). Ultimately, what is needed is community education in the deep philosophy pertaining to visions of, and for, language, society and urban sociology. A very good example is Griggs, & Howarth (2008: 125) in addressing paradoxical concerns in the politics of urban sociology:

 

“Very generally, to put it in terms borrowed from Rousseau, the paradox concerns the difficulties of mediating and reconciling the gap between ‘the will of all’ (the sum of particular wills) and the ‘general will’ (the moment of universality that is common to each particular will), thus highlighting the tension between the free pursuit of private self-interest and those activities directed at the realization of the common or public good (Rousseau, 1978). But while Rousseau (as well as Hegel and Marx in their different ways) strived for a complete overcoming of this split in any legitimate political order, where individual freedom would coincide with community and the good of all, he was of course deeply pessimistic about its realization in actual political orders. Indeed, it is clear that the tension pinpointed by Rousseau is still pertinent today, even though in contemporary theory it admits of a range of possible permutations and expressions. In rational choice theory, for example, it is manifest in the difficulties of reconciling the logic of individual, rational self-interest with the logic of collective action, as the perceived costs of the latter can outweigh its perceived benefits, or because the goods can be achieved without acting in concert at all (Olson, 1965).”

 

Again, this is not an argument for cynical resignation. Our hope lies in better ways of being cognisant of the issues. The various arguments of this document ought to bring the Minister to an intelligent decision upon the Local Planning Instrument No.1 of 2023.

 

2.0 Conclusion

 

Incorporating the five technical arguments discussed in this document, for true community urban planning, land use strategies. design excellence, climate resilient neighbourhood plans and adequate and varied housing density buildings, solutions should involve adequate urban design with participatory governance. This can be visualised through a trifecta framework of 1. long term economic value, 2. social, and 3. environmental framework aligned to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).  Reference for image: https://www.unaa.org.au/2023/02/07/united-nations-habitat-35-declaration/ (figure 3 below).

 

A further consideration is that the Queensland Treaty and Education Minister would be good to engage for the input and voice of indigenous peoples which it references. This submission sets out to demask or de-ideologize policy narratives in urban planning. Philosophy professor at UQ, Donald Vandenberg, argued that the first step is to the understanding the forces at play in the public arena. However, ideology always serves the interests of those in power, and, now with the focus on the Brisbane Olympic Games in 2032, it will become increasingly harder for those wishing to challenge the ideology with rational thought and evidence. The tension between inner city and suburban development will continue to be a political argument of ‘totalitarian free-market government de-planning’ no matter the evidence to the contrary. The Minister, though, has the agency of the honesty, not to accept false narratives and bad policies.

 

The educated public is a notion that resonates with the community, and Lewis Mumford in the 1970s continues to be deeply influential for the community. Many community geographers have seen the lively debates on the relationship between the city and space: ‘we need to put space in its place’. The whole object of town planning ought to be a focus on the human activities taking place within space and not space per se.  Leibnitz argued that space is nothing but a series of relations which is in stark contrast to the Newtonian conception of absolute space as a container into which all sorts of object are placed. There needs to be a conversation around such philosophic thought, and perhaps as part of re-thinking and re-designing community education.

 

The community is fed up with the game playing political rhetoric of institutional bullshit from those who are too lazy to think a little deeper about the kind of city our children will inherit. There well may be political backlash if the Minister gives the Kurilpa Sustainable Growth Temporary Local Planning No 1 of 2023 a tick of approval but at least the ‘TRUTH’ has been presented to the Minister which is a positive outcome of the submission. It remains to be seen. Will logic, evidence and argument prevail?

 

Figure 3: Necessary Scoping in Thought for Urban Planning and Sociology: United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

 

 

 3.0        Bibliography and References

Allen, P. (2011). The End of Modernism? People’s Park, Urban Renewal, and Community Design. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 70(3), 354–374. https://doi.org/10.1525/jsah.2011.70.3.354

Arias, J. S., Draper-Zivetz, S., & Martin, A. (2017). The Impacts of the Sustainable Communities Initiative Regional Planning Grants on Planning and Equity in Three Metropolitan Regions. Cityscape, 19(3), 93–114. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26328354

Badcock, B. (1984). Unfairly Structured Cities. Oxford: Blackwell.

Barker, K. (2019). Redesigning Housing Policy. National Institute Economic Review, 250, R69–R74. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48564806

Basso, S. (2018). Rethinking public space through food processes: Research proposal for a “public city.” Urbani Izziv, 29, 109–124. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26516365

Beer, A. R., Delshammar, T., & Schildwacht, P. (2003). A Changing Understanding of the Role of Greenspace in High-density Housing: A European Perspective. Built Environment (1978-), 29(2), 132–143. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23288812

Berg, L. van den, Drewett, R., Klaassen, Rossi, A. and Vijverberg, C.H.T. (1982). Europe, A Study of Growth and Decline, Oxford: Pergamon.

Bramley, G., & Leishman, C. (2005). Planning and Housing Supply in Two-speed Britain: Modelling Local Market Outcomes. Urban Studies, 42(12), 2213–2244. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43197241

Bricocoli, M., & Cucca, R. (2016). Social mix and housing policy: Local effects of a misleading rhetoric. The case of Milan. Urban Studies, 53(1), 77–91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26146232

Bridgman, H., R. Warner, and J. Dodson (1995). Urban Biophysical Environments. Oxford University Press.

Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution, New York: Zone Books.

Cheshire, P. (2018). Broken Market Or Broken Policy? The Unintended Consequences Of Restrictive Planning. National Institute Economic Review, 245, R9–R19. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48562309

Cook, Margaret (2019). A River with a City Problem: A History of Brisbane Floods, University of Queensland Press.

Cook, Margaret (2022). Cities in a Sunburnt Country: Water and the Making of Urban Australia, Cambridge University Press

Coutts, A. M., Beringer, J., & Tapper, N. J. (2007). Impact of Increasing Urban Density on Local Climate: Spatial and Temporal Variations in the Surface Energy Balance in Melbourne, Australia. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 46(4), 477–493. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26171916

D’Apolito, R. (2012). Can’t We All Get Along? Public Officials’ Attitudes toward Regionalism as a Solution to Metropolitan Problems in a Rust Belt Community. Journal of Applied Social Science, 6(1), 103–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23549001

Dear, M. (1986). Postmodernism and planning. Environment and Planning Development: Society and Space 4: 367–384.

Dikeç, M. and Swyngedouw E. (2017) .Theorizing the politicizing city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Studies 41(1): 1–18.

Dodson, J. and Gleeson B. (2007) The use of density in Australian planning. Paper presented at the 2007 State of Australian Cities Conference, Adelaide, 28–30 November 2007.

Edwards, Arthur Trystan (1921). The Things Which Are Seen: A Revaluation of the Visual Arts, London.

Edwards, Arthur Trystan (1944). Style and Composition in Architecture: An Exposition of the Canon of Number, Punctuation and Inflection, London.

Edwards, Arthur Trystan (1947). The Things Which Are Seen: A Philosophy of Beauty, 2nd edition, London.

Fainstein, S. (2000). New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35: 451–478.

Frankfurt, Harry G. (2005). Bullshit, Princeton University Press.

Frew, T., Baker D. and Donehue P. (2016). Performance based planning in Queensland: A case of unintended plan-making outcomes. Land Use Policy, 50: 239–251.

Galuszka, J. (2019). What makes urban governance co-productive? Contradictions in the current debate on co-production. Planning Theory, 18(1), 143–160. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26677440

Glaeser, G. L., Gyourko, J. and Saiz, A. (2008). Housing supply and housing bubbles, Journal of Urban Economics, 64, pp. 198

Gleeson, B. (2006) Australian Heartlands: Making Space for Hope in the Suburbs, Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.

Goodman, A. C. and Thibodeau, T. G. (2008). Where are the speculative bubbles in US housing markets?, Journal of Housing Economics, 17, 117-137.

Gordon J. and Gordon C. (1933) The London Roundabout. Edinburgh: Harrap.

Griggs, S., & Howarth, D. (2008). Populism, Localism And Environmental Politics: The Logic and Rhetoric of the Stop Stansted Expansion Campaign. Planning Theory, 7(2), 123–144. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26004248

Gurran, N., & Phibbs, P. (2016). “Boulevard of Broken Dreams”: Planning, Housing Supply and Affordability in Urban Australia. Built Environment (1978-), 42(1), 55–71. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44132319

Hammonds, A. (2005). Kelvin Grove Urban Village. Environment Design Guide, 1–10. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26148283

Healey P (1996) The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formation. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 23: 217–234.

Hilber, C. A. L., & Schöni, O. (2016). Housing Policies in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States: Lessons Learned. Cityscape, 18(3), 291–332. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26328289

Hibou, B. (2011). Le mouvement du 20 février, le Makhzen et l’antipolitique… Cahiers du CERI, May, pp. 1-11.

Jackson, K. (1985). Crabgrass frontier: the suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kulmer, V., Koland, O., Steininger, K. W., Fürst, B., & Käfer, A. (2014). The interaction of spatial planning and transport policy: A regional perspective on sprawl. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(1), 57–77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26202672

Leclair-Paquet, B. (2017). The ‘Baltimore Plan’: case-study from the prehistory of urban rehabilitation. Urban History, 44(3), 516–543. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26398769

Lenth, B. A., Knight, R. L., & Gilgert, W. C. (2006). Conservation Value of Clustered Housing Developments. Conservation Biology, 20(5), 1445–1456. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3879136

Mace, A. (2016). The suburbs as sites of “within-planning” power relations. Planning Theory, 15(3), 239–254. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26098748

MacLeod, G. and Johnstone C. (2012). Stretching urban renaissance: Privatizing space, civilizing place, summoning community. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 36:1–28.

Maleas, I. (2018). Social housing in a suburban context: A bearer of peri-urban diversity? Urbani Izziv, 29(1), 73–82. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26446684

March, A. (2010). Practising theory: When theory affects urban planning. Planning Theory, 9(2), 108–125. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26004197

McManus, R. (2011). Suburban and urban housing in the twentieth century. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature, 111C, 253–286. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472822

McCabe, M. P. (2016). Building the Planning Consensus: The Plan of Chicago, Civic Boosterism, and Urban Reform in Chicago, 1893 to 1915. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 75(1), 116–148. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43818683

Mc Cawley, D. G. (2019). Law and Inclusive Urban Development: Lessons from Chile’s Enabling Markets Housing Policy Regime. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 67(3), 587–636. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26866522

Meen, G., & Nygaard, C. (2011). Local Housing Supply and the Impact of History and Geography. Urban Studies, 48(14), 3107–3124. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43082026

Mitchell, D., Attoh K. and Staeheli L. (2015). Whose city? What politics? Contentious and noncontentious spaces on Colorado’s Front Range. Urban Studies 52: 2633–2648.

Miller, Mervyn (1992). Raymond Unwin: Garden Cities and Town Planning, Leicester.

Moos, M., Kramer, A., Williamson, M., Mendez, P., McGuire, L., Wyly, E., & Walter-Joseph, R. (2015). More Continuity than Change? Re-evaluating the Contemporary Socio-economic and Housing Characteristics of Suburbs. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 24(2), 64–90. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26195292

Mumford L. (1968). The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace International.

Murdoch, J. (2004). Putting Discourse in Its Place: Planning, Sustainability and the Urban Capacity Study. Area, 36(1), 50–58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20004357

Nairn I. (1955). Outrage: On the disfigurement of town and countryside, London. Architectural Review 117: 361–460.

Nankervis, M. (2003). Measuring Australian Planning: Constraints and Caveats. Built Environment (1978-), 29(4), 315–326. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23288882

Nelson, A. C. (2009). Catching the Next Wave: Older Adults and the ‘New Urbanism.’ Generations: Journal of the American Society on Aging, 33(4), 37–42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26555694

Nethercote, M. (2019). Melbourne’s vertical expansion and the political economies of high-rise residential development. Urban Studies, 56(16), 3394–3414. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26958648

Newman, P. and Kenworthy, J. (1999). Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Newton, P. W. (2010). Beyond Greenfield and Brownfield: The Challenge of Regenerating Australia’s Greyfield Suburbs. Built Environment (1978-), 36(1), 81–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23289985

Newton P. and Glackin S. (2014) Understanding infill: Towards new policy and practice for urban regeneration in the established suburbs of Australia’s cities. Urban Policy and Research, 32(2): 1–23.

Oke, T. R., 1982: The energetic basis of the urban heat island. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 108, 1–24.

Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Ormerod, E., & MacLeod, G. (2019). Beyond consensus and conflict in housing governance: Returning to the local state. Planning Theory, 18(3), 319–338. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26759191

Patel, Shirish B., Alpa Sheth, & Neha Panchal. (2007). Urban Layouts, Densities and the Quality of Urban Life. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(26), 2725–2736. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4419764

Philifert, P. (2014). Morocco 2011/2012: Persistence of Past Urban Policies or a New Historical Sequence for Urban Action? Built Environment (1978-), 40(1), 72–84. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43296872

Pløger, J. (2004). Strife: Urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory 3(1): 71–92.

Preville, P. (2011). Exodus to the ‘burbs: why diehard downtowners are giving up on the city. Toronto Life September 14. (Accessed January 29, 2014: ttp://www.torontolife.com/informer/features/2011/09/14/exodus-to-the-burbs-whydiehard-downtowners-are-giving-up-on-the-city/)

Priemus, H., & HALL, P. (2004). Multifunctional Urban Planning of Mega-City-Regions. Built Environment (1978-), 30(4), 338–349. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24026086

Rancière, J. (1999). Dis-Agreement: Politics and Philosophy. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Randall, T. A., & Baetz, B. W. (2015). A GIS-based land-use diversity index model to measure the degree of suburban sprawl. Area, 47(4), 360–375. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24811684

Raynor, K., Matthews, T., & Mayere, S. (2017). Shaping urban consolidation debates: Social representations in Brisbane newspaper media. Urban Studies, 54(6), 1519–1536. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26151428

Raynor, K., Mayere, S., & Matthews, T. (2018). Do ‘city shapers’ really support urban consolidation? The case of Brisbane, Australia. Urban Studies, 55(5), 1056–1075. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26428476

Rousseau, J. J. (1978). On the Social Contract: With Geneva Manuscript and Political Economy. New York: St Martin’s Press.

Ruming, K. and Houston D. (2013). Enacting planning borders: Consolidation and resistance in Ku-ring-gai, Sydney. Australian Planner 50(2):123–129.

Ruming, K., Houston D. and Amati M (2011). Multiple suburban publics: Rethinking community opposition to consolidation in Sydney. Geographical Research 50(4): 421–435.

Sager, T. (2018). Planning by intentional communities: An understudied form of activist planning. Planning Theory, 17(4), 449–471. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26539550

Scheurer, J., Curtis, C., & McLeod, S. (2017). Spatial accessibility of public transport in Australian cities: Does it relieve or entrench social and economic inequality? Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 911–930. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26211762

Searle G and Filion P (2011) Planning context and urban intensification outcomes: Sydney versus Toronto. Urban Studies, 48: 1419–1438.

Sewell, J. (2009). Shape of the Suburbs: Understanding Toronto’s Sprawl. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Shasore, N. E. (2018). ‘A Stammering Bundle of Welsh Idealism’: Arthur Trystan Edwards and Principles of Civic Design in Interwar Britain. Architectural History, 61, 175–203. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26794867

Stretton, H. (1971). Ideas for Australian Cities. Melbourne: Georgian.

Stone, B., and M. O. Rodgers, 2001: Urban form and thermal efficiency—How the design of cities influences the urban heat island effect. Journal of American Planning Association, 67, 186–198.

Swyngedouw, E. (2009). The antinomies of the postpolitical city: In search of a democratic politics of environmental production. International Journal of Urban and Regional Studies 33: 601–620.

Swyngedouw, E. (2011). Interrogating post-democratization: Reclaiming egalitarian political spaces. Political Geography 30: 370–380.

Tapper, N. J., 1984: Prediction of the downward flux of atmospheric radiation in a polluted urban environment. Australian. Meteorological Magazine, 32, 83–93.

Troy, L. (2018). The politics of urban renewal in Sydney’s residential apartment market. Urban Studies, 55(6), 1329–1345. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26510366

Viljoen, A., Schlesinger, J., Bohn, K. & Drescher, A. (2015). Agriculture in urban planning and spatial design. In: de Zeeuw, H. & Drechsel, P. (eds.) Cities and agriculture. Developing resilient urban food system, pp. 88-120. New York, Routledge.

Wood, G., Berry, M., Taylor, E., & Nygaard, C. (2008). Community Mix, Affordable Housing and Metropolitan Planning Strategy in Melbourne. Built Environment (1978-), 34(3), 273–290. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23289784

Wright, K. (2010). The Relationship Between House Density and Built-Form Energy Use. Environment Design Guide, 1–8. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26150782

Yule, P. (ed.) (2004). Carlton: A History, Melbourne University Press.

 

*****

We, of the Southern Brisbane Suburban Forum Inc., submit this report as a submission to the Queensland Government and Council as being truthful and accurate.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Dr Neville Buch

President, Southern Brisbane Suburban Forum Inc.

Acknowledgement of the editing and textual contributions of SBSF’s urban engineer Elizabeth Harrison, and Dr.
Adrian O’Connor, South-East Queensland geographer, and Dr. Neil Peach, urban sociologist.

Public Historian and Sociologist,

MPHA (Qld), Ph.D. (History) UQ., Grad. Dip. Arts (Philosophy) Melb., Grad. Dip. (Education) UQ.

ABN 86703686642

[1] Ian Nairn (1930-1983) was the British architectural critic who coined the word ‘Subtopia’ to indicate drab suburbs that look identical through unimaginative town-planning. There is an intellectual link here with the ABC television program “Utopia”.

[2] J. Gordon and C. Gordon (1933). The London Roundabout. Edinburgh: Harrap.

[3] Lewis Mumford (1895-1990) is the best urban sociologist to go, to understand the big problems of urban-town-city planning currently in Queensland.

Why Academia.edu and Not Quora? Automation Failure in Machine Learning (A.I.) and the Truth Value of Community Education

Why Academia.edu and Not Quora? Automation Failure in Machine Learning (A.I.) and the Truth Value of Community Education

Why Academia.edu and Not Quora? Automation Failure in Machine Learning (A.I.) and the Truth Value of Community Education

[Teaching Document Copy]

“Quora advertises with the slogan ‘The best answer to any question’, ‘Quora aggregates questions and answers to topics. Users can collaborate by editing questions and suggesting edits to other users’ answers’” (Anon 2015, ‘quora’).” (Wawra, D. 2015: 225).

 

“I am subscribed to something called Quora Digest. I have  no idea how that happened, but each week this website accepts questions that anyone is free to answer. Lots of the questions are silly, but some are pretty interesting.” (Robertson, B. 2017: 66).

 

“Creating a social networking presence that will be in any way effective requires careful analysis of your business goals, strategic planning that is incorporated into your overall marketing efforts, diligence, time by you or someone else, and in most cases, money.

Below are several key points to bear in mind when venturing into the vast world of social media and social networking platforms such as blogging, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and, most recently, Quora.” (Schuele, S. 2011:25).

 

“Try reading and answering academic blog posts. This can be great practice in responding to ideas in a creative but informed way. Do it properly too – don’t just offer opinion: apply some critical thinking to your responses. Some digital scholars actively use blog answering as their principal ‘online voice’. Or join Quora and try answering a few questions (www.quora.com). Again, do this properly –make it a piece of research and academic text. (Jones, D. 2014).”

 

“Food Logging and Blogging was created in an educational setting; however, there are many arenas within the health profession that can easily adapt these blogging concepts. It is a valid forum for communicating and has the potential to expand any program that is considering to increase awareness within the health community. The Internet website, Quora, puts the number of blogs that exist on the Internet at roughly 152,000,000. However, it is difficult finding an exact number because of the blogs still online but abandoned by their creators.” (Percoco, V. M. 2017: 80).

 

“Moviemakers risk millions in the hope of producing the next big hit. Could artificial intelligence and machine learning improve the odds? Disney Research, the media giant’s science lab, thinks so, and is working with colleagues at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, to develop an AI algorithm that can predict if readers will enjoy a short story. To create a database, the Disney team used the crowd-sourced Q&A website Quora to collect nearly 55,000 responses, classifying 28,000 as stories. They then used reader votes as “a proxy for narrative quality” and created several neural networks—which simulate human brain reactions—to determine the popularity of each story. The technology is a long way from being able to pick hot scripts, the ultimate goal.” (T.G. 2017: 12).

 

 

This blog article explains the primary problem of the platform Quora and demonstrate that the platform Academia.edu serves the truth value of community education far better.

 

The article was spurred by the blocking of an answer I had placed on Quora; for the reason Quora provided as violating their ‘spam policy’ (see image below).  I had violated the policy by recommending that a scholarly book would be a far better answer than what the platform was garnishing. Admittedly, the language was strong, but ought not to have been taken as offensive – “Try reasoning a scholarly book for once.” It was not SPAM, as I was not the author and have no relation to the author or the publisher, and I was recommending it as a better read that the Quora answers. I was not promoting the book for purchase. Apparently, it is not hard to block intelligent content:

 

“In 2017, a single typo from an Amazon engineer accidentally blocked access to a large set of servers resulting in disruption of Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) and outages on sites such as Quora, Trello, and IFTTT.” (Handler, S., Liu, L., & Herr, T. 2020: 4).

 

The response in this blog article is more considered and has researched an answer, not like most of the Quora answers to which Quora believes worthy to be published. Questions which are more reliably answered in Quora would be those not on the basis of the automotive-generated (A.I.) “research” technologies (e.g., Candeub, A. 2017: 153). The answers are highly technical in relation to the technology but, in most cases, there is misinformation and discrimination to the thinking on what is “research” and the educative concept of “research” in every other topic, subject, and discipline (the abuse of the technology demonstrates an inability to make these cognisant distinctions).

 

Anya Schiffrin (2017: 119-20) well sums up why platforms, such as Quora, cannot publish reliable research, let alone demonstrate that the concept and practice is understood:

 

By 2016, it was apparent that something had gone very wrong; many of the optimists of 2010 and 2011 had changed their thinking, warning of the dangers of digital technology. Wael Ghonim, whose Facebook pages are credited with galvanizing the protests in Egypt, declared that the web had become a “mobocracy.” Along with Emily Parker, Ghonim launched a site called Parlio that was meant to encourage civilized and expert discourse online about vital topics of the day. The site never garnered a large following but was bought by Quora and eventually closed down. Philip Howard began studying bot activities and disinformation during the 2016 elections in Europe and the US and came up with some startling numbers about the amount of disinformation shared over Twitter. Howard and his colleagues at the Computational Propaganda Research Project at the Oxford Internet Institute looked at seven million tweets that used hashtags related to the 2016 election between November 1 and November 11 in 16 swing states. After developing a typology based on the URLs included in these tweets, which sorted all tweets into six categories including professional political content such as government and campaign sources, professional news outlets, and polarizing and conspiracy content; Howard and his colleagues found overwhelming levels of news from Russian outlets, Wikileaks, and “junk news” sources flooding Twitter just before the 2016 US presidential elections. Howard and his colleagues also noted that in these 16 swing states, levels of “junk” and polarizing news exceeded those of the United States as a whole.

 

One only has to scratch the surface in research to find the insights to “the impacts of cyber-enabled information operations on the thinking minds and feeling hearts of target audiences” (Boyd, B., & Lin, H. 2019: 49).

 

 

And yet the public, including myself, continue to use Quora in high numbers. Quora can defend  itself by referring to cases where their answers might lead to better answers (e.g., Nyffenegger, N. 2020: 222-3, 232). There are often issues with the semantics of survey questions and answers, however, if the parameter is to only record direct testimony than platforms like Quora are effective. The accuracy is read as recorded direct testimony (e.g., Bass, H. 2018: 8).

 

A study of the research shows several factors in why Quora fails in the truth value of community education and platforms, such as academia.edu, are much more reliable:

 

Search Engines as Tools and the IT Futurist Vision of replacing direct in-person community education: It is a type of archetype that IT Futurists (futurism) are grossly anti-intellectualists in all other disciplines than theoretical science, technology, and mathematics; and that is difficult to pin down since the search engines avoid the term. An example is Futurism.com, a science and tech website formerly owned by Singularity University. The company has faced allegations of sexual assault, embezzlement, and discrimination since its founding. The public marketplace has been sold this falsehood that we no longer need direct in-person community education since the I.T. and I.A. will replace the need for such community education. In  denying intelligence from the other disciplines, the fool-idiot of the IT Futurist merely points the finger at everyone else as an I.T. and I.A. user, and that being the dismissive conclusion. If the stupidity, idiocy, foolishness has to be explained, there are such violations of critical thinking in several fallacies here for the counter-argument; the key one is it is the dismissal by not addressing the specific problems stated.

 

What needs to be explained is the I.T. broad system where the I.T. specialist is the one who speaks beyond their expert knowledge-bases and skills, and in the process, created an insular bubble:

 

“A Bing search from Internet Explorer produces a Wikipedia digest, Poe works, people (Virginia Clemm, Hawthorne, John Cusack), images, the Wikipedia URL, videos, eight Poe-related suggestions (biography, history, short story, quotes, raven, poem, death theories, collected works), and the promise of 10,900,000 results. At the page top we find Bing’s invitation to make Firefox one’s default browser with Bing its home page. The major innovation for Bing is the column on the right third of the screen called Social Results, beginning with five potential Facebook connections, followed by a selection of some ten recent Poe postings from social networks, such as Twitter, Klout, Quora, Huffngton [sic] Post, and Baltimore Sun. The Bing top menu includes Web, Images, Videos, Maps, News, and More—the last with more than a dozen additional choices, including Entertainment, Social, Weather, Translation, Events, Math, Dictionary, Developer Tools, and Bing Apps for mobile devices and social networking. Microsoft’s position in the new browser wars is to standardize one interface throughout its entire line, Windows 8 to operate desktop and laptop computers, Internet Explorer as browser, Bing as search engine, and its new ventures into hardware, the Windows Surface tablet and Windows smartphone using versions of Windows 8.” (Heyward Ehrlich. 2013: 115-6).

 

The wide application of the tools without sufficient direct in-person community education has created misunderstanding in a bubble which becomes stupidity, idiocy, or foolishness; for the reason of its lack of openness to deeply-human communication.

 

The I.T. industry completely misses the problem. For example, van Manen, H., et. al. (2019: 25) concluded:

 

“…the infrastructure component of the country’s scoring exercise is conceptualized as being contingent on the existence of resources which facilitate:

  1. a) the harvesting and/or generation of large reams of data, referred to as digitization;
  2. b) the speedy processing and/or analysis thereof, referred to as data processing potential;
  3. c) the development of innovative and/or utile algorithms, referred to as innovation infrastructure.

The absence of any of these three factors negatively impacts a nation’s ability to develop cutting-edge AI and to apply it towards geopolitically-relevant outcomes…Even if a large volume of data is harvested, its use within the context of training algorithms will be limited in the absence of the computing power necessary to analyze it.”

 

Van Manen, H., et. al. (2019) sets out well the problem within the I.T. bubble, but concludes the matter as computing power. That maybe true but the greater truth is quality facts, not the numbers calculated in computing power. It is  that the training algorithms cannot be simply applied towards geopolitically-relevant outcomes, even if “unlimited”. The archetypal problem with I.T. futurists is the “mad-scientist crazy idea” that human factors can be reduced to computing power. This is the greater truth, not the technical answers inside the bubble.

 

There are several other factors in why Quora fails in the truth value of community education and platforms, such as academia.edu, are much more reliable. These factors come from the relations of the issues, stated above, and that there are only rare interdisciplinary conversations between the disciplinary bubbles:

 

Automation: The problems speak to the “intense software filtering that has allowed [specific]  e-print repository” (Reyes-Galindo, L. 2016; 586).

Disclosure: The problems speak to the “women’s and men’s privacy concerns and management when communicating on the social websites” (Wawra, D. 2015: 219). This has to do with the right of privacy weighted against deliberate attempts for concealing content relating to significant public interest.

Cognitive Design: This goes to the statement of David D. Caron in his work, Confronting Complexity, Valuing Elegance —  “we should distrust complex solutions to complex problems and seek instead those that are elegant.” John Crook, however, easily demonstrates (but as complexity, not elegancy) that the stupidity of the IT futurists [my term] of seeking out “elegant software to be ‘simple, obvious, straightforward and [to require] very little intellectual effort to understand immediately.’” (Crook, J. R. 2019: 72, as one example). The critical point is that elegance in all disciplines is not simple, but complex, in many cases far too complex for the types of algorithms that Quora use.

 

One disciplinary solution offered up is the Law discipline. The abstract of Andrew Keane Woods (2018) sums up the problem(s) well and discusses the legal solution:

 

“Because the internet is so thoroughly global, nearly every aspect of internet governance has an extraterritorial effect. This is evident in a number of high-profile cases that cover a wide range of subjects, including law enforcement access to digital evidence; speech disputes, such as requests to remove offensive or hateful web content; intellectual property disputes; and much more. Although substantively distinct, these issues present courts with the same jurisdictional challenge: how to ensure one state’s sovereign interest in regulating the internet’s local effects without infringing on other states’ interests.

The answer, for better or for worse, is comity, the foreign affairs principle that informs a number of sovereign- deference doctrines. Sovereignty arguments have pervaded a number of recent consequential cases, including Google’s challenge to the ‘right to be forgotten’ in Europe and Microsoft’s challenge to a court order to produce foreign-held emails under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. These arguments will continue to play a significant role in future cases. Yet the proper application of foreign affairs law to cross-border internet disputes is not what many litigants and courts have claimed. Crucially, no sovereign-deference doctrine prohibits global takedown requests, foreign production orders, or other forms of extraterritorial exercises of jurisdiction over the internet. To the contrary, one of the key lessons of the sovereign-deference jurisprudence is that in order to avoid tensions between sovereigns, courts often enable, rather than inhibit, extraterritorial exercises of authority.

This Article [Woods, A. K. 2018] has three goals. First, it seeks to identify and characterize an emerging body of case law, which we might call data-sovereignty litigation: a diverse set of cases pitting national sovereigns against large internet firms. Second, the Article aims to show how the doctrinal rules of sovereign deference ought to apply to these disputes. Finally, it makes the case for a policy of sovereign deference beyond courts. The stakes are considerable. If we do not find ways to accommodate legitimate sovereign claims over global cloud activity, states will forcefully assert those interests – typically by taking physical control over local network infrastructure – imposing significant costs on entrepreneurship, privacy, and speech.” (Woods, A. K. 2018: 328).

 

Google’s challenge to the ‘right to be forgotten’ in Europe is particularly of interest to historians. The concept of the ‘right to be forgotten’ is extremely disturbing when it comes to the destruction of historical records which will have extraordinary consequences for future public histories (Buch, 2023). The line between the right of privacy and significant public interest is not as solid as folk thinks on social media. Woods also raised the issue of significant costs on entrepreneurship, privacy, and speech in taking physical control over local network infrastructure. These issues are not only beholden to the Law discipline; however, it is important discipline not to dismiss in the light of litigation in the I.T. Industry (e.g.,  Hermes, J. 2017). To the credit of the Economics discipline, this is one multi-disciplinary issue that the I.T. Industry has to take seriously and the economists can explain why (Greenstein, S. 2020: 192-214). The Literary and Publishing Industry are also set by problems which the I.T. Industry has very little understanding inside its bubble (e.g., Hunter, et al. 2013).

 

There is no shortage in the multi-disciplinary literature to speak of both the vices and virtues of both online and in-person interaction (e.g., Haugen, K., et al. 2016). This blog article has said nothing of the academia.edu as the alternative, and that is, to go to the question, “why academia.edu”, goes to the virtues of the platform as the opposites of the vices in Quora. This can be summed up as three points as the conclusion, and answering the question:

Answer: The best Online Platform is –

1) collegial with experts listening to each other across the disciplines;

2) based in the epistemology of critical thinking; and most importantly, is

3) research-focused, according to the academia protocols.

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Bass, H. (2018). President’s Message: The Truth Is Out There. ABA Journal, 104(1), 8–8. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26516123

 

Buch, Neville (2023). The Right Not to Be Forgotten, Dr Neville Buch Teaching Documents, ABN 86703686642

 

Boyd, B., & Lin, H. (2019). Affecting the Cognitive Dimension of the Information Environment through Cyber-Enabled Information Operations. Journal of Information Warfare, 18(3), 49–66. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26894681

 

Candeub, A. (2017). Networks, Neutrality & Discrimination. Administrative Law Review, 69(1), 125–173. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44648609

 

Crook, J. R. (2019). Finding Elegance in Unexpected Places. Ecology Law Quarterly, 46(1), 71–80. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26853543

 

Greenstein, S. (2020). The Basic Economics of Internet Infrastructure. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 34(2), 192–214. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26913190

 

Handler, S., Liu, L., & Herr, T. (2020). Where is The Cloud? In Dude, Where’s My Cloud?: A Guide For Wonks And Users (pp. 3–5). Atlantic Council. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26654.6

 

Haugen, K., Rodriguez, A., Minchella, A. R., Johnston, M. S., Gibbs, T. N., Hornick, A., & Field, J. B. (2016). Networking Online and in Person. GPSolo, 33(6), 10–16. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44736981

 

Hermes, J. (2017). Section 230 as Gatekeeper: When Is an Intermediary Liability Case Against a Digital Platform Ripe for Early Dismissal? Litigation, 43(3), 34–41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26402058

 

Heyward Ehrlich. (2013). Poe in Cyberspace: The Browser Wars Redux. The Edgar Allan Poe Review, 14(1), 113–118. https://doi.org/10.5325/edgallpoerev.14.1.0113

 

Hunter, A., Lipskar, S., O’Leary, A., Ratliff, E., & Tayman, J. (2013). The Writer’s Dilemma. The Virginia Quarterly Review, 89(2), 28–41. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26446734

Jones, D. (2014). Broadcast Your Ideas. In D. Jones, A. Williams, & J. Robertson (Eds.), BITE: Recipes for Remarkable Research (pp. 105–107). Brill. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctv2gjwn0p.31

 

Nyffenegger, N. (2020). The Illicit Touch: Theorising Narratives of Abused Human Skin. In C. Nirta, D. Mandic, A. Pavoni, & A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos (Eds.), Touch (Vol. 3, pp. 195–234). University of Westminster Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv11cvxbx.8

 

Percoco, V. M. (2017). Food Logging and Blogging Toward Healthier Nutrition: Bringing the Curriculum Out of the Classroom and Into the 21st Century. Pedagogy in Health Promotion, 3(2), 77–81. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26652613

 

Reyes-Galindo, L. (2016). Automating the Horae: Boundary-work in the age of computers. Social Studies of Science, 46(4), 586–606. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26100615

 

Robertson, B. (2017). Science 101: Q: Can Electromagnetic Waves Affect Emotions? Science and Children, 55(1), 66–69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26387035

 

Schiffrin, A. (2017). Disinformation and Democracy: The Internet Transformed Protest But Did Not Improve Democracy. Journal of International Affairs, 71(1), 117–126. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26494367

 

Schuele, S. (2011). Social Networking: How To Be Effective. GPSolo, 28(4), 24–27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23630380

 

T.G. (2017). Artificial Intelligence: SCREEN TEST. ASEE Prism, 27(2), 12–12. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26819878

 

van Manen, H., Atalla, S., Arkhipov-Goyal, A., Sweijs, T., Hristov, A., Zensus, C., & Torossian, B. (2019). Actor: AI Programs and Profiles. In Macro Implications of Micro Transformations: An Assessment of AI’s Impact on Contemporary Geopolitics (pp. 24–53). Hague Centre for Strategic Studies. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep19557.5

 

Wawra, D. (2015). Digital Communication and Privacy: Is Social Web Use gendered? AAA: Arbeiten Aus Anglistik Und Amerikanistik, 40(1/2), 219–245. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24722047

 

Woods, A. K. (2018). Litigating Data Sovereignty. The Yale Law Journal, 128(2), 328–406. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45389445

 

 

*****

 

 

 

Neo-Orthodoxy Today from Historical Legacy

Neo-Orthodoxy Today from Historical Legacy

Introduction

 

Today, we hear stories of Orthodox Judaism, and in this recent article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, we learn that ‘new orthodoxy’ is a ‘thing’.

Image: Online story, Sylvia Goodman. ‘Alternative’ or ‘Sham’? Yeshiva U. Created a New LGBTQ Club — but Won’t Recognize the One That Sued, The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 24, 2022.

 

Dogmatists have been great at denying ‘new orthodoxy’ as a ‘thing’ since the claim brings modification to ‘correct belief’, creating incorrect belief; according to the dogmatists. However, the existence of many ‘new orthodoxies’ proposes an inescapable problem, for the dogmatist. The problem here is not confided to Orthodox Judaism, or even western  religions, but any belief system which attempts to avoid admitting systemic error.

 

The focus here, for the concept of a new orthodoxy or neo-orthodoxy, goes to the worldviews of the Protestant and Catholic schemas, including secular expressions. So, the paper/article/blog (is there a difference today?) puts aside Orthodox Judaism and the Orthodox Christian traditions for obvious reasons, that ‘new orthodoxy’ is intellectually denied. Islam is too complex a story for orthodoxy and lies outside the specialist work of the author. In any case of ‘other religions’ and their schemas, it may well be the case that in ‘other religion’ new orthodoxies exist. The author argues that in the last few centuries the creation of new orthodoxies had come from the evolution in Protestant thought. The key understanding is the three Broad Academic Schools in Studies of Religion and 14 Academic Schools in the Philosophy of Religion

 

Three Broad Academic Schools in Studies of Religion and 14 Academic Schools in the Philosophy of Religion

 

The three main academic schools are:

 

1. That which centred on a general theory of religion developed by Rudolph Otto (1869 – 1937) and then later by Paul Tillich (1886 – 1965). The school had universal thought towards ‘religion’ and it is what began the larger enterprise of the academic studies of (or in) religion. The distinction between ‘academic studies’ and education broadly is made below.

 

2. That which centred on phenomenon, in opposition to a general theory. It was known as phenomenology of religion and developed by Mircea Eliade (1907 – 1986) but the concepts applied were generated from the leading phenomenologists and existentialists, and in particular, Edmund Husserl (1859 – 1938) and Martin Heidegger (1889 – 1976). In this regard, Paul Tillich’s ‘ultimate concern’ becomes phenomenological.  This is a movement in the academic studies that predominated in the mid-twentieth century. It, nevertheless, coexisted with the education of the general theory, and arguably would not have existed without it.

 

3. That which centred on cultural pluralism. This is particularly the British school of Ninian Smart (1927 – 2001; Lancaster University) and John Hull (1935 – 2015; Birmingham University) in the academic studies, but a fair number of American and British philosophers of religion have been particularly important in the education: Huston Smith (Why Religion Matters, 2001) and Don Cupitt (After God: The Future of Religion, 1997) are significant.  The school of ‘religious’ thinking came late; in the last few decades of the twentieth century, and is now predominant in the early 21st century. The school conjoins the phenomenological concern as cultural pluralism and the deeper skepticism of the fourth school emerges from the work of Fitzgerald and McCutcheon which focuses on the conceptual challenges of cultural pluralism.

 

All together the scholars across the academic studies are known as ‘religionists’. Before looking closely at the three main schools, religionists need to be distinguished with ‘religious educators’. There is a separate academic field of education which is also concerned with the academic studies of religion, but concerned with marrying these theories and concepts of religion to those of educational studies. In this regard, a few more scholars also have to be examined in relation to the Queensland history. John Dewey (1859 – 1952) was a very well-known broad educator whose views on ‘religion’ were very influential among American educators of religion. Dewey’s general theory was A Common Faith (1934), a humanistic study of religion originally delivered as the Dwight H. Terry Lectureship at Yale University.  Influencing Dewey and other educators on religion was William James (1842 – 1910). James’ ‘The Will to Believe’, a lecture first published in 1896 is seminal.  It brought ideas of Personal Idealism (George Holmes Howison 1834 – 1916) and of Personalism (F. C. S. Schiller 1864 – 1937) into the arrangement of American Pragmatism. Other major influences in the American Religious Education movement were Eric Erikson (1902 – 1994) for his work in the psychology of religion, and Charles Hartshorne (1897 – 2000) for his work in process philosophy. The institutions and persons in the American Religious Education movement will be considered further on.

 

The 14 Theological Directions from Studies of Religion and Wider Consideration of the Philosophy of Religion

 

The philosophic thinking has streamed between 30 to 40 theological directions and taken aboard wider consideration of contemporary philosophy of religion than what has generally been recognised in academic theological discourse in relation to the curriculum, but nevertheless has representation in 20th century education for belief and doubt, including formal programs of religious education or Christian education. Seeing how philosophical thinking streams and overlaps into the diverse theological directions, which are represented in educational programs, better provides the wide range of the educational discourse. Ranging from the earliest shift in Christian thought, following from the conventional to the less popular or less known programs, the schools of thought can range from the German Neo-Orthodox Stream to the Anglo-American Atheist-Deist Stream. At this point of the research, the focus is the scoping of Protestant Thought, bearing in mind that innovations in Catholic thought and the continuing non-innovation from the Orthodox tradition will also need to be considered. Furthermore, there are often officially-unstated influences between the three Christian broad traditions. For this reason, Catholic ‘theologians’ who are influential in Queensland, a state where Catholic thought overlapped into the thinking of broad ‘Protestant’ institutions, have to be noted. The following might not be a comprehensive listing of the theological or atheological streams, but the list is extensive and includes all major players who informed religious/Christian education:

 

  1. German Neo-Orthodox Stream – Liberal Neo-Orthodoxy

Karl Barth

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Jürgen Moltmann

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Karl Rahner Nouvelle théologie; Transcendental Thomism
Romano Guardini
Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)

 

  1. European Reformed ‘Neo-Orthodox’ Stream – Liberal Neo-Orthodoxy

Emil Brunner

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Edward Schillebeeckx Dominican

 

  1. German ‘Neo-Orthodox-Process’ Stream – Liberal Neo-Orthodoxy

Wolfhart Pannenberg

 

  1. German Existentialist ‘Neo-Orthodox’ Stream – Liberal Neo-Orthodoxy

Rudolf Bultmann

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Jacques Maritain Existential Thomism

 

  1. American Neo-Orthodox-Realist Stream – Liberal Neo-Orthodoxy

Reinhold Niebuhr

Richard Niebuhr

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Bernard Lonergan Transcendental Thomism
Avery Dulles

 

  1. Anglican ‘Orthodox’ Stream 

Richard Swinburne

John Milbank

 

  1. Anglo-American Existentialist ‘Neo-Orthodox’ Stream

Paul Tillich

John Macquarrie

 

  1. Anglo-America Process ‘Neo-Orthodox’ Stream

Paul Weiss

Charles Hartshorne

Robert Cummings Neville

John B. Cobb

 

  1. American ‘Neo-Liberal’/Universalist Stream (‘Neo-Orthodox’?)- Quietism-New Thought-Unitarian-Universalist (Christian) Stream

Langdon Gilkey

John Shelby Spong

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Hans Küng Rejection of Papal Infallibility; Global Ethic
John Courtney Murray Religious Liberty; Dignitatis Humanae

 

  1. East ‘Asian’ Influence of Confucian-Buddhist-Tao-Shinto (‘Neo-Orthodox’?) Stream – Evangelical Sub-Steams 3. and 4. Radical Discipleship and Liberation

Watchman Nee

S. Song

Simon Chan (AOG)

Kwok Pui-lan (Asian feminist theology)

Chung Hyun Kyung (Asian feminist theology)

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Thomas Merton Trappist
Bernadette Roberts Carmelite
Aloysius Pieris Sri Lankan Jesuit

 

  1. Anglo-American African Black Revolutionary- Africana Stream (‘Neo-Orthodox’?)

Cornel West

James H. Cone

Albert Cleage

Barney Pityana

Allan Boesak

Zephania Kameeta

 

  1. Anglo-American Quietism-New Thought-Unitarian-Universalist (Christian) Stream (the original modern Christian ‘neo-orthodoxy’?)

Parker Palmer (Quaker)

Elton Trueblood (Quaker)

Rufus Jones (Quaker)

Richard Foster (Quaker)

Emil Fuchs (Quaker)

Ernest Holmes (Christian New Thought)

Johnnie Colemon (Christian New Thought)

James Luther Adams (Unitarian-Universalist)

Webster Kitchell (Unitarian-Universalist)

 

Catholic ‘Theologian’ Tradition
Henri Nouwen Catholic Quietism
Jean-Luc Marion Postmodern Phenomenology

 

  1. Anglo-American ‘Death of God’-Secular Theology Stream (the basis for secular ‘neo-orthodoxy’?)

Harvey Cox

Don Cupitt

Paul van Buren

 

(14) With 30. Anglo-American Atheist-Deist Stream

Antony Flew

Brand Blanshard

 

There might be other ways to slice the Protestant and Catholic pie, but the schema is a very accurate worldview outlook in the widest scoping, and it has secular expression in every case.

 

The collapse of ‘religion’ and the rise of Studies-in-Religion

 

In last 40 years, the studies in religion discipline had been shaken by a broad set of criticisms for the philosophical category of ‘religion’ and ‘secular’; from a large body of literature, led by well-known scholars, Jonathan Z. Smith (1982), Wilfred Cantwell Smith (1990), Talal Asad (1993), Russell T. McCutcheon (1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2012 with William Arnal, 2014), Timothy Fitzgerald (2000, 2007), and Tomoko Masuzawa (2005).

 

 

There is urgency in providing education which will defuse the explosive confusion of popular misconceptions in the history of ‘religious’/Christian instruction/‘education’.[1] Education policy makers and the general public have not caught up with the trend in higher education scholarship, and are still thinking in the outdated models of the academic discipline. If we take the last four decades as being the era of the fourth school of philosophical skepticism, there have been three previous academic schools of thought that shaped religious/Christian education: that which focused on a general theory of religion; focused on phenomenology; and focused on cultural pluralism.

 

 

These four-way schemas are being applied in research for a book to provide the Queensland case study. This is an important and urgent analysis since the characterisation of Queensland reinforces the retrograde national narrative for outdated models of church-state relations, and will continue to do so, unless better education for faith and belief is provided. This paper will mark out the Queensland historical players and events on the pathway that shifted back and forth between religious instruction, Christian education, and religious education.

 

The collapse of ‘orthodoxy’ and the rise of nuanced pluralist models in monist frameworks.

 

At a local and regional level, as in my research on Queensland intellectual paradigms, neo-orthodoxy is translated, and can be translated, into nuanced frameworks during particular time periods, based on who lived in that local society at the time and the global waves of reading and dialogues (often overlapping):

 

  1. Colonial Period

 

Anti-Erastian Christianity

British Classical Education

Christian Biblicalist Education

Christian Broad-Curriculum Education

Christian Church Education

Christian Classical Education

Christian Conservative Education

Christian Secular Education

Christian Secular Modernist Education

Literary Austra-European (Colonial-Patriotic) Intellectual Education

Pre-Vatican I Catholic Education

 

  1. Federation Period

 

Recap: Colonial Literary Folk Education

British Classical Education

Christian Biblicalist Education

Christian Classical Education

Christian Conservative Broad-Curriculum Education

Efficient Broad-Curriculum Education

International Laborite Education

Irish Loyalist Catholic Education

Liberal-Left Evangelical Education

Vatican I Catholic Education

 

  1. Nation-Building Period

 

Adult and Community Education

Christian Biblicalist Education

Christian Broad-Curriculum Education

Christian Classical Education

Christian Conservative Modernist Education

Christian Modernist Education

Christian Secular Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Education

Egalitarian Utilitarian Agrarian-valued Education

Irish Loyalist Catholic Education

Liberal-Left Evangelical Education

Literary Folk Education

Megachurch Prosperity Gospel Education

Modernist Social Work Education

Post-Idealist Christian Modernist Education

 

  1. Period of Mid-Century Neo-Orthodoxy and Heresy

 

Broad-Curriculum Education

Charismatic Christianity

Christian Broad-Curriculum Education

Christian Conservative Broad-Curriculum Education

Christian Conservative Modernist Education

Christian Modernist Liberal Education

Christian Modernist Social Work Education

Christian Secular Modernist Education

Confucianism (‘foreign’ integrated/appropriated syncretic)

Conservative Evangelical Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Indigenous Education

Diagnosis and Remedial Education

Domestic Technical Education

Educational Psychology

Fundamentalist Christianity (Creationism)

Liberal-Left Evangelical Education

Literary Modern Education

Megachurch Prosperity Gospel Education

Modernist Liberal Indigenous Education

Progress Philosophy

Renegade Laborite Education

Traditional Reformed Theology Education

 

  1. The Late Modern Period

 

Charismatic Christianity

Christian Conservative Broad-Curriculum Education

Christian Evangelical Skeptical Education

Christian Modernist Social Work Education

Christian Modernist-Postmodernist Liberal Education

Christian Multiculturalism and Religionist Historiography

Conservative Evangelical Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Indigenous Education

Fundamentalist Christianity (Creationism)

Liberal-Left Evangelical Education

Megachurch Prosperity Gospel Education

 

  1. The New Century

 

Christian Modernist Liberal Education

Christian Modernist-Postmodernist Liberal Education

Conservative-Liberal Evangelical Education

Modernist Social Work Education

Traditional Reformed Theology Education

 

The continual reinvention of orthodox belief was a key part of the frameworks.[2] Together, it works, not as a singular belief system, but as Randall Collins’ The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change model for charting relationships of cultural and social transmissions (e.g., ‘Queensland Intellectual Scatterplot Matrix’). The historiographical model is an explanation of the global-local layering, and in my research specifically to:

 

  1. Theological Education;
  2. Church Education Programs; and
  3. Christian schooling.

 

On a global scale Collins (1998) argues that cultural and social transmissions happen as networks of scholars, in different types of relationships, and often beyond boundaries of the instituted ‘schools’. The traditional ‘schools’ outlook leads into the critique of Ivan Illich (1970) for “Deschooling Society”. Schools lack the capacity of correcting for the inadequacies for established and personal worldviews. With the movements of transnational histories and the dynamics of global-regional-local relations, we can see how the Queensland intellectual and educational environment was reshaped by scholars between the University of Queensland, Griffith University, and the rest of the educated society.

 

REFERENCES IN THE PRIMARY SOURCE RESOURCE AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ON THE TOPIC

 

Ackerman, J. M. (1991). Reading, Writing, and Knowing: The Role of Disciplinary Knowledge in Comprehension and Composing. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(2), 133–178. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40171186

Adam, R. (2008). Relating Faith Development and Religious Styles: Reflections in Light of Apostasy from Religious Fundamentalism. Archiv Für Religionspsychologie / Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 30, 201-231. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/23907899

Alford, R. (1961). Catholicism and Australian Politics: A Case Study of ‘Third Parties’ and Political Change. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 6(1), 15-33. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/42888980

Almond, P. (1983). Wilfred Cantwell Smith as Theologian of Religions. The Harvard Theological Review, 76(3), 335-342. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1509527

Almond, Philip C. & Woolcock, P. G.  (1978).  Dissent in Paradise : Religious Education Controversies in South Australia.  Magill, S.A :  Murray Park College of Advanced Education

Andrews, D. (1996). Case study in holistic mission No. 20: And now for the Good News from the “Waiters’ Union”. Transformation,13(3), 17-21. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43054943

Arcus, M. E. (1980). Value Reasoning: An Approach to Values Education. Family Relations, 29(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.2307/584067

Ata, A., & Windle, J. (2007). The Role of Australian Schools in Educating Students about Islam and Muslims. AQ: Australian Quarterly, 79(6), 19-40. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20638519

Badger, C.R.  (1971). The Reverend Charles Strong and the Australian Church, Melbourne, Charles Strong Memorial Trust

Bagood, A. (2010). Complexity System and Our Catholic Faith. Angelicum, 87(1), 177-202. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/44616488

Baker, L., et al (2001). Soul, Body, and Survival: Essays on the Metaphysics of Human Persons (Corcoran K., Ed.). Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctv3s8s32

Barcan, A. (1990). The Control of Schools and the Curriculum. The Australian Quarterly, 62(2), 170-177. doi:10.2307/20635582

Barcan, A. (2007). Whatever Happened to Adult Education? AQ: Australian Quarterly, 79(2), 29-40. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20638464

Belzil, C., & Leonardi, M. (2013). Risk Aversion and Schooling Decisions. Annals of Economics and Statistics, (111/112), 35-70. doi:10.2307/23646326

Berger, Peter L (1973). The Social Reality of Religion, Harmondsworth, Penguin.

Berger, Peter L. (1998). ‘Protestantism and the quest for certainty’, The Christian Century, 115 (23), 782–796.

Black, A. (1985). The Impact of Theological Orientation and of Breadth of Perspective on Church Members’ Attitudes and Behaviors: Roof, Mol and Kaill Revisited. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 24(1), 87-100. doi:10.2307/1386277

Bouma, Gary  (2007). Australian Soul : Religion and Spirituality in the 21st Century, Cambridge University Press

Bowler, Kate, and Wen Reagan (2014). ‘Bigger, Better, Louder: The Prosperity Gospel’s Impact on Contemporary Christian Worship,’ Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 186–230.

Brennan, Damien & Barry, Graeme (1997). A syllabus for religious education for Catholic schools : Brisbane Archdiocese : years 1 to 12. Brisbane Catholic Education.

Brennan, Damien & Barry, Graeme (1997). Religious education : a curriculum profile for catholic schools. Brisbane Catholic Education.

Brown, David (2006). Richard Hofstadter: An Intellectual Biography, University of Chicago Press

Bruner, Jerome S. (1977). The Process of Education, Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

Bruno-Jofré, Rosa (2022). Ivan Illich Fifty Years Later: Situating Deschooling Society in His Intellectual and Personal Journey, University of Toronto Press

Buch, Neville (1995). ‘Americanizing Queensland Protestantism’, Studying Australian Christianity 1995 Conference, Robert Menzies College, Macquarie University, July.

Buch, Neville (1995). The Significance of the American Invasion for Australian Churches: A Preliminary Examination, War’s End Conference (Queensland Studies Centre, Griffith University), University Hall, James Cook University, July.

Buch, Neville (1997). ‘‘…many distractions confronting the Church’: The Responses of Protestant Religion to Popular Culture in Queensland 1919-1969,’ Everyday Wonders Popular Culture: Past and Present’, 10th International Conference, Crest Hotel, Brisbane, June.

Buch, Neville (2007). Religion Remain a Problem. The Skeptic. Summer.

Buckley Jr., William F. (1951). God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom”, Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing.

Burritt, A. (2022). Jesus in Schools: The Education (Religious Instruction) Act 1950. Journal for the Academic Study of Religion, 35(1), 94–111. https://doi.org/10.1558/jasr.22394

Carson, D.A. (2008). Christ and Culture Revisited, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company

Chant, Barry (1984; revised edition). Heart of Fire: The Story of Australian Pentecostalism, Unley Park: House of Tabor.

Chant, Barry (1999), ‘The spirit of Pentecost: Origins and development of the Pentecostal movement in Australia, 1870–1939’, PhD thesis, Macquarie University.

Chant, Barry (2006). The Hallowed Touch: A Reflection on the Assembly of God Church, North Queensland, 1924-1949, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 9, webpage

Chant, Barry (2011). The Spirit of Pentecost:  The Origins and Development of the Pentecostal Movement in Australia, 1870-1939, Emeth Press.

Chappell, D. (2004). Prophetic Christian Realism and the 1960s Generation. In A Stone of Hope: Prophetic Religion and the Death of Jim Crow (pp. 67-86). University of North Carolina Press. Retrieved May 22, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9780807895573_chappell.7

Chilton, Hugh (2019). Evangelicals and the End of Christendom: Religion, Australia and the Crises of the 1960s, Routledge.

Clark, William  (2006). Academic Charisma and the Origins of the Research University, University of Chicago Press

Clifton, Shane (2009). Pentecostalism and the Age of Interpretation: A Response,  Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 11. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/96

Clifton, Shane J. (2005). An analysis of the developing ecclesiology of the Assemblies of God in Australia, PhD thesis, Australian Catholic University.

Collins, Randall (1998). The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, Harvard University Press.

Connell, W.F.. 1980. A History of Education in the Twentieth Century World. Canberra.

Crook, Paul (2017). Intellectuals and the Decline of Religion: Essays and Reviews, Brisbane: Boolarong Press

Crown, A. (1977). The Initiatives and Influences in the Development of Australian Zionism, 1850-1948. Jewish Social Studies, 39(4), 299-322. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/4466971

Curthoys, Ann (1991) Teaching applied history, Australian Historical Studies, 24:96, 192-197, DOI: 10.1080/10314619108595880

Davis, Glyn (2017). The Australian Idea of a University, Melbourne University Press

Davison, Graeme (1988) The Use and Abuse of Australian History, Australian Historical Studies, 23:91, 55-76, DOI: 10.1080/10314618808595790

Dayton, D. (1988). Pentecostal/Charismatic Renewal And Social Change: A Western Perspective. Transformation, 5(4), 7-13. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43053010

De Souza, M. (2014). Religious Identity and Plurality amongst Australian Catholics: Inclusions, Exclusions and Tensions. Journal for the Study of Religion, 27(1), 210-233. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/24798877

Del Nevo, Matthew (2007). Pentecostalism and the Three Ages of the Church, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 10. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/23

Dening, G. M. (1973) History as a social system, Historical Studies, 15:61, 673-685, DOI: 10.1080/10314617308595498

Deverell, Garry Worete  (2018). Theology : A Trawloolway man reflects on Christian Faith, Morning Star Publishing

Dewey, John  (1934, 2013). A Common Faith, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.

Dewey, John (1909). Moral Principles in Education, Boston : Houghton Mifflin

Dewey, John (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, London: Macmillan and Co. Limited.

Dewey, John (1938). Experience and Education, New York: Simon and Schuster.

Dulles, Avery (1988). Models of the church (2nd ed). Dublin: Gill and Macmillan,

Dux, Monica  (2021). Lapsed: Losing Your Religion is Harder Than it Looks, ABC Books

Emison, Mary (2013). Degrees for a New Generation: Marking the Melbourne Model, University of Melbourne Press

Erb, F. (1916). The Development of the Young People’s Movement. The Biblical World, 48(3), 129-192. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3142079

Erdozain, Dominic (2016). The soul of Doubt : the religious roots of unbelief from Luther to Marx. Oxford University Press

Evers, Colin and Gabriele Kakomski (2022). Why Context Matters in Educational Leadership: A New Theoretical Understanding, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxan, UK.

Fitzgerald, Timothy (2000). The Ideology of Religious Studies, Oxford University Press.

Fitzgerald, Timothy (2007). Discourse on Civility and Barbarity : a critical history of religion and related categories. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Fogarty, Stephen  (2011). The Dark Side of Charismatic Leadership, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 13, webpage

Freire, Paulo. (1970a). Cultural Action and Conscientization, Harvard Education Review 40, (3), 452-477.

Freire, Paulo. (1970b). Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Seabury Press.

Freire, Paulo. (1972b). A letter to a theology student, Catholic Mind, 70, 1265.

Freire, Paulo. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness, New York: Seabury Press.

Freire, Paulo. (1975). Conscientization, Geneva: World Council of Churches.

Freire, Paulo. (1976). Education, the Practice of Freedom, London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative.

Freire, Paulo. (1985). The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation, South Hadley: Bergin & Garvey.

Freire, Paulo. (1994). Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Continuum.

Freire, Paulo. (1998b). Politics and Education, Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center Publications.

French, E. (1965). The Australian Tradition in Secondary Education 1814-1900. Comparative Education, 1(2), 89-103. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3098340

Friesen, G., & Taksa, L. (1996). Workers’ Education in Australia and Canada: A Comparative Approach to Labour’s Cultural History. Labour History, (71), 170-197. doi:10.2307/27516453

Ganter, R. (2018). Engaging with missionaries. In The Contest for Aboriginal Souls: European missionary agendas in Australia (pp. 107-146). Australia: ANU Press. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv301dv4.9

Ganter, R. (2018). Protestants divided. In The Contest for Aboriginal Souls: European missionary agendas in Australia (pp. 23-48). Australia: ANU Press. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv301dv4.6

Garrison, J. (1995). Deweyan Pragmatism and the Epistemology of Contemporary Social Constructivism, American Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 716-740.

Gilbert, Bennett  (2020). A Personalist Philosophy of History, Routledge

Giroux, Henry (1983, co-edited with David E. Purpel). The Hidden Curriculum and Moral Education: Deception or Discovery? Berkeley: McCutchan.

Giroux, Henry and Stanley Aronowitz (1985). Education Under Siege: The Conservative, Liberal, and Radical Debate Over Schooling, Westport: Bergin and Garvey Press.

Giroux, Henry and Stanley Aronowitz (1991). Postmodern Education: Politics, Culture, and Social Criticism, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Goldburg, P. (2008). Teaching Religion in Australian Schools. Numen, 55(2/3), 241-271. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/27643310

Gough, Austin (1962) Catholics and the free society, Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 10:39, 370-378, DOI: 10.1080/10314616208595243

Gowers, Ann & Scott, Roger. 1979. Fundamentals and fundamentalists : a case-study of education and policy-making in Queensland. Australasian Political Studies Association, Bedford Park, S.A.

Graeber, David (2018). Bullshit jobs (First Simon & Schuster hardcover edition). Simon & Schuster, New York

Grey, Jacqueline (2002). Torn Stockings and Enculturation: Women Pastors in the Australian Assemblies of God, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 5/6. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/51

Gwenda Tavan (1997) ‘Good neighbours’: Community organisations, migrant assimilation and Australian society and culture, 1950–1961, Australian Historical Studies, 27:109, 77-89, DOI: 10.1080/10314619708596044

Hally, C. (1960). Student Formation in Australia. The Furrow,11(10), 662-666. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/27657937

Handy, Robert T. (1976). A History of the Churches in the United States and Canada, Oxford at the Clarendon Press.

Handy, Robert T. (1977). A Christian America: Protestant Hopes and Historical Realities, New York. Oxford University Press.

Hannah-Jones, A. (2003). Competing Claims for Justice: Sexuality and Race at the Eighth Assembly of the Uniting Church in Australia, 1997. Journal of the History of Sexuality, 12(2), 277-304. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/3704615

Hans, N. (1939). History of Education in the British Commonwealth of Nations. Review of Educational Research,9(4), 361-367. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1167565

Harris, F. (2007). Dewey’s Concepts of Stability and Precariousness in His Philosophy of Education, Education and Culture, 23(1), 38-54.

Harrison, John. (2006). The Religious Culture of Queensland: Pietism in Religious Practice, Congregationalism in Ecclesiastical Polity. Ph.D. thesis, University of Queensland.

Hayot, Eric (2021). Humanist Reason: A History, An Argument, A Plan, Columbia University Press

Hedges, Paul Michael  (2021). Understanding Religion: Theories and Methods for Studying Religiously Diverse Societies, University of California Press

Hey, Sam (2011). God in the Suburbs and Beyond: The Emergence of an Australian Megachurch and Denomination. Ph.D thesis, School of Humanities, Griffith University.

Hey, Sam and Geoff Waugh (2016). Megachurches: Origins, Ministry and Prospects. Morning Star Publishing.

Higgins, Jackie  (1998, 2022). Sister Girl: Reflections on Tiddalism, Identity and Reconciliation, University of Queensland Press

Hilliard, David (1991) God in the suburbs: The religious culture of Australian cities in the 1950s, Australian Historical Studies, 24:97, 399-419, DOI: 10.1080/10314619108595856

Hilliard, David (1997) Church, family and sexuality in Australia in the 1950s, Australian Historical Studies, 27:109, 133-146, DOI: 10.1080/10314619708596048

Hoffer, Eric (2002). The True Believer : thoughts on the nature of mass movements (First Perennial Modern Classics edition). Harper Perennial Modern Classics, New York

Hogan, M. (1979). Australian Secularists: The Disavowal of Denominational Allegiance. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 18(4), 390-404. doi:10.2307/1386363

Horne, Donald  (2022). The Education of Young Donald Horne Trilogy, NewSouth Publishing

Howe, Brian & Hughes, Philip,  et al. (2003). Spirit of Australia II : religion in citizenship and national life. ATF Press, Hindmarsh, SA

Hudson, Wayne (2016). Australian religious thought. Monash University Publishing, Clayton, Victoria

Hughes, Philip (1996). The Pentecostals in Australia, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, ACT.

Hutch, R. (1987). Biography, Individuality and the Study of Religion. Religious Studies, 23(4), 509-522. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20019245

Hutchinson, Mark (1999). The New Thing God is Doing: The Charismatic Renewal and Classical Pentecostalism, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 1, webpage

Hutchinson, Mark (2017). Australasian Charismatic Movements and the “New Reformation of the 20th Century?”  Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 19.

Illich, Ivan (1971). Deschooling Society. London: Calder & Boyars.

Illich, Ivan (1973). Tools for Conviviality. New York: Harper & Row.

Illich, Ivan (1974). Energy and Equity. London: Calder & Boyars.

Illich, Ivan , et al (edited,1977). Disabling Professions, New York Marion Boyars

Jagelman, Ian (1999). Church Growth: Its Promise and Problems for Australian Pentecostalism, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 1. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/46

Jagelman, Ian (1999). Harvey Cox and Pentecostalism: A Review of Fire from Heaven, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 1,webpage

Jones, Adrian (2011) Teaching History at University through Communities of Inquiry, Australian Historical Studies, 42:2, 168-193, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2010.531747

Jordan, Trevor L. (2007). Scapegoating Girard: Violence and the future of religion. St Mark’s Review, (202), 31-38.

Jordan, Trevor. (1992). Ethical education after Fitzgerald: return to a golden past or the end of civilisation as we know it? Social Alternatives, 11(3)

Jordan, Trevor. (1998). Studies in Religion as a Profession. Australian Religion Studies Review. 11(2)

  1. S. Inglis (1958) Catholic historiography in Australia, Historical Studies: Australia and New Zealand, 8:31, 233-253, DOI: 10.1080/10314615808595120

KIRK, G. (2015). The Shortcomings of Abstraction (1871–2017). In The Pedagogy of Wisdom: An Interpretation of Plato’s Theaetetus (pp. 155-196). Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv47wcf7.9

Kohn, Rachael  (2003). The New Believers: Re-Imagining God, Harper Collins

Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle over Educational Goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163342

Lattke, M. (1985). Rudolf Bultmann on Rudolf Otto. The Harvard Theological Review, 78(3/4), 353-360. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1509695

Lawry, J. (1967). The Development of a National System of Education in New South Wales. History of Education Quarterly,7(3), 349-356. doi:10.2307/367177

Lecompte, M. D. (2014). Collisions of culture: Academic culture in the neoliberal university. Learning and Teaching: The International Journal of Higher Education in the Social Sciences, 7(1), 57–78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24717955

Leigh Boucher & Michelle Arrow (2016) ‘Studying Modern History gives me the chance to say what I think’: learning and teaching history in the age of student-centred learning, History Australia, 13:4, 592-607, DOI: 10.1080/14490854.2016.1249274

Loos, N. (1991). From Church to State: The Queensland Government Take-Over of Anglican Missions In North Queensland. Aboriginal History, 15(1/2), 73-85. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/24046403

Macintyre, Stuart (2009) The Poor Relation: Establishing the Social Sciences in Australia, 1940–1970, Australian Historical Studies, 40:1, 47-62, DOI: 10.1080/10314610802663019

Macklin, Michael (1972). To Deschool Society, Cold Comfort, December 1972.

Macklin, Michael (1975).  Those Misconceptions are not Illich’s, Educational Theory, 25 (3), 323-329

Macklin, Michael (1976). When Schools are Gone: A Projection of the Thought of Ivan Illich, St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.

Maddox, Marion (2001). For God and Country: Religious Dynamics in Australian Federal Politics, Canberra: Parliament of Australia

Maddox, Marion (2005). God Under Howard: The Rise of The Religious Right in Australian Politics, Sydney: Allen & Unwin

Maddox, Marion (2014). Taking God to School: The End of Australia’s Egalitarian Education, Allen & Unwin

Malcolm Vick (1992) Community, state and the provision of schools in mid‐nineteenth century South Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 25:98, 53-71, DOI: 10.1080/10314619208595893

Marginson, S. (1997). Imagining Ivy: Pitfalls in the Privatization of Higher Education in Australia. Comparative Education Review, 41(4), 460-480. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1189004

Marginson, Simon  (2016). Higher Education and the Common Good. Melbourne University Publishing

Marsden, George M. (1987). Reforming Fundamentalism. Fuller Seminary and the New Evangelicalism, Grand Rapids: William B. Eermanns Publishing Company.

Marsden, W. E. (2000). Geography and Two Centuries of Education for Peace and International Understanding. Geography, 85(4), 289–302. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40573474

Marti, Gerardo (2020). American Blindspot: Race, Class, Religion, and the Trump Presidency, London: Rowman & Littlefield.

Marty, Martin E. (1970). Righteous Empire. The Protestant Experience, New York:The Dial Press.

Mavor, Ian. 1977. Religious education : its nature and aims : a statement of principles underlying the development work of the Religious Education Curriculum Project. Queensland. Dept. of Education. Religious Education Curriculum Project. Select

MAYRL, D. (2011). Administenng Secularization: Religious Education in New South Wales since 1960. European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes De Sociologie / Europäisches Archiv Für Soziologie, 52(1), 111-142. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43282174

McCutcheon, Russell T (1997). Manufacturing Religion : the discourse on sui generis religion and the politics of nostalgia. Oxford University Press, New York

McCutcheon, Russell T. (2014). Entanglements: Marking Place in the Field of Religion, Equinox Publishing.

McDonagh, S. (2006). The Australian Church and Climate Change. The Furrow, 57(1), 48-53. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/27665281

McLoughlin, William G. (1987). Revivals, Awakenings and Reform: An Essay on Religion and Social Change in America 1607-1977, The University of Chicago Press.

Mead, Sidney E. (1975). The Nation with the Soul of a Church, New York: Harper and Row.

Meyer, C. (2000). “What a Terrible Thing It Is to Entrust One’s Children to Such Heathen Teachers”: State and Church Relations Illustrated in the Early Lutheran Schools of Victoria, Australia. History of Education Quarterly, 40(3), 302-319. doi:10.2307/369555

Miller, R. (1939). Is Temple a Realist? The Journal of Religion,19(1), 44-54. Retrieved May 7, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1197939

Mol, H. (1974). The Sacralization of the Family With Special Reference to Australia. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 5(2), 98-108. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/41600888

Mol, J. (1969). Rites of Passage in Australia. The Australian Quarterly, 41(3), 64-74. doi:10.2307/20634302

Montessori, Maria (1914). Dr. Montessori’s Own Handbook, New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company.

Montessori, Maria (1949). The Absorbent Mind, Madras: Theosophical Publishing House.

Montessori, Maria (Translated by Anne E. George,1912). The Montessori Method: Scientific Pedagogy as Applied to Child Education in ‘The Childhood Houses’ with Additions and Revisions by the Author, New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company.

Montessori, Maria (Translated by Barbara B. Carter, 1936). The Secret of Childhood, New York: Longmans, Green & Co. Inc.

Montessori, Maria (Translated by Mary A. Johnstone, 1948). The Discovery of the Child, Madras: Kalakshetra Publications Press.

Mulder, Mark & Marti, Gerardo. (2020). The Glass Church: Robert H. Schuller, the Crystal Cathedral, and the Strain of Megachurch Ministry, Rutgers University Press

Murphy, Kate (2015) ‘In the Backblocks of Capitalism’: Australian Student Activism in the Global 1960s, Australian Historical Studies, 46:2, 252-268, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2015.1039554

Murray, Iain H. (1988) Australian Christian Life From 1788: An Introduction and an Anthology, Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust.

Myers, Benjamin (2012). Christ the Stranger: The Theology of Rowan Williams, t & t Clark.

Nethersole, Reingard (2015). Twilight of the Humanities: Rethinking (Post)Humanism with J.M. Coetzee. Symplokē, 23(1-2), 57-73. doi:10.5250/symploke.23.1-2.0057

Niebuhr, Reinhold (1932). Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Politics, Charles Scriber’s Sons [Rev. Ed. Westminster John Knox, 2001].

Niebuhr, Richard (1937). The Kingdom of God in America

Niebuhr, Richard (1951). Christ and Culture, New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers

Niebuhr, Richard (1963). The Responsible Self : An Essay in Christian Moral Philosophy

Noddings, Nel  (2013). Education and Democracy in the 21st Century, Teachers’ College Press

Noddings, Nel (1984). Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Noddings, Nel (1996). Stories and Affect in Teacher Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 26 (3).

Noddings, Nel (1999). Justice and Caring: The Search for Common Ground in Education, Teachers College Press, New York.

Noddings, Nel (2005). Identifying and Responding to needs in Teacher Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 35 (2).

Noddings, Nel (2005). What does it mean to Educate the WHOLE child? Educational Leadership, 63 (1).

Noel Pearson (2021). Mission: Essays, Speeches & Ideas, Black Inc.

Nolan, Carolyn & Stuartholme Convent of the Sacred Heart (Brisbane, Qld.) (1995). Ribbons, beads and processions : the foundation of Stuartholme. Stuartholme Parents and Friends Association, Toowong, Qld

Nuyen, A. (2001). Realism, Anti-Realism, and Emmanuel Levinas. The Journal of Religion, 81(3), 394-409. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/1206402

Nye, Adele, and Marnie Hughes-Warrington, Jill Roe, Penny Russell, Mark Peel, Desley Deacon, Amanda Laugeson & Paul Kiem (2009). Historical Thinking in Higher Education, History Australia, 6:3, 73.1-73.16, DOI: 10.2104/ha090073

O’Brien, Anne (1993) ‘A church full of men’: Masculinism and the church in Australian history, Australian Historical Studies, 25:100, 437-457, DOI: 10.1080/10314619308595925

O’Brien, Anne (1996) The case of the ‘cultivated man’: Class, gender and the church of the establishment in interwar Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 27:107, 242-256, DOI: 10.1080/10314619608596012

O’Brien, Anne (1997) Sins of Omission? Women in the history of Australian religion and religion in the history of Australian women. A reply to Roger Thompson, Australian Historical Studies, 27:108, 126-133, DOI: 10.1080/10314619708596032

O’Brien, Anne (2002) Historical overview spirituality and work Sydney women, 1920–1960, Australian Historical Studies, 33:120, 373-388, DOI: 10.1080/10314610208596226

O’Farrell, Patrick (1977) Historians and religious convictions, Historical Studies, 17:68, 279-298, DOI: 10.1080/10314617708595552

Ono, A. (2012). You gotta throw away culture once you become Christian: How ‘culture’ is Redefined among Aboriginal Pentecostal Christians in Rural New South Wales. Oceania, 82(1), 74-85. Retrieved April 27, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/23209618

Osborn, D. (2010). CHAPTER THREE: Resisting the State: Christian Fundamentalism and A Beka. Counterpoints, 376, 35-45. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/42980731

Otto, R., & Almond, P. (1984). Buddhism and Christianity: Compared and Contrasted. Buddhist-Christian Studies, 4, 87-101. doi:10.2307/1389938

Pals, Daniel (2022). Ten Theories of Religion, Oxford University Press.

Perry, B. (2011). Universities and Cities: Governance, Institutions and Mediation. Built Environment (1978-), 37(3), 244–259. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23290044

Petersen, D. (1999). Missions in the twenty-first century: Toward a methodology of Pentecostal compassion. Transformation, 16(2), 54-59. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/43053095

Phillips, R. (1978). John Dewey Visits the Ghetto. The Journal of Negro Education, 47(4), 355-362. doi:10.2307/2295000

Phillips, Walter (1981). Defending “a Christian country” : churchmen and society in New South Wales in the 1880s and after. University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, Qld

Piaget, Jean (1953). Logic and Psychology, Manchester: Manchester University Press,

Piaget, Jean (1969). The Mechanisms of Perception, New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, Jean (1977). The Grasp of Consciousness: Action and concept in the young child, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Pietsch, Tamson (2015). Empire of Scholars : Universities, Networks and the British Academic World, 1850-1939. Manchester University Press, Oxford

Piggin, Stuart & Linder, Robert D., (author.) & Scalmer, Sean, (series editor.) & Monash University Publishing, (publisher.) (2018). The Fountain of Public Prosperity : evangelical Christians in Australian history 1740 – 1914. Monash University Publishing, Clayton, Vic

Pizmony-Levy, O. (2011). Bridging the Global and Local in Understanding Curricula Scripts: The                    Case of Environmental Education. Comparative Education Review, 55(4), 600–633. https://doi.org/10.1086/661632

Rademaker, Laura; Noelani Goodyear-Ka’opua, April K. Henderson (2022). Found in Translation : Many Meanings on a North Australian Mission, University of Hawai’i Press.

Radford, M. (2007). Passion and Intelligibility in Spiritual Education, British Journal of Educational Studies, 55 (1), 21-36.

Riches, Tanya (2010). Next Generation Essay: The Evolving Theological Emphasis of Hillsong Worship (1996–2007), Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 13. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/108

Ringma, Charles; Chadwick, Remy. (2017). Three Graces for a Word of Truth. The church’s calling in a troubled world: the grand design and fragile engagement. Hawthorn, VIC: Zadok Institute for Christianity and Society.

Rocha, Cristina, Mark P. Hutchinson and Kathleen Openshaw (edited, 2020). Australian Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements: Arguments from the Margins, Leiden: Brill.

Rouse, Joseph (2015). Articulating the World: Conceptual Understanding and the Scientific Image, The University of Chicago Press

Rutland, Suzanne D. (2018) A Celebratory History of Queensland Jewry, History Australia, 15:1, 202-204, DOI: 10.1080/14490854.2018.1416547

Saperstein, D. (2003). Public Accountability and Faith-Based Organizations: A Problem Best Avoided. Harvard Law Review,116(5), 1353-1396. doi:10.2307/1342729

Shay, Marnee  and Rhonda Oliver (edited, 2021). Indigenous Education in Australia: Learning and Teaching for Deadly Futures, 1st Edition, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, UK.

Sherlock, Peter (2008) ‘Leave it to the Women’ The Exclusion of Women from Anglican Church Government in Australia, Australian Historical Studies, 39:3, 288-304, DOI: 10.1080/10314610802263299

Sherlock, Peter (2018) Book Review: ‘Our Principle of Sex Equality’: The Ordination of Women in the Congregational Church in Australia 1927–1977, Australian Historical Studies, 49:3, 428-429, DOI: 10.1080/1031461X.2018.1495153

Sider, Ronald (1982). Lifestyles in the Eighties. An Evangelical Commitment to Simple Lifestyles, Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

Smith, Jonathan Z. (1982). Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, The University of Chicago Press

Smith, Philippa Mein (2018) Locating Australia? How students view Australia’s region, History Australia, 15:2, 216-235, DOI: 10.1080/14490854.2018.1452161

Spearritt, G. (1995). Don Cupitt: Christian Buddhist? Religious Studies, 31(3), 359-373. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20019757

Sperry, William L. (1945). Religion in America, Cambridge University Press.

Stacey, Jeff (2004). Does the Historical Phenomenon of Revival Have a Recognisable ’Pattern’ of Characteristic, Observable Features? Australasian Pentecostal Studies, Issue 8. Retrieved from https://aps-journal.com/index.php/APS/article/view/71

Stanczak, G. (2006). Engaged Spirituality: Social Change and American Religion. New Brunswick, New Jersey; London: Rutgers University Press. Retrieved May 9, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hj8ft

Stark, Rodney and William S. Bainbridge (1987).  A Theory of Religion, New York, Peter Lang.

Starr, I. (1954). John Dewey, My Son, and Education for Human Freedom, The School Review, 62 (4), 204-212.

Starr, J. P. (2019). To improve the curriculum, engage the whole system. The Phi Delta Kappan, 100(7), 70–71. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26677377

Stauberg, Michael , Carole M. Cusask, Stuart A. Wright (edited, 2022). The Demise of Religion:  How Religions End, Die, or Dissipate, Bloomsbury Publishing PL

Steiner, Rudolf (1907). The Education of the Child, New York: Rudolf Steiner Publications, Inc.

Stevens, Bruce (2006). “Why Feel Bad?” A Theory of Affect and Pentecostal Spirituality, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 9, webpage

Swain, Shurlee (2005) Do You Want Religion with That? Welfare History in a Secular Age, History Australia, 2:3, 79.1-79.8, DOI: 10.2104/ha050079

Sweet, William Warren (1965). Revivalism in America, Gloucester: Peter Smith.

Szasz, Ferenc Morton (1982). The Divided Mind of Protestant America 1880-1930, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press.

Tacey, David (2000). ReEnchantment: The New Australian Spirituality, Sydney: Harper Collins

Tacey, David (2004). The Spirituality Revolution: The emergence of contemporary spirituality, London: Routledge

Tacey, David (2015). Religion as Metaphor: Beyond Literal Belief, London: Routledge

Tauber, Zvi. (2006). Aesthetic Education for Morality: Schiller and Kant. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40(3), 22-47. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/4140178

Teese, Richard (2000). Academic Success and Social Power: Examinations and Inequality, Melbourne University Press

Thompson, Roger C. (1997) Women and the significance of religion in Australian history, Australian Historical Studies, 27:108, 118-125, DOI: 10.1080/10314619708596031

Tobin, Susan M. (1987). Catholic Education in Queensland. Conference of Catholic Education, Queensland, Brisbane.

Truman, T. (1958). Church And State: The Teaching Of The Catholic Church On Intervention In Politics. The Australian Quarterly, 30(4), 35-43. Retrieved April 29, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/20694699

Unnamed. (1975-1979). Catholic education : Policy and Practice. Catholic Education Council (Brisbane, Qld.).

Unnamed. (1983-1987). Religious Education: Teaching Approaches. Department of Education Queensland.

Unnamed. (1984). Religious Education Curriculum Project 1975-1983 : project report. Queensland. Department of Education. Curriculum Branch .

Unnamed. (1986). Religious Education: Teachers Notes – Years. Department of Education Queensland.

Unnamed. (1990). Growing together in faith : religious education content for Years P – 7. Catholic Education Office, Rockhampton, Qld.

Unnamed. (1998). Religious education in state schools : coordinators handbook. Brisbane Catholic Education.

Vondey,Wolfgang  (2011).A Review Symposium on: Wolfgang Vondey, Beyond Pentecostalism, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 13, webpage

Vygotsky, Lev (Russian edition from 1982). The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky, Soviet Union, including, Volume 3, Chapter 15: The Historical Meaning of the Crisis in Psychology: A Methodological Investigation (Plenum Press, 1987).

Walker, A. (1961). The Church in the New Australia. The Australian Quarterly, 33(3), 70-80. doi:10.2307/20633722

Wallis, Jim (1995). The Soul of Politics: Beyond “Religious Right” and “Secular Left”, Harcourt Brace.

Walter Phillips (1971) Australian Catholic historiography: Some recent issues, Historical Studies, 14:56, 600-611, DOI: 10.1080/10314617108595446

Warhurst, J. (1976). United States’ Government Assistance to the Catholic Social Studies Movement, 1953-4. Labour History, (30), 38-41. doi:10.2307/27508215

Warhurst, J. (2012). Religion and the 2010 Election: Elephants in the room. In Simms M. & Wanna J. (Eds.), Julia 2010: The caretaker election (pp. 303-312). ANU Press. Retrieved May 6, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt24h9hm.30

Weber, B. (2011). Design and its discontents. Synthese, 178(2), 271-289. Retrieved May 8, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/41477275

Weiler, Peter T. (2000). Pentecostal Postmodernity? An Unexpected Application of Grenz’s Primer on Postmodernism, Australasian Pentecostal Studies, 2/3, webpage

Werpehowski, William (2002). American Protestant Ethics and the Legacy of H. Richard Niebuhr, Georgetown University Press

Wieneke, Peter, Phillips, Ian. 1979. Study of Christianity : Religious Education Curriculum for Years 11, 12. Villanova College. Select

Wild, M. (2015). Liberal Protestants and Urban Renewal. Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, 25(1), 110–146. https://doi.org/10.1525/rac.2015.25.1.110

Williams, Stafford. 1986. R.E. lesson plans for secondary schools. Youth Concern Ltd, Gold Coast, Qld. Select

Wuthnow, R. (2004). Public Policy and Civil Society. In Saving America?: Faith-Based Services and the Future of Civil Society (pp. 286-310). Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctt7s2hm.13

Wyatt, T. (2009). The Role of Culture in Culturally Compatible Education. Journal of American Indian Education, 48(3), 47–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24398754

 

 

ENDNOTES

 

[1] B.01 Education for Faith & Belief: ‘Education for Faith and Belief’: The Problem of Popular Misconceptions in Queensland, 2022 Australian Historical Association, Geelong, Victoria, Australia, Thursday 30 June 2022.

[2] Historical Sociology of/for Christian/Religious Education in Queensland: Mapping 1859-2022 and Beyond, 2022 Australian Sociological Association Conference (TASA), University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Wednesday 30 November 2022.