Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorHankins, Barry, 1956-
dc.contributor.authorJohnston, Marshall Ron.
dc.contributor.otherBaylor University. Institute of Church-State Studies.en
dc.date.accessioned2007-12-03T18:50:53Z
dc.date.available2007-12-03T18:50:53Z
dc.date.copyright2007
dc.date.issued2007-12-03T18:50:53Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2104/5068
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 308-332).en
dc.description.abstractWilliam Stringfellow (1928-1985) was a Harvard-trained attorney, social critic, and popular theologian. His theology and the social and political critique it engendered were developed against the backdrop of American exceptionalism. American exceptionalism refers to the consciousness of moral uniqueness and superiority that characterizes the popular American national image. This consciousness has been expressed in various ways and has referred to different aspects of the sociopolitical framework that defines the country. Politically, American exceptionalism has been expressed in the terms known as the American Creed, the emphasis upon individual rights and the implication that this creed could be and should be universally believed. Economically, American exceptionalism has been associated with the Protestant work ethic, the myth of the self-made man, the American dream, and the sanctity of property. Theologically, it has been expressed most explicitly in the notion of the chosen nation, divinely called for the purpose of spreading its values throughout the world, and in the more specific idea of America as a Christian nation. Pervading Stringfellow’s work is a constant critique of all of these notions. In almost everything he wrote there was an implied or explicit critique of America’s national ideology, especially its theological justifications. Consequently, the following is a study of Stringfellow’s thought, with particular reference to his criticism of American exceptionalism. His critique may be summarized as follows: Claims of the nation for morally unique status are bombastic in that they are contradicted by many empirically observed injustices and are blasphemous in that they imply a promise to free citizens from death in its various forms, which is something only God can do. Furthermore, some forms of these exceptionalistic claims reflect a bastardized version of the Gospel in that they presume to announce a form of salvation to the world, politically, economically, and, in some cases, religiously.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Marshall Ron Johnston.en
dc.format.extentvii, 332 p.en
dc.format.extent157389 bytes
dc.format.extent1772540 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.rightsBaylor University theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact librarywebmaster@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission.en
dc.subjectStringfellow, William.en
dc.subjectUnited States -- Ethnic relations.en
dc.subjectChristian lawyers --- United States.en
dc.subjectNational characteristics, American.en
dc.subjectChurch and the world.en
dc.subjectNationalism --- United States -- History.en
dc.titleBombast, blasphemy, and the bastard gospel: William Stringfellow and American exceptionalism.en
dc.typeThesisen
dc.description.degreePh.D.en
dc.rights.accessrightsWorldwide accessen
dc.contributor.departmentChurch and State.en


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record