Reading a A History of Pastoral Care in America by Holifield

A History of Pastoral Care in America : From Salvation to Self-Realization by E. Brooks Holifield 

I found myself entranced by Holifield’s book, so much so that I read the first 4 chapters in addition to the 3 assigned. The thematic focus of how pastoral care shifted over time from self-denial and salvation to self-realization and acceptance added clarity to my understanding of history and how we can have such diverse factions within Christian theology and practice today. I want to focus on the height of colonial power and the influences towards pastoral care and justice.

Holifield traces the social and economic changes happening during the 1890s to 1910s. While he gives genuine thought into the arrogance of the educated and elite of the time, there is plenty to expand upon. Holifield lists 5 influences to perceptions of self and pastoral care: shifting to interest in biology, increasing language and perception of technology as power, post Civil War’s cult of masculinity (and reverting to efficiency, realism, individualism), economic consequences of technology, and a popular cultural mindset of physical fitness and strength (165-168). The predominant theological perspective that existence is naturally organized and patterned by God, reinforces and is reinforced by these cultural perspectives (ref. Bacon, Thomas Reid). Also within this list, I see the consequences of colonialism and patriarchy.

The shift to biological sciences was still rooted in “inductive rational science” (i.e. phrenology), producing conclusions about race, gender, and sexuality that still haunt us today. It seems as if the consequences of the Enlightenment and the Second Great Awakening happening during (or because of?) radical shifts in social structure (like factory capitalism and shift to urban centers) led to religion and psychology playing perpetual catch up. The same inductive rational thinking applied to race, gender, and sexuality that still exist today are also applied to the bible to justify fundamentalist worldviews. It continues to be very problematic towards achieving both personal and social justice.

I find the intersections of technology, economy, and the cult of masculinity and virility fascinating. I wonder how much of the imperial colonial mindset is a part of this as well. Americans colonized through territories, but it is essentially the same concept. Wrapped within it all is a hierarchy of oppositional binaries that places men, civilization, technology, success and power on one side and women, savagery, affective experience, deprecation and powerlessness on the other. While reading about the expectations of pastors to be virile and physically fit and strong, I kept thinking of Marcus Borg’s reflection on the Superman myth and Jesus. From Wikipedia, I learned Superman was created in 1933 and published in 1938. That means the creators of Superman were children during this transformative period emphasizing masculinity, virility, and power. Holifield demonstrates how over time the tension between reason and sentiment expresses itself.

Mission work and social work were also infected by these perceptions of self and the world. The mission societies allowed women to find a place to express their value that did not step on male virility. The biological justification of the patriarchal colonial hierarchy allowed acts of charity and conversion to appear as religious expressions of faith. As long as those being helped are inferior, whether by race, gender, or culture, then the hierarchy of power remains intact.

Reading this view of theological history, the stance that Tillich and Niebuhr brothers took makes much more sense. My primary awareness being the discussions within feminist theology challenging Niebuhr’s concept of the sin of pride makes sense coming from the end of colonial era and post-WWII. It also makes Saiving’s argument for women’s sin of self-deprecation even more poignant. Women, as part of the negative side of the oppositional binary can easily internalize with all that is powerless. As these thoughts develop, then we see that the experience of white educated women also contained elements of power and privilege. This reading has pieced together how important the heuristic development of theology and philosophy is. Holifield demonstrates in some ways how theological and psychological thought transformed and grew to the point that constructive postmodern perspectives became possible as part of social construction.