Ten Questions for Diana Butler Bass on A People’s History of Christianity, (HarperOne, 2009).
What inspired you to write A People’s History of Christianity? What sparked your interest?
A conversation with a friend prompted the writing of A People’s History. About a dozen years ago, she quizzed me as to why I was still a Christian. Although I actually tried to avoid answering her, I eventually realized that I had remained a Christian largely because I am held in faith by history; the past provides me with spiritual memory and a community that exists through time. Many people, of course, reject Christianity on the basis of its history. Of course, Christians have committed a much historical mischief and done outright evil things. But that’s not the whole story. There’s much in the tradition to be both admirable and imitated. So, I decided to write “the other side of the story,” the sort of history that enables me to stay Christian.
What’s the most important take-home message for readers?
I hope people read the book and understand that spiritual amnesia in regards to history is dangerous for both faith communities and society. I heard Jon Meacham recently remark that “History is to a country what memory is to an individual.” Without history, we have no sense of identity or meaning. With no memory of those people I write about, Christians are cut off from both their selves and the wisdom of those who have gone before. I don’t think any faith community can afford that at this moment of global challenge and transformation.
Anything you had to leave out?
A People’s History covers 2000 years in 350 pages. Maybe it would be better to ask me what I left in.
What are some of the biggest misconceptions about your topic?
Recently, my eleven-year-old daughter told one of her fifth grade Sunday school classmates that her mother had written a book on church history. He replied, “What’s that about? Killing Muslims and Jews?” That pretty well sums it up—most people think that Christian history is about wars, inquisitions, crusades, and a corrupt church. I don’t deny that—it would be impossible to—but many people have managed to live admirable lives despite Christianity’s institutional failings. And I write about those people. I’m a realist when it comes to history, and part of that is a realistic assessment of when Christianity has lived up to the teachings of its founder. A People’s History isn’t about war; it is about love of God and love of neighbor.
Did you have a specific audience in mind when writing?
The book is aimed at Western Christians, particularly mainline Protestants, social justice Roman Catholics, progressive and emergent evangelicals. But I hope it invites anyone who is might be willing to give Christianity a second look—those who are “spiritual-but-not-religious” and the “church alumni club.” And those who might be completely post-religious and just want to read a good story about interesting people in the past.
Are you hoping to just inform readers? Give them pleasure? Piss them off?
I always want my readers—of my books, blogs, or articles—to say, “I’ve never really seen the world from that angle before.” It is more than information; I always hope to provide some transformative vision into life and the world. On the journey of reading, I want people to laugh, cry, agree, gasp, wonder, and get angry. Books, even non-fiction, should engage the full spectrum of emotion.
What alternate title would you give the book?
My original title was After Jesus: How Christians Loved God and Neighbor Through Church History. As I wrote, however, my editor noted that the manuscript very much had the “spirit” of Howard Zinn’s history about regular people and social justice. Thus, HarperOne re-titled it A People’s History of Christianity. I’m humbled by the comparison.
How do you feel about the cover?
It is orange.
Is there a book out there you wish you had written? Which one? Why?
The DaVinci Code. Now, that’s a profitable reworking of Christian history. I wouldn’t have to worry about paying for my daughter’s college education. Seriously, I wish I could have written Charles Taylor’s A Secular Age. It is one of those magisterial books about history that has become part of history. Books like that happen once in a generation. Sigh.
What’s your next book?
It is on a less-than cheerful subject—the decline of Christianity in the West. I’m wondering what forms Christianity will take, and what wisdom it will bear, as its hold on its ancestral homeland weakens. A People’s History is about Christianity’s past; the next book will be about its future.
Tags: christianity, community, faith, history, progressive
It sounds good so far. I definitely like the article "Go and Do Likewise." It reflects what I've been trying to teach the last 4 years.
Love, Hope, Peace, & Christ Is With Us All,
Cal-el
I disagree with this author. First, history and memory may be similar to some regard, but as history teaches us, memory is selective, and history written by selective memory is quite biased. Take for example, the Nazi history of the Jews. Memory is never accurate for the most part because humans are not that aware.
Second, a sense of meaning and identity can be forged in spite of, not because of history. Ask rape victims. And often times the "because" of results in bitter people who have been abused by the church. There are no "institutional" failings. There are only personal failings. No building ever molested a child. Ted Haggard's tax status never snorted meth. It wasn't a governance structure chart that killed George Tiller. It has always been people who have committed crimes.
Third, it is history that finally opened my eyes to see that most of Christianity's story is simply that: a story, not the truth. The book it is based on has a history that requires one to seriously question the claim of the word of an omniscient or omnipotent God.
On the other hand, I would recognize the transformational power of beliefs, even in a largely fictional character, of certain select individuals. That is the path they have chosen for this life. I can respect that. No sense in arguing with love of neighbor, your god, and I did notice and hope it was an oversight, as yourself.
Diana's arguments work well for people with certain personality traits.
"Without history, we have no sense of identity or meaning."
If this is true, then history can come from your family stories or your local community but does not have to come from the religion of your parents (say they were West Virginia snake handlers) or the hobbies of your parents (say they loved NASCAR racing). One can keep one's personal history simple. One does not have to grab the history they are handed. One can choose.
But if you have the personality type that likes the familiar, does not care to experiment and explore, then the things you are handed are the safest and most comfortable. I get that. But let's not fool ourselves that you made generalizable philosophical insights, these are strictly personal.
"I had remained a Christian largely because I am held in faith by history".
You were held in because you had no clearly better options in front of you that still let you fit in, stay friends with the community you loved, and prosper. There may have been other options but they demanded giving those up and exploring and experiment with the unfamiliarity -- probably a trade-off you preferred to avoid. I get that -- and it may have been the best decision for you. But we are also served well by those with personality traits that are willing to take chances. The check and balance of these two types of people, in a tolerant society, can keep our society vital.
I think it is the vibrant, peaceful connections we make with others is what gives us a substantial history, not the traditions we are handed -- that was merely your choice.
Comments closed
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.