Race, Religious Freedom, and the Institutional Limitations of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION JOURNAL OF CHURCH AND STATE Pub Date : 2024-02-22 DOI:10.1093/jcs/csae004
Andrew Gardner
{"title":"Race, Religious Freedom, and the Institutional Limitations of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs","authors":"Andrew Gardner","doi":"10.1093/jcs/csae004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1936, Baptists from across geographic and racial lines cooperatively began working together to address questions of common social concern—specifically, religious freedom. Ten years later, this cooperative work spurred the formation of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, later known as the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC). Recent scholarship has critiqued conceptions of religious freedom in the United States from a multitude of perspectives. Tisa Wenger has shown the ways in which religious freedom in the first half of the twentieth century functioned as a cover for white Christians to avoid addressing questions of race and segregation. This article further explores this idea through the history of the Baptist Joint Committee. It shows how BJC and its board members were unable to foster significant interracial collaboration in its early years not only because of its singular focus on religious freedom but also because of the denominational and bureaucratic social networks that helped establish this organization. White BJC staff and board members lacked the necessary relationships with and knowledge of Black Baptist denominational leaders and organizations. This article shows that the challenges facing BJC in cultivating an interracial conception of religious freedom were far more than solely intellectual. These challenges were social and bureaucratic.","PeriodicalId":44712,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHURCH AND STATE","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CHURCH AND STATE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csae004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1936, Baptists from across geographic and racial lines cooperatively began working together to address questions of common social concern—specifically, religious freedom. Ten years later, this cooperative work spurred the formation of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, later known as the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty (BJC). Recent scholarship has critiqued conceptions of religious freedom in the United States from a multitude of perspectives. Tisa Wenger has shown the ways in which religious freedom in the first half of the twentieth century functioned as a cover for white Christians to avoid addressing questions of race and segregation. This article further explores this idea through the history of the Baptist Joint Committee. It shows how BJC and its board members were unable to foster significant interracial collaboration in its early years not only because of its singular focus on religious freedom but also because of the denominational and bureaucratic social networks that helped establish this organization. White BJC staff and board members lacked the necessary relationships with and knowledge of Black Baptist denominational leaders and organizations. This article shows that the challenges facing BJC in cultivating an interracial conception of religious freedom were far more than solely intellectual. These challenges were social and bureaucratic.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
种族、宗教自由和浸礼会公共事务联合委员会的制度限制
1936 年,来自不同地域和种族的浸礼会成员开始合作,共同解决共同关心的社会问题,特别是宗教自由问题。十年后,这一合作促使浸礼会公共事务联合委员会(Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs)成立,该委员会后来被称为浸礼会宗教自由联合委员会(Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty,BJC)。近期的学术研究从多个角度对美国宗教自由的概念进行了批判。蒂萨-温格(Tisa Wenger)揭示了 20 世纪上半叶宗教自由如何成为白人基督徒逃避解决种族和种族隔离问题的幌子。本文通过浸礼会联合委员会的历史进一步探讨了这一观点。文章展示了浸礼会联合委员会及其董事会成员如何在其早期无法促进重要的跨种族合作,这不仅是因为其只关注宗教自由,还因为帮助建立该组织的教派和官僚社会网络。浸礼会白人工作人员和董事会成员缺乏与黑人浸礼会教派领袖和组织的必要关系,也不了解他们。这篇文章表明,黑人浸信会在培养跨种族的宗教自由观念时所面临的挑战远不止智力上的。这些挑战是社会和官僚方面的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The Journal of Church and State is concerned with what has been called the "greatest subject in the history of the West." It seeks to stimulate interest, dialogue, research, and publication in the broad area of religion and the state. JCS publishes constitutional, historical, philosophical, theological, and sociological studies on religion and the body politic in various countries and cultures of the world, including the United States. Each issue features, in addition to a timely editorial, five or more major articles, and thirty-five to forty reviews of significant books related to church and state. Periodically, important ecclesiastical documents and government texts of legislation and/or court decisions are also published."
期刊最新文献
Rousseau, American Laicite, and the Future of Religious Liberty in America Creative Incoherence: 303 Creative and First Amendment Exemptions to Antidiscrimination Law State Church and Religious Equality: A Comparative Study of Competing Logics during the Process of Changing Relations between State and Church in Sweden and Norway Religion, Pluralism, and the Australian State after Same-Sex Marriage Race, Religious Freedom, and the Institutional Limitations of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1