Bible-Carrying Christians by DH Watt

I must admit to being utterly bewildered. Sometimes I do end up confused, but usually not as a result of my own doing. I feel like a lost, teenaged hayseed, fresh off the Greyhound, suitcase in hand, wandering around somewhere in the unfamiliar maze of a bewildering downtown Los Angeles bus terminal. Why? Well, because I actually spent $55.00 dollars on a book titled: Bible-Carrying Christians: Conservative Protestants and Social Power. It has to be one of the silliest reads I have purchased in quite some time. Its silliness actually rivals that of Why Christianity Must Change or Die by Bishop Spong. Too, remember, I say this as a fan of neither liberal religion, nor fundamentalism.

So, why do I not like this book? I will try to explain in a short page or two.

The author, David Harrington Watt, would have us to believe – he goes out of his way to do so – that his so-called field method will reveal something about conservative Protestants that would otherwise go unobserved. I have nothing at all against ethnographic study, which is his method of choice. Ethnographic study can be a wonderful tool leading to a fuller anthropological understanding of cultures and/or subcultures, at least when it is taken to the field in a disciplined manner. Watt is not disciplined in his attempted field study. In fact, his research predictably reads more like a bitter Ex-Southern Baptist turned Episcopalian than a disciplined Ethnographer. The introduction of culturally preferred preferences into field work is an inherent danger facing the Ethnographer. Religious communities maximize and compound this danger, because religious communities are religious and everyone – even Ethnographers – has an opinion or preference concerning religion and subsequent communities. I suppose, Watt can skate if he can prove that there is such a beast as total objectivity in research, and that his own religious development (Southern Baptist to Episcopalian) had no residual effect(s) upon his field experience and research. I won’t hold my breath.

Watt cherry picked his churches. Watt is no stranger to Christianity.

Watt cherry picked his churches. What do I mean? Simply this: Watt is no stranger to Christianity. He was a Southern Baptist; he is now an Episcopalian. He understands well the liberal and conservative dynamic inherent to American Christianity. He’s not stupid. So, Watt trounces through Philadelphia in search of three Christian churches into which he can live and circulate, albeit for a limited time. What churches does he pick: Oak Grove Church, The Philadelphia Mennonite fellowship, and the Philadelphia Church of Christ? They are all socially conservative churches, and staunchly so (The Mennonite Community was slightly progressive on a few issues). Sure, these churches are populated with individuals who carry their Bibles to Church, but so are many others, I’m sure. So, was the act of “Bible-Carrying” the litmus test for the picking of these churches, or was social conservativism? If it is the later, which I strongly suspect, then the whole premise of this book is off-kilter. Too, it seems the recurring issue for Watt was the social relationship between male and female within the church communities. Every chapter ends with comments regarding alleged gender oppression against women within the church. There are politically moderate and/or indifferent churches out there and they are filled with people carrying Bibles. Why were not a few of these chosen? Why focus on the negative social characteristic of these churches? Doesn’t anything good happen in these communities too? It seems strange that a wise and serious Ethnographer would knowingly choose specific churches for field study in which he already knew he would not be able to authentically assimilate, without decisive argument. More than that, why the argument in the first place? Do Ethnographers actually engage in debate with their filed subjects? I don’t think so. This sounds not like Ethnographic research, but a religious liberal hack job dressed up as Ethnography. There are plenty of so-called “Bible-Carrying” Christians out there who are not at all limited to the characterizations advanced by Watt in this book. Too, I’m not so sure these folk posses anything remotely close to the social power attributed to them, save within their own communities, and that’s their own choice.

So, I’m confused. I spent $55.00 of my hard earned money on this book. I’ll never see those dollars again. I could have scored a whole lot of Fuddruckers with $55.00! Oh well.