HS501: Traditional Syllabus
Winter 2011, Jan 10 – Mar 21
Section 2: Tue 7 – 10:15 pm
Dr. Chris Armstrong
Bethel Seminary
Office: Faculty Hall, A212
E-mail: c-armstrong@bethel.edu
T.A.: Laine Gebhardt; geblai@bethel.edu
EARLY CHURCH TO THE REFORMATION
Course Description: An introduction to the major movements, persons, and ideas in Christian
history from the church's birth through the fifteenth century. Students will also be introduced to
basic methodology and bibliographical tools used in the study of the past.
Objectives:
1. Recount major events, ideas, figures, and movements in the Church from its
beginnings to the fifteenth century.
2. Analyze, discuss, and write about selected documents and ideas in church history.
3. Learn how to connect the church's past to our present in a careful, responsible, and
practically helpful way.
Texts:
Gonzalez, Justo. The Story of Christianity, vol. 1, Early Church to Reformation. San Francisco:
HarperCollins Publishers, 1984. ISBN 0060633158
Bettenson, Henry and Chris Maunder, eds. Documents of the Christian Church, 3rd ed. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1999. ISBN 0192880713
Heath, Gordon L. Doing Church History: A User-friendly Introduction to Researching the
History of Christianity (Toronto, Ont.: Clements Publishing, 2008; 1894667905)
www.christianhistory.net. Currently this website is giving access to all articles from all back
issues of Christian History magazine (all 99 of ‘em), for free. Where I indicate "CH" in the
readings below, I'm referring to this source.
Course Requirements:
1.
Testing: Three unit exams will be given, each covering one segment of the course, with
questions on the Gonzalez text and lectures. Short answer questions will be asked on Gonzalez
and essay questions on the lectures. 1st Edition page numbers are followed by (2nd edition page
numbers).
Exam I
Gonzalez 7-17, (8-23), 31-108 (41-125) and lecture material
Exam II
Gonzalez 113-219 (131-260) and lecture material
Exam III
Gonzalez 231-374 (269-445) and lecture material
HS501: Syllabus
page 2
2.
Online forum postings: TO BE DESCRIBED
3.
In-class discussion leading: TO BE DESCRIBED
4.
Final integrative paper: TO BE DESCRIBED
Integrative Portfolio: In addition to submitting this assignment to the course instructor,
you are also required to upload your assignment to your Integrative Portfolio. For
important uploading instructions, visit your Integrative Portfolio Moodle course (GS002
or GS003). This requirement applies to all degree seeking students who initiate their
degree program from fall of 2008 forward.
Grading:
Three exams (3x16%)
Online forum posting
In-class discussion leading
Final integrative paper
Evaluation (see below)
48%
16% (8% per assigned week, 2 assigned weeks)
10% (1 assigned week)
24%
2%
EVALUATION: Owing to a change in Bethel Seminary policy, I am required to count your
completion of the course evaluation at the end of the course as 2% of the final grade. I won’t be
able to look at the evaluation text itself (have no fear!), but I will be able to tell whether you
completed it or not, so I can add that 2% to your final grade.
PARTICIPATION (involvement in our discussions; attendance is assumed, and mandatory!) will
be used as a “straw in the wind.” That is, my observation of your involvement in class discussion
will serve to push you, if your final grade is on or near a “line” between two letter-grades, toward
either the higher or the lower grade. As stated in the Academic Course Policies, your completion
of the course evaluation electronically at the end of the course “will be included as a factor in
your final course grade.” See “Course Grading” above for how this will be calculated. All
evaluations remain anonymous to the faculty.
Academic Course Policies: Please familiarize yourself with the catalog requirements in the
Academic Course Policies document on the Syllabus page in Moodle. You are responsible for
this information, and any academic violations, such as plagiarism, will not be tolerated.
HS501: Syllabus
page 3
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Date
Jan 10-16
Week 1
Course questions/lectures
WHAT IS HISTORY? HOW JEWISH
WAS THE EARLIEST CHURCH
LOOK? Introduction, history study,
Jewishness of the earliest church
Assignments
****See Moodle Forums: VI. Topics
and Readings, below, for list of
additional reading assignments for
each week, beyond Gonzalez
No postings due—a good time to get a
jump on exam I by reading Gonzalez
Jan 17-23
Week 2
Jan 24-30
Week 3
THE FIRST CULTURAL
TRANSLATION OF THE GOSPEL.
HOW DID THE CHURCH GROW TO
DOMINANCE DESPITE
PERSECUTION? HOW WAS THE
CHURCH'S IDENTITY SHAPED IN
ITS GROWTH?: Shift to a gentile church,
The three authority structures,
Christianizing the Empire
Forum postings on discussions 2 (Early
church-state relations) and 3
(atonement) due Wed (19th)/ Fri (21st)/
Mon (24th)
HOW DID THE CHURCH DEFEND ITS
DOCTRINE AND INTERACT WITH
(GREEK) CULTURE?: Hellenization,
The apologists and their defense of the
faith
In class: discussion 1 (Greek culture)
led by Prof. Armstrong
No in-class discussion this week
Do assigned readings for next week's
discussion 1 (Greek culture)
In class: discussions 2 (Early churchstate relations) and 3 (atonement) led
by students
Forum postings on discussions 4
(creeds) and 5 (Christ’s divinity and
humanity) due Wed/Fri/Mon
Jan 31Feb 6
Week 4
WHY IS TRADITION IMPORTANT?
HOW DID THE DOCTRINES OF
CHRIST’S DIVINITY AND
HUMANITY DEVELOP? Tradition and
the Nicene Council (lecture and
reading/discussion)
Exam I due by midnight on Friday,
Feb 4 on Gonzalez 7-17, (8-23), 31-108
(41-125) and lectures from weeks 1-3
Discussions 4 (creeds) and 5 (Christ’s
divinity and humanity)
No forum postings due this week—use
the time to study for exam I!
Feb 7-13
Week 5
Reading
week 1
HOW DID EARLY CHRISTIANS "DO
CHURCH"? WHERE DID
MONASTICISM COME FROM? WHAT
IS CHURCH?: Early church leadership,
Anthony of Egypt and the origins of
monasticism; “Models of Church”
Forum postings on discussions 6 (early
church leadership & worship) and 7
(Augustine and the Pelagians) due
Wed/Fri/Mon
No in-class discussion today
Outline of integrative papers due in
assignment area by midnight on
Friday, Feb 11
HS501: Syllabus
Date
page 4
Course questions/lectures
Assignments
Feb 14-20 AUGUSTINE, FATHER OF WESTERN Discussions 6 (early church leadership
Week 6
THEOLOGY: Augustine’s conversion
and thought
Reading
week 2
No forum posts due this week; good
time to study for exam II and work on
your paper
Feb 21-27 HOW DID THE WESTERN CHURCH
Week 7
Feb 28Mar 6
Week 8
Mar 7-13
Week 9
BECOME THE ROMAN CATHOLIC
CHURCH? How the West became
Roman Catholic; Gregory the Great
Exam II due by midnight on Friday,
Feb 25 on Gonzalez 113-219 (131-260)
and lectures from weeks 4-6
Forum postings on discussions 8
(Montanism & Donatism) and 9 (postChalcedon Christological
controversies) due Wed/Fri/Mon
HOW DID THE CHURCH’S FIRST
MAJOR DIVISION HAPPEN, AND
WHAT WERE THE DISTINCTIVES OF
THE EASTERN CHURCH? How the
East became Orthodox; Eastern
distinctives compared to Western
Discussions 8 (Montanism &
Donatism) and 9 (post-Chalcedon
Christological controversies)
WHAT DID MEDIEVAL CHRISTIANS
BELIEVE AND HOW DID THEY “DO”
CHURCH? Ten key elements of the
medieval worldview and four key
theological ideas;
Discussion 10 (dark ages church-state
relations and heresy) note discussion
11 will happen next week
Mar 14-20 HOW DID MONASTICISM DEVELOP
Week 10
& worship) and 7 (Augustine and the
Pelagians)
Forum postings on discussions 10 (dark
ages church-state relations and heresy)
and 11 (Benedictine monasticism) due
Wed/Fri/Mon
No forum postings due—study for exam
III and work on papers!
Discussion 11 (Benedictine
UNDER BENEDICT? WHAT DID THE monasticism)
MEDIEVAL CHURCH LOOK LIKE
Study for exam III / finish paper
RIGHT BEFORE THE
REFORMATION? Benedictine
monasticism; issues in the medieval
church, renewal; wrap-up
HS501: Syllabus
Date
page 5
Course questions/lectures
Mar 21
Assignments
Exam III due by 11 p.m. on Monday,
Mar 21, on Gonzalez 231-374 (269445) and lectures from weeks 7-10.
Essay questions are: 1. What can the
modern American church learn from
Eastern Orthodoxy? 2. What can the
modern American church learn from
Medieval (Western) Christianity?
Final integrative paper due by
midnight on Monday, Mar 21, via the
“Assignment” link on Moodle. Please
do not submit via email or hard copy.
Moodle forum postings
I. Assignment
We’re going to have topical discussions both on the Moodle forums and in the classroom. What
we’re aiming for is to begin our topical discussions for each week in the Moodle forums and then
continue and expand them in the classroom.
During the course, each student will post on two primary topics and two secondary, for a total
of six posts, in Moodle “topic forums” (the topic areas and readings for these are listed at the end
of this document). In two weeks during the quarter you will post (1) one meaty presentation post
on a primary topic, (2) one “probe” on the other student's post (secondary topic), and (3) one
wrap-up post addressing the “probe” that the other student has made on your own primary post.
If there is not a secondary topic during your week, post your probe on the student who
shares your primary topic. Topics will be assigned to you during the first week.
Here’s how it’s going to work:
In the course documents area of the course’s Moodle site, you will find scanned copies of the
contextualizing readings listed under “V: Topics and readings,” below. These contextualizing
readings come from Everett Ferguson’s Church History: From Christ to Pre-Reformation and
Mark Noll’s Turning Points. You will also find listed readings from Christian History magazine
(marked “CH”), which are accessible via www.christianhistory.net (issues are sorted by number
at the left of the main webpage, near the bottom). These readings, along with Gonzalez and some
additional library research, will help you contextualize and understand the Bettenson material.
Each week in which forum postings are due, you are responsible for reading the context material
and assigned Bettenson readings associated with the topic assigned to you. Then you will need to
post the following:
(1) on your assigned topic, a two-page (500-word) initial post;
HS501: Syllabus
page 6
(2) on another student's topic (also assigned), a one-paragraph (roughly 75-word) probe; then
finally
(3) on your assigned topic, a two-paragraph (roughly 150-word) wrap-up post addressing the
question(s) raised by the other student's probe.
The terms “initial post,” “probe,” and “wrap-up post” are further explained under “III: Your
three postings,” below.
NOTE: In addition to the contextualizing reading for the two topics on which you are posting
(either primary post or probe), you are responsible for the contextualizing readings for
discussion #1 (week 3) and #12 (week 10).
III. Your three postings
(The deadlines for all three posts may be found in section IV below.)
A. Your initial post
Your two-page (500-word) initial post should use what you know from Gonzalez and the extra
readings (e.g. Ferguson, Noll, the Christian History issues) along with at least two Bettenson
excerpts:
(1) from the contextualizing readings, explain briefly and contextualize the topical question listed
in section V below, then
(2) answer the question in brief, using at least two quoted passages from Bettenson to illustrate
your answer
B. Your probe
Your one-paragraph (roughly 75-word) probe should pose at least two penetrating questions
on the other student's post. You should read the contextualizing readings for that topic before
posting your probe. Also, please probe on time, so your initial post-er can wrap up on time.
C. Your concluding wrap-up post
Your two-paragraph (roughly 150-word) wrap-up post should address the question posed by
your respondent in a summing-up-and-clarifying statement, along with anything else you'd like
to add in the way of clarification or further insight.
III. Post grading
These Blackboard forum postings are worth 16% of your course grade, calculated as follows: 5%
for each initial post, 1% for each probe, and 2% for each wrap-up
I may browse the posts, but they will be read and graded by my t.a., Laine Gebhardt, according
to a clearly defined rubric. Here is that rubric:
HS501: Syllabus
page 7
5 points for initial post
1. Does it answer my topical question in at least abbreviated form (or does it
answer some other question/s I didn't ask)?
2. Does the post meet the 500-word assigned length (or is it fewer than 450
words; don't worry about longer posts—penalize only those that are more than
1,000 words, reminding the student gently that they owe their reader the courtesy
of keeping to the assigned length)?
3. Does it quote Bettenson at least twice (or not)?
4. Does it ground the answer in historical fact (or is it fuzzy and generalized)?
5. Does it set up the topical question (that I provide on pp. 7-12 or so of the
syllabus) by putting it in historical context (or does it never ground the answer in
historical context)?
6. Does it show evidence of reading the posted contextualizing materials (or,
again, is it generalized and unhelpful)?
7. Would it be accessible to an "adult Sunday school" audience not familiar with
the material (this is subjective of course, but depends a lot on the answer to "a,"
above, as well as to "f." Posts should not assume a lot of prior knowledge, nor
should they use big, fancy words unexplained).
8. Is it cogently and clearly written (or difficult to parse/full of grammatical and
spelling errors)?
These areas are listed in order of their importance to the grade. Complete failure in any of these
areas is grounds for taking off a full point.
Out of courtesy to your respondent and to Laine, don’t exceed the 500 words by much. 1,000
words, for example, is way too long!
1 point for probe:
a. Does it pose at least two penetrating questions?
b. Is it on-topic—that is, does it really respond to the actual content of the other student's
post?
c. Is it readable/clear?
d. Is it the assigned length of 75 words (or fewer than 60 or so)?
Up to ½ point docked for complete failure in any of these areas.
2 points for wrap-up:
a. Does it extend the thought of the primary post (or either repeat the info in the primary
post or just flail about emptily)?
b. Does it sum up and/or clarify something in the initial post (or is it completely unrelated to
the initial post)?
HS501: Syllabus
page 8
c. Does it address the question/s posed (or go off on a tangent/avoid the question/s)?
d. Is it the assigned 150 words (or fewer than 115 or so)?
Again, could dock up to ½ point or even a full point for complete failure in any of these areas.
IV. Discussion leading
The week after you do one of your two primary posts, you will be leading discussion on the topic
on which you posted (see "Discussion leading on Bettenson readings," below). This is an
opportunity for us to help each other explore further the themes and questions we uncovered
during our research for the post, in a way that goes beyond the limits of discussion-board
posting.
V. Deadlines
Each week when you have a posting assignment:
Post your primary post by midnight on Wednesday night.
Post your probe by noon on Friday.
Post your wrap-up post to the other student's probe by midnight on Sunday.
All posts receive an automatic time-stamp when you post them. Late work will be docked, and
will also, in the case of initial posts and probes, prevent your fellow students from completing
their assigned probes or wrap-ups—PLEASE be sure to complete these on time! If, however,
your assigned probe-r does not post on time, then a statement extending the thought of your
initial post with new ideas & material is acceptable.
VI. Topics and readings
NOTE: All contextualizing readings not in Bettenson or CH are posted in Course Documents.
All students are to read the material for topic 1, as preparation for our in-class discussion on
that topic in week 3.
1. How did Christians interact with Greco-Roman culture—especially Greek
thought? What were the results for Christian thought & practice (especially
theology)?
Bettenson, pp. 1-7: References to Christianity in classical authors, Christianity and ancient
learning
CH 80: The First Bible Teachers, esp. Christopher Hall, “Classical Ear-Training”; Joseph
Lienhard, “The First Battle For the Bible”
Pelikan, Jesus Through the Centuries, chap. 3: "The Light of the Gentiles"; chap. 5, "The Cosmic
Christ"
HS501: Syllabus
page 9
2. What did church-state relations look like in the Roman world before and
after legalization? How did the church handle its political position as
persecuted (large) minority, as tolerated minority, and eventually as official
majority?
Bettenson, pp. 7-25: Church and state in the Roman Empire, including persecution and
martyrdoms; Church and state in the Roman empire after legalization
CH 27: Persecution in the Early Church
Pelikan, Jesus Through the Centuries, chap. 4: "The King of Kings"
3. How did the earliest Christians think about the atonement? What historical
factors might have led to those ways of thinking about the atonement? And
what do we think of those atonement views, as faithful exegesis and theology?
Bettenson, pp. 32-38: The person and work of Christ
Library: check out discussions of early atonement thought in encyclopedias of the early church
and other reference works (don't forget your friendly seminary librarian is available to help with
this); also see the pages of primary source excerpts from early church documents on the
atonement (I will provide)
4. What is a creed? How did creeds develop—both in general, and the
particular creeds recorded in Bettenson? What are the differences between
these creeds, and how and why did those particular differences come about?
Bettenson, pp. 25-29: Creeds
CH 85: The Council of Nicaea, Why a Creed? : A Conversation with Robert Louis Wilken;
Christopher A. Hall, How Arianism Almost Won: After Nicaea, the Real Fight Began; D. H.
Williams, Do You Know Whom You Worship?: Did the Nicene Creed distort the pure gospel, or
did it embody and protect it?; Lewis Ayres, The Final Act: It took almost 60 years for the church
to make Nicaea its standard of faith. And other articles: browse the whole issue!
5. Describe the struggle of the early church both on the divinity of Christ and
on the relationship between his divinity and his humanity, up to the Council of
Chalcedon.
Bettenson, 38-57: Heresies concerning the person of Christ, The problem of the relation of the
divinity and the humanity in Christ
Ferguson (Moodle): chap. 13, 255-267 (about 26 pp)
Backup reading: Noll (Moodle): chapter 3, 65-82 (about 18 pp)
CH 96: The Gnostic Hunger for Secret Knowledge browse issue; CH 51: Heresy in the Early
Church browse issue; CH Issue 85 (as above)
HS501: Syllabus
page 10
6. The Bible doesn’t give us a clear, organized rulebook for “how to do
church.” So first- and second-century Christians worked their ways through
various ideas and practices related to leadership and worship. Describe and
assess several interesting developments in these areas.
Bettenson, 68-86: The church, the ministry, and the sacraments in the first centuries
CH 37: Worship in the Early Church; CH 17: Women in the Early Church
Library: check out discussions of early church worship in encyclopedias of the early church and
other reference works (don't forget your friendly seminary librarian is available to help with this)
7. One of Augustine’s biggest fights was against the Pelagians. How and why
did this issue of the human role in our salvation arise, how did Augustine
respond, and how did the fight play out in the church, post-Augustine?
Bettenson, 57-68: Pelagianism, human nature, sin, and grace, including Augustine’s response
and the semi-Pelagians
CH 67: Augustine, esp. Robert Payne, “The Dark Heart Filled with Light”; David Allen, “SemiAugustinians”; Roger Olson, “Fighting Words”
Pelikan, Jesus Through the Centuries, chap 6: "The Son of Man"
8. Both Montanism and Donatism raised important theological and practical
questions about ecclesiology—that is, the nature of the church. How did the
church respond to these challenging questions, and what did they affirm
about the nature of the church in response to the Montanists and Donatists?
Bettenson, 84-86: Two heresies on the nature of the church/ ministry: Montanism & Donatism
CH 51: Heresy in the Early Church, esp. “Testing the Prophets”
Library: check out discussions of Montanism and Donatism in encyclopedias of the early church
and other reference works (don't forget your friendly seminary librarian is available to help with
this)
9. Describe how the struggle of the early church on the relationship between
his divinity and his humanity continued after the Council of Chalcedon
Bettenson, 97-106: From Chalcedon to the East-West Breach (1. Nestorians, Monophysites,
Zeno’s Henoticon; Second Council of Constantinople, “three chapters,” 553; Monothelites, Third
Council of Constantinople, 681)
Ferguson (Moodle): chap. 16, 306-313; chap. 17, 327-331
HS501: Syllabus
page 11
10. How did church-state interaction and the control of heresy continue to
work themselves out in the so-called "Dark Ages" (500-1000 AD) and beyond
into the Middle Ages?
Bettenson, 102-105 (Nicholas I vs. Louis II—Independence of Apostolic See); 123-127 (Pope
and Imperial Elections); 146-149 (Church and Heresy) (about 13 pp altogether)
Ferguson (Moodle): chap. 18, 375-378; chap. 24, 469-474; chap. 24, 501-509; chap. 24, 520-523
(about 23 pp altogether)
CH 22: Waldensians
11. How did Benedictine monasticism describe a life given over to God? What
were the key disciplines and benefits of that life?
Bettenson, 127-141
Noll (Moodle), chap 24, 83-105
CH 93: Benedict: A Devoted Life
Discussion leading on Bettenson readings:
Each student will lead the in-class discussion for one of the two topics on which you are posting
to the Moodle forum. There will be 10 student-led discussions during the course (plus one,
discussion # 1, that I will lead, for which you are also responsible to do contextualizing
readings). Each will be led by somewhere between 1 and 4 students, depending on class size.
The discussions should take roughly 30-40 minutes each. When you lead discussion, you and
your fellow discussion-leaders are expected to lead off with about 15-20 minutes of "set-up."
During this set-up, leaders will do the following (you should meet together before you lead the
discussion, to decide who will do what; you can divide things up any way you like, but as a rule
of thumb, allow at least 5 minutes per leader):
1. Contextualize the topic using what you know from the readings posted on Moodle, the
recommended CH issues/articles, and the appropriate sections of Gonzalez. Essentially,
you are putting both the overarching topical question (see list above) and any subquestions you pose (see #2 directly below this paragraph), along with the relevant
Bettenson documents and particular quotations from those documents, into the larger
historical context of early church history—that is, in the framework of what you
discovered in your readings.
2. Pose, as "sub-questions" to the overarching topical question listed above, several
fruitfully discussable questions (one to two per presenter is good). See below for
definition of a "fruitfully discussable question."
3. In the course of presenting 1 & 2 above, refer to specific quotations from at least 3
Bettenson documents (that's a total of 3, not three per leader!)
HS501: Syllabus
page 12
4. As you set up the discussion, you must use at least one of: (1) Powerpoint or (2)
handouts. Use of small, carefully selected bits from the Moodle documents and/or
CH issues is encouraged, but don't clog your set-up with this material.
5. After your set-up, you will be primarily responsible for fielding and answering your
fellow students' questions. I may interject some answers as well, but I will be attending to
your ability to field questions; this is definitely part of your discussion-leading grade.
6. By the end of the class in which you lead discussion, give Prof. Armstrong a hard copy of
both your discussion notes and any handouts used, and/or (shortly after the class), email
to him a copy of any Powerpoint used. Note well: Having your discussion-leaders' notes
allows me to double-check your discussion-leader grade against what I perceived in class.
These notes need not be formatted as full paragraphs, etc. Handwritten notes are OK, but
please try to make them legible!
A tip: when dealing with the Bettenson quotations themselves, you’ll want to help your audience
understand what, precisely, the author of the document was saying. What is/are the central
contention(s) or theme(s) of the document/excerpt/quotation? What arguments does the author
marshal in support of the contention(s) or what evidence does the author give to support the
themes? And of course, how did those arguments and that use of evidence relate to the historical
context of the author?
HS501: Syllabus
page 13
Fruitfully discussable questions: a definition
Your interpretive questions must be fruitfully discussable—or in other words, non-trivial.
First, to be discussable and non-trivial, your interpretive question must not lead to a dead end
because it is unanswerable from the primary texts. So the question, “Did Gregory the Great
secretly desire to overthrow the papacy?” or the question, “Would Gregory the Great have
espoused Confucian thought?” are both trivial questions because there’s no way to answer either
of them from the texts. Any answer we might give would be conjecture or would require some
other source text or piece of evidence we don’t have. Note that a “trivial” question in this sense
is not necessarily an un-important one—just not useful for discussion.
Second, to be discussable and non-trivial, your interpretive question must not lead to an
immediate, obvious answer. So, “Did Cyprian really believe there was no salvation outside the
church?” would be trivial because we can immediately answer the question from the primary
texts. Again, “trivial” in this sense does not mean un-important, just not fruitful for discussion.
One possible non-trivial interpretive question on Cyprian would be this one: “Why did
Cyprian place so much emphasis on the church as ‘mother’?” Though the presenter may not have
an immediate answer to this question, it could spark a good discussion that would draw not only
on the text itself, but on what Cyprian’s contemporaries and antecedents thought about the
church—and the social, cultural, and theological contexts in which they thought these things.
Such a discussion could help us work toward important truths about early church ecclesiology.
Note that I say we work toward these truths. I don’t believe we can ever come to the definitive,
complete, comprehensive, water-tight truth about this or any other important question related to
history. It’s the Law of Diminishing Certainty: the more important and “deep” the question, the
harder it is to get a single, simple, conclusive answer.
This may discourage those of you who come to the study of history on a quest for objective
truth—defining truth in strong modernist terms as absolute certainty. Or it may confirm those of
you with tendencies toward strong postmodernism in the opinion that history-writing is just “a
joke we play on the dead”—imposing whatever fanciful interpretations we want to on the past,
and let the most convincing orator (or the person with the bucks and the social power to publish
the most books) win.
I now fall in neither of these extreme camps—though during my graduate studies I went through
both of them. I’ve finally cast my lot with the Pietists. This is my position: If we ask good,
meaty, non-trivial questions in our study of what human beings have said and done in history, we
will learn useful, transformative things. In other words, history repays those who join its
interpretive conversation: they come away better people for it.
In the end, for our purposes, the journey is, in a significant sense, the destination. That’s why
we’re investing time in primary source reading, presentation, and discussion in this course: we’re
learning how to become our own interpreters of history.
HS501: Syllabus
page 14
Integrative paper
I. Find a single issue in the church today that concerns you personally. This should not be
too broad. It should be a problem or opportunity that shows up in some single branch or
area of church life today. There are two ways to go on this. (1) You can choose an issue
facing (with particular acuteness) a single denomination or even a single congregation—
perhaps your home church. Or (2) you can choose a single, tightly defined practice or
idea that may show up across a variety of churches, say within the orbit of “modern
American evangelicalism.” In either case, you will think about what is at stake for this
particular church or what is at stake in the area of this particular idea or practice as it
affects a broader group of churches. How would resolving the issue you have identified
benefit the church?
II. Find a single historical crux—that is, a single document, single event, single person’s
idea, etc.—from pre-Reformation history in which some version of that same issue
emerges, which you feel could help today’s church wrestle with that issue upon which
you briefly “editorialized.” (You will probably need to find your “modern issue” and
your “historical crux” at the same time—before you start writing either the editorial or
the historical portions of this assignment.)
III. Study that historical “crux” (document, event, person’s idea, etc.) by reading a balanced
bibliography of primary and secondary sources—at least two and preferably three or
more of each. In other words, you want to know both what people of that time thought
was going on in that crux, and what historians since that time have said about it.
IV.
Now you will write a three-pronged, 8-10 pp paper, following this format:
A.
Describe your issue in the church today in detail, as if you were writing a brief
editorial article for Christianity Today. That is, write in the first person—ideally
basing your remarks on your own observations and experience. Again, you want to
show your readers exactly what the issue is, who it affects, and how the church
would benefit from resolving this issue.
B.
Using the best canons of historical writing (see provided documents on how to
write historical essays), write a summary/analysis/interpretation of how that issue
played out at your chosen historical crux. Very important: you must acknowledge
ways in which the contemporary issue differs in how it is playing out today from
how it played out at your historical crux. Different times and contexts entail
different presuppositions that people find convincing in making an argument. Your
summary/analysis/interpretation should follow this format:
HS501: Syllabus
page 15
1. Start with the who-what-where-why-when. We need names, years, places.
Historical writing falls apart without these.
2. Set up the context of your crux, the stakes and stakeholders, the reasons why
people did what they did as the crux unfolded.
3. Now analyze your single document, event, idea, etc.: Outline the logic of how
the issue played out: what argument or solution prevailed, and why? What
grounds did the players use for deciding in favor of that argument or solution?
From what agreed-upon warrants and shared presuppositions did they reach
their conclusion?
4. Now show how that conclusion played out concretely in the flesh-and-blood
church of that historical moment: in belief, practice, organization, worship, or
other appropriate aspect(s) of church life
5. Give your interpretation (assessment) of the way your crux played out: was it
beneficial or harmful for the church? Did it make sense in terms of Scriptural
teaching, human psychology/sociology, theological integrity, etc.? (Choose
your own criteria)
C.
Finally, return to your “Christianity Today editorial” style and write a conclusion
on the issue in the church today based on your research into the historical crux:
How can knowing the ins and outs of the historical crux you have just presented
and analyzed help us resolve this issue that faces us today?
I want to make something crystal clear about the format of the final paper: THE BULK OF THE
PAPER MUST BE DEDICATED TO THE ANALYSIS OF YOUR HISTORICAL "CRUX."
Don't be tempted, in other words, to spend too much space on the editorial "set-up" or "wrap-up."
In order for this to be properly a history paper (though of course an integrative one), you need to
limit the two "editorial" sections, front and back, to NO MORE THAN A PAGE OR AT MOST
TWO EACH.
Again, THE GUTS OF THIS PAPER IS THE HISTORICAL ANALYSIS. I tried to indicate this
by giving that part of the paper a much more detailed treatment than the other parts when I
describe the assignment in the syllabus. So gauge the relative weight you should be giving the
historical/analytical and modern/journalistic material in the paper accordingly.
One more note of guidance: for examples of writing about contemporary issues that draws
from historical analysis, see CH Issue 94: Building the City of God in a Crumbling World, via
www.christianhistory.net .
HS501: Syllabus
page 16
Note the care taken by the historian-authors in this issue: they do not impose
today’s perspectives on the past (that is called “presentism,” and is anathema
to historians). Rather, they seek an accurate picture of the past, from which
they can extrapolate lessons for the present. That is the kind of care and
historical integrity with which you are to write this integrative assignment.
However, note that these articles are by and larger broader and more general
than this assignment. So that you do not either flounder in a sea of research
possibilities or spout unsupported generalizations, you will need to narrow
your focus—both in the modern issue you address (that’s why I caution you
to choose a single church or a single idea or practice) and in the historical
crux (ditto here: you really do need to pick a single document, person’s idea,
or event, to keep this assignment from getting out of hand!)
HS501: Syllabus
page 17
Exam study guide
Gonzalez Study Items, Test I
Diaspora Judaism
Stoicism
Persecution: Domitian
Ignatius of Antioch
Persecution: Marcus Aurelius
Lofty Criticism against Christianity
Apologists: Tatian and Justin
Arguments of the Apologists
Gnosticism
Marcion
Apostolic Succession
Irenaeus
Clement of Alexandria
Tertullian: Prescription against Heretics
Tertullian: Montanism
Origen
Decius
The Lapsed: Cyprian and Novatian
Christian Worship
Organization of the Church
Persecution: Galerius
Christian art
Gonzalez Study Items, Test II
Licinius
Constantine: conversion
Impact of Constantine
Constantine: churches
Eusebius of Caesarea
Origins of monasticism
Anthony
Pachomius
Martin of Tours
Donatist schism
Outbreak of Arian controversy
Council of Nicea
Julian’s religious policy
Athanasius: the early years
Athanasius: exile
Macrina
Basil the Great
Gregory Nazianzus
Ambrose: the bishop and the throne
John Chrysostom
Jerome
Augustine: path to faith
Augustine: theologian
End of an era
Gonzalez Study Items, Test III
The barbarian kingdoms: Britain
Benedictine monasticism
Pope Gregory I
Christology: Apollinaris, Nestorius, Eutyches
Eastern Church: further debates
Charlemagne: theological activity
Charlemagne: decay in the papacy
Cluniac reform
Papal reform
Papcy vs. Empire: Henry IV
The First Crusade
Franciscans
Pope Innocent III
Anselm, Abelard
Aquinas
Middle Ages: new conditions
Boniface VIII
Great western schism
Conciliar movements
John Wycliff
John Huss
Savonarola
The mystical alternative
The later course of Scholasticism
HS501: Syllabus
page 18
Helps on reading primary documents and writing essays
IMPORTANT for your reading and interpreting of the primary documents excerpted in the
Bettenson book:
Additional reading at beginning of class (by first class session, if possible; or at least by second class
session): How to Read a Primary Source (Bowdoin:
http://academic.bowdoin.edu/WritingGuides/primaries.htm)
A primary document is any document written by the historical figures themselves. It is distinct
from a secondary document (though sometimes the line blurs), which is written, almost always in
the third person, by another person about a historical figure.
So, if we’re just reading the words of the historical figures themselves, then that’s pretty
straightforward, right? The writers are just giving eyewitness, first-hand accounts of what they have
experienced. And we just read them, and then we know what “really happened” in history, right?
Of course, it’s not that simple. If we are really going to learn from primary documents, we must
bring to them a prepared mind. Inattentive, unprepared reading will result in skewed, caricatured—
or, frankly, dead wrong—ideas about what “really happened,” or even about what the writer was
trying to tell us (the two are not always the same thing!)
But don’t despair: with some basic direction to show you which tools you’ll need to bring to the job,
any non-historian can begin mining primary sources for the gold and gems they contain. And that’s
when the real fun of learning history begins.
First, you will feel much closer to the life of the past when you read such sources. There is no
substitute for hearing those voices from the past resurrected in vivid power as you read.
Second, many students find the historical detective work you need to do when reading a primary
source stimulating--even addictive (really!)
To get you started, the link above is a “tip sheet” on how to work with primary documents. It is
short and succinct, but powerfully helpful, especially to students who have not been in a history
classroom in a while. Read it carefully, early in the course:
IMPORTANT for your online forum postings, exam essays, and final integrative paper:
Two final notes on essay-writing: First, I have a friend who teaches at Westmont and has done
students everywhere a service with a very strict (and appropriate) list of suggestions about how
to put essays together for his classes. You can find my friend’s “A Few (Strong) Suggestions on
Essay Writing” at the following web address:
http://www.westmont.edu/~work/material/writing.html . Though I am not as strict as he is,
following his suggestions carefully will result in a near-guaranteed improvement in your papers
for this course—and future courses. NOTE CAREFULLY his words on plagiarism. Bethel has a
policy similar to Westmont's. You are responsible for knowing and following Bethel's policy
on plagiarism. DO NOT use other people's wordings and ideas without properly citing them.
Doing so results in an automatic "F" on the course!
HS501: Syllabus
page 19
Second, I want to share with you my favorite web sources for writing help. Some students will
benefit from these more than others, but all should find something useful here.
The first is a couple of lists of helps for writers that I put together while working as a writing
tutor at Duke. You can find these helpful lists at the following web addresses:
http://uwp.aas.duke.edu/wstudio/resources/writing.html, and
http://uwp.aas.duke.edu/wstudio/resources/editing.html.
Also, almost everyone can also benefit from this site:
http://bcs.bedfordstmartins.com/smhandbook/default.asp. It contains not only a list of the twenty
errors most commonly found in student papers, but a concise explanation of each error and
(when you click on the link to "Exercise Central") exercises to help you identify and correct
these errors. To do the exercises, just do the free "student registration" at the Exercise Central
page, entering your name and your own email for “instructor email.” You’ll find that you can
browse the errors and do the exercises quite quickly. Bookmark this site and the sites in the
previous paragraph, and refer to them throughout your seminary career and beyond!