I am agnostic but, given my deep love of literature and history, wanted to know more about the history of Christianity, and so have been reading about its development. I read Turning Points right after I finished A History of Christianity by Paul Johnson, hoping for another thoughtful perspective on one of the world’s most influential religions. Boy, was I disappointed.
Turning Points is a fairy tale masquerading as an academic work; it has all the depth of a children’s book you’d read in Sunday school. I was looking for a balanced, or at least multi-faceted, view of Christianity’s development and its influence on world events, the kind I found in Johnson’s work. What I got was a self-righteous assembly of essays extolling the virtues of Christianity with very little, if any, critical analysis, and a complete disregard for the religion’s negative influences. And before some ass wipe tells me that my assessment of this book is colored by a hatred of Christianity, I will say that I do not hate Christianity or religion in general; my belief is that shitty people can be found everywhere and they will use whatever tools at their disposal to be shitty. I also believe that unthinking adherence to any doctrine is dangerous, especially those that encourage hatred and violence towards others.
Below, I’ve detailed my two biggest problems with the book.
1. An unapologetic Protestant bias
While I appreciated Noll’s coming out and saying that he’s coming at history from a Protestant perspective, I felt he did not make any real attempts to even approximate academic objectivity. Of course, no one can be wholly objective. But given that he is a *professor,* I was hoping that at least some effort would be made. It is not. Rather, his views, which of course are not representative of all Protestants, are aired as authoritative. The word “correct” appears multiple times when describing issues of faith, as if he is the final arbiter of what “correct” faith is. Johnson is also Christian and he comes out as a Catholic in the introduction to his book. But he tries to not let his personal beliefs get in the way of academic rigor. He criticizes and praises people from all denominations.
2. His overview of missionary work is offensively lacking
What I hated most about this book was its complete glossing over of the horrors enacted and encouraged by Christian nations and people. I found his treatment of missionaries especially disturbing: he completely disregards how missionaries were part and parcel of destructive, dehumanizing, and cruel colonial endeavors. The most cursory reading (or googling) about the role of Christianity in colonial expansion will teach you that religion was often used as an excuse for the most horrifying violence. Even with missionaries who were motivated by a sense of altruism, that altruism often came from a racist conviction of the cultural supremacy of white Europeans and Americans. Native peoples and religions were and are viewed as “primitive,” “barbaric,” and “simple,” views embraced by this book. And of course there is no mention of how religion was used to justify the horrors of the Inquisition, the Crusades (which were political and economic ventures as well as religious), the Holocaust, etc. etc.
It is obvious that Noll deliberately omitted any facts that would have cast any Christian in a less than noble light. For instance, when he talks of Bartolome de las Casas, he notes, correctly, that de las Casas was one of the few Europeans who objected to the Spaniards’ treatment of the Taino and who advocated on their behalf. But he does NOT mention that it was de las Casas who proposed that, to solve the problem of Spanish cruelty, Africans should be brought as slaves to Hispaniola. He later went back to say that both forms of slavery were wrong. But we don’t hear ANYTHING about it. And de las Casas is one of the more sympathetic figures we see; if he can’t provide context for this figure, imagine how unbalanced and simplified his profiling of others is.
His treatment of missionaries among Native Americans is also risibly pollyannish. There is absolutely no mention of missionaries deliberately and violently invading Native American culture and life; for instance, the kidnapping children and forcing them into “civilizing” schools where they were punished for speaking their own language and, by use of physical and emotional abuse, encouraged to abandon their cultures.
Johnson, whose book was published in 1975, shows racist views in his depiction of the spread of Christianity; I would argue, though, that overall he is actually *less* racist than Noll because at least he explores some Europeans’ skepticism/disapproval over the whole endeavor and the ways in which missionary work negatively affected the lives of those living in colonized areas. Johnson also talks about how Christians collaborated with Nazis or remained silent during the Holocaust, and also points out other times in history when Christians behaved in terrible ways.
Turning Points does a disservice to Christians. If I were a Christian, I would want to learn as much about the good AND the bad of my religion’s history. By refusing to delve into the intricacies of Christianity’s past, Noll denies his readers the opportunity to learn how religion brought people together, how it tore people apart, how it inspired people to incredible feats of generosity, but also how it was used as a tool to dehumanize, enslave, and conquer. I would want to know the strengths and weaknesses of the people who preceded me so I could have a deeper understanding of how my own religion could be improved, and how I, as a Christian, could become better. Through Noll’s cotton-candy fluff piece, we get none of these opportunities. Rather than being billed as an academic work, this book should be relegated to Sunday school, alongside the equally simplistic Veggie Tales. The reason I gave this book two stars instead of one is because, like Veggie Tales, it provided me a sense of how many Christians view themselves, as well as a brief sketch of important events and stories. I do feel like I have a sense of some big moments and their consequences.
Had Noll simply cobbled together Wikipedia pages on the turning points he explores, he would have had a much better (and more extensively cited) book. I can’t believe I paid for this bullshit.