Piety Versus Moralism Today

In 1932 a book titled, “Piety versus Moralism: The Passing of the New England Theology”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xi) was published in New York. The author Joseph Haroutunian was a displaced Armenian from Turkey who migrated to America in the early part of the twentieth century. He was to become an important historian and Protestant theologian whose contribution to American religious history and theology is now largely unknown outside of academic circles. Stephen Crocco provides a good brief introduction to Haroutunian’s life and intellectual background.

Crocco writes: “Haroutunian was a displaced Armenian—born in Marash, Turkey in 1904. His father was a minister in the Armenian Evangelical Church and professor of practical theology at Marash Theological Seminary. Haroutunian attended the American University of Beirut and immigrated to the United States in 1924 where he finished his undergraduate work. He earned graduate degrees at Union Theological Seminary and Columbia University”(Crocco, 1988, p.413). Haroutunian completed his PhD under the supervision of Hebert Wallace Schneider an acclaimed historian of American history and Puritanism (Crocco, 1988, p.413-414). Haroutunian’s book which was originally his PhD dissertation is widely considered a masterpiece and the argument of his book and its wider implications is what this article aims to discuss.

What was Haroutunain’s argument in “Piety versus Moralism” and why is it still worth our attention today? Haroutunain’s argument in “Piety versus Moralism” turned on its head the conventional American liberal Protestant argument that liberal Christianity was the positive and necessary development of the Christian message of human betterment and rational religious belief. This liberal view involved a dismissal and misrepresentation of the kind of piety and God-centered religiosity best represented by Jonathan Edwards who was an eighteenth century American theologian, philosopher and preacher. Edwards is considered by many to be one America’s greatest theologian/philosophers and Haroutunian sought to give him new hearing.

For Haroutunian the liberal turn in theology while understandable, socially, politically and culturally was as Stephen Crocco put it “steps in the wrong direction.”(Crocco, 1986, p.64) What was lost in the liberal optimism and what Haroutunian refers to as a, “man- centered theology”(Haroutunian, 1939, p.485) is a sense of the tragic and a sense of human limits. The nub of Haroutunian’s argument is that in the theological understandings of human beings in relation to God changed in large measure due to “social and political forces”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxii) which made a theocentric religious piety, a God centered piety increasingly difficult to sustain. What then replaced theocentic or God centered piety? In the near term liberal Christianity. In the longer term secular liberal moralism. In a review of Haroutunian’s book L. M. Pape summarizes the basic argument:

“The historians of the New England theology have envisaged the decline of Edwardian Calvinism in terms of theological dialectics. But this is to overlook the underlying realities. One theology did not yield to the dialectical superiority of another. Rather a faith, a piety, paled, and its rationalized theology-one which glorified God and his sovereignty over man-was superseded by a theology which rationalized the attitude of a need for human effort; an attitude engendered by the social conditions consequent of the new industrial order. This new theology was not only remoralized, but it explicitly held itself amenable to morality. Previously, God's dictates were ipso facto good. Now God conforms to morality. But such a God is not the God of Calvin or Edwards.”(Pape, 1932, pp.78-79)

In Haroutunian’s telling, compared to the older God centered Calvinist beliefs of theologians such as Jonathan Edwards, whose thinking was representative of a broadly Augustinian approach to religion, liberal Christianity comes across to modern minds as more reasonable, ethically defensible and fitting in with contemporary views on morality and social life. In discussing this shift to moralism Haroutunian argues that the “congruity between the medieval mind and the inherited Christian faith, … disappeared with the rise of modern culture.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xi) Social and political changes that were occurring in the early America made the older Calvinistic theology seem anachronistic if not pernicious to more modern minds. A more liberal religiosity was “a religion more in line with the spirit of the age”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xv). Haroutunian writes:

“Good and intelligent Christians discarded such Calvinism with little remorse. They were busy men, proclaiming the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of men, and the moral ideal set up by the "gentle Jesus"; telling men of the dignity and the value of the human soul, its potential likeness to the perfectly good God, and its ultimate destiny in heaven. They were urging men to believe in "God, freedom, and immortality"; to be good, to do good, and to live in peace with their fellowmen. They preached these things, and expected men to believe and practice them. They were great optimists.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.282)

Overdone optimism, self regard and an over confidence in our ability to transcend our limitations ultimately leads to, perhaps rests upon, a kind of conceit. However in theological terms it also leads to a subordination of God’s will to our conception of what God ought to do and be like. In other words, the shift to moralism is a shift away from a faith in God to a “faith-in-man”(Haroutunian, 1939, p.483). According to Haroutunian: “The temper of modern religion, as disclosed to the writings of the English Deists and the champions of “liberal Christianity,” is that of modern secular morality.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xvi)

In discussing the historical shift from a society that found piety natural and congenial to one where it was challenged and seemingly out of step Haroutunian observes: “In ages when men were not quite so conscious of their excellences and happy moral state as the modern regard for self-respect has taught the wise and the foolish to be, men found it not hard to accept their need of salvation, and to depend upon the grace of God for it...”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xii) In other words in the older medieval world a God centered theology seemed natural because the theological mindset was “organic with the facts of life, a religious interpretation of normal human relations.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xiv)

Haroutunian goes on to point out that: “The explanation of the decline of Calvinism is seen in the divorce of the modern everyday life of the middle classes from their ancient Augustinian philosophy.” (Haroutunian, 1964, p.xv) In essence the older God centered world view of the medieval pre-modern period was consistent with and in Haroutunian’s words of, “one piece with his social and natural life.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xiv) Changes in economic and social relations, driven by the growth of commercialism and the expansion of European empires, combined with changes in our view of the natural world driven in part by scientific discovery, led to a disconnect between this older Augustinian religious outlook and the broader social political and scientific context within which people increasingly lived. Thus in Haroutunian’s understanding of the historical issue the older Augustinian piety became increasingly adrift from the social world. The liberal turn in theology thus was an attempt to integrate the “moralism of the new age”(Haroutunian, 1964 pp., p.xix) into theology in an effort to maintain relevance and presence.

The shift to moralism in liberal theology and the slow yet seemingly inexorable transformation of this moralism both to politicized religion and secularized and deeply politicized liberal moralism reveal to some extent a basic dividing line which still exists in societies which have traveled this path from piety to moralism and beyond. A trend away from a strict God centered faith towards at first a moralized religiosity and ultimately a secularized version of this is best captured in the powerful moral pull of contemporary causes which express themselves in opposition to or espousing multiple “isms”. What is interesting about Haroutunian’s argument is that while some critics have observed that it was somewhat of an oversimplification in regards to the specific history of early Calvinist theology in America, yet when looked at against our contemporary moral and religious landscape the essential division and trend: from piety to moralism seems quite relevant.

In short while Haroutunian’s thesis as concrete history may be, if we agree with his critics, an over simplification of the actual historical currents and processes of antebellum New England theology, as a general argument about the direction of American religion and values his thesis hold up quite well. This leads us to another observation. If Haroutunian’s argument is most convincing from a wider historical and philosophical angle, if its general point is correct then is this general argument of any interest beyond the history of American Protestantism? Is there any broader relevance?

On this issue some speculative points of view may provide food for thought. Firstly, Haroutunian’s argument can be viewed as part of a wider critique of liberal moralism and processes of secularization which are impacting many cultures and religions. What is interesting is that these process do not originally begin or have their roots in a rejection of religion as such but from within the transformation of religion as it relates to social change. Seen from this perspective the shift from piety to moralism is part of a wider shift in the conditions of modernization, secularization and of the desacralization of modern life. God in modernity is seen to be either increasingly absent or subordinated to contemporary moral notions. While this is by no means what those theologians enamored of the shift towards a liberal and a more apparently humanitarian theology intended; from Haroutunain’s perspective, it has been the result.

Is such a shift inevitable? Is it irreversible? Haroutunian provides us with an interesting response to this. From Haroutunian’s perspective our despair and sense that the promise of our reason has increasingly run its course may lead us back to faith. Writing during the period of the Great Depression the rise of totalitarian political movements and with an increasing sense that the promises of liberalism were increasingly subject to default. Haroutunian argues:“The optimism and the humanism of the nineteenth century have already lost their rational quality. It is probable that a revival of the "tragic sense of life," together with the wisdom and sobriety which grows out of it, should be forthcoming.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxv)

In other words once we lose our facile optimism in our human capabilities and virtues we may reconsider our views on religion. This is a process which can occur in diverse cultural and religious contexts. A shift to moralism, can be found in diverse contexts and religious traditions sometimes manifesting in liberal guise and sometimes in illiberal guise. Within the Abrahamic religious cultures the signs of such a shift to moralism and a “man- centered”(Haroutunian, 1939, p.485) view are found when movements and individuals confuse the will of human beings with the will of God. This confusion lends itself to a diminution of God centered piety. However a genuine reassessment and re-invigoration of God centered religious sensibility can also occur in different cultural contexts driven in some part by a recognition that the promises of politicized religions, secular moralism and commercialized life degrades rather than enhance our lives.

Haroutunian reminds us that there are still truths which are dismissed because there are, “powerful cultural forces which often lead men to discard ideas which they may not have properly disproved.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxiv) Fashions change, our conceit grows and we discard that which does not seem fashionable or flatters our self regard. But what happens when we are no longer so enamored of our current fashions? What happens when our inclinations make us come unstuck. What happens when we truly face our tragic condition? Finally what happens when the promises of modernity are seen increasingly as chimeras? Haroutunian argues:“There are stable and elemental realities underlying the pattern of any culture which survive its processes and recur in others. When the superficial enthusiasms of an age subside, the human mind returns to a just view of its traits, and forgotten truths reappear to strike a balance. … When the world gets tired of the tyranny of new favorites, and cries for help, old ones return to shed new light, and there is progress.”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxiv)

From Haroutunian’s point of view a God centered religious sensibility can help us to adapt to and engage a world of tragedy and despair. A world that does not necessarily bend to our whims and a world where our happiness can result not from acquisition but self denial is a world where a religious sensibility begins to make more sense. Thus from Haroutunian’s point of view a belief in God is not some kind of irrational or idealistic formulation far from the realities of the world. Rather it is facing up to the realities of life that leads us back to a consideration of religion and belief in God. Such a reconsideration does not mean simply trying to go back to the older practices and beliefs, uncritically, warts and all. Nor does it mean an utter and total repudiation of the liberal tradition which in Haroutunian’s estimation despite its significant flaws has “lasting virtues”(Haroutunian, 1943, p.146). Rather what it entails is a reconsideration and recognition of “the good sense” and “forgotten truths” in our older traditions (Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxiv).

When the optimism and the cornucopia of promises in modern life lose their attractiveness and when in Haroutunian’s words we tire of the “tyranny of new favorites”(Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxiv) are we so sure that older more “elemental realities” (Haroutunian, 1964, p.xxiv) will not again receive a proper hearing? Finally if there is a shift towards such a proper hearing wont this provide an example of the continued relevance of Haroutunian’s argument that we referred to above?

References

Crocco, S. D. (1986). American theocentric ethics: a study in the legacy of Jonathan Edwards. (Doctor of Philosophy). Princeton University, Princeton.

Crocco, S. D. (1988). Joseph Haroutunian: Neglected Theocentrist. The Journal of Religion, 68(3). doi:10.1086/487877

Haroutunian, J. (1939). Modern Protestantism: Neither Modern nor Protestant. The American Scholar, 8(4), 479-493. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/41204444

Haroutunian, J. (1943). Liberal Theology: An Appraisal: Essays in Honor of Eugene William Lyman . David E. Roberts , Henry Pitney van Dusen. The Journal of Religion, 23(2). doi:10.1086/483001

Haroutunian, J. (1964 ). Piety versus Moralism: The Passing of the New England Theology. Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books.

Pape, L. M. (1932). Book Review: Piety Versus Moralism: The Passing of the New England Theology. Joseph Haroutunian. Ethics, 43(1), 78-79. doi:10.1086/208046