John Williamson Nevin —— American Theologian

I'm so impatient for the new D.G. Hart bio of Nevin coming out this fall (2005), that I decided to prep myself with Richard Wentz's 1997 bio from Oxford Univ. Press. Well, I'd say it is unsatisfying, but its full of gems. Nevin is SUCH a fascinating guy -- high ecclesiology, antipathy to revivalism and pietism, high sacramentology, Reformed theology, and ecumenicity. He was an Old School Presbyterian before migrating to the German Reformed, and was the one who filled in for Hodge at Princeton in the 1820s when Hodge went to study in Europe two years. Schaff is not nearly as interesting as Nevin, to me. Wentz seems less of an evangelical or confessionalist than Nevin (see p. 96). At one point he gushes that de Chardin and Tillich have shown us that understanding Christ as center does not require a commitment to Christianity as superior religion. Wentz likes Nevin partly because he sees Christianity as 'not an ideology.' He teaches religion at Arizona State (don't discount ASU, Heiko Oberman was there for years). Still: concise (just 147 pp.). Lots of good historical narrative. Unpreteniously, simple but smart writing style. It will be difficult for anyone without a background in Reformed theology. Some nuggets: pp. 76-77 -- Nevin's postmil sensibilities made him sure the Church would not be absorbed into the state but the state will 'vanish away into the Church.' Got that one wrong. Nevin's ministry had a strong hint of futility. Nevin's brilliant, Biblical, ecumenical efforts at liturgical renewal were met by either suspicion or yawns. Wertz editorializes about the efforts of contemporary Nevins: "In the liturgical renewal movements of the mid-20th century that have affected the worship life of mainstream traditions such as Presbyterians, Methodists, and UCC, the people (laity) have maintained a stoical toleration They have continued to look at liturgical matters as, at best, cornments that preface the delivery of the sermon." (p. 127). And "what does the average American care about Te Deum, litany, lessons and collects, and creed? Even if it be true, as Nevin assumed, that the people could possibly find themselves properly in these symbolic realities, they are not likely to be interestd in the experiment." (p. 134). Nevin's work on the Heidleberg Catechism sounds fascinating. I definitely plan on getting a copy of that. His Mystical Presence, of course, is a classic. Wentz does a great job of showing Nevin's strong case for the value of catechesis. I was fascinated by Nevin's critique of nationalism. Every bit as sophisticated as Hodge's (and Lincoln's). If Wertz's conclusion does not get you to buy either his book or the Hart one you have no soul: "The worship of American churches is found wanting because it gives no evidence of the sacramental character of the mystical presence of Christ. It focuses instead on private experience, private judgment, and bibliocism. The radical catholicity of the Incarnation is sacramental and liturgical......... the heart of that challenge [against American religious thought of his day] beats with concern for the community of faith, for the body that represents the presence of a new creation in the midst of the old." (p. 147).

Wentz's portrayal of Nevin is quite different from that of James Hastings Nichols' book, *Romanticism on the American Frontier* written back in the '60s. Nichols allied Nevin (and Schaff) primarily with German idealism and romanticism. Wentz claims, as the title suggests, that Nevin was a particularly American theologian who was in dialog with American culture. He also claims that, since Nevin's theology resulted from his engagement with the formation of American culture, he can not be counted as a confessional theologian. Because of Nevin's understanding of history and culture, Wentz refers to Nevin as an American postmodern theologian. This book, while brief, is not an easy read. Some familiarity with Mercersburg theology would be a helpful pre-requisite for any reader. Wentz occasionally uses Nevin's theology as a springboard to go off on a tangent of his own, but overall this volume is a challenging and welcome movement forward in the study of Nevin and the Mercersburg Movement.

This book has very little to contribute in the way of historical scholarship on Nevin or the Mercersburg movement. At times it is simply sloppy (e.g. attributing words to Nevin's biographer which were actually penned by Nevin on p. 13). The most annoying feature, however, are Wentz's sermonettes that pepper the book (cf. e.g. his criticism of Nevin for not being a universalist on pp. 25-26). At other places the reader is simply bogged down by Wentz's importing of 20th century religious studies jargon into Nevin's thought (cf. Wentz's thesis statement on pp. 12-13 which starts of strong but gets worse as he goes on). So far, James Hastings Nichols's Romanticism in American Theology, flaws notwithstanding, is still the most honest reading of Nevin in English that I have come across. Nevin seems to be one of those figures that attracts historians who are looking for someone to pin their own quirky theological positions on. Nevin is more interesting than Nichols, Hart, and definitely Wentz let on. Even Appel cut out parts that are interesting. So I have to make a retraction. Go to a library that has access to the Weekly Messenger and read Nevin's "My Own Life." It's long but the best way to get an idea who Nevin was in his early, and later life. If you can't do that, get Theodore Appel's "Life and Work of..." It's free to download on Google Books.

I'm so impatient for the new D.G. Hart bio of Nevin coming out this fall (2005), that I decided to prep myself with Richard Wentz's 1997 bio from Oxford Univ. Press.Well, I'd say it is unsatisfying, but its full of gems. Nevin is SUCH a fascinating guy -- high ecclesiology, antipathy to revivalism and pietism, high sacramentology, Reformed theology, and ecumenicity. He was an Old School Presbyterian before migrating to the German Reformed, and was the one who filled in for Hodge at Princeton in the 1820s when Hodge went to study in Europe two years. Schaff is not nearly as interesting as Nevin, to me.Wentz seems less of an evangelical or confessionalist than Nevin (see p. 96). At one point he gushes that de Chardin and Tillich have shown us that understanding Christ as center does not require a commitment to Christianity as superior religion. Wentz likes Nevin partly because he sees Christianity as 'not an ideology.' He teaches religion at Arizona State (don't discount ASU, Heiko Oberman was there for years).Still: concise (just 147 pp.). Lots of good historical narrative. Unpreteniously, simple but smart writing style. It will be difficult for anyone without a background in Reformed theology.Some nuggets: pp. 76-77 -- Nevin's postmil sensibilities made him sure the Church would not be absorbed into the state but the state will 'vanish away into the Church.' Got that one wrong.Nevin's ministry had a strong hint of futility. Nevin's brilliant, Biblical, ecumenical efforts at liturgical renewal were met by either suspicion or yawns. Wertz editorializes about the efforts of contemporary Nevins: "In the liturgical renewal movements of the mid-20th century that have affected the worship life of mainstream traditions such as Presbyterians, Methodists, and UCC, the people (laity) have maintained a stoical toleration They have continued to look at liturgical matters as, at best, cornments that preface the delivery of the sermon." (p. 127). And "what does the average American care about Te Deum, litany, lessons and collects, and creed? Even if it be true, as Nevin assumed, that the people could possibly find themselves properly in these symbolic realities, they are not likely to be interestd in the experiment." (p. 134).Nevin's work on the Heidleberg Catechism sounds fascinating. I definitely plan on getting a copy of that. His Mystical Presence, of course, is a classic.Wentz does a great job of showing Nevin's strong case for the value of catechesis.I was fascinated by Nevin's critique of nationalism. Every bit as sophisticated as Hodge's (and Lincoln's).If Wertz's conclusion does not get you to buy either his book or the Hart one you have no soul: "The worship of American churches is found wanting because it gives no evidence of the sacramental character of the mystical presence of Christ. It focuses instead on private experience, private judgment, and bibliocism. The radical catholicity of the Incarnation is sacramental and liturgical......... the heart of that challenge [against American religious thought of his day] beats with concern for the community of faith, for the body that represents the presence of a new creation in the midst of the old." (p. 147).

Wentz's portrayal of Nevin is quite different from that of James Hastings Nichols' book, *Romanticism on the American Frontier* written back in the '60s. Nichols allied Nevin (and Schaff) primarily with German idealism and romanticism. Wentz claims, as the title suggests, that Nevin was a particularly American theologian who was in dialog with American culture. He also claims that, since Nevin's theology resulted from his engagement with the formation of American culture, he can not be counted as a confessional theologian. Because of Nevin's understanding of history and culture, Wentz refers to Nevin as an American postmodern theologian.This book, while brief, is not an easy read. Some familiarity with Mercersburg theology would be a helpful pre-requisite for any reader. Wentz occasionally uses Nevin's theology as a springboard to go off on a tangent of his own, but overall this volume is a challenging and welcome movement forward in the study of Nevin and the Mercersburg Movement.

This book has very little to contribute in the way of historical scholarship on Nevin or the Mercersburg movement. At times it is simply sloppy (e.g. attributing words to Nevin's biographer which were actually penned by Nevin on p. 13). The most annoying feature, however, are Wentz's sermonettes that pepper the book (cf. e.g. his criticism of Nevin for not being a universalist on pp. 25-26). At other places the reader is simply bogged down by Wentz's importing of 20th century religious studies jargon into Nevin's thought (cf. Wentz's thesis statement on pp. 12-13 which starts of strong but gets worse as he goes on).So far, James Hastings Nichols's Romanticism in American Theology, flaws notwithstanding, is still the most honest reading of Nevin in English that I have come across. Nevin seems to be one of those figures that attracts historians who are looking for someone to pin their own quirky theological positions on. Nevin is more interesting than Nichols, Hart, and definitely Wentz let on. Even Appel cut out parts that are interesting.So I have to make a retraction. Go to a library that has access to the Weekly Messenger and read Nevin's "My Own Life." It's long but the best way to get an idea who Nevin was in his early, and later life. If you can't do that, get Theodore Appel's "Life and Work of..." It's free to download on Google Books.