NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion - Volume 74, Issue 3, 2020

Abstract This article revisits Theo van Baaren’s (1912-1989) call for a ‘systematic science of religion’. With this call Van Baaren urged Dutch scholars of religion to do away with the religionist biases of the phenomenology of religion, while retaining comparison as a cornerstone of the discipline. Unfortunately, Van Baaren’s programme was never realized in the Netherlands, and Dutch study of religion became dominate Read More

Abstract In a response to Markus Davidsen’s article ‘Theo van Baaren’s Systematic Science of Religion Revisited: The Current Crisis in Dutch Study of Religion and a Way Out’, this contribution first reviews Davidsen’s claim of a crisis in the study of religion in the Netherlands, as compared to what he calls the ‘systematic mentality’ of the ‘Nordic countries’. It then turns to the prescribed cure for the alleged ailment that Davids Read More

Abstract The response to Markus Altena Davidsen’s article ‘Theo van Baaren’s Systematic Science of Religion Revisited: The Current Crisis in Dutch Study of Religion and a Way Out’ analyses the image of anthropology depicted in the article. It delineates the role anthropology plays in formulating Davidsen’s vision for a new disciplinary identity and research agenda of a ‘science of religion’. The response further questions if reanim Read More

Abstract The author appreciates Davidsen’s concern with the future of Religious Studies, but thinks that its strength lies in being an interdisciplinary field of study. The field has the potential to bring together scholars involved in the study of religion and demonstrate its relevance by generating insights into complex, relevant and pressing problems.

Abstract Reacting positively to Markus Davidsen’s call for a Dutch programme of systematic study of religion, this response highlights certain points of discussion that should be considered moving forward. First of all, we should consider letting students get familiar with theories about religion earlier in the curriculum. Secondly, philological competences should not be placed above other methodological competences. Thirdly, o Read More

Abstract The study of religion exceeds the boundaries of the comparative, or systematic, study of religion in a strict sense. Markus Davidsen considers this a problem. Scholars of religion should unite in order to prevent particularism and protect the discipline against postmodern tendencies. Therefore, a solid foundation is needed. This response argues that in the contemporary context religion itself is dispersed. T Read More

Abstract In this reply I engage with the response articles by Kocku von Stuckrad, Katja Rakow, Eric Venbrux, Arjan Sterken, and Kees de Groot. Noting where we agree, disagree, and seem to talk past each other, I clarify what I consider to be the subject matter and the fundamental problems and methods in the systematic study of religion.

Abstract G. Arnold’s Impartial History of the Church and of Heretics (1699-1700) offered a radical-pietist view of church history, originating from Lutheranism. With its fundamental criticism of the church as an instrument of power, it deprived confessional ‘partial’ historiography of its foundations. Arnold insisted on the rehabilitation of persecuted and oppressed minorities. His work not only promoted the debate on the Read More