Tracing religious upheaval from Reformation to 9-11

by Nicole Findlay

Had the Globe and Mail run its series, Talking to the Taliban, only a few years ago, readers might have dismissed the headline as an oxymoron. However one might disagree with their methods, lumping them altogether as lunatics motivated by religious delusions has done little to resolve the conflict occurring in Afghanistan.

Johannes Wolfart, associate professor of religion in the college of the humanities, is researching religious transformation and labeling of violent acts in the name of religion. His interests span the Reformation in Europe to current global conflicts waged under the auspices of religion.

His work on the Reformation examines how 17th century German protestants interpreted the previous century’s religious upheavals. Two theories generally account for religious change the first emphasizes an evolutionary model in which changes are made over time.  The second attributes change to revolutionary forces. 

Wolfart believes that many changes occur in more banal or even accidental ways. His research focuses on how ordinary people and their actions effect remarkable change on religion. He is less interested in tracing the root causes that many historians look to as watershed moments that mark shifts, than he is in how individual bureaucrats and people think about and interpret religious transitions.

“Typically, humans attribute change to divine, human or natural causes in an attempt to find meaning in the past,” said Wolfart. He contends that the narrative form many contemporary historians follow to capture past events is based on techniques that were developed by early modern historians as they recorded the Reformation. This period set an example for modern historical interpretations that most historians today would not recognize as an evolution – not from antiquity as is commonly thought, but from the relatively recent past.

A second, sweeping project is perhaps even more ambitious in scope. Together with NYU colleague, Brad Verter, Wolfart is compiling what he anticipates will result in a comprehensive four-volume anthology on religion and violence. He ruefully admits that “since 9-11, the anthology has become a bit like painting the Confederation Bridge.”

In 1997, Wolfart organized a conference at UofT in which scholars debated the degree to which conflict is about religion. Subsequent world events have increased the level of attention religious violence receives. Historically, Wolfart says much of the violence that has been linked to a religious cause has not been perpetrated by “outstandingly evil personalities or remarkably dysfunctional societies,” but that “small example of religious violence was all around.”

The subject presents a problem for scholars who argue about the politics of labeling conflict as religious violence. Wolfart is interested in the politics of associating violent acts as an outcome of religious beliefs. “Why does one thing get called religious violence and another does not?” he asks. “We label things as religious violence in order to make them seem less rational. We say ‘those guys are so fanatical, there is no talking to (them)’.” This serves to delegitimize the offending party and by declaring the situation intractable, it places the issue in a realm where a claim can be made that its lack of logic makes it impossible to resolve.

As the Globe and Mail series suggests, sifting through religious beliefs from other geopolitical issues is one step towards understanding and resolving conflict.