2010 SPIRAL Graduate Student Conference on Religion

May 3rd 2010

Evans Room, Rozsa Centre, University of Calgary

Program of Events

Opening Remarks
Dr. Eliezer Segal
Religious Studies Department Head, University of Calgary

1:00 - 1:30
“Revival and Reform in the Rockies: The Kootenay Evangelistic Campaign,
1909”
Stuart Barnard,
Department of History, University of Calgary

1:30 – 2:00
“A Birds Eye View of God”
Caleb Lee
Philosophy Department, University of Calgary

2:00 - 2:30
“Reader-Response Criticism and the Bhagavad Gītā: An Argument for a
Responsible Reading in Colonial and Post-Colonial India”
Sunny V. T. Vallyara
Religious Studies Department, University of Calgary

2:30 - 2:40 - Short Break

2:40 - 3:10
“Taking down the Drapery: The Tearing of the Temple Curtain in Mark”
Chelsey Vargo, University of Alberta

3:10 - 3:40
“The Few, the Proud, the Martyrs”
Angela Brkich-Sutherland, University of Alberta

3:40 - 3:50 – Short Break

3:50 - 4:20
“Pax Ottomanica: Group Rights, the Millet System, and Religious Tolerance in
the Early Modern Ottoman Empire”
Michael Whitaker, University of Calgary

4:30 – 5:00
“Christian and Muslim Non-Reductionist Voices of Religious Pluralism: New
Directions in Interfaith Dialogue”
Mehmet Salih Sayilgan, University of Alberta

5:00 - 5:30
Discussion Panel
“Theories and Methods in the Interdisciplinary Study of Religion”
Hsu Chien-Yuan, Kendra Marks, Tracy Derynck and Kyle Nunweiller
Religious Studies Department, University of Calgary

Abstracts

“Revival and Reform in the Rockies: The Kootenay Evangelistic Campaign, 1909”
Stuart Barnard, Department of History, University of Calgary

In the spring of 1909, the Presbyterian Church in Canada launched one of its most
ambitious evangelistic campaigns in the Kootenay region of the Canadian Rockies. The
revival campaign focused on issues of moral and social reform, aiming for renewed
activism of local churches in the mining communities of the region. At the same time,
negotiations between the region’s mine operators and miners’ union broke down, leading
to a major strike that lasted for months. These events took place at a time of
transformation in Canada’s religious history, when established churches sought an
effective response to growing intellectual challenges and social demands. In light of the
growing social problems that accompanied urbanization and industrialization at the turn
of the twentieth century, the Presbyterian’s revival campaign was as much about saving
society from the perils of sin as it was about saving souls from the fires of hell. This
paper will focus on the Presbyterians’ efforts to bring impress upon workers in the
Kootenay the need for temperance and piety, and how the preachers’ language and
presentation aimed at these ends. Scholars have examined the relationship between labour
and religion, and the Kootenay evangelistic campaign and mining strike presents a unique
opportunity to examine the work of preachers and labour leaders alongside one another.
Although the campaign organizers did not keep specific records of attendance or
conversions, the meetings were widely publicized and well attended. However, the
church’s lack of involvement in resolving the strike and the absence of reference to the
strike issues in the evangelistic meetings suggest that the efforts of church and labour
leaders were further apart than one might assume in light of the development of the
Social Gospel that would occur in the following decade.
“A Birds Eye View of God”
Caleb Lee, Philosophy Department, University of Calgary

The later Wittgenstein holds that the role of Philosophy is to describe language.
His philosophical method can be described by two principles that are outlined in the
following passage taken from the Philosophical Investigations. “Philosophy may in no
way interfere with the actual use of language; it in the end can only describe it. It cannot
give it any foundations either. It leaves everything as is” (PI § 124). It is clear from this
section that, first, philosophy is to be purely descriptive and, second, that philosophy does
not change the objects of its description. For Wittgenstein, Philosophy is descriptive and
inert.
In my paper, I will consider whether religious terms are able to endure
Wittgenstein's descriptive analysis unchanged. If they cannot, then Wittgenstein's
approach to philosophy is ineffective. Religious discourse then would threatens the
viability of Wittgenstein's philosophical method. Ultimately, I will argue that this isn't the
case. However, I think the point is worth exploring as to avoid some misconceptions
about Wittgenstein's approach to philosophy as well as gleaning some interesting insights
into the philosophical status of religious practice.
I believe this issue has not received enough attention in the literature. Most
theorists who focus on Wittgenstein's philosophy of religion are more concerned with
what a Wittgensteinian analysis of religious discourse looks like and less concerned with
the implications such an analysis has for the integrity of Wittgenstein's philosophical
method. I believe theorists ignore this topic because they believe it to be a non-issue.
There are two conflicting reasons one could think this is so. Firstly, it might seem
obvious that Wittgenstein's philosophical method does not change religion in anyway and
that the idea that it does is based on a misunderstanding. This is the view that that I will
ultimately defend. Secondly, however, it might be assumed that religious activity is itself
based on a misunderstanding. This second view I believe to be inconsistent with not only
what Wittgenstein says about religion but also his method in general.
I will argue that religious discourse is left unchanged by Wittgenstein's
descriptive approach to philosophy for the simple reason that religious problems are not
philosophical problems. To see this, I will draw an analogy between a Wittgensteinian
analysis of scientific and religious discourse. Since, the only areas of language that
change by Wittgenstein's descriptive analysis are those founded on linguistic confusion, it
is possible for religious discourse to remain unchanged insofar as it is not simply the
result of linguistic confusion. Religious practice, I will argue, is then consistent with and
presents no challenge to a descriptive approach to philosophy.

“Taking Down the Drapery: The Tearing of the Temple Curtain in Mark”
Chelsey Vargo, University of Alberta

The image of the temple curtain tearing in half at the moment of

Jesus’ death in the gospel of Mark is one which is heavily infused with the theology that
Mark is trying to present to his audience. First and foremost, I will argue that it is the
outer curtain of the temple, the one which would have been visible to all those outside of
the temple which is the one being referred to by the author of the gospel of Mark. This
goes against past prevalent theories which argued that it was instead the inner curtain,
that which guarded the Holy of Holies, which was being referred to in the gospel of
Mark. This paper will then examine the inclusion of such curtain imagery and the
relationship between the curtain and the apocalyptic nature of Mark’s narrative. The
tearing of the curtain is also included to highlight the relationship between the baptism of
Jesus, his transfiguration, and his crucifixion, as in all three instances the figure of Elijah
is specifically mentioned. The inclusion of Elijah, and the tearing of the temple curtain all
speak to the prevalent Jewish nature of Mark’s gospel. This paper seeks to highlight
instances of Mark’s assertion that John the baptizer was “the new Elijah” required to
usher in the arrival of the Messiah. Although not representative of the totality of
Mark’s theology, this paper will help to clarify some of the author’s use of Hebrew bible
references to justify the divinity of Jesus, and to help explain the seemingly out of place
reference to tapestry tearing.

“The Few, the Proud, the Martyrs”

Angela Brkich-Sutherland, University of Alberta

A thorough consideration of historical evidence indicates that the concept of

self-sacrifice did not originate within early Christian communities. Long before early
Christians appropriated and redefined the Greek word μάρτυς, Jews as well as ancient
Greeks and Romans understood and accepted the concept of self-sacrifice. Though
actually few in number, early Christians were able to transform their memory
of martyrs into a valorized “spirit” and theology of martyrdom by transforming the
ancient notion of the noble death. This paper will examine the advantages of considering
early Christian martyrdom as a ritual. I will examine the manner in which early
Christians re-interpreted self-sacrifice in an attempt to understand sporadic but intense
persecutions. I suggest that such re-interpretation led to the “ritualization” of Christian
executions where the memory of martyrs was reconstructed. I will consider whether this
reconstitution of martyrdom memory offered the early Christians a group identity that
provided them with a direct connection to Jesus, their “proto-martyr”. Finally, I will
evaluate how the “ritualization” of self-sacrifice offered early Christians with a new
social identity which granted them the ability to transcend the negative stigma that was
associated with accepting death passively.

“Pax Ottomanica: Group Rights, the Millet System, and Religious Tolerance in the
Early Modern Ottoman Empire”
Michael R. Whitaker, University of Calgary

Examination of the Ottoman Empire—the epitome of Muslim civilization in the

early modern period—suggests that, contrary to the phobias of early modern Europe
(some of which stubbornly persist to present day), there is nothing coded into Islam that
makes it intrinsically unwilling to countenance the existence of alternative faiths. On the
contrary, religious edicts guaranteeing free worship for the Empire’s numerous non-
Muslim groups were augmented by secular laws directed towards preserving and
maintaining harmony of a distinctly pluralistic state. Islamic theology informed the
creation of a comprehensive social schema known as the millet system by which all
Imperial citizens were also sorted into semi-autonomous theocratic sub-nations according
to their particular confession. While this system allowed little room for flexibility in
terms of defining one’s own identity, especially in view of the Western Enlightenment’s
apotheosis of personal liberty, it did afford a great deal of protection to group rights.
Significantly, Ottoman Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the early modern period seem to
have coexisted without major incident, and found the social arrangement more than
agreeable.
My paper will focus on the millet system in detail, trace its Koranic roots, and
explain how in spite of the fact that it enshrined religion as the primary and totalizing
form of personal identity in fact served to minimize confessional violence and promote
harmony in the Ottoman Empire. In so doing, I hope to demonstrate that Islamic states
are more than capable of accommodating a robust religious heterodoxy without relying
upon Western models of individual freedom of conscience.

“Christian and Muslim Non-Reductionist Voices of Religious Pluralism: New

Directions in Interfaith Dialogue”
Mehmet Salih Sayilgan, University of Alberta

Muslim and Christian scholars criticize the current “dialogue industry” for its
reductionist approach towards religious pluralism. The presuppositions and assumptions
of interfaith advocates like John Hick or Leonard Swidler are very problematic for the
vast majority of orthodox believers in every major religious tradition. An authentic
interfaith dialog has to guard the integrity of each faith tradition and should respect its
nonnegotiable elements. This paper argues that the non-reductionist approach towards
religious pluralism as proposed by scholars like Ian S. Markham and Muhammad
Legenhausen is genuine and progressive in promoting dialogue, as it addresses a large
religious audience while preserving the uniqueness of each religious tradition.

_______________________________________________________________________
_
Thank you!

Spiral would like to thank the Religious Studies Department for showing its
continuing support for its graduate students and for this annual event. We would like to
thank especially Rachel LeBlanc and Perlea Ashton for assisting in the planning of this
conference and Dr. Tinu Ruparell for serving as our referee. On behalf of all Spiral
members, Thank you!
-The Spiral Events Committee: Sarah Gallant, Tenzan Eaghll, Kyle Nunweiler