Re-enchanting... conversion & US evangelicalism

Journalist and professor Molly Worthen talks to Belle and Justin about what led her to embrace faith, after researching the good, the bad and the ugly of Christian history.

Nick Jones

Nick is the senior editor of Seen & Unseen.

A woman seated at a table gestures with both hands while talking

Journalist and professor Molly Worthen talks to Belle and Justin about what led her to embrace faith after researching the good, the bad and the ugly of Christian history.

Molly Worthen is a journalist and associate professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. For the past decade she has pursued a career researching the religious and intellectual history of North America. As well as writing books such as Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism, she is regular contributor to publications such as the New York Times, The Atlantic and The New Yorker.

But Molly’s story took an interesting turn recently. Having been an agnostic most of her life, last year she converted to Christianity. Having researched the good, the bad and the ugly of Christian history we’ll be finding out what led her to embrace faith in the end. And with the continuing polarisation of politics and church culture among US evangelicals why on earth has Molly chosen to be an insider rather than an outsider in the US church?

For more episodes of Re-Enchanting: https://www.seenandunseen.com/podcast

There’s more to life than the world we can see. Re-Enchanting is a podcast from Seen & Unseen recorded at Lambeth Palace Library, the home of the Centre for Cultural Witness. Justin Brierley and Belle Tindall engage faith and spirituality with leading figures in science, history, politics, art and education. Can our culture be re-enchanted by the vision of Christianity?

Snippet

Culture

Film & TV

Politics

Royalty

11 November 2024

2 min read

Would you rather live in Wolf Hall?

Monarchy and deciding who's really in charge.

Jack Chisnall

Jack Chisnall is a former gag teller and Oxford Theology graduate, combining the two at Holy Fooling.

A TV production set shows Henry VIII at a masked ball.

Daniel Day-Lewis digs his claws into the role of Henry VIII.

BBC.

Viewers of Wolf Hall: The Mirror and the Light may well have breathed a sigh of relief: thank goodness we don’t live in such times. Henry VIII, depicted by Damian Lewis with lionesque intensity, flexes and pouts at his Privy Council, prepared to send even his own daughter to the axeman’s block. He is unimaginably powerful, capricious, and easily offended.

Meanwhile, almost four-thousand miles away, we have just witnessed a democratic election in a nation which wanted nothing to do with kings. Donald Trump has won a second term in the White House - whatever one thinks of him, a sitting President is contained by counterpoised checks and balances. Congress. The Supreme Court. Here, at least, are some features that would have usefully reigned in Henry VIII’s absolute power.

Kings are perhaps cutting a rather pathetic figure right now, even without a sulky, fur-clad Damian Lewis to damage their PR. A few weeks ago, King Charles was heckled by an Australian Senator during a trip to Parliament: “not my King!” yelled Lidia Thorpe. Lately, King Felipe VI of Spain had dirt hurled at him as he walked through Paiporta, to examine the damages of recent floods. So much for a royal welcome.

So, is this just the way things are going? Farewell to tyrants. Humiliated, shouted at, mud-splattered and powerless - will we finally decommission them like old submarines?

But the question of “who’s really in charge here?” is one that all human societies have to face squarely. For our ancestors, there had to be something real behind a legitimate government. It could not just be a useful or appropriate way of organising ourselves - there had to be something copper-bottomed to give authority its clout. Only the gods could prop up a leader. In the pagan world, a philosopher like Aristotle would add that it is just the case that some people rule, some are ruled.

The UK constitution - though few would speak of it in this way - is premised on the idea that the King represents the people of this country to God, who alone can vouchsafe his legitimacy. A monarch in this sense is not absolute. They are contained - contained by the most comprehensive and eternal power that can be conceived. No tyrant gets away with it, on the Christian view.

All societies seek this real basis to power, whether that is “self-evident truths”, or the “will of the people”. The question is: which of them provide for a flourishing community for the longest? King Felipe may have been abused, but he did not flee to the refuge of a car like the Prime Minister. Here was a man of immense privilege reaching out to his subjects. Despite their pain and anger, he wanted to show he really cared - indeed, that he was born to care. For as long as monarchies seem like a reasonable and compassionate answer to the issue of legitimate government, they may endure yet.