|
||||||||||||
|
Meet the FacultyCandy Gunther Brown
Education
Contact Information
Background
My current research focuses on spiritual healing practices. Recent public opinion polls suggest that eighty percent of Americans believe God supernaturally heals people in answer to prayer; nearly half the population believes that demons are behind some sicknesses. Although belief in divine healing and deliverance from demons conflicts with the controlling assumption of modern science, that permanent natural laws account for every observable phenomenon, many Americans see no contradiction in combining physical and spiritual approaches when confronted with a serious illness. One of my current book-projects, Miracle Cures? Divine Healing and Deliverance in America, traces a cultural history of divine healing and deliverance practices in the United States from the colonial era to the present, emphasizing links to Latin America, Canada, and Africa. I analyze the epistemological assumptions and narrative strategies employed by proponents and detractors; position specific practices within varied geographic and social landscapes; and relate changes over time to broader historical currents. The study illuminates competing constructions of the human body; incommensurable definitions of science; challenges to the cultural authority of modern medicine; struggles of women, African Americans and Latinos to create a public narrative voice; and global, multilingual patterns of cultural exchange in the construction of religious meaning. Healing practices have contributed, sometimes in ironic ways, to what I argue is one of the most significant religious and cultural realignments of the twentieth century: a shift from the traditional Protestant-Catholic divide to a new polarity between materialist and spiritual worldviews. Strange new alliances have formed with scientific naturalists and functionally naturalistic evangelical and liberal Protestants and Catholics aligned across a philosophical chasm from Pentecostal and charismatic Protestants and Catholics, as well as metaphysical-healing practitioners who embrace varying definitions of spiritual healing. The need for healing may prove to be one of the most powerful engines for reshaping American religions, culture, and politics in the twenty-first century. A second book-project, Therapeutic Pluralism: America’s Pursuit of Healing for Body, Mind, and Spirit, begins with the observation that alongside the widespread practice of divine healing, therapeutic alternatives rooted in vitalistic and metaphysical religious philosophies, such as homeopathy, Christian Science, chiropractic, curanderismo [folk healing], yoga, acupuncture, and Therapeutic Touch, have made spiritual healing a flourishing business in America. Indeed, many of the twenty-three percent of Americans who are charismatic or Pentecostal Christians regularly exposed to divine healing and the forty-percent of Americans who use metaphysical alternatives but may have no particular religious connections sample the same therapies. In an era in which the political power of conservative Christian and alternative healing constituencies is of great media interest, the largely unrecognized intersections of these communities merit further consideration. As globalization accelerates, U.S. patterns are increasingly influenced by healing practices that have long flourished in parts of the world where scientific naturalism has never been the dominant paradigm. Cultivating a “therapeutic” culture that privileges the practical fulfillment of individual needs over religious or medical orthodoxy, Americans in need of healing tend to experiment with diverse therapies. In what scholars have termed lived religion, people select, negotiate, and create from available alternatives as they confront life’s complexities, particularly when basic matters such as health, illness, and healing are at stake. At times, the drive to relieve pain has led people to do things they otherwise would not choose to do and to believe things they otherwise would not choose to believe. Since the civil rights and consumer revolutions of the 1960s, “informed consent” has become a watchword as Americans insist upon their moral and legal rights to make autonomous choices, based on the principles of personal autonomy and self-determination. Citizens have a legal right to freedom of choice, but for choices to be genuinely free, individuals must know what they are choosing and why. Pragmatic healthcare decisions can lead people to restructure their worldviews rather than make informed choices about whether particular therapies further their long-range goals and values. The issue is not whether any particular alternative is a good or bad option, but that therapies are often chosen unreflectively. If Americans become accustomed to accepting any seemingly effective therapy, the door is opened wide to uncritical acceptance of countless alternatives, some of which may in the long-term compromise individual or societal goals and values. Research Interests
Courses Recently Taught
Publication HighlightsBooksThe Word in the World: Evangelical Writing, Publishing, and Reading in America, 1789-1880 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004). Articles"Global Reach: Practice, 1898-present." In Religion in American History, ed. John Corrigan and Amanda Porterfield. Malden, MA: Blackwell, forthcoming. “Healing Words: Narratives of Spiritual Healing and Kathryn Kuhlman’s Uses of Print Culture, 1947-1976.” In Religion and the Culture of Print in Modern America, ed. Charles L. Cohen and Paul S. Boyer, 271-297. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2008. "Religious Periodicals and Their Textual Communities." In A History of the Book in America, vol. 3, The Industrial Book, 1840-1880, ed. Scott Casper, Jeff Groves, Stephen Nissenbaum, and Michael Winship, 270-278. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press & AAS, 2007. .
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||