Introduction to Theology

Photo: Lake Geneva

Willie James Jennings, After Whiteness

Katie Geneva Cannon, Katie's Canon: Womanism and the Soul of the Black Community ; 25th Anniversary edition

John Calvin, Calvin's Institutes , edited by Donald Kim, abridged edition Westminster John Knox Press

Michelle Chaplin Sanchez, Calvin and the Resignification of the World Cambridge University Press

Papers should be 5 double-spaced pages, 1 inch margins, 11 or 12 font.  Papers will be graded according to the following 4 criteria:

1. A clearly stated claim;
2. Textual evidence to support the claim;
3. Quality of writing (organization, proper use of sentences and paragraphs, grammar, spelling, and all other mechanics);
4. Depth and seriousness of analysis. 

In a short paper the claim typically appears as the last sentence of the introductory paragraph (if it is not there the writer needs clearly to mark where it is, since otherwise readers will assume that sentence is the claim).  A claim states the conclusion of the argument put forward in the paper.  In other words, there should be a clear answer to the paper question on the page in the introduction. Then the body of the paper provides the evidence to support your claim.  In a short paper you will likely not be able to summarize the all the points the author makes, nor should you try.  Your paper will likely not follow the same organization as the reading under analysis, since the logic of your argument will not be the same as the logic of the argument of the reading.  If your paragraphs tend to begin “And then . . .;  Next . . .” then it is probably time to go back and do at least one more draft and re-think what you are presenting and how.  Papers for this class are a little closer to the summary end of the spectrum than a term paper might be, since they are the basis for our discussion.  But they are still papers that make engage the text by making a point about the text.

There is an intimate relationship between writing and thinking. The purpose of the papers is to encourage deep engagement with the texts. You are entering into a conversation with a theological partner, dead or alive, and fruitful conversations are open, respectful, and rigorous.  This is best accomplished when the analytical essays take a charitable stance towards the readings. Some of them may seem old-fashioned, and the writers may have different concerns than do we.  You may simply disagree with an author, which is fine. As in any good conversation, it is important first to try to see where the writer is coming from, rather than to be dismissive of their ideas. There will be plenty of time later to decide what is useful to you and what is not.  We must begin with an accurate understanding of what is actually going on in the essay.

Papers will be graded on the following scale:

4 = A
3 = B
2 = C
1 = D
0 = F

Writing Conventions: Citations and Punctuation

Are these academic conventions or my pet peeves? Is there a difference?

Basically, for citations, consistency is the main thing. These are not research papers, you don’t need a bibliography. The two most common sets of conventions for citing texts are the MLA (Modern Language Association) and Chicago Manual of Style. Many people are also moving towards a system more commonly used in social sciences than in the humanities (APA—American Psychological Association).

I follow the Chicago Manual of Style--it is easily accessible on the library's page under "Browse Databases," and it is surprisingly un-intimidating to navigate and understand.

Here are some things especially of which to be aware:

I've noticed in the last year or so students suddenly putting periods and commas outside of closing quotation marks. They go inside unless you’re a Brit. Question marks go outside if the question is yours, inside if the question is being quoted.

When you cite a quote, the citation is not part of the quote (e.g.: as Reimarus writes, "blah blah blah p. 67"), but it is part of your sentence. So you need to cite as follows: As Reimarus writes, "blah blah blah" (p. 67). And you need to manipulate the quote so that your sentence in which it is embedded is still a grammatically correct sentence. This means not just that the syntax has to work, but also standards of capitalization and punctuation. If the quote is the beginning of the sentence in the source material, but not the beginning of your sentence, you will need to fix the capitalization. But you need to indicate to your reader that you have altered it. This is done with brackets: A famous opening sentence is, "[c]all me Ishmael."

Clauses set off by dashes use dashes, not hyphens. That is done in word processing by using two hyphens--like this. Word will usually convert those into one dash, longer than the shorter hyphen. But if it doesn't that's OK, use the 2 hyphens.

Ellipses indicate text you omit when quoting. They are three periods--and they are separated by spaces (both from each other, and from the preceding and succeeding words . . . ). If you omit text and then end a sentence, you will need 4 dots--three ellipses and a period . . . .

Finally, your reader knows that when you quote you are not quoting the entire text. So you very very rarely need ellipses at the beginning or end of a quote (unless it will not be clear that you have not quoted something in its entirety, and that will be confusing). No need to write, " . . . And the word became flesh." 

And notice the way periods and parentheses work. If an entire sentence is in parentheses, the period goes inside the closing paren. (Like this.) If the paren ends a sentence but is not the whole sentence, the period goes outside (like this).

Sign up to present 2 Fragments. Please do not present twice on the same author. To sign up, hit the "edit" tab, put your name next to a number that is open, and remember to "save" before leaving. Please do not add your name if the slots for that reading are already full--I am aiming for as complete coverage of the readings as we can get over the quarter.

 

Sign up to present two Fragments during the quarter. Please do not present on the same author twice.

 

 

Sign up for one week--on the week for which you have signed up, by Monday, email to me a short excerpt from one of the readings that week. It can be as short as a sentence, no longer than a paragraph. Choose a passage that you find especially difficult, either because it simply does not make sense to you, or because you can't quite believe that it is saying what you think it is saying. Very briefly, include in your email to me why you have chosen this passage. To sign up, hit the "edit" button, put your name by an open number, and don't forget to hit "save" before you leave.

Course Description:

This introduction to Christian theology will focus on systematic theology, that is, what are the traditional loci (topics or rubrics) that form a complete theological system, how do they fit together, and how does thinking them as a system influence theological thinking? We will look at how the Christian theological tradition provides resources for contemporary theology. As examples we will take a close look at the locus of theological anthropology.

This class will provide an introduction to artificial intelligence, and get at what it means to be human by asking some of the questions AI raises about the nature of humans: what is the relationship of humans to technology? What is intelligence? Must intelligence be embodied? Must it be social? Must it have a culture? What is the place of humans in the cosmos? Etc.

Professional Degree Learning Goals for Constructive Theology Area:

Constructive Theology (TH) : critically engage historical and contemporary theological expressions of religious traditions and articulate one's own constructive theological position in relation to contemporary events and/or situations.

Learning Outcomes:

After taking this class, students will be able to:

1. Say, with authenticity, “Wow. I read, engaged, and analyzed some really interesting authors. Some were fun, some were a slog, but they pushed me to think and respond in ways I hadn’t yet.
2. Connect theological arguments to things they find important in their world and in their lives.
3. Articulate what systematic theology is.
4. Speak knowledgeably about some of the touchstones in the history of Christian thought.
5. Demonstrate awareness of what the traditional theological loci are (and say what a theological locus is), and see how the loci hang together.
6. Write academic papers with increased ability to formulate a claim and support it with apt textual evidence.

Course Requirements

1. Introduction . Introduce yourself to your colleagues. Due Wednesday, January 12. 5% of final grade.
2. Theological autobiography . Share with your group by Wednesday, January 19. Meet on Zoom (or whatever) with your group for about an hour to discuss. As a group, record and discuss a 5-minute video of what you learned, or what surprised you, due Wednesday, January 26. This video is 10% of final grade.

3. Fragments . Sign up for 2 readings on the Fragments sign up sheet. On the week that reading is assigned, use a powerpoint/keynote/presentation to structure your work and record the presentation, with voiceover, using Zoom. The presentation should be no longer than 5 minutes. If more than one chapter from an author is assigned, you will likely want to focus on just one of them. Please remember to include the following five topics:

   • Context: Give a brief description of the author and context (historical, cultural, theological) of the piece
   • Summary : A summary of the main or central argument of the piece. Please note, this is NOT a summary of the whole reading. That would be impossible. Prioritize what you take to be the main point, and analyze that.
   • Fragments : As Jennings writes, “we always and only work in the fragments.” Please share 1-3 key fragments (typed out on the slide or slides)
   • Takeaways: Put these fragment(s) to work to solve a problem in your life. {What resonates in your context? How did this challenge your thinking? What surprised you or moved you, and why? What questions do you have for this author?}

   Post your video to the Resource page for the week the reading is assigned by Wednesday so other students can watch it. On the days your presentation is not due, please watch the videos and then provide feedback (written or video) on the videos posted for that day. I'd love to have these by Thursday, but Friday at the latest. Each Fragment is worth 15% of your final grade.

4. Group Annotation . Sign up for one week--on the week for which you have signed up, by Monday, email to me a short excerpt from one of the readings that week. It can be as short as a sentence, no longer than a paragraph. Choose a passage that you find especially difficult, either because it simply does not make sense to you, or because you can't quite believe that it is saying what you think it is saying. Very briefly, include in your email to me why you have chosen this passage. By Tuesday I will post this passage in Hypothes.is, a group annotation tool. Together we will figure out what is going on. Please return to the site twice, once by Wednesday night and once by Friday night, to read your colleagues' comments, and to post at least one of your own. Your active participation commenting on these passages is worth 15% of your final grade.
5. Paper. A draft of a 5-page paper on questions posed by the instructor will be due on Friday February 18. 10% of your final grade. I will schedule Zoom conversations with the same small groups of 3 during the week of February 21 to give each student feedback on their papers in a group setting. A revision will be due Friday March 4, and the revision is 30% of your final grade. Please read the Paper Guidelines carefully before turning in your draft.

Special Needs

Iliff engages in a collaborative effort with students with disabilities to reasonably accommodate student needs.  Students are encouraged to contact their assigned adviser to initiate the process of requesting accommodations.  The advising center can be contacted at advising@iliff.edu or by phone at 303.765.1146 .