Well-written history engages like a good story. It makes you want to keep turning the pages. It has a drama and life all of its own, and you find yourself caught up in it. That experience can be found here in Thuesen’s book on the fate of the doctrine of predestination in North America. Even if you are not especially interested in the topic of predestination, or possibly find it offensive, you will discover here that the social implications of predestination are intertwined with significant movements in America’s history. Even the core beliefs enshrined in the convictions of Thomas Jefferson and others among America’s founders responded to and rejected the views of earlier Americans who were convinced Calvinists.

So, what is predestination all about? It deals with the question of whether or not God foreordains things for his purposes (2). Most specifically, it examines whether or not God arranges all things for the salvation of the "elect." Thuesen notes that it is correlated with the doctrine of "providence," in which God superintends all events toward preordained ends presumably for the well-being of those who are saved (2). The questions raised by the doctrine are: Does God predestine people to salvation regardless of their actions or does salvation depend in some sense on human cooperation? But here a conundrum arises. If human agency is not involved in our salvation, then God’s choice of who is saved and who is not comes across as arbitrary and cruel. On the other hand, if human cooperation is required for salvation, then it would seem an impossible responsibility is laid on the human conscience (3).

These are the parameters in which Thuesen charts his story about how the doctrine of predestination faired in the North American experience and how it impacted the development of various denominations and society in general. Thuesen first examines the rise of the doctrine in Paul and Augustine, traces it to its appropriation by the classical Reformers, Luther and Calvin, and then situates its Calvinistic incarnation on North American shores in the original New Englanders. For the most part, these New Englanders upheld the view that God has chosen a few to be saved and most to be damned. This position however found an opponent. It was rejected by the Dutch Reformed theologian, Arminius who maintained that God elects people in view of their faith and that Jesus is the savior of the entire world and not just the elect (38). In Thuesen’s rich narrative, it is the Arminian position, in one way or another, that overall would win the day in America. Due to the rise of democracy (and capitalism [not mentioned by Thuesen]) "choice" became equated with freedom. Human participation and choice of ends or purposes was favored as the most important of American values and ultimately it would lead Americans to favor the Arminian stance. In his reading of the debate, Thuesen notes an important subplot: To the degree that predestination was affirmed, appreciation for the sacraments declined. It would seem that centering faith in predestination as opposed to sacramental life inculcates a mystical awe before the electing decree in opposition to a spirituality governed by mystical wonder before priestly ritual (7).

Augustine said that God owes us nothing. The fact that any humans are saved is due solely to grace since all sinners merit damnation (25). This theme was appropriated by the classical Reformers, Luther and Calvin, who both affirmed that God is in charge of everyone’s destiny. As mentioned, this view was challenged by Arminius for whom God offers grace to all and which we can accept or reject in some measure.

The Puritans, whose role was so important in the shaping of early America, followed Calvin’s teaching. Having experienced persecution in England, they found themselves politically free in America. In England, they had a clear view of who was right (themselves) and who was wrong (the established Anglican church). Now, however, they were the established church in Massachusetts. In that dominant position, without an external nemesis, New England Puritans increasingly built an opponent within their own ranks. They distinguished the godly from the ungodly (49). Such a move had implications for the doctrine of predestination. This very doctrine, which the classical reformers packaged as comforting—your salvation is not in your hands, but that of God’s (so don’t worry about it)—became for some Puritans a threat that evoked anxiety. How do I know that I am saved? (Ironically, this is the very question that plagued Luther) (65). Carried to an obsession, some troubled Puritans responded that it was that it was better to commit suicide than continue to live as a sinner. After all, with a shorter life there would be less punishment in hell than if one lives long and commits sins (65). Ultimately, the Puritans found the answer to such a problem in "perseverance"—our election would be secure if we stay true to Christ to the end (68).

With the rise of the Enlightenment in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the doctrine of predestination increasingly came under attack, even though clergy of the stature of Jonathan Edwards defended it. For Enlightenment thinkers, the autonomy of the individual was emphasized. From this perspective, God’s sovereignty and the doctrine of predestination appeared arbitrary (86). Likewise, newer developments in physics and other sciences for early moderns seemed to indicate that the universe was akin to a machine since it was enveloped in cause and effect relations. As a response, Europeans viewed the will as independent of the body and as capable of free decisions (after all, morality was at stake) while the body was part of this causal continuum. Protestants increasingly responded to these conceptual changes by locating the source of religion as no longer in knowing (doctrinal truth) or doing (ethics), but increasingly in feeling, a personal experience of faith, as we see among the Pietists and Methodists. Like Enlightenment thinkers, these groups opposed the older view of predestination and its undermining of human choice and agency. For revivalists, following the footsteps of the earlier Pietists, it was important to chose God—"make a decision for Jesus"—as is said today.

For a thinker like Thomas Jefferson the original goodness and rationality of humanity is to be affirmed in opposition to Calvin (105) and such views were to have an impact on newer religious movements in the United States as diverse as Mormonism, the Disciples of Christ, and the Unitarians and Universalists, all of which denied original sin in addition to predestination. Lutherans too shared in the fray. Thuesen offers a fascinating retelling of the "election controversy" among upper Midwest nineteenth century German- and Norwegian-background synods. Even nineteenth century Presbyterians, theological descendents from Calvin, revised parts of their Westminster Confession in light of widespread disagreement over Calvin’s original teachings.

In spite of such changes, Thuesen discerns that elements of predestination continue even in Neo-Evangelical Rick Warren’s "purpose-driven" approach to the Christian faith. All in all, Thuesen concludes that "the preoccupation with predestination weakened the hold of sacramental mystery over the Christian imagination. To the extent that Americans emphasized the immemorial decree of God’s electing choice, the grace offered here and now through the sacraments was correspondingly deemphasized, despite what some predestinarians have claimed" (216). And, "predestinarian controversies contributed to the decline of dogmatic mystery. In fighting so strenuously for particular doctrines of grace, the various contending denominations turned predestination into something logical and rational, unwittingly depriving grace of the miraculous all-sufficiency they were trying to preserve" (217).

As mentioned, this book offers a delightful read. If you are at all interested in the role of religion in American history, Thuesen will hold your curiosity. In many respects, it is likely that Thuesen has isolated the core of the debate among conservative and liberal Americans. After all, America is a debate about what it means to be an American. And, it would seem that American conservatives hearken back to Puritan origins while American liberals look to the autonomous liberty espoused by Jefferson and Thomas Paine.

While not brought up by Thuesen, the secularization of predestination or "election" as expressed in the early Republic’s quest for "manifest destiny" might be a valuable avenue to explore. Manifest destiny was used to legitimate conquest of turf previously owned by Mexico. Perhaps it even continues to legitimate our current imperial status. Overall, this is an outstanding text.