by Thomas Scarborough

Frankly, I was disappointed with this book. I bought it on the strength of its having been published by Oxford University Press, “the world’s most trusted reference books”. The content leans strongly towards higher criticism — which in itself need not represent a problem (higher criticism has been very much a part of the Christian Church after all, and has often enriched it). However, the bias of the book seriously influences its content, even tends to disrupt it, and tends to exclude other perspectives.

IS THE DICTIONARY COMPREHENSIVE?

By and large, this dictionary is comprehensive. Perhaps at times it would seem TOO comprehensive. It even includes references to e.g. the falda (a little known vestment) or the liturgical fan. In particular, it is strong on “high Church” history, to use the term loosely. If you should be a Roman Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican, the book encompasses a great many terms which apply. This having been said, it is short on modern Church history. For example, it excludes crucial entries such as the Lausanne Congress, or Gustavo Gutierrez. Considering that the book was specially updated to reflect “more recent events”, there are a good many significant omissions. Not only this, but important entries are skimmed over. The Keswick Convention receives just one sentence (less than the liturgical fan), and the Assemblies of God two.

HOW DOES HIGHER CRITICISM INFLUENCE CONTENT?

There are two ways in which higher criticism tends to skew the content of the book. Firstly, the possibility that other perspectives could be valid is frequently not entertained. For example, with regard to the Fall, the book notes that in the past Christians “regarded the Fall of Adam and Eve as a historical event” — as though the belief were no longer common. With regard to angels, “in modern times the whole concept of such supernatural beings has been challenged” — as though this might represent the status quo (demons do not receive an entry). Secondly, a great deal of argument surrounds higher cricitism issues, with other emphases being afforded correspondingly less space. For instance, with regard to the resurrection, nearly half the text deals with how the Gospels “disagree over the details” and how critics have “questioned its historicity”.

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS OF THE BOOK?

One of the most significant strengths of the book is its global vision. It has special entries for the Church in virtually all of the major countries of the world: the USA, Ethiopia, South Africa, Russia, and so on. Even so, there are puzzling omissions. For example, the history of Wales fails to mention the Welsh revival, and the prominence given to denominations in South Africa is awry. Another strength of the book is its comprehensive treatment of less common terms in the Church, which are precisely the kind one might wish to look up. Examples are: breviary, concupiscence, extreme unction, or the purgative way. Finally — with the qualification that more recent entries tend to be patchy — the dictionary includes a very comprehensive list of Christians of past generations.

SYNTHESIS

This was a “dead” book, in the sense that it seemed to be too fixated with issues of veracity, and seemed to reflect too little of the true life of the Church over past millennia. For a scholar to whom issues of higher criticism are important, this may be just the book. However, for the Christian who needs a lively feel for the context of the various terms, events, and personae of the Church, it may all seem too stilted. Add to this the various omissions, either in whole or in part, and this book is, in short, a mixed bag.

CITATION OF REFERENCE

Livingstone, E.A. Oxford Concise Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. ISBN 0-19-280057-4. Publisher price: £8.99/US$15.95.