October 15, 2024 • 47 mins
Today's conversation features Dr. Guy Erwin, the President of the United Lutheran Seminary. As a lifelong educator both with roots on a Native American reservation and as an openly gay man, Dr. Erwin shares his perspective on some of the social and cultural challenges faced by the church in the last generation. More generally, our discussion also considers the place of Christianity in public life and the relationship between the church and higher education.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Chip Gruen (00:03):
Welcome to ReligionWise. I'm your host,
Chip Gruen. if you're a regularlistener to ReligionWise, you'll
know that our goal is to hostconversations about religion in
public life. We do this mostlyby featuring discussions that
consider religion and religiousdiversity as they are relevant
to public life in all kinds ofways. So this might be
(00:24):
scholarship that focuses onimportant issues surrounding
religion in our world, but itmight also feature conversations
that are more immediatelyrelevant to understanding of
law, policy, medicine orbusiness. Our basic premise is
that a more sophisticated,nuanced way of considering the
place of religion in our worldwill help us to understand and
(00:44):
interact with that world in abetter way and also a more
empathetic way, one thatconsiders the needs and the
perspectives of others. Ofcourse, the dominant
conversation about religion inour world is held by religious
individuals talking about theirown communities. We often
feature those conversations inanother program hosted by the
Institute for Religious andCultural Understanding called
(01:07):
WorldViews, that is held oncampus at Muhlenberg College
during both the fall and thespring semesters. If you're
interested for more informationon that, either if you're local
you or you want to livestream,you can go to our website at
religionandculture.com to getall of the details. Today on
ReligionWise, we will host asimilar kind of conversation
that features this importantpart of the public discourse on
(01:30):
religion by talking to Dr. GuyErwin. Dr Erwin currently serves
as the President of the UnitedLutheran Seminary. He has also
held the office of bishop in theEvangelical Lutheran Church in
America, and is a prominentchurch historian specializing in
reformation studies. Hisbiography is an interesting one,
though he does a much better jobof introducing himself, which
(01:51):
he'll do during the episode. Iwant to make you aware of a few
details about his life as wehead into the conversation. So
first, he grew up on a nativereservation in Oklahoma and is a
member of the Osage Nation. Fromthere, after having lived some
time in Germany, he went on topursue his higher education in
the United States, holdingadvanced degrees from both
Harvard and Yale. He also holdsthe distinction of being the
(02:14):
first openly gay male to serveas a bishop in the churches of
the Lutheran World Federation,of which the ELCA is a part. I
had the opportunity to sit downwith Dr. Irwin while he was on
campus to talk about how thehistory and legacy of the
Reformation has affectedLutheran ideas about higher
education. It's my pleasure towelcome Dr. Erwin to
(02:36):
ReligionWise, to not only talkabout this groundbreaking
career, but also to considerlarger questions on vocation and
the place of contemporaryChristianity in our public
conversation more generally. Dr.
Guy Erwin, thanks for coming onReligionWise.
Guy Erwin (02:55):
I'm glad to be here.
Thank you for inviting me.
Chip Gruen (02:57):
All right, so one of the things I noticed in your
writing and your teaching thatI, that I was researching coming
into our conversation is youreally emphasize both the human
and the humane. And I think it'smaybe a good habit to start off
with asking you a question aboutyou as a human. Can you tell me
a little bit about where youcome from, how you got here, and
(03:19):
what's the story of Guy Erwin?
Guy Erwin (03:20):
Sure, sure. I I have had a very interesting life and
trajectory, and a lot of it isnot what one would expect. I was
born in northeastern Oklahoma onthe Osage Indian Reservation in
a very small town, which wasalso the county seat and the
capital of the reservation, andI have lived in a lot of
(03:40):
different places since then, andseen and done a lot of things
that I think most of the otherpeople who were born there in
that year would never haveimagined. And it's not because
of my own accomplishment alone,but because of decisions other
people made for me andopportunities I've taken. I was
raised by parents who thoughthey would not articulate, I
(04:05):
think, any sense of religiousidentity, and didn't practice
any particular form ofChristianity, were what I would
call ethically informedProtestants, secular
Protestants, in a way they did.
We didn't actually ever belongedto a church when I was growing
up, but I was brought up to havea high regard for the dignity of
(04:25):
other people and a pretty deepcuriosity about the way the
world is, and they often withoutarticulating it in words, set an
example for me that basicallywas ask every question, find out
whatever you can, don't miss anyopportunity to learn something
(04:45):
new and and I didn't realize, ofcourse, until I was fully the
person they had helped mebecome, that I'd actually
learned it from them. And now Ilook back and I'm very grateful.
For the upbringing I had and thewillingness to say yes to things
that I think some of my peersand friends and even relatives
(05:05):
would have been afraid to do.
Chip Gruen (05:09):
So you remarked that you've been able to do lots of
things. You've had lots ofopportunities. I'll also say you
your your career, your life, hasbeen marked by a lot of firsts.
You're the first openly gay maleto serve as an Evangelical
Lutheran Church in AmericaBishop, the first Native
American to serve as a bishop inthe ELCA. Beyond those, the
(05:32):
personal characteristics thatenabled you to be a
groundbreaker, I have to thinkthat your worldview is also
informed by something of arevolutionary temperament. Maybe
that's too strong. You can tellme if that, if that makes sense
or not, are you a rebel? Youknow, and if you are, how does
this bled into your career as ateacher, a preacher and a leader
of the church?
Guy Erwin (05:52):
That question is a really good one, because I
suppose in some ways, I am arebel. I never would have put it
that way. It would never haveoccurred to me to think of
myself that way. In fact, in myconscious self reflection, I
would say I am not a rebel. Infact, a traditionalist and a
conservationist, in a sense ofbeing having a high regard for
(06:17):
the past and the experience ofthose who've gone before us.
Where I have been rebellious isthat I refuse to accept what
everyone else says has to be asan ultimate reality, and the
fact that, I wish I could saythat I was the person who
(06:37):
knocked down the wall, whoopened the kick to open the
door, I didn't. I waited tillthe door was open a crack, and
then I put my foot in it, andthen I put my whole self in it
so it couldn't be closed again.
And that's how I was a first.
That's how I changed things. Youknow, I think other gay people
and other members of minorityracial groups whose identity is
(07:02):
not obvious from their faceswould agree with me that our
lives growing up are kind ofalways testing the room we're in
to see how safe we are. And Inever, I don't think for the
most part, I presented to otherpeople as gay in an obvious way.
It wasn't an attempt on my partto conceal who I was. It's part
(07:25):
of being in my generation thatthe models of masculinity I had
were fairly what we would thinkof now as fairly old fashioned,
and I have never reallyquestioned that part of my
identity. But I was always awarethat if everyone in the room
knew everything about me that Iknow about myself, I might not
(07:47):
be as safe as I am, and that haskept me cautious, but it's also
given me the opportunity to goin some spots where people who
are maybe more rebellious bynature would have would have
stumbled or would have playedtheir hand too strongly. If you
grow up always having to codeswitch and always having to read
(08:08):
the room around you, it's hardto give it up. And I'm grateful
that younger people don't reallyhave to do that anymore, and can
kind of just blow into a spacebeing 100% who they are. I
actually don't feel like I don'tdo that but, but I understand
that my way of doing it is notone that's going to it hasn't
(08:28):
gotten me in too much trouble,and I'm I hope that my doing
that has helped make the spacesafer for other people. I know
that in my career in the church,for example, that there are a
lot of people who know me insome way as a figure of
authority or respect who knowthat first and then find out,
(08:49):
oh, he's gay, so a husband orhe's native, he's Osage and the
native stuff doesn't matter toomuch. There's not a deep
prejudice, I think, in oursociety against natives in
general, just more indifference.
But being gay, that's that's abig deal in Christian circles
and and if people have alreadycome to like me or have some
respect for me, or at least seeme fully for who I am as a as a
(09:11):
church leader, before they findout I'm gay, it's very hard to
completely roll that back andsay, "oh, well, that means he
doesn't know anything, can't sayanything," and that has helped
in some ways too. I don't thinkone could get from the A to B in
my life in the same way todaythat I did it in my time, and I
(09:33):
had lots of peers who were moreoutspoken, braver, more
assertive, more more rebelliousthan I was, and at times I felt
guilty about that, but I knew itwas not in my nature to do that.
So we all get, we get where weneed to be in the trajectory of
(09:54):
our lives, but we take differentpaths.
Chip Gruen (09:59):
So the other part of your identity that I want to
hesitate on for a little bit isgrowing up as a part of the
Osage Nation, of being Native,and you describe that as being
as having of those traditions,at least the ones that you grew
up in, as having faded with thegenerations, or that they were
(10:20):
an overlay of, quote, middleclass, white American values.
And you know, something I'vealways wondered, and, you know,
tried to be empathetic to foryou know, indigenous people is,
on the one hand, knowing thetragedy of the past, that that's
part of your story, but on theother hand, I mean, particularly
in your situation, being aleader of a cultural institution
(10:43):
that is not got clean hands, youknow. You know broadly. You know
for Colonial exploits or for thepolitical and and social world
of the past. You know. You know.
So I wonder how you, how youcome to terms to that? How do
you think about that being, youknow, the face, really, of an
institution that has...
Guy Erwin (11:06):
I mean, I do think about it from the standpoint of
the institutions, but I would goa little bit deeper and say
that, in fact, even part of mylife search for meaning in
faith, has been coming to termswith the fact that there are no
clean hands. Humans just aren'tlike that. My ancestors are both
(11:26):
the enslavers and the enslaved,the dispossessed and the
dispossessors, and especially inmy case, since I'm mostly white,
my Indian ancestors are only afraction of my total number of
ancestors. I have to think aboutthat every day. Which side am I
on? The thing is, there reallyaren't any sides in America we
(11:47):
are all kind of in thissituation of being both guilty
and living and living with thebenefit of the exploitation that
was done, both of enslavedpeople and of dispossessed ones,
but also realizing that they areus. You remember the you might
remember the old cartoon thatwe've met the enemy, and they
(12:10):
are us, and in some ways that isis us. Now, in my case of being
Osage, there were some specialissues involved in that. I
belong to a tribe that is hasabout 20,000 members now, of
whom there are less than a dozenwho are 100% Osage in their
ancestry. So every ancestor theyknow of is Osage. Everyone else
(12:33):
is mixed to some degree. Somepeople are more native than
others because their, theirancestors intermarried with
people from other tribes. Sothey're quite a lot of mixed
Indian families, but almosteverybody has some white
ancestors too. And some of themost active members of my tribe
are people who are no more Osagethan I am in we don't like to
(12:55):
talk about the blood quantumthing, because that's really is
a racist way of assuming, offiguring out who's who. But you
are, you are as Osage as youfeel in some ways. It's not even
a matter of knowledge, I thinkbecause some of us know more
than others, I know some things,and I've I realized in my
maturity that I learned thingsas a child from having grown up
(13:18):
there around it, that myrelatives, who grew up in other
parts of the United States, whoare as Osage as I, didn't know,
and this has been a veryinteresting source of
conversation for us in lateryears, how much of it is kind of
osmosis, because I was not told,I was not given lessons.
Nowadays, I'm really happy toreport if you're a child growing
(13:41):
up where I was born, you learnthe Osage language in Head
Start, and you get instructionin the public schools, because
the tribe pays for it. When Iwas a kid, I felt like the tribe
was, in some ways, trying todisappear culturally. There
wasn't any support for that. Ifyou wanted to learn Osage, you
had to be in a family that spokeit. And nobody in my circle of
(14:02):
relatives did. So I mean, it'skind of one of my old age
projects is to learn some of thelanguage, to catch up a little
bit on what I missed. But ofcourse, at the time, I couldn't
have had it. I think we were. Wewere living in a racist paradigm
that had bought the the old ideathat the less Indian you were,
the better you'd be, the betterAmerican you'd be, the more
(14:24):
chances you'd have at materialprosperity and upward mobility
and and that's that's really,that's a really basic problem
for natives in America today, isthe pull to be not native,
because it isn't an advantage.
There's almost no place whereit's really an advantage.
Chip Gruen (14:44):
So zooming out just a little bit, you know, seeing
some of your sermons and some ofyour written work, it seems to
me, one of the central cores ofyour understanding the Christian
message is that it hinges on thedefiance of expectations. So you
say in one place, you know thatthe gospel doesn't fit into the
usual categories of experience.
You even describe Jesus assomeone who, quote, "delights in
(15:08):
breaking the rules other humanshad made to hang on to control."
I don't want to be overtlypolitical, but here we are in
2024 so it's sort of hard toavoid it, but it seems to me
like the role of the church is alittle bit up for grabs right
now, with a great deal ofavailable options, whether that
be retreat from public life,full throated political
(15:30):
activism, you know, thinkingabout, on the one hand, defiance
of expectations and what'sexpected and the categories that
we're set to fill and the otherhand, you know, the current
political situation where,historically, you know, go back
to Constantine, Christians havebeen super active, you know, in
(15:51):
in political life. I mean, howdo you square your read of the
gospel with what the Christiancalling is for political
vocation?
Guy Erwin (16:03):
That's another really complicated one. I on the on the
one level, I think that it isimportant for Christians to
develop a sense of what it meansto live in the Gospel. There are
two things I mean by that. Oneof them is the, I think the more
superficial, but perhaps at themoment more important one of us
(16:25):
constituting, situating one'slife and one's work in a way
that works toward the commongood and that serves one's
neighbor. So Christianity is notthe only faith that does this,
but in its best moments, helpspeople get past themselves, to
think about the good of othersand to act in ways that promote
(16:46):
that. If we, if we voted the waywe believed there would be,
there still could be a widevariety of ways in which we
would vote. But I think that atleast for Lutherans, Luther
gives us a pretty good roadmapin the Small Catechism. For in
his his explanation of the 10commandments about how we are to
(17:07):
live together with others, andthe living together part is
important. People talk aboutProtestant individualism and
finding your own, you know yourown salvation, and it being
between the individual and God.
But in fact, it doesn't everstop there, because we aren't
alone. We always live incommunity and society. And for
Luther, at least, that's rightthere. It's never, it's not even
step two. It's the other side ofthe coin. And so I think in some
(17:31):
ways it would, it's very easy touse Jesus, the example and
teaching of Jesus, in a way toset up a political program by
which one could say, yes, thenyou ought to vote in this way on
that issue and that way on thatissue. I also though, at the
same time, think the church'sjob is to say, wait, there's
(17:51):
more to it than that, becauseneither, no human construct, no
platform, not even Luther'sexplanation of the Catechism or
the 10 Commandments in theCatechism, is a is an infallible
roadmap to better. We're alwayspartial. We're always we always
(18:12):
have those dirty hands, and wecannot extricate ourselves from
where history and life has putus so that, in some ways, I
think we need to say, the churchneeds to say, at the same time,
paradoxically, this is reallyimportant, that we do the right
thing and say, in the end, itmight not matter. We might not
(18:35):
be able to decide what the rightthing is. And you know, that's
not something everyone, anyone'sever going to run a campaign on,
because it's too complicated.
But the reality is that the thelife of a Christian is a life
that is not just in the here andnow, but one that connects us to
(18:55):
the whole story of God's work increation and with humanity,
we're part of something biggerthan ourselves and something
that reaches out beyond the spanof time in which we live, and
the Church has always said that,and usually not been listened to
when it does. I derive a lot ofinspiration from St Augustine,
who's not people's favoritesaint anymore because of I don't
(19:18):
know, human sexuality issues,but I think the more you read
Augustine, the more complicatedand subtle he becomes, and the
caricatures are easy, but hissense that the world was ending
in every material way, and yetthe church was going to survive,
that God was in charge, I findit inspiring. It's maybe not the
(19:43):
best and clearest call topolitical action. I get that,
and I do think we need to beresponsible citizens. The more
agency we have, the moreresponsibility we have. And
Americans have a great deal ofagency in their political
choices. Though, right now, Iwill say, and I maybe I
shouldn't say this out loud, theidea that a well organized
(20:04):
minority could trample on therights of everyone shakes my
faith in the kind of democracywe've set up here, and it might
be a little corrosive of myfaith and democracy in general,
because I do have, at the end ofthe day, a fairly low view of
(20:25):
human nature in the collective Ithink we're very easily swayed
by fear and and I'm afraid thatmodernity has not made us less,
it's not made us less gulliblein some ways.
Chip Gruen (20:38):
So I want to chase that a little bit more by
referencing a turn of phrasethat you've used, I mean the
commonplace of the one church,right? That you use the church
in the singular, which, ofcourse, is a very old kind of
vocabulary that goes way back.
But you, as a church historian,have the great vantage point of
seeing the diversity in thetradition that's always existed.
(21:00):
And I guess I want to ask about,sort of the contemporary
diversity and maybe the blackeye that Christianity as a whole
gets in the public view, rightthe public discourse. I'm sure
that there, you know, maybe evenlisteners right now who are
(21:21):
surprised that someone like youis in a position of authority,
right with your identifyingcharacteristics, is in a
position of authority within amainstream Christian
denomination, because they knowwhat Christians are, right?
Christians are those people whowant to tell me what to do, or
Christians are those people whoare really socially conservative
or theologically intolerant ofdifference, or what have you.
(21:43):
Can we talk about that? Can wejust talk about the ways in
which, you know, the, to put itcrudely, the brand of
Christianity has gotten reallydamaged in the past generation.
Guy Erwin (21:54):
In some ways, I think I was, I was kind of formed for
this moment, because growing upmy my parents as I said were
highly ethical, thoughtful, kindpeople who were pretty much
untouched by by specificreligious commitments. And we
knew we were. My family was sortof culturally Protestant, but,
(22:16):
but we weren't any more narrowlyshaped than that. If somebody
would ask what we were, we wouldsay we were Methodists, because
that usually just ended theconversation. But we never
belonged to a congregation, andit was, as I say, two
generations earlier, sinceanyone had what it means,
though, is that we were acutelyaware of the Christianity around
(22:38):
us. It was more than one thing,but I lived, I grew up in a
religion saturated environment,and it was a Christian one. We
had, I knew I didn't meetsomebody Jewish until I was in
grade school in another part ofthe country, and I didn't, I
don't think I met a practicingMuslim until I was in college.
(22:58):
And so it was a Christian world,but in my family, at least, if
something was described among usas Christian, it had invisible
quotation marks around it, andit meant those people like that.
And what we meant in the in theeastern in the Oklahoma setting,
was fundamentalists orPentecostals, people whose way
(23:21):
of being Christian was reallyforeign to us, so much so that
we really couldn't see ourselvesin that story. It's in some ways
remarkable that I wanted to be aChristian in spite of that. I
don't know exactly why. Maybethat's where my rebelliousness
comes in is that I've alwaysthought there was something more
(23:43):
to be learned or something moreto be said, and I might even
have been slightly envious ofpeople who had that kind of
strong, powerful associationthat built a kind of a community
identity. I don't rememberconsciously thinking that. I do
remember the first branch ofChristianity, aspect of
(24:04):
Christianity I was impressedwith was the Roman Catholic
Church, because of itsantiquity, which is also sort of
more apparent than real in lotsof ways, because it cultivates
the idea of tradition withoutalways knowing that some
traditions are not that old andbut the whole, the whole
edifice, points in the directionof tradition. And that appealed
(24:27):
to me in some ways. The pointI'm trying to make is that I've
always known there wereChristians I didn't want to be
one of. And I think my becominga Christian was a process of
eliminating them, of kind oftaking, going through the
filters in such a way I had a Icould find a livable faith, one
(24:47):
that I wasn't embarrassed by,and that's and that landed me in
the in the Protestant mainline,but especially Lutheranism, had
some things that offered thatsome of those other churches
didn't so, so I do see thatprocess, for me as being really
closely tied to my discovery ofLuther and Lutheranism.
Chip Gruen (25:10):
I can see why you have an affinity towards
Augustine, because he trieseverything first too right,
everything else.
Guy Erwin (25:17):
Well, I wish I could say I had as an exciting path to
it as he did but I did not.
Chip Gruen (25:23):
So I want to zoom out a little bit further on your
role as a scholar and aneducator. You talk a little bit
about the advantages you've hadabout being an outsider to the
tradition, and even just now,you talked about becoming a
Christian, because you know yourfamily's religious life was not,
you know, well defined if that'sif that's fair to say. And so
(25:47):
you talk about being adoptedinto this Lutheran Christian
identity, as opposed to being aquote, unquote "cradle
Lutheran." Can you talk aboutyour distance from the
tradition, and what you meanwhen you say that's an advantage
over some of your colleagues andpeers for navigating it?
Guy Erwin (26:04):
Yeah, advantage makes it sound like there's a kind of
one can win in this, which isnot really the case. I do think
it gives me a valuableperspective that my that my
fellow Lutherans need, and otherChristians can benefit from, and
that is that I don't, forexample, actually believe
there's such a thing as a cradleLutheran. There are people who
(26:26):
have been part of Lutherancommunities their whole lives
because they were born intoLutheran families. And in fact,
I think our the Lutheranchurches in America, kind of
rejoice in the great number ofpeople who have been, have
always been there, and whoseparents and grandparents were
there and since they came fromEurope. But we all know that is
(26:47):
not how one becomes Christian,that it is, it is not just a
matter of an action and adecision. I don't believe in
decision theology, but if youdon't know what it means, you
haven't really made it your own.
And so I'll admit sometimes Itake a puckish delight in in
teasing lifelong Lutherans abouthow much they assume that being
(27:11):
who they are in the family inwhich they're embedded, in the
congregation to which theybelong, is their understanding
of what Lutheranism is and howthin that is, because it doesn't
really stand on anything exceptthis collective experience and
sentiment. And that's why whenthen we introduce new peoples,
new populations, new cultures,into the faith, and try to have
(27:35):
people who are not white,European Americans in our
churches, often we crash becausewe can't understand them, and
they can't understand us becausewe've associated our faith with
our religious culture. And it'shelped me a great deal in being
Lutheran that I I was shaped notjust by American Lutherans, but
(27:58):
also by German ones and EastGerman ones who lived under
communism and were disadvantagedfor their faith. And I have been
very much influenced byLutherans from other parts of
the world. So I don't see Ithink American Lutherans tend to
confuse Americanness withLutheranness too, and and I try
not to do that. So there's thisold I wish I knew exactly where
(28:23):
it came from, but there's an oldFinnish Lutheran proverb that a
Christian is only ever one dayold. What you were yesterday
doesn't matter. What you aretomorrow, you can't possibly
know. You wake up every day intothe reality that you inhabit,
and you decide, am I with God?
(28:45):
Is God with me in Jesus or not?
And live accordingly. That Ifind that enormously consoling,
although I think some peoplemight find that scary, because
it seems a little intangible,but I really think it's
important to remember that itisn't the tradition, it isn't
the pomp, it isn't the songs weknow by heart. It's it's the
(29:06):
decision each day, who's to,whom do we belong?
Chip Gruen (29:12):
So that seems a little bit in opposition to
something else, and I don't knowyou can straighten me out that
you describe your initialinterest in Christianity as one
that views it as a quote,unquote, "human phenomenon." And
I'll admit, when I read that, Iwas like, Oh, I like this,
(29:32):
right? I like this idea. Ialways start my classes teaching
my students that at least whatwe can see in the religious
studies classroom isunderstanding the human
phenomenon of religion. So whatdo you mean when you discuss
Christianity as a humanphenomenon? And maybe to go back
to the previous answer, how doesthat square with this idea of
that presentism, as opposed to,you know, banking on the
(29:55):
tradition of the past?
Guy Erwin (29:56):
That's a really good question, and I think that's the
difference. I mean, I don't knowhow well I'll be able to explain
it, but that is at heart, thedifference between being someone
who's very interested inChristianity and someone who is
a believer. I talk about I wascaptured entranced by the by the
physical phenomena ofChristianity as a child,
(30:18):
visiting churches andcathedrals, seeing the ways in
which human effort had gone insuch to such remarkable degree
into depicting and strengtheningideas the abstract. And I think,
I actually think I probablywould still have been a
historian of Christianity, evenif I had never come to faith. I
(30:40):
would have done it in exactlythat way, and I and I have a
deep curiosity about thosethings. I always want to know
more. I'm still learning, butI'm also learning about other
faiths. I led a tour of studentsand a few adults and clergy to
Spain and Morocco after 9/11 somy response to the attack in
(31:02):
2001 was to teach a class thenext semester on Holy War and
the three Abrahamic faiths,because we all have this legacy.
It isn't just a Muslim thing.
You know, the God of hosts wepray to in the Sanctus at the
Holy Communion the verses fromthe Old Testament. That's the
God of armies. We're invokingthe armies of God at the
Eucharistic table and and so Iwanted to show that this isn't
(31:26):
really too subterranean, even inChristianity and certainly in
Judaism. And then the studentswere so interested in it that I
decided to lead a tour. That's along story. The point of the of
the anecdote is that I had avery earnest Lutheran pastor
with me on the tour. And as wewould visit places that were
holy to Muslims, I would explainhow, as much best I can, I'm no
(31:52):
expert and don't pretend to behow Muslim worship was carried
out, what the prayer meant, whatthe symbolism of the mosques
meant, all the kind ofdecoration, what the call to
prayer signified to thedifferent times of day, all that
sort of thing. And she, in herearnestness, somehow came to
believe I was a secret Muslim,or wanted to be one, just
(32:15):
because I was able to work up asympathetic enthusiasm for the
practices of someone else'sfaith, and that sympathetic
enthusiasm is what makes me ascholar of religion. It doesn't
make me a Muslim. My fascinationwith everything Jewish doesn't
make me Jewish, but I hope itallows me to talk about those
(32:37):
things with my students andothers I need to talk with in
that way, without prejudice,with trying to remove the
barrier between us. I don't haveto decide, I don't have to
insist that a Christian way ofdoing things is right. In fact,
it gets in the way ofunderstanding what other people
do. So as a scholar, I try topractice that kind of self
removal, but I know that when Iwas studying Luther and working
(33:02):
as especially as a collegestudent, that I was really also
looking for something else. Iwanted to be a part of it
myself. I wanted to, I wanted tobe inside and not just looking
at it from the outside. And Idon't know, I can't really
describe how it happened. I reada lot of Augustine. I read a lot
(33:23):
of Luther, and there wassomething about the way Luther
described God's presence, God'sself manifestation, in Jesus,
and the way that changes theequation of the relationship
between God and humankind that Ifound so compelling that I could
never it, it wouldn't leave mealone. And that's maybe also an
(33:43):
Augustinian trait that, and Imean, it's been exaggerated how
much of an Augustinian Lutherwas, but the but that idea that
God is there, God has come, Godhas grabbed on and will not let
go was also held on to me untilI was ready, very slowly and
(34:05):
with tiny steps to actually makethe public declaration of my own
faith. And it took me, it tookme quite a while.
Chip Gruen (34:16):
So you talk about, and I'm really happy to have
this conversation, becauseyou've expressed, I mean, not a
rigid binary, but a binary thatI don't think I would have
expressed before, between whatyou describe on the one hand is,
oh, help me, it was enthusiasticsympathy?
Guy Erwin (34:35):
Yes, yes.
Chip Gruen (34:36):
Yeah, on the one hand, but that not being the
same thing or being differentfrom being within a faith
community, right? And I describethis sometimes as and I think
you have in your writing as wellas empathy, right, and the
cultivation of empathy and thatpart of your work is helping to
cultivate that in yourself andothers. And the reason I'm kind
(34:56):
of excited about this justeditorialize for a second, is
because I am always trying toreinforce to my students, and
you know, when I do publictalks, that empathy is actually
an intellectual exercise thatneeds to be practiced, right?
That it's not, it's not kumbaya,it's not just egalitarianism,
(35:17):
but it's like, it's hard work,right?
Guy Erwin (35:18):
The keyword being exercise, yes, it requires
effort and requires practice.
Chip Gruen (35:23):
And yet, right while on the one hand, you put that on
the side of historical study,you describe it one place as you
know, cultivation of empathy forpeople we can only know
partially and whose lifeexperience was profoundly
different from our own. It alsoseems to have a role in your
other vocational calling that isan engagement with difference,
(35:46):
right, all kinds of difference.
So can you talk a little bitmore about that, that
enthusiastic sympathy, or thatempathy, and how it is not just
about, you know, history and thehistorical other, but it's also
about, you know, contemporarycommunities.
Guy Erwin (36:04):
Yeah, I want to take it quickly to the very highest
possible level and say that, Ithink, in a very real way, for
me, Jesus is the ultimateexpression of God's empathy for
for the creation, humankind inparticular. We're human, so we
put ourselves in the center. AndI think that's that's natural
enough. So having said that thefact that God is wants to
(36:30):
demonstrate this empathy for us,this love, you know, we start we
we call it love, we call itgrace. We call it mercy, all
these things that God wants tobe connected to us as we are,
not at some point when we reachour highest form of development,
I see that as enabling us,enabling me to manage my anxiety
(36:56):
with all the kinds of differencethat either delight me or cause
me to be afraid. I mean, I'mnot. I'm no better than anyone
else at being confronted byradical difference. I have to
adjust myself to it, but I'dlike to think that I have
(37:17):
practiced enough not to besurprised by what is human, not
immediately to draw a line andrefuse to look any further. I
think, to be also being ahistorian, to be a historian who
deals with the 20th century. AndI'm, I was really, I kind of, to
be honest with you, avoided thatthe 16th century bad enough, but
(37:39):
the 20th century was, was Icouldn't face. And I think
anyone to be a good historianhas to be able to look the evil
in the eye, and you don't haveto be the ultimate judge, but
you have to be able to look atit long enough to appreciate
what was done and be able totalk about it in a way other
people can or write about it ina way that other people can
(38:00):
understand. And that takes, thattakes real effort, and it isn't
always empathy. I don't think wecan completely be empathetic
with people we can never fullyknow, but it's an attempt, at
least to get beyond our owndisgust and understand that
there are people so profoundlydifferent that there's almost
nothing we have in common.
Chip Gruen (38:20):
So your occasion for visiting Muhlenberg, and this is
today, I'm super grateful foryour time, because you're very
busy, and I'm sure you're goingto collapse tonight after it's
all over, but your occasion forcoming is to talk about higher
education, to talk aboutvocation, you know, as a part of
the Lutheran heritage. And Iwant to talk to you just a
little bit about highereducation in general and your
(38:44):
own calling as a vocation in it.
And I want to call yourattention to something you wrote
in The Expert's Historian. Youwrote the foreword to that book
because it was written by amentor of yours, Leonard Smith.
I get that correct? Yes, and youdescribe his life and work as
displaying a quote "blend ofbroad and dispassionate
knowledge with intense andpassionate conviction". You go
(39:05):
on to describe him as havinglived a scholar's life within a
teacher's vocation, and that hewas perfectly at home, both in
the library and the classroom.
Now I'm not bringing this upbecause I want to dive deep into
Leonard Smith's life and work.
But it seems to me like thatthis is at least aspirationally
autobiographical for yourself.
(39:29):
So can you talk about thebalancing of these different
callings within your vocation asteacher, preacher, leader in the
communities you served?
Guy Erwin (39:38):
It's, I think it's fascinating that you found that
and lift it up. Because, in away, I think you're correct
about this autobiographicalaspect, without my having ever
noticed that until you pointedit out. Because the one thing
you need to know about LeonardSmith, and I think one of the
reasons I could write that withsuch feeling, is that, this is a
(40:00):
man who taught in a veryordinary undergraduate
institution, it was one ofquality but, but ordinary
liberal arts school. He has avery long career, taught many
kinds of history because he wasin a small department, and
during this entire career, keptan intense fascination with one
narrow aspect of German 19thcentury historiography that he
(40:25):
collected and wrote about andhoned and all of that until he
was in his late 80s, and thenfinally published it. He was
long retired. He'd retiredbefore I ever got to that
school, and we just becamefriends, and and I hope I fear
that I have thought and thoughtand thought and not said enough.
(40:49):
That if I'm, it's not that theworld needs me, but that it
would be a waste to have spentas much time thinking about
these things as I have withoutdoing a better job of telling
telling the story back. And soit's one of the reasons I accept
invitations like the one to cometo Muhlenberg today is that it
helps me frame my own calling totalk about faith and learning in
(41:14):
ways that might help otherpeople, might strengthen other
people's ability to do that. Butpeople don't need to be rescued
by me. But if we have somethingto contribute that will help
people, keep people from fallinginto traps that are too narrow,
too small, too sectarian, andhave a wider view, then we ought
to do it. I've been strugglingwith how to do that. You don't
(41:35):
gain respect in the historicalguild by writing a brief history
of everything from my ownpersonal perspective. You do it
by showing you know inescapableexpertise in some narrow way.
And I'm past that now in my ownlife at thinking so I'm I almost
(41:55):
hate the focus on on me that thecurrent wave of memoirists seems
to be evoking, but there may besome kind of memoir like thing I
need to say before my life comesto an end. I'm not that old,
but, but you need to think aboutthings like that and and so as I
frame as you ask questions and Ianswer them as I will speak
(42:17):
tonight at Muhlenberg, I'malways trying to figure out,
what does this mean, and whatdoes it mean that I need to talk
about it in some way while I'mhere, because I do have, I do
think I have had someextraordinary experiences of
crossing boundaries, beinginsider outsider in many
different ways. And we live in aworld that is so sharply
(42:38):
polarized, in which peoplelisten to one another so badly
or so little that that wedesperately need that to to
improve. And liberal artscolleges like Muhlenberg have an
opportunity to give people thespace to talk safely about
complicated and difficult thingsand grow. And we really need
(42:59):
that in our society right now,I'm sorry, the degree to which
polarization has taken over evencolleges, because that ought to
be a kind of a sacred groundwhere we can, where we can
regard each other as humanbeings first and encounter ideas
as not the last word on things.
Chip Gruen (43:23):
So speaking of the last word on things, I want to
give you the last word. I liketo exercise a little bit of
humility here by recognizingthat I might be totally missing
the boat on our conversationabout what's really important,
about what the the message as wethink about about vocation,
(43:43):
about higher education, aboutthe life of the church, what am
I missing that you think issuper important for our
listeners to kind of take awayfrom this conversation?
Guy Erwin (43:52):
I um, I'll take a stab at it. I'm not confident
this is the last word, but I'mincreasingly convinced that what
motivates most people is someform of fear, and especially in
this polarized situation we findourselves in this country, so
many people are afraid of losingsomething valuable to them, and
(44:15):
I won't characterize the theends of the poles, but to say
that we need to be calmer andmore self differentiated when it
comes to the engagement withultimate questions, because none
of us has an ultimate answer,and if you can talk about faith
(44:36):
with someone who has a differentfaith from you, you're a long
ways along that path, but it'sstill hard for us to do. And I,
and I am concerned and a littlealarmed by the degree to which,
especially in intellectualcircles in the United States and
often in universities, talkingabout faith is just off the
(44:56):
table. It's taboo. It reminds meof when I was when I lived in
East Germany for a while as agraduate student during
dissertation research andstudying at the university in
Leipzig, I lived with my hostfamily, my professor's family,
and they had a high school agedaughter who came home in tears
at least once a week because herteacher had humiliated her in
(45:17):
front of the class by pointingout that she was a Christian and
therefore unable, by definition,to think scientifically. For
them, it was a categoricalbinary. If you were a person of
faith, you couldn't be a personof knowledge in the way that
knowledge was valued, in that,in that philosophical system.
And and one day, she came homeand her father had a leather box
(45:42):
that had in it three large goldmedals, and they had that had
been given to him by EricHonaker, the chair of the
Central Committee of theCommunist Party of East Germany,
for his achievements in Lutherscholarship, because that was
the year that East Germanywanted to welcome all the
tourists from the west tocelebrate Luther's 500th
birthday, and they needed thehard currency. So the hypocrisy
(46:05):
of a system that would humiliatea schoolgirl but reward a
professor for talking about thesame things, that's really made
me realize that we need we needto make a have a better
integration of faith andlearning. The fact that that
religion has been banished fromthe intellectual public square
(46:27):
is as much religion's fault asany I don't blame the
enlightenment or rationalism forthis. I blame the fact that when
it was invited to engage,Christian thinkers often pulled
back and said, No, we just goingto insist on what we know to be
true, and you'll have to comealong. And I think we really
(46:47):
lost something there. TheEnlightenment was not won by the
free thinkers. It was lost bythe people of faith, and it
still remains one of the mostinteresting periods of our
history. We can still learn fromthat era, and I hope he will.
Chip Gruen (47:02):
All right. Well, I think that is a good place to
leave off. Guy Erwin, thank youso much for coming on. It's been
a great pleasure.
Guy Erwin (47:08):
Thanks for talking with me.
Chip Gruen (47:11):
This has been ReligionWise, a podcast produced
by the Institute for Religiousand Cultural Understanding of
Muhlenberg College. ReligionWiseis produced and directed by
Christine Flicker. For moreinformation about additional
programming, or to make aninquiry about a speaking
engagement, please visit ourwebsite at
religionandculture.com Thereyou'll find our contact
(47:32):
information, links to otherprogramming, and have the
opportunity to support the workof the Institute. Please
subscribe to ReligionWisewherever you get your podcasts.
We look forward to seeing younext time.
Welcome to ReligionWise. I'm your host,
Chip Gruen. if you're a regularlistener to ReligionWise, you'll
know that our goal is to hostconversations about religion in
public life. We do this mostlyby featuring discussions that
consider religion and religiousdiversity as they are relevant
to public life in all kinds ofways. So this might be
(00:24):
scholarship that focuses onimportant issues surrounding
religion in our world, but itmight also feature conversations
that are more immediatelyrelevant to understanding of
law, policy, medicine orbusiness. Our basic premise is
that a more sophisticated,nuanced way of considering the
place of religion in our worldwill help us to understand and
(00:44):
interact with that world in abetter way and also a more
empathetic way, one thatconsiders the needs and the
perspectives of others. Ofcourse, the dominant
conversation about religion inour world is held by religious
individuals talking about theirown communities. We often
feature those conversations inanother program hosted by the
Institute for Religious andCultural Understanding called
(01:07):
WorldViews, that is held oncampus at Muhlenberg College
during both the fall and thespring semesters. If you're
interested for more informationon that, either if you're local
you or you want to livestream,you can go to our website at
religionandculture.com to getall of the details. Today on
ReligionWise, we will host asimilar kind of conversation
that features this importantpart of the public discourse on
(01:30):
religion by talking to Dr. GuyErwin. Dr Erwin currently serves
as the President of the UnitedLutheran Seminary. He has also
held the office of bishop in theEvangelical Lutheran Church in
America, and is a prominentchurch historian specializing in
reformation studies. Hisbiography is an interesting one,
though he does a much better jobof introducing himself, which
(01:51):
he'll do during the episode. Iwant to make you aware of a few
details about his life as wehead into the conversation. So
first, he grew up on a nativereservation in Oklahoma and is a
member of the Osage Nation. Fromthere, after having lived some
time in Germany, he went on topursue his higher education in
the United States, holdingadvanced degrees from both
Harvard and Yale. He also holdsthe distinction of being the
(02:14):
first openly gay male to serveas a bishop in the churches of
the Lutheran World Federation,of which the ELCA is a part. I
had the opportunity to sit downwith Dr. Irwin while he was on
campus to talk about how thehistory and legacy of the
Reformation has affectedLutheran ideas about higher
education. It's my pleasure towelcome Dr. Erwin to
(02:36):
ReligionWise, to not only talkabout this groundbreaking
career, but also to considerlarger questions on vocation and
the place of contemporaryChristianity in our public
conversation more generally. Dr.
Guy Erwin, thanks for coming onReligionWise.
Guy Erwin (02:55):
I'm glad to be here.
Thank you for inviting me.
Chip Gruen (02:57):
All right, so one of the things I noticed in your
writing and your teaching thatI, that I was researching coming
into our conversation is youreally emphasize both the human
and the humane. And I think it'smaybe a good habit to start off
with asking you a question aboutyou as a human. Can you tell me
a little bit about where youcome from, how you got here, and
(03:19):
what's the story of Guy Erwin?
Guy Erwin (03:20):
Sure, sure. I I have had a very interesting life and
trajectory, and a lot of it isnot what one would expect. I was
born in northeastern Oklahoma onthe Osage Indian Reservation in
a very small town, which wasalso the county seat and the
capital of the reservation, andI have lived in a lot of
(03:40):
different places since then, andseen and done a lot of things
that I think most of the otherpeople who were born there in
that year would never haveimagined. And it's not because
of my own accomplishment alone,but because of decisions other
people made for me andopportunities I've taken. I was
raised by parents who thoughthey would not articulate, I
(04:05):
think, any sense of religiousidentity, and didn't practice
any particular form ofChristianity, were what I would
call ethically informedProtestants, secular
Protestants, in a way they did.
We didn't actually ever belongedto a church when I was growing
up, but I was brought up to havea high regard for the dignity of
(04:25):
other people and a pretty deepcuriosity about the way the
world is, and they often withoutarticulating it in words, set an
example for me that basicallywas ask every question, find out
whatever you can, don't miss anyopportunity to learn something
(04:45):
new and and I didn't realize, ofcourse, until I was fully the
person they had helped mebecome, that I'd actually
learned it from them. And now Ilook back and I'm very grateful.
For the upbringing I had and thewillingness to say yes to things
that I think some of my peersand friends and even relatives
(05:05):
would have been afraid to do.
Chip Gruen (05:09):
So you remarked that you've been able to do lots of
things. You've had lots ofopportunities. I'll also say you
your your career, your life, hasbeen marked by a lot of firsts.
You're the first openly gay maleto serve as an Evangelical
Lutheran Church in AmericaBishop, the first Native
American to serve as a bishop inthe ELCA. Beyond those, the
(05:32):
personal characteristics thatenabled you to be a
groundbreaker, I have to thinkthat your worldview is also
informed by something of arevolutionary temperament. Maybe
that's too strong. You can tellme if that, if that makes sense
or not, are you a rebel? Youknow, and if you are, how does
this bled into your career as ateacher, a preacher and a leader
of the church?
Guy Erwin (05:52):
That question is a really good one, because I
suppose in some ways, I am arebel. I never would have put it
that way. It would never haveoccurred to me to think of
myself that way. In fact, in myconscious self reflection, I
would say I am not a rebel. Infact, a traditionalist and a
conservationist, in a sense ofbeing having a high regard for
(06:17):
the past and the experience ofthose who've gone before us.
Where I have been rebellious isthat I refuse to accept what
everyone else says has to be asan ultimate reality, and the
fact that, I wish I could saythat I was the person who
(06:37):
knocked down the wall, whoopened the kick to open the
door, I didn't. I waited tillthe door was open a crack, and
then I put my foot in it, andthen I put my whole self in it
so it couldn't be closed again.
And that's how I was a first.
That's how I changed things. Youknow, I think other gay people
and other members of minorityracial groups whose identity is
(07:02):
not obvious from their faceswould agree with me that our
lives growing up are kind ofalways testing the room we're in
to see how safe we are. And Inever, I don't think for the
most part, I presented to otherpeople as gay in an obvious way.
It wasn't an attempt on my partto conceal who I was. It's part
(07:25):
of being in my generation thatthe models of masculinity I had
were fairly what we would thinkof now as fairly old fashioned,
and I have never reallyquestioned that part of my
identity. But I was always awarethat if everyone in the room
knew everything about me that Iknow about myself, I might not
(07:47):
be as safe as I am, and that haskept me cautious, but it's also
given me the opportunity to goin some spots where people who
are maybe more rebellious bynature would have would have
stumbled or would have playedtheir hand too strongly. If you
grow up always having to codeswitch and always having to read
(08:08):
the room around you, it's hardto give it up. And I'm grateful
that younger people don't reallyhave to do that anymore, and can
kind of just blow into a spacebeing 100% who they are. I
actually don't feel like I don'tdo that but, but I understand
that my way of doing it is notone that's going to it hasn't
(08:28):
gotten me in too much trouble,and I'm I hope that my doing
that has helped make the spacesafer for other people. I know
that in my career in the church,for example, that there are a
lot of people who know me insome way as a figure of
authority or respect who knowthat first and then find out,
(08:49):
oh, he's gay, so a husband orhe's native, he's Osage and the
native stuff doesn't matter toomuch. There's not a deep
prejudice, I think, in oursociety against natives in
general, just more indifference.
But being gay, that's that's abig deal in Christian circles
and and if people have alreadycome to like me or have some
respect for me, or at least seeme fully for who I am as a as a
(09:11):
church leader, before they findout I'm gay, it's very hard to
completely roll that back andsay, "oh, well, that means he
doesn't know anything, can't sayanything," and that has helped
in some ways too. I don't thinkone could get from the A to B in
my life in the same way todaythat I did it in my time, and I
(09:33):
had lots of peers who were moreoutspoken, braver, more
assertive, more more rebelliousthan I was, and at times I felt
guilty about that, but I knew itwas not in my nature to do that.
So we all get, we get where weneed to be in the trajectory of
(09:54):
our lives, but we take differentpaths.
Chip Gruen (09:59):
So the other part of your identity that I want to
hesitate on for a little bit isgrowing up as a part of the
Osage Nation, of being Native,and you describe that as being
as having of those traditions,at least the ones that you grew
up in, as having faded with thegenerations, or that they were
(10:20):
an overlay of, quote, middleclass, white American values.
And you know, something I'vealways wondered, and, you know,
tried to be empathetic to foryou know, indigenous people is,
on the one hand, knowing thetragedy of the past, that that's
part of your story, but on theother hand, I mean, particularly
in your situation, being aleader of a cultural institution
(10:43):
that is not got clean hands, youknow. You know broadly. You know
for Colonial exploits or for thepolitical and and social world
of the past. You know. You know.
So I wonder how you, how youcome to terms to that? How do
you think about that being, youknow, the face, really, of an
institution that has...
Guy Erwin (11:06):
I mean, I do think about it from the standpoint of
the institutions, but I would goa little bit deeper and say
that, in fact, even part of mylife search for meaning in
faith, has been coming to termswith the fact that there are no
clean hands. Humans just aren'tlike that. My ancestors are both
(11:26):
the enslavers and the enslaved,the dispossessed and the
dispossessors, and especially inmy case, since I'm mostly white,
my Indian ancestors are only afraction of my total number of
ancestors. I have to think aboutthat every day. Which side am I
on? The thing is, there reallyaren't any sides in America we
(11:47):
are all kind of in thissituation of being both guilty
and living and living with thebenefit of the exploitation that
was done, both of enslavedpeople and of dispossessed ones,
but also realizing that they areus. You remember the you might
remember the old cartoon thatwe've met the enemy, and they
(12:10):
are us, and in some ways that isis us. Now, in my case of being
Osage, there were some specialissues involved in that. I
belong to a tribe that is hasabout 20,000 members now, of
whom there are less than a dozenwho are 100% Osage in their
ancestry. So every ancestor theyknow of is Osage. Everyone else
(12:33):
is mixed to some degree. Somepeople are more native than
others because their, theirancestors intermarried with
people from other tribes. Sothey're quite a lot of mixed
Indian families, but almosteverybody has some white
ancestors too. And some of themost active members of my tribe
are people who are no more Osagethan I am in we don't like to
(12:55):
talk about the blood quantumthing, because that's really is
a racist way of assuming, offiguring out who's who. But you
are, you are as Osage as youfeel in some ways. It's not even
a matter of knowledge, I thinkbecause some of us know more
than others, I know some things,and I've I realized in my
maturity that I learned thingsas a child from having grown up
(13:18):
there around it, that myrelatives, who grew up in other
parts of the United States, whoare as Osage as I, didn't know,
and this has been a veryinteresting source of
conversation for us in lateryears, how much of it is kind of
osmosis, because I was not told,I was not given lessons.
Nowadays, I'm really happy toreport if you're a child growing
(13:41):
up where I was born, you learnthe Osage language in Head
Start, and you get instructionin the public schools, because
the tribe pays for it. When Iwas a kid, I felt like the tribe
was, in some ways, trying todisappear culturally. There
wasn't any support for that. Ifyou wanted to learn Osage, you
had to be in a family that spokeit. And nobody in my circle of
(14:02):
relatives did. So I mean, it'skind of one of my old age
projects is to learn some of thelanguage, to catch up a little
bit on what I missed. But ofcourse, at the time, I couldn't
have had it. I think we were. Wewere living in a racist paradigm
that had bought the the old ideathat the less Indian you were,
the better you'd be, the betterAmerican you'd be, the more
(14:24):
chances you'd have at materialprosperity and upward mobility
and and that's that's really,that's a really basic problem
for natives in America today, isthe pull to be not native,
because it isn't an advantage.
There's almost no place whereit's really an advantage.
Chip Gruen (14:44):
So zooming out just a little bit, you know, seeing
some of your sermons and some ofyour written work, it seems to
me, one of the central cores ofyour understanding the Christian
message is that it hinges on thedefiance of expectations. So you
say in one place, you know thatthe gospel doesn't fit into the
usual categories of experience.
You even describe Jesus assomeone who, quote, "delights in
(15:08):
breaking the rules other humanshad made to hang on to control."
I don't want to be overtlypolitical, but here we are in
2024 so it's sort of hard toavoid it, but it seems to me
like the role of the church is alittle bit up for grabs right
now, with a great deal ofavailable options, whether that
be retreat from public life,full throated political
(15:30):
activism, you know, thinkingabout, on the one hand, defiance
of expectations and what'sexpected and the categories that
we're set to fill and the otherhand, you know, the current
political situation where,historically, you know, go back
to Constantine, Christians havebeen super active, you know, in
(15:51):
in political life. I mean, howdo you square your read of the
gospel with what the Christiancalling is for political
vocation?
Guy Erwin (16:03):
That's another really complicated one. I on the on the
one level, I think that it isimportant for Christians to
develop a sense of what it meansto live in the Gospel. There are
two things I mean by that. Oneof them is the, I think the more
superficial, but perhaps at themoment more important one of us
(16:25):
constituting, situating one'slife and one's work in a way
that works toward the commongood and that serves one's
neighbor. So Christianity is notthe only faith that does this,
but in its best moments, helpspeople get past themselves, to
think about the good of othersand to act in ways that promote
(16:46):
that. If we, if we voted the waywe believed there would be,
there still could be a widevariety of ways in which we
would vote. But I think that atleast for Lutherans, Luther
gives us a pretty good roadmapin the Small Catechism. For in
his his explanation of the 10commandments about how we are to
(17:07):
live together with others, andthe living together part is
important. People talk aboutProtestant individualism and
finding your own, you know yourown salvation, and it being
between the individual and God.
But in fact, it doesn't everstop there, because we aren't
alone. We always live incommunity and society. And for
Luther, at least, that's rightthere. It's never, it's not even
step two. It's the other side ofthe coin. And so I think in some
(17:31):
ways it would, it's very easy touse Jesus, the example and
teaching of Jesus, in a way toset up a political program by
which one could say, yes, thenyou ought to vote in this way on
that issue and that way on thatissue. I also though, at the
same time, think the church'sjob is to say, wait, there's
(17:51):
more to it than that, becauseneither, no human construct, no
platform, not even Luther'sexplanation of the Catechism or
the 10 Commandments in theCatechism, is a is an infallible
roadmap to better. We're alwayspartial. We're always we always
(18:12):
have those dirty hands, and wecannot extricate ourselves from
where history and life has putus so that, in some ways, I
think we need to say, the churchneeds to say, at the same time,
paradoxically, this is reallyimportant, that we do the right
thing and say, in the end, itmight not matter. We might not
(18:35):
be able to decide what the rightthing is. And you know, that's
not something everyone, anyone'sever going to run a campaign on,
because it's too complicated.
But the reality is that the thelife of a Christian is a life
that is not just in the here andnow, but one that connects us to
(18:55):
the whole story of God's work increation and with humanity,
we're part of something biggerthan ourselves and something
that reaches out beyond the spanof time in which we live, and
the Church has always said that,and usually not been listened to
when it does. I derive a lot ofinspiration from St Augustine,
who's not people's favoritesaint anymore because of I don't
(19:18):
know, human sexuality issues,but I think the more you read
Augustine, the more complicatedand subtle he becomes, and the
caricatures are easy, but hissense that the world was ending
in every material way, and yetthe church was going to survive,
that God was in charge, I findit inspiring. It's maybe not the
(19:43):
best and clearest call topolitical action. I get that,
and I do think we need to beresponsible citizens. The more
agency we have, the moreresponsibility we have. And
Americans have a great deal ofagency in their political
choices. Though, right now, Iwill say, and I maybe I
shouldn't say this out loud, theidea that a well organized
(20:04):
minority could trample on therights of everyone shakes my
faith in the kind of democracywe've set up here, and it might
be a little corrosive of myfaith and democracy in general,
because I do have, at the end ofthe day, a fairly low view of
(20:25):
human nature in the collective Ithink we're very easily swayed
by fear and and I'm afraid thatmodernity has not made us less,
it's not made us less gulliblein some ways.
Chip Gruen (20:38):
So I want to chase that a little bit more by
referencing a turn of phrasethat you've used, I mean the
commonplace of the one church,right? That you use the church
in the singular, which, ofcourse, is a very old kind of
vocabulary that goes way back.
But you, as a church historian,have the great vantage point of
seeing the diversity in thetradition that's always existed.
(21:00):
And I guess I want to ask about,sort of the contemporary
diversity and maybe the blackeye that Christianity as a whole
gets in the public view, rightthe public discourse. I'm sure
that there, you know, maybe evenlisteners right now who are
(21:21):
surprised that someone like youis in a position of authority,
right with your identifyingcharacteristics, is in a
position of authority within amainstream Christian
denomination, because they knowwhat Christians are, right?
Christians are those people whowant to tell me what to do, or
Christians are those people whoare really socially conservative
or theologically intolerant ofdifference, or what have you.
(21:43):
Can we talk about that? Can wejust talk about the ways in
which, you know, the, to put itcrudely, the brand of
Christianity has gotten reallydamaged in the past generation.
Guy Erwin (21:54):
In some ways, I think I was, I was kind of formed for
this moment, because growing upmy my parents as I said were
highly ethical, thoughtful, kindpeople who were pretty much
untouched by by specificreligious commitments. And we
knew we were. My family was sortof culturally Protestant, but,
(22:16):
but we weren't any more narrowlyshaped than that. If somebody
would ask what we were, we wouldsay we were Methodists, because
that usually just ended theconversation. But we never
belonged to a congregation, andit was, as I say, two
generations earlier, sinceanyone had what it means,
though, is that we were acutelyaware of the Christianity around
(22:38):
us. It was more than one thing,but I lived, I grew up in a
religion saturated environment,and it was a Christian one. We
had, I knew I didn't meetsomebody Jewish until I was in
grade school in another part ofthe country, and I didn't, I
don't think I met a practicingMuslim until I was in college.
(22:58):
And so it was a Christian world,but in my family, at least, if
something was described among usas Christian, it had invisible
quotation marks around it, andit meant those people like that.
And what we meant in the in theeastern in the Oklahoma setting,
was fundamentalists orPentecostals, people whose way
(23:21):
of being Christian was reallyforeign to us, so much so that
we really couldn't see ourselvesin that story. It's in some ways
remarkable that I wanted to be aChristian in spite of that. I
don't know exactly why. Maybethat's where my rebelliousness
comes in is that I've alwaysthought there was something more
(23:43):
to be learned or something moreto be said, and I might even
have been slightly envious ofpeople who had that kind of
strong, powerful associationthat built a kind of a community
identity. I don't rememberconsciously thinking that. I do
remember the first branch ofChristianity, aspect of
(24:04):
Christianity I was impressedwith was the Roman Catholic
Church, because of itsantiquity, which is also sort of
more apparent than real in lotsof ways, because it cultivates
the idea of tradition withoutalways knowing that some
traditions are not that old andbut the whole, the whole
edifice, points in the directionof tradition. And that appealed
(24:27):
to me in some ways. The pointI'm trying to make is that I've
always known there wereChristians I didn't want to be
one of. And I think my becominga Christian was a process of
eliminating them, of kind oftaking, going through the
filters in such a way I had a Icould find a livable faith, one
(24:47):
that I wasn't embarrassed by,and that's and that landed me in
the in the Protestant mainline,but especially Lutheranism, had
some things that offered thatsome of those other churches
didn't so, so I do see thatprocess, for me as being really
closely tied to my discovery ofLuther and Lutheranism.
Chip Gruen (25:10):
I can see why you have an affinity towards
Augustine, because he trieseverything first too right,
everything else.
Guy Erwin (25:17):
Well, I wish I could say I had as an exciting path to
it as he did but I did not.
Chip Gruen (25:23):
So I want to zoom out a little bit further on your
role as a scholar and aneducator. You talk a little bit
about the advantages you've hadabout being an outsider to the
tradition, and even just now,you talked about becoming a
Christian, because you know yourfamily's religious life was not,
you know, well defined if that'sif that's fair to say. And so
(25:47):
you talk about being adoptedinto this Lutheran Christian
identity, as opposed to being aquote, unquote "cradle
Lutheran." Can you talk aboutyour distance from the
tradition, and what you meanwhen you say that's an advantage
over some of your colleagues andpeers for navigating it?
Guy Erwin (26:04):
Yeah, advantage makes it sound like there's a kind of
one can win in this, which isnot really the case. I do think
it gives me a valuableperspective that my that my
fellow Lutherans need, and otherChristians can benefit from, and
that is that I don't, forexample, actually believe
there's such a thing as a cradleLutheran. There are people who
(26:26):
have been part of Lutherancommunities their whole lives
because they were born intoLutheran families. And in fact,
I think our the Lutheranchurches in America, kind of
rejoice in the great number ofpeople who have been, have
always been there, and whoseparents and grandparents were
there and since they came fromEurope. But we all know that is
(26:47):
not how one becomes Christian,that it is, it is not just a
matter of an action and adecision. I don't believe in
decision theology, but if youdon't know what it means, you
haven't really made it your own.
And so I'll admit sometimes Itake a puckish delight in in
teasing lifelong Lutherans abouthow much they assume that being
(27:11):
who they are in the family inwhich they're embedded, in the
congregation to which theybelong, is their understanding
of what Lutheranism is and howthin that is, because it doesn't
really stand on anything exceptthis collective experience and
sentiment. And that's why whenthen we introduce new peoples,
new populations, new cultures,into the faith, and try to have
(27:35):
people who are not white,European Americans in our
churches, often we crash becausewe can't understand them, and
they can't understand us becausewe've associated our faith with
our religious culture. And it'shelped me a great deal in being
Lutheran that I I was shaped notjust by American Lutherans, but
(27:58):
also by German ones and EastGerman ones who lived under
communism and were disadvantagedfor their faith. And I have been
very much influenced byLutherans from other parts of
the world. So I don't see Ithink American Lutherans tend to
confuse Americanness withLutheranness too, and and I try
not to do that. So there's thisold I wish I knew exactly where
(28:23):
it came from, but there's an oldFinnish Lutheran proverb that a
Christian is only ever one dayold. What you were yesterday
doesn't matter. What you aretomorrow, you can't possibly
know. You wake up every day intothe reality that you inhabit,
and you decide, am I with God?
(28:45):
Is God with me in Jesus or not?
And live accordingly. That Ifind that enormously consoling,
although I think some peoplemight find that scary, because
it seems a little intangible,but I really think it's
important to remember that itisn't the tradition, it isn't
the pomp, it isn't the songs weknow by heart. It's it's the
(29:06):
decision each day, who's to,whom do we belong?
Chip Gruen (29:12):
So that seems a little bit in opposition to
something else, and I don't knowyou can straighten me out that
you describe your initialinterest in Christianity as one
that views it as a quote,unquote, "human phenomenon." And
I'll admit, when I read that, Iwas like, Oh, I like this,
(29:32):
right? I like this idea. Ialways start my classes teaching
my students that at least whatwe can see in the religious
studies classroom isunderstanding the human
phenomenon of religion. So whatdo you mean when you discuss
Christianity as a humanphenomenon? And maybe to go back
to the previous answer, how doesthat square with this idea of
that presentism, as opposed to,you know, banking on the
(29:55):
tradition of the past?
Guy Erwin (29:56):
That's a really good question, and I think that's the
difference. I mean, I don't knowhow well I'll be able to explain
it, but that is at heart, thedifference between being someone
who's very interested inChristianity and someone who is
a believer. I talk about I wascaptured entranced by the by the
physical phenomena ofChristianity as a child,
(30:18):
visiting churches andcathedrals, seeing the ways in
which human effort had gone insuch to such remarkable degree
into depicting and strengtheningideas the abstract. And I think,
I actually think I probablywould still have been a
historian of Christianity, evenif I had never come to faith. I
(30:40):
would have done it in exactlythat way, and I and I have a
deep curiosity about thosethings. I always want to know
more. I'm still learning, butI'm also learning about other
faiths. I led a tour of studentsand a few adults and clergy to
Spain and Morocco after 9/11 somy response to the attack in
(31:02):
2001 was to teach a class thenext semester on Holy War and
the three Abrahamic faiths,because we all have this legacy.
It isn't just a Muslim thing.
You know, the God of hosts wepray to in the Sanctus at the
Holy Communion the verses fromthe Old Testament. That's the
God of armies. We're invokingthe armies of God at the
Eucharistic table and and so Iwanted to show that this isn't
(31:26):
really too subterranean, even inChristianity and certainly in
Judaism. And then the studentswere so interested in it that I
decided to lead a tour. That's along story. The point of the of
the anecdote is that I had avery earnest Lutheran pastor
with me on the tour. And as wewould visit places that were
holy to Muslims, I would explainhow, as much best I can, I'm no
(31:52):
expert and don't pretend to behow Muslim worship was carried
out, what the prayer meant, whatthe symbolism of the mosques
meant, all the kind ofdecoration, what the call to
prayer signified to thedifferent times of day, all that
sort of thing. And she, in herearnestness, somehow came to
believe I was a secret Muslim,or wanted to be one, just
(32:15):
because I was able to work up asympathetic enthusiasm for the
practices of someone else'sfaith, and that sympathetic
enthusiasm is what makes me ascholar of religion. It doesn't
make me a Muslim. My fascinationwith everything Jewish doesn't
make me Jewish, but I hope itallows me to talk about those
(32:37):
things with my students andothers I need to talk with in
that way, without prejudice,with trying to remove the
barrier between us. I don't haveto decide, I don't have to
insist that a Christian way ofdoing things is right. In fact,
it gets in the way ofunderstanding what other people
do. So as a scholar, I try topractice that kind of self
removal, but I know that when Iwas studying Luther and working
(33:02):
as especially as a collegestudent, that I was really also
looking for something else. Iwanted to be a part of it
myself. I wanted to, I wanted tobe inside and not just looking
at it from the outside. And Idon't know, I can't really
describe how it happened. I reada lot of Augustine. I read a lot
(33:23):
of Luther, and there wassomething about the way Luther
described God's presence, God'sself manifestation, in Jesus,
and the way that changes theequation of the relationship
between God and humankind that Ifound so compelling that I could
never it, it wouldn't leave mealone. And that's maybe also an
(33:43):
Augustinian trait that, and Imean, it's been exaggerated how
much of an Augustinian Lutherwas, but the but that idea that
God is there, God has come, Godhas grabbed on and will not let
go was also held on to me untilI was ready, very slowly and
(34:05):
with tiny steps to actually makethe public declaration of my own
faith. And it took me, it tookme quite a while.
Chip Gruen (34:16):
So you talk about, and I'm really happy to have
this conversation, becauseyou've expressed, I mean, not a
rigid binary, but a binary thatI don't think I would have
expressed before, between whatyou describe on the one hand is,
oh, help me, it was enthusiasticsympathy?
Guy Erwin (34:35):
Yes, yes.
Chip Gruen (34:36):
Yeah, on the one hand, but that not being the
same thing or being differentfrom being within a faith
community, right? And I describethis sometimes as and I think
you have in your writing as wellas empathy, right, and the
cultivation of empathy and thatpart of your work is helping to
cultivate that in yourself andothers. And the reason I'm kind
(34:56):
of excited about this justeditorialize for a second, is
because I am always trying toreinforce to my students, and
you know, when I do publictalks, that empathy is actually
an intellectual exercise thatneeds to be practiced, right?
That it's not, it's not kumbaya,it's not just egalitarianism,
(35:17):
but it's like, it's hard work,right?
Guy Erwin (35:18):
The keyword being exercise, yes, it requires
effort and requires practice.
Chip Gruen (35:23):
And yet, right while on the one hand, you put that on
the side of historical study,you describe it one place as you
know, cultivation of empathy forpeople we can only know
partially and whose lifeexperience was profoundly
different from our own. It alsoseems to have a role in your
other vocational calling that isan engagement with difference,
(35:46):
right, all kinds of difference.
So can you talk a little bitmore about that, that
enthusiastic sympathy, or thatempathy, and how it is not just
about, you know, history and thehistorical other, but it's also
about, you know, contemporarycommunities.
Guy Erwin (36:04):
Yeah, I want to take it quickly to the very highest
possible level and say that, Ithink, in a very real way, for
me, Jesus is the ultimateexpression of God's empathy for
for the creation, humankind inparticular. We're human, so we
put ourselves in the center. AndI think that's that's natural
enough. So having said that thefact that God is wants to
(36:30):
demonstrate this empathy for us,this love, you know, we start we
we call it love, we call itgrace. We call it mercy, all
these things that God wants tobe connected to us as we are,
not at some point when we reachour highest form of development,
I see that as enabling us,enabling me to manage my anxiety
(36:56):
with all the kinds of differencethat either delight me or cause
me to be afraid. I mean, I'mnot. I'm no better than anyone
else at being confronted byradical difference. I have to
adjust myself to it, but I'dlike to think that I have
(37:17):
practiced enough not to besurprised by what is human, not
immediately to draw a line andrefuse to look any further. I
think, to be also being ahistorian, to be a historian who
deals with the 20th century. AndI'm, I was really, I kind of, to
be honest with you, avoided thatthe 16th century bad enough, but
(37:39):
the 20th century was, was Icouldn't face. And I think
anyone to be a good historianhas to be able to look the evil
in the eye, and you don't haveto be the ultimate judge, but
you have to be able to look atit long enough to appreciate
what was done and be able totalk about it in a way other
people can or write about it ina way that other people can
(38:00):
understand. And that takes, thattakes real effort, and it isn't
always empathy. I don't think wecan completely be empathetic
with people we can never fullyknow, but it's an attempt, at
least to get beyond our owndisgust and understand that
there are people so profoundlydifferent that there's almost
nothing we have in common.
Chip Gruen (38:20):
So your occasion for visiting Muhlenberg, and this is
today, I'm super grateful foryour time, because you're very
busy, and I'm sure you're goingto collapse tonight after it's
all over, but your occasion forcoming is to talk about higher
education, to talk aboutvocation, you know, as a part of
the Lutheran heritage. And Iwant to talk to you just a
little bit about highereducation in general and your
(38:44):
own calling as a vocation in it.
And I want to call yourattention to something you wrote
in The Expert's Historian. Youwrote the foreword to that book
because it was written by amentor of yours, Leonard Smith.
I get that correct? Yes, and youdescribe his life and work as
displaying a quote "blend ofbroad and dispassionate
knowledge with intense andpassionate conviction". You go
(39:05):
on to describe him as havinglived a scholar's life within a
teacher's vocation, and that hewas perfectly at home, both in
the library and the classroom.
Now I'm not bringing this upbecause I want to dive deep into
Leonard Smith's life and work.
But it seems to me like thatthis is at least aspirationally
autobiographical for yourself.
(39:29):
So can you talk about thebalancing of these different
callings within your vocation asteacher, preacher, leader in the
communities you served?
Guy Erwin (39:38):
It's, I think it's fascinating that you found that
and lift it up. Because, in away, I think you're correct
about this autobiographicalaspect, without my having ever
noticed that until you pointedit out. Because the one thing
you need to know about LeonardSmith, and I think one of the
reasons I could write that withsuch feeling, is that, this is a
(40:00):
man who taught in a veryordinary undergraduate
institution, it was one ofquality but, but ordinary
liberal arts school. He has avery long career, taught many
kinds of history because he wasin a small department, and
during this entire career, keptan intense fascination with one
narrow aspect of German 19thcentury historiography that he
(40:25):
collected and wrote about andhoned and all of that until he
was in his late 80s, and thenfinally published it. He was
long retired. He'd retiredbefore I ever got to that
school, and we just becamefriends, and and I hope I fear
that I have thought and thoughtand thought and not said enough.
(40:49):
That if I'm, it's not that theworld needs me, but that it
would be a waste to have spentas much time thinking about
these things as I have withoutdoing a better job of telling
telling the story back. And soit's one of the reasons I accept
invitations like the one to cometo Muhlenberg today is that it
helps me frame my own calling totalk about faith and learning in
(41:14):
ways that might help otherpeople, might strengthen other
people's ability to do that. Butpeople don't need to be rescued
by me. But if we have somethingto contribute that will help
people, keep people from fallinginto traps that are too narrow,
too small, too sectarian, andhave a wider view, then we ought
to do it. I've been strugglingwith how to do that. You don't
(41:35):
gain respect in the historicalguild by writing a brief history
of everything from my ownpersonal perspective. You do it
by showing you know inescapableexpertise in some narrow way.
And I'm past that now in my ownlife at thinking so I'm I almost
(41:55):
hate the focus on on me that thecurrent wave of memoirists seems
to be evoking, but there may besome kind of memoir like thing I
need to say before my life comesto an end. I'm not that old,
but, but you need to think aboutthings like that and and so as I
frame as you ask questions and Ianswer them as I will speak
(42:17):
tonight at Muhlenberg, I'malways trying to figure out,
what does this mean, and whatdoes it mean that I need to talk
about it in some way while I'mhere, because I do have, I do
think I have had someextraordinary experiences of
crossing boundaries, beinginsider outsider in many
different ways. And we live in aworld that is so sharply
(42:38):
polarized, in which peoplelisten to one another so badly
or so little that that wedesperately need that to to
improve. And liberal artscolleges like Muhlenberg have an
opportunity to give people thespace to talk safely about
complicated and difficult thingsand grow. And we really need
(42:59):
that in our society right now,I'm sorry, the degree to which
polarization has taken over evencolleges, because that ought to
be a kind of a sacred groundwhere we can, where we can
regard each other as humanbeings first and encounter ideas
as not the last word on things.
Chip Gruen (43:23):
So speaking of the last word on things, I want to
give you the last word. I liketo exercise a little bit of
humility here by recognizingthat I might be totally missing
the boat on our conversationabout what's really important,
about what the the message as wethink about about vocation,
(43:43):
about higher education, aboutthe life of the church, what am
I missing that you think issuper important for our
listeners to kind of take awayfrom this conversation?
Guy Erwin (43:52):
I um, I'll take a stab at it. I'm not confident
this is the last word, but I'mincreasingly convinced that what
motivates most people is someform of fear, and especially in
this polarized situation we findourselves in this country, so
many people are afraid of losingsomething valuable to them, and
(44:15):
I won't characterize the theends of the poles, but to say
that we need to be calmer andmore self differentiated when it
comes to the engagement withultimate questions, because none
of us has an ultimate answer,and if you can talk about faith
(44:36):
with someone who has a differentfaith from you, you're a long
ways along that path, but it'sstill hard for us to do. And I,
and I am concerned and a littlealarmed by the degree to which,
especially in intellectualcircles in the United States and
often in universities, talkingabout faith is just off the
(44:56):
table. It's taboo. It reminds meof when I was when I lived in
East Germany for a while as agraduate student during
dissertation research andstudying at the university in
Leipzig, I lived with my hostfamily, my professor's family,
and they had a high school agedaughter who came home in tears
at least once a week because herteacher had humiliated her in
(45:17):
front of the class by pointingout that she was a Christian and
therefore unable, by definition,to think scientifically. For
them, it was a categoricalbinary. If you were a person of
faith, you couldn't be a personof knowledge in the way that
knowledge was valued, in that,in that philosophical system.
And and one day, she came homeand her father had a leather box
(45:42):
that had in it three large goldmedals, and they had that had
been given to him by EricHonaker, the chair of the
Central Committee of theCommunist Party of East Germany,
for his achievements in Lutherscholarship, because that was
the year that East Germanywanted to welcome all the
tourists from the west tocelebrate Luther's 500th
birthday, and they needed thehard currency. So the hypocrisy
(46:05):
of a system that would humiliatea schoolgirl but reward a
professor for talking about thesame things, that's really made
me realize that we need we needto make a have a better
integration of faith andlearning. The fact that that
religion has been banished fromthe intellectual public square
(46:27):
is as much religion's fault asany I don't blame the
enlightenment or rationalism forthis. I blame the fact that when
it was invited to engage,Christian thinkers often pulled
back and said, No, we just goingto insist on what we know to be
true, and you'll have to comealong. And I think we really
(46:47):
lost something there. TheEnlightenment was not won by the
free thinkers. It was lost bythe people of faith, and it
still remains one of the mostinteresting periods of our
history. We can still learn fromthat era, and I hope he will.
Chip Gruen (47:02):
All right. Well, I think that is a good place to
leave off. Guy Erwin, thank youso much for coming on. It's been
a great pleasure.
Guy Erwin (47:08):
Thanks for talking with me.
Chip Gruen (47:11):
This has been ReligionWise, a podcast produced
by the Institute for Religiousand Cultural Understanding of
Muhlenberg College. ReligionWiseis produced and directed by
Christine Flicker. For moreinformation about additional
programming, or to make aninquiry about a speaking
engagement, please visit ourwebsite at
religionandculture.com Thereyou'll find our contact
(47:32):
information, links to otherprogramming, and have the
opportunity to support the workof the Institute. Please
subscribe to ReligionWisewherever you get your podcasts.
We look forward to seeing younext time.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com