Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Story Behind the Picture

Tuesday, July 8th, 2014

By: Bruce Hindmarsh

My presidential address in January, “The Inner Life of Doctrine: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on the Calvinist-Arminian Debate Among Methodists,” is published this month in Church History, but it began several years ago on a padded bench in Henry E. Huntington’s villa in San Marino, California.

This grand house was built in 1911 and is now the centre-piece of the Huntington Art Galleries. I was in Pasadena with my family and working on a research fellowship at the Huntington Library, and every day I enjoyed walking through the gardens to have lunch in the Café. I used to stop off on the way at the Huntington villa to wander through the galleries, and especially to sit in the Grand Manner Portrait Gallery to look at pictures by Gainsborough, Lawrence, Romney and other eighteenth-century greats. In the library, I was reading sources having to do with Methodism, but here, sitting on my padded bench, I was looking at pictures painted around the very same time.

I became fascinated with one particular portrait, the painting of the actress Sarah Siddons as the Tragic Muse by Joshua Reynolds. As I looked at the date, 1784, I tried to think of all that was going on that same year among the evangelical figures that I was reading about. I realized how easily we begin to study our subjects in disciplinary silos, rather than to make the rich interdisciplinary connections that reflect the reality of life lived on the ground then as now. As I became curious, I began reading about eighteenth-century portraiture and seeing connections to my work on evangelical subjects. At first some of the connections were interesting enough, but superficial. Apparently, Reynolds had a niece who was a god-fearing Methodist who wrote a commentary on Ezekiel. The evangelical John Russell was a leading pastelist and member of the Royal Academy with Reynolds. And so on. But then the connections became more profound as it became apparent that there were deeper aspirations and cultural concerns that brought art and religion into the same frame (so to speak!). I began to try to look at these things together, and if art and religion, then why not other cultural “silos,” and so I began to draw in philosophy, literature, and music, as connections appeared. In the end, this interdisciplinary perspective allowed me to take the Calvinist-Arminian debate among evangelicals—what for many folks today would seem a something of sectarian backwater—and place it back at the centre of eighteenth-century culture and to show how it reflected fundamental aspirations. I used the “sublime” and the “agon” as terms of art that made these connections.

There is a nice coda to this story, since my journey with this article also ended with sitting on another bench in another gallery. Several of us were in Oxford in April for the first joint meeting the ASCH and the Ecclesiastical History Society in the UK—a very successful venture and stimulating conference. It was a busy four days on the ground in Oxford for me, as co-chair of the conference. I was also hosting an alumni event for Regent College and visiting with old friends and colleagues from earlier days in Oxford. It was breathless. Immediately after the conference on Saturday, I rushed to North Oxford to have tea with my good friend, the great Methodist scholar, John Walsh. He insisted on “whizzing” me back into town, after tea, to get ready for the alumni reception. At the last minute, I remembered that the painting, “The Choice of Hercules” by Paulo de Matteis was housed at the Ashmolean in Oxford, and I’d be going right by. This is the painting, commissioned by the Third Earl of Shaftesbury, that appears on the cover of this month’s issue of Church History, and it figured largely in my address and the article. I had not actually seen the painting in person, and I did not know if it was on display. I asked John to drop me at the corner by the museum, and I rushed past the tourists pouring out the front doors and went to the main desk. It was five minutes to closing, and they were shutting down the computers. A kind museum volunteer started up her computer again and looked up the painting. It was upstairs in the European Gallery at the far end, and if I ran I might be able to get there in time to see it. And so I ran, taking the stairs two or three at a time, and arrived huffing and puffing to the gallery, where I saw the painting. It was hard to miss. I took the picture below to help me remember the scale of it. The gallery attendants kindly gave me ten minutes with the painting in an empty gallery, and it was a fitting conclusion to my research for this article.

I am left with two reflections on my experience. The first one I have alluded to already, namely, that we ought as historians to be open to interdisciplinary investigations as a way of seeing our religious subjects in their fullest context. But secondly, and more personally, I am reminded of the importance of a certain element of disinterested exploration, or what Josef Pieper termed “leisure,” in our research. It was in the interstices—the breathing spaces—of my research at the Huntington, when I was “off duty,” so to speak, that I found my way to Reynolds and began to contemplate connections that would later bear fruit in my work. This element of scholarly leisure is increasingly hard to find, and hard to justify in terms of the world in which we now live, but I am grateful the Huntington remains the sort of gracious place that invites such contemplation.

Finally, I refer to an oratorio by Handel in my article, and if any readers would like to hear the music for this work, “The Choice of Hercules,” which is a kind of sound track to the painting below, you may hear at least snippets of the music here. The track for the trio that I describe in my article is number 18.

Bruce Hindmarsh is the James M. Houston Professor of Spiritual Theology at Regent College. This post is drawn from his Presidential Address to the American Society of Church History at the Society’s 2014 Winter Meeting in Washington, D.C. The address was published in the June 2014 issue of Church History and is available here.

New Books in Religious History: Hudnut-Beumler’s In Pursuit of the Almighty’s Dollar

Tuesday, July 1st, 2014

By: James Hudnut-Beumler

The editors asked me to contribute to this author’s feature, which focuses on recent books in religious history and their back-stories, so to speak. The book that they had in mind was my In Pursuit of the Almighty’s Dollar: A History of Money and American Protestantism. They indicated that I could write about how the book came to be written, the books that didn’t get written out of the research conducted, and any unplowed fields that I might have found along the way available to other scholars, or some combination of these themes. I accepted the challenge because I have always been interested in other’s “book stories” and because this book, my fourth, had emerged from the greatest forest of possibilities to-date and hence seemed worth writing about for others.

In Pursuit began as a proposal to write a non-reductive economic history of American religion that was funded by the Lilly Endowment as part of its work in Financing American Religion, and specifically a grant for the Material History of American Religion Project, which I directed that led to the writing of a wide range of monographs by individual scholars who were using non-literary evidence (food, movies, images, things heard, dress, etc.) as ways to extend what we knew about American religion in the past. My evidence was economic–money raised, money spent, buildings built, people paid–and so forth. The year the grant was issued was 1996 and my book was not in copy-edited form for a decade. (Typical post-tenure timetable, I know). Here then are the twists and turns.

I began, with the able assistance of Daniel Sack and several students collecting every knowable datum, data set, books about money in churches and synagogues, memories of ministers and their families (more on that later) and evidence about religious spending. The project resembled nothing so much as an NSA data collection effort; for interpretive history it was about as useful. Every summer for three years, however, all the authors in the Material History Project brought what they were writing on to a long weekend writing conference and provided and received critique on chapters in progress. Two pieces of critique stuck with me: limit the story to Protestants and get more people into the story. The first was good advice, since the Protestant money story really is a different one especially in the first centuries of Protestant cultural hegemony. And, of course, peopling our histories (particularly when theological concepts or percentage rates of change are being discussed) is always a way to return important questions of motivation and effect to the foreground.

Once I was simply focused on the Protestants and immersed in their material, one theme presented itself more strongly than all others, namely the reality that the freedom from state establishment of religion attendant to American nationhood was, seen economically, the first great privatization of a European public good, and religiously seen, a funding crisis that preachers would over time convert into the virtue of stewardship. This pursuit of money for God’s work, all the while knowing that it funded the preacher’s own salary was, the ministers’ enduring dilemma. The curious history of this practice of money raising, and what it tells us about the people doing the asking and giving, and the conception of churches God “required” in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries became the backbone of the book.

What then of all the other boxes of data, books, letters, and records I had collected? I had originally organized my material into economic categories marked “nature of the firm,” “income,” “capital,” “market competition,” “labor,” “price series data,” “clergy thinking about the economy,” and so on. A number of other useful studies might have been written out of these boxes, but having noticed that over long spans of time, people (mostly clergy) and buildings and their upkeep consumed roughly 2/3s and 1/3s, respectively, of all congregational income, I decided to mine those aforementioned boxes for what those Protestants spent God’s money on, and how that spending both changed over time and served as material disclosures about religious life in particular times and places. Once I did that, I discovered that not a few of my sources that told just how far the ministers’ incomes went were ministers’ wives writing on a more practical plane than their husbands were given to express themselves. Together, the income and property chapters formed the rest of an economic history of American Protestantism from the era of colonial establishments to the age of entrepreneurial preachers in the early 21st century.

In the last paragraph I deliberately use the indefinite article to claim that I had written an economic history. My exploration of finance and expenditure of Protestants might well be extended to Catholicism where changes in labor patterns especially would figure strongly in any such history. I understand a dissertation is already being completed along the lines of my study for American Judaism and I look forward to reading it. Beyond what we would learn from applying similar approaches to different groups, the boxes that didn’t get used in the study intrigue me. There was one with so much material on religious publishing that I was grateful for those who had written monographs on the topic, but also aware of how a truly economic view of American religion would attend to the ways tracks, newspapers, and book concerns (and now the Internet) form religious experiences in ways that are present in individuals in congregations, but often are difficult to see at that level of analysis. So some historical attention to the religious publishing sector as a factor in the economy of religion would be a welcome addition to our field. Another box that didn’t get used to its full potential was the one marked “religious entrepreneurship.” In Pursuit I described how we have gone from an America where select members of your town’s church decided what kind of religion you got when they chose a settled minister to a contemporary situation where in America you can have as much religion as you or someone else is willing to pay for. The rise of religious entrepreneurs is a phenomenon that is treated, to be sure, in the study of new religious movements. As an American religious historian, however, I am fascinated by the number of instances of repackaging old time religion in a shiny new cover for sale with a spirit that is as much American free enterprise as it is sincere faith. In both of these examples, looms a sense that in modern America the religious economy (like a political economy) is larger and more complex than the actors themselves perceive, but nonetheless a factor in the histories with which we grapple.

I used the term “non-reductive economic history of religion “at the beginning of this essay and I return to it at this, the end. I believe there are many additional insights that economic perspectives on what is going on in various religious histories can offer, providing of course that the tools are used to enlighten rather than flatten the religious subject itself. I would encourage other scholars in the field to count, quantify, and compare in order to see the movement of religious people in and over time. Follow their money as they follow their faith and we just might discover something valuable.

James Hudnut-Beumler is the Anne Potter Wilson Distinguished Professor of American Religious History at Vanderbilt University. His new book, In Pursuit of the Almighty’s Dollar: A History of Money and American Protestantism, was published by UNC Press in 2014.

The Catholic Gaze: Agency through Discipline

Friday, June 27th, 2014

By: Sally Dwyer-McNulty

Examining the interpersonal dynamics surrounding Catholic uniforms for Common Threads, I found three subgroups the most readily interpretable: those who make the clothing rules, those who follow the rules, and those who violate the rules. But other actors, often women, old and young, fictive and real take up a role regarding uniforms — they are the observers. Applying Michel Foucault’s insights about the practices that enforce norms in Discipline & Punishment: The Birth of the Prison, these uniform monitors comprise a network that participates in identifying rule violators and disciplining them. Foucault refers to this network, one that is informal and usually outside of the traditional institutional framework of power, as part of the “mechanism of discipline.” Nevertheless, through their policing Catholic gaze, these often unrecognized inspectors of attire and behavior claim a degree of authority, and assist in sustaining the material and behavioral dimension of Catholicism (1).

For those caught out of uniform or stretching the dress code, the “tattling” female may embody the stereotype of the nitpicky and gossiping woman, but in the context of Catholicism, with few opportunities for official authority, some women find policing a more accessible and viable form of power. The fictional character Mrs. Quimp in the 1944 film Going My Way reminded me to take note of the significance of the lay enforcer. In my initial analysis of Mrs. Quimp, I placed her in the category of a foil used by the film director Leo McCarey to further accentuate the difference between the new, more modern curate, Father O’Malley, and older more traditional pastor, Father Fitzgibbon. Observing Father O’Malley’s stylish boater hat and casual behavior with the boys playing baseball in the street, Mrs. Quimp telephoned the rectory to report on the new priest’s activities to the pastor. I likewise noted that McCarey employed a common stereotype of the nosey and gossipy female neighbor. After reanalyzing the scene, however, I feel l I may have missed an interpretive opportunity. Mrs. Quimp, like real life Catholic women, surveyed the boundaries of Catholic attire and behavior, and therefore, took on the regulator position of Catholic presentation by asserting herself as a tattler. In short, Mrs. Quimp constituted a vital part of what Foucault defines as the mechanism of discipline.

In reconsidering Mrs. Quimp’s role in policing uniform norms, real life examples from my own research reinforced this insight about those outside the formal mechanisms of power playing a policing role in support of Catholic norms. Sisters, it may be more commonly known, inspected school uniforms, prom gowns, and graduation attire. But, I am not thinking of the sisters here. After all, they are often the identifiable originators of the clothing policies themselves. Students, however, are another story. They, like the fictional Mrs. Quimp, participated in surveillance. For instance members of the Student Council at Mount St. Joseph Academy in the Philadelphia area checked and fined students who transgressed uniform standards in the 1940s. Students could charge other students, if they caught violators with “untidy shoes and uniforms” (2). Students who found stockingless legs on the tennis court or on the bus, both of which were considered penalty worthy infractions, issued fines as well. In 1939 at the John W. Hallahan Catholic Girls’ High School, a student officer met girls at the front door of their school for a uniform inspection. Accompanying a picture of two hatless girls arriving at the front door of the high school, the yearbook caption read: ”’Crime does not pay,’ listen to the tale of a pair of young sceptics who had doubts speedily removed. They ventured to disregard a precept of Hallahan’s code by carrying their hats in their hands. On their arrival at the scholastic portals, a blue-ribbon student officer pricked their bubble of nonchalance by awarding them a punitive pasteboard apiece” (3). The administrators required the students to wear hats to and from school, but it was the girls themselves they called upon to reinforce the rule. Despite the critical presentation of Mrs. Quimp’s monitoring, in the area of Catholic clothing, church members valued the act.

Sociologist Nathan Joseph, author of Uniforms and Nonuniforms: Communication through Clothing, like Foucault, identifies the position of the knowledgeable observer as a norm enforcer (4). According to Joseph, members of a group affirm or denounce the other distinctly dressed members and status holders of an organization through inspection. The gazers may not be as obvious as the “big three” but they are no less significant in maintaining identifiableness and discipline. And, despite their participation in promoting control, they nonetheless become agents in their own right.

(1) I would like to thank Lynn Eckert, Janine Peterson, and Robyn Rosen for reading and offering helpful comments on this essay. See Dany Lacombe, “Reforming Foucault: a critique of the social control thesis,” British Journal of Sociology, 47:2 (June 1996):332-352. Lacombe argues that for Foucault, “Power implies a network of relations of force between individuals. This relation of force does not suggest confinement; rather power is a mechanism that both constrains and enables action.” Lacombe, 342.
(2) Sally Dwyer-McNulty, Common Threads: A Cultural History of Clothing in American Catholicism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2014), 150.
(3) John W. Hallahan Catholic High School for Girls’, Philadelphia, PA. 1939 Silver Sands (yearbook), 48-49. Although the photograph was likely staged, by its inclusion, the photograph conveyed a recognizable scenario of a student monitoring fellow classmates.
(4) Nathan Joseph, Uniforms and Nonuniforms: Communication through Clothing (New York: Greenwood Press, 1986), 50.

Sally Dwyer-McNulty is an Associate Professor of History at Marist College. Her new book, Common Threads: A Cultural History of Clothing in American Catholicism, was published by UNC Press in 2014.

Arthur Scherr’s “Thomas Jefferson Versus the Historians”: A Response by Matt McCook

Tuesday, June 24th, 2014

By Matt McCook

Church History’s Spring issue included an article by Arthur Scherr, entitled “Thomas Jefferson Versus the Historians: Christianity, Atheistic Morality, and the Afterlife.” When the article appeared we solicited a number of responses, which can be found here, here, and here. Today we add one more response, this time from Matt McCook, Associate Professor of History at Oklahoma Christian University.


The religious faiths of the founders, particularly Thomas Jefferson, have been the subject of so much recent scholarship and polemical writing, Arthur Scherr’s title, “Thomas Jefferson Versus the Historians: Christianity, Atheistic Morality, and the Afterlife” led me to wonder which historians Scherr’s Jefferson would battle. It was clear from the opening paragraph that historians who supposedly champion the position of the Religious Right were the intended opponents. Although all respondents on this blog have mentioned that Scherr casts his net too widely in identifying the culprits, the critique bears repeating. Polemical works on all sides deserves to be called out by serious scholars, but not all scholars who argue that Jefferson was more Christian or more comfortable with some degree of cooperation between church and state are necessarily writing on behalf of the Religious Right. I find little similarity between the works of David Barton and the scholarship of James Hutson, Paul Conkin, Edwin Gaustad, or even Daniel Dreisbach. Their works are not merely provocative, as unsupported polemical assertions are, nor would they claim their conclusions were above historical revisionism. Rather, they have contributed reasonable assertions based on available evidence that demand attention; their contributions are not so easily dismissed.

Scherr raises important questions about Jefferson’s motives for issuing executive prayer and fasting declarations as Virginia’s Governor. Yet, his depiction of Jefferson makes it nearly impossible to trust what the founder says. Scherr’s Jefferson expresses himself more freely when out of office, more honestly when corresponding with fellow skeptics and materialists, and more evasively when addressing spiritualists or Christians in his own party. If, as Scherr suggests, Jefferson might lie to his friend, Benjamin Rush to keep from offending him, how can we know the true Jefferson? Scherr does not explain why we should take Jefferson’s more heretical writings to heart while explaining away more favorable comments on Christianity. Perhaps John Quincy Adams was justified, not by calling Jefferson an “infidel”, but by labeling him a “double-dealer.”

Much of what Sherr cites as examples of Jefferson’s support for atheism, more clearly illustrates his opposition to Calvinism. In this, Jefferson was in good Christian company for many evangelical reformers blasted popular notions of Calvinistic dogma as vehemently as Jefferson. These were the same evangelicals who supported Jefferson politically being unaware or unconcerned with whatever his unorthodox views might have been. Sherr points out that Jefferson’s hatred of Lyman Beecher and Timothy Dwight were constant, but these were long time political foes and not religious rivals. Perhaps Scherr would agree that Jefferson overlook one’s religious differences, even those of an atheist, more than he could look past one being a Federalist.

In an interesting side note, Scherr points out that Jefferson was confused about Jewish beliefs in an afterlife which raises interesting questions worthy of further study about other mistaken notions various founders had about various religious groups or doctrines.

To his credit, Scherr does not apply his conclusions about Jefferson to the founders generally, something popular audiences and some scholars can hardly resist. Among those scholars who have most convincingly argued against such generalizations are James Hutson and Daniel Dreisbach. Scherr succeeds in distinguishing Jefferson from other founders on religious beliefs. Although, in doing so, he makes John Adams seem more orthodox. Thus, the tug of war over the founders and their faiths will continue. Polemical writers and popular audiences will continue to simplify and overgeneralize. Works like Scherr’s will be scrutinized and analyzed resulting in a deeper understanding of Jefferson’s religious beliefs. In this way, Scherr joins the company of other worthy scholars who force us to contemplate. While I do not agree with all of his assertions, I especially appreciate the much needed attention to historiography.

Church History – June 2014

Tuesday, June 17th, 2014

The June issue of Church History is out on Cambridge Journals Online. In this issue:

Robert McEachnie, “A History of Heresy Past: The Sermons of Chromatius of Aquileia, 388-407.”


Alison More, “Institutionalizing Penitential Life in Later Medieval and Early Modern Europe: Third Orders, Rules, and Canonical Legitimacy.”


Jan Stievermann, “Faithful Translations: New Discoveries on the German Pietist Reception of Jonathan Edwards.”


Bruce Hindmarsh, “The Inner Life of Doctrine: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on the Calvinist-Arminian Debate Among Methodists.”


Emily Anderson, “Containing Voices in the Wilderness: Censorship and Religious Dissent in the Japanese Countryside.”


Phillip A. Cantrell, II, “We Were a Chosen People”: The East African Revival and Its Return to Post-Genocide Rwanda.”


Check out the full issue at Cambridge Journals Online.

ASCH Annual Meeting Live Blog

Thursday, January 2nd, 2014

Click here to follow our Live Blog for the ASCH Annual Winter Meeting in Washington, DC, displaying tweets, conference events, and updates as they happen.

You can find our conference program, maps, and local restaurants here, or scan the QR code below.

ASCH 2014 Program


Annual Meeting Apps, Maps, and Resources

Monday, December 30th, 2013

by Shaun Horton

The annual Winter Meeting is only a few days away, and we have launched an online conference program with daily session listings, maps, and the ASCH live blog feed. You can access the program on any smart phone by following this link (, or by scanning the QR code below.

ASCH 2014 Winter Meeting Program

The AHA has its own smartphone app for registered meeting attendees, which can be found here.

For those who still planning their session itinerary, Mike Pasquier has listed several panels that may be of interest to historians of American religion. If you are specifically interested in the American West, Cara Burnidge has started list of panels featuring contributors to Religion in the American West. John Fea has also weighed in with a list of sessions on American religion at The Way of Improvement Leads Home.

If you can’t make it to the meeting, but you want to know what is going on, you can follow the ASCH live blog, like our Facebook pageto see ongoing updates, and follow the conference live on Twitter at #ASCH2014.

December 2013 Issue Available

Thursday, November 21st, 2013

The December issue of Church History is now online. In this issue:

Martin Marty reviews Peter Brown’s Through the Eye of a Needle.

Daniel Richie looks at Irish Reformed Presbyterians who opposed slavery in antebellum America.

Kathy Schneider discusses the secular front organizations established by Catholics in the Second Republic of Spain to get around laws prohibiting schools run by religious orders.

Luke Fenwick looks at the politics surrounding the denazification of two Protestant churches in Germany after 1945.

Klaus Petersen and Jørn Henrik Petersen analyze the attitudes of Danish and Norwegian Lutherans toward the modern welfare state in the mid-twentieth century.

And George Faithful examines successive versions of the hymn “O Sacred Head Now Wounded” with an eye toward the theological and aesthetic needs of its translators’ religious traditions.

Check out the entire issue at Cambridge Journals Online.

Important Dates for Upcoming Meetings

Wednesday, November 20th, 2013

As we make our way through conference season, here are some dates to remember for the Society’s upcoming meetings:

December 12: The last day to make reservations at the Dupont Circle Hotel at the discount rate of $119/night. The Dupont Circle Hotel offers free WiFi, free breakfast, and free admission to the annual WITCH breakfast for ASCH members who make reservations with the confirmation code AMER200313.

The hotel is about a ten minute walk from the Washington Hilton (where the ASCH sessions are held), about five minutes by subway to the Marriott Wardman Park (where many of the AHA sessions are held), and a five minute walk from a coffeehouse that advertises locally roasted coffees and espresso. Location is everything.

December 15: The last day to register for the Winter Meeting at the discounted rate.

December 21: The last day to preregister for the the concurrent AHA annual meeting.

January 20, 12 PM London Time: The final deadline for proposals for the ASCH’s first international joint conference with the Ecclesiastical History Society in April 2014.

Any time: A good time to donate, if you haven’t already, to the ASCH’s Endowment Campaign to support graduate student research in the history of Christianity. While the Society has raised about $48,000 to fund research grants for graduate students, over 1,000 Society members have yet to make a donation, and we still are still short of our $50,000 goal. A mere 100 people giving or pledging $20 apiece would get us there.

And of course, the Winter Meeting is held on January 2-4. To keep abreast of conference-related news via Twitter, follow Keith Francis @kfrancis50, or the Society blog feed @ASChurchHistory, and keep an eye out for the hashtag #ASCH14.

Call for Papers: FSU Religion Graduate Symposium

Wednesday, October 16th, 2013

February 21-23, 2014 • Tallahassee, Florida

The Florida State University Department of Religion is pleased to announce its 13th Annual Graduate Student Symposium to be held February 21-23, 2014 in Tallahassee, Florida.

Last year’s symposium was a huge success, allowing over 60 presenters from over 18 universities and departments as varied as History, Political Science, Philosophy, Psychology, and Classics to share their research, learn from one another, and meet many of their peers and future colleagues.

This year’s symposium will be centered on the theme “Inscribing Authority: Bodies, Spaces, Texts.”

Due to our commitment to collaborative scholarship, students from all fields with interdisciplinary interests in the study of religion and at all levels of graduate study are encouraged to submit paper proposals.

Possible topics include, but are not limited to: Authorship and Identity, Remembering and Myth Making; Practice and Ritual; Conceptions of Self; Material Culture and Food; and Acquisition of Knowledge.

Presentations should be approximately 15 to 20 minutes in length and will receive faculty responses. In addition, every year respondents select the best graduate paper to receive the Leo F. Sandon Award, an endowed award named for the Religion Department’s former chair.

Proposals including an abstract of approximately 300 words, a list of key terms, and a one-page CV should be submitted by December 8, 2013 for review. Final papers must be submitted by January 15, 2014. Please send proposals to Sher Afgan at

Thank you for your interest. We look forward to hearing from you or your students and seeing you at the 2014 Graduate Student Symposium at Florida State University.