“It is too early to assess the impact of the Great Depression upon American Protestantism,” wrote Robert Moats Miller in his recent study of American Protestantism and social issues in the period between the world wars. No doubt it is too early for any overall assessment, yet it is becoming steadily clearer that American religion passed through an important transition in the depression period. If we are to gain a fuller understanding of developments in American Christianity since the 1930's, then serious attention needs to be given to that bleak period. Inasmuch as our understanding of times long past are significantly influenced by our definitions of the present situation, attempts to deal with that particular period of crisis in our recent past may help us more adequately to see the whole story of American religion in fairer perspective. Furthermore, a number of recent dissertations, articles and books have dealt in whole or in part with the period between the wars; they provide guidance for handling the vast array of sources relevant for an understanding of religion in the depression, supply material for at least prcliminary interpretations, and point to the need for further analysis. This paper is one effort to suggest some interpretative guide lines for further exploration into an important topic.

The golden age of French Protestantism, insofar as de jure recognition is concerned, extends from Henry IV's religious settlement in 1598 to the important modification of that settlement by Louis XIII in 1629. These years witnessed important developments both within the Protestant movement and in the relations between that movement and the French crown.

The late 1820's, particularly the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829, marked the end of an era in the history of the English Established Church. Earlier, for more than a century, the Anglican hierarchy had served as an appendage of the political system dominated by the landed interests; and since the younger Pitt's time, the Church had functioned politically as an ally of the Tory Party. By the year 1827. however, churchmen faced a rapidly changing political environment.

In 1927 William Warren Sweet observed that “the most important and far-reaching of the schisms in the American churches were caused by Negro slavery and the effects of the bitter contests in the churches over slavery, which began nearly a century ago, are still with us. Therefore any study of the peculiar factors which have determined the course of American church history must of necessity give a prominent place to slavery.” He himself pursued this suggestion in subsequent research.

The Broad Church movement, of which “muscular Christianity” was one of the most influential expressions, represented a type of liberalism within the Church of England. Benjamin Jowett claimed that the name “Broad Church” was first proposed in his hearing by Arthur Hugh Clough and that it had become a familiar term in circles at Oxford a few years before 1850. In July 1850, A. P. Stanley, writing on the Gorham controversy in the Edinburgh Review, said that the Church of England was “by the very conditions of its being, not High or Low, but Broad.” The term “Broad Church”, however only began to be used generally from October 1853, when an unsigned article by W. J. Conybeare, entitled “Church Parties,” appeared, also in the Edinburgh Review. F. D. Maurice believed that Conybeare invented the name.

The traditional unconcern for historical roots in the Methodist Episcopal Church still prevails sufficiently to help account for a less extensive program of historical investigation than that reviewed above for Great Britain. The fact that England has a long-established Historical Society with a vigorous publishing program is indicative of the contrast. Organization for historical study in America is either dominated by the limited vision of Annual Conference groups or is so informal and peripheral as to lack central support.