The American Religion

by Harold Bloom

In this fascinating work of religious criticism, Harold Bloom examines a number of American-born faiths: Pentecostalism, Mormonism, Seventh-day Adventism, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, Southern Baptism and Fundamentalism, and African-American spirituality. He traces the distinctive features of American religion while asking provocative questions about the role religion plays in American culture and in each American's concept of his or her relationship to God. Bloom finds that our spiritual beliefs provide an exact portrait of our national character.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Christianity, Theology, Literary Criticism

305 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1992

About the author

Harold Bloom was an American literary critic and the Sterling Professor of Humanities at Yale University. In 2017, Bloom was called "probably the most famous literary critic in the English-speaking world." After publishing his first book in 1959, Bloom wrote more than 50 books, including over 40 books of literary criticism, several books discussing religion, and one novel. He edited hundreds of anthologies concerning numerous literary and philosophical figures for the Chelsea House publishing firm. Bloom's books have been translated into more than 40 languages. He was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 1995.
Bloom was a defender of the traditional Western canon at a time when literature departments were focusing on what he derided as the "school of resentment" (multiculturalists, feminists, Marxists, and others). He was educated at Yale University, the University of Cambridge, and Cornell University.

Reviews

[BlackOxford · Rating 5 out of 5]

Authoritarian Bufoonery Explained

America - from Jefferson to Trump - cannot be understood apart from its peculiar religious culture. Bloom makes a brilliant case that that culture is essentially neither Christian nor European but Gnostic and Middle Eastern. The ultimate expression of the American religious culture is Mormonism, the religion of the perfection and deification of mankind through its return to its original unity with the universe. Put another way: Transcendentalism is inherent in American being. From 'inalienable rights' to 'American greatness', this gnostic tendency is pervasive and persistent. Bloom recognises his own gnostic preferences, so this is not so much a reproach as an appreciation of the uniqueness of American culture, including its wackiness in alien abductions and Trumpian non-sequiturs. Americans do indeed live in an alternative universe. Recently Terry Eagleton's 'Across the Pond' (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) and Chris Lehmann's 'The Money Cult' (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) both provide interesting confirmation of Bloom's thesis.

[Michael Perkins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bottomline: most Christians don't read the Bible, or know it very well, and they're Gnostic in that their beliefs are based on personal, spiritual knowledge (including claims to personal revelation), not on the Bible. On some level, each has his own religion with his own eccentric beliefs that they readily combine with whatever appeals to such believers, including political ideas or a quest for wealth.

===========

"Inerrancy” in the Bible is the starting point for the Fundamentalist creed, and is a very difficult notion to grasp, since “Biblical Inerrancy” does not mean that Fundamentalists are obsessive, sustained Bible readers. Fundamentalists engage in a kind of bibliolatry in worshiping the Bible, but don't actually follow the precepts of Jesus. At most, it's a "once saved, always saved" notion drawn from a loose interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans or obsession with the "End Times," drawn from the abstruse Book of Revelation, that has gone on for two thousand years.

In the absence of a creed, or a set of interpretive rules by which new challenges might be evaluated, Fundamentalists can hold together only with a core belief structure of extraordinary generality and ambiguity. The Bible fills the need; it becomes a projective test, a protean Rorschach, a talisman. As the code words have become “Biblical inerrancy,” the Bible itself is less read than preached, less interpreted than brandished. Increasingly, pastors may drape a limply bound Book over the edges of the pulpit as they depart from it. Members of the congregation carry Bibles to church services; the pastor announces a long passage of text for his sermon and waits for people to find it, then reads only the first verse of it before he takes off.

I've seen this in action with the prosperity Gospel preacher, Joel Osteen, in Houston, who can be viewed on late night TV across the U.S. He strides around a stage set in a former basketball stadium. He holds forth a fat, gilded-edged Bible, always opened at the middle. He never actually reads from it.
It's nothing but a prop.

Osteen's spiel, which is essentially the same every time, goes something like this....

"God is faithful. That promotion you've been waiting for: it's just around the corner. That lifetime soulmate you've always been looking for is on the way to you right now. The bonus money you need to take a vacation: you'll get that check by Christmas."

Then he'll use some story, usually from the Old Testament, to illustrate. And throw in a couple of contemporary anecdotes. "I met a man....."

What if these good things don't come true? The dark side is that you get blamed. Somehow you've incurred God's displeasure.

======

As for the End Times, no less than C.S. Lewis, a genuine scholar, debunks it....

https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/05/...

=====

Question: there are more than 31,000 verses in the Bible. Which ones are considered essential guides to faithful Christian practice, and which are readily ignored or explained away?

Answer: you cherry-pick, out of context, to support your pre-conceived notions.

=====

Whither the unholy blending of politics and fanatical religion....

“Of course we will have Fascism in America, but we will call it democracy.”

(Huey Long, populist governor of Louisiana, 1928 to 1935).

=======

Millennials Are Leaving Religion And Not Coming Back

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...

[Cooper Cooper · Rating 4 out of 5]

Harold Bloom starts The American Religion with the following:

Freedom, in the context of the American Religion, means being alone with God or with Jesus, the American God or the American Christ. In social reality, this translates as solitude, at least in the inmost sense. The soul stands apart, the Real Me or self or spark, thus is made free to be utterly alone with a God who is also quite separate and solitary, that is, a free God or God of freedom. What makes it possible for the self and God to commune so freely is that the self already is of God; unlike body and even soul, the American self is no part of the Creation, or of evolution through the ages. The American self is not the Adam of Genesis but is a more primordial Adam, a man before there were men or women. Higher and earlier than the angels, this true Adam is as old as God, older than the Bible, and is free of time, unstained by mortality. Whatever the social or political consequences of this vision, its imaginative strength is extraordinary. No American pragmatically feels free if she is not alone, and no American ultimately concedes that she is a part of nature.

*Why Religion? Why does man have religion at all? Fear of death, says Bloom. Fear of the void, the abyss. This leads to a longing and a quest for immortality. “Religion, whether it be shamanism or Protestantism, rises from our apprehension of death. To give a meaning to meaninglessness is the endless quest of religion.” “Clearly we possess religion…precisely to obscure the truth of our perishing.” “American religion, like American imaginative literature, is a severely internalized quest romance, in which some version of immortality serves as the object of desire.” “Resurrection is the entire concern of the American Religion.”

*Gnosticism. Bloom thinks religion in America is more Gnostic than Christian. “The American Religion…masks itself as Protestant Christianity yet has ceased to be Christian.” What is Gnosticism? Essentially the belief that the immortal core or “spark” in man has existed as long as the universe. “The self is the truth, and there is a spark at its center that is best and oldest, being the God within.” That inner spark, or deepest and purest part of the self, is superior to the God who created this world—the Demiurge. “For the Gnostics, the Demiurge is…the creator god in Genesis, a god taken by the Gnostics to be at best a botcher or ignoramus, or at worst a spirit of malevolence.” Once a religion of a select few, who recovered their divine spark through esoteric knowledge and practices, Gnosticism has become to Americans a religion of the people. “Ancient Gnosticism, together with its Enthusiastic shadows, was the most elitist and negative of theologies. It is the dubious achievement of the darker versions of the American Religion that they have democratized Gnosticism.”
“The American Religion is pervasive and overwhelming, however it is masked, and even our secularists, indeed, even our professed atheists, are more Gnostic than humanist in their ultimate presuppositions. We are a very religiously mad culture, furiously searching for the spirit, but each of us is subject and object of one quest, which must be for the original self, a spark or breath in us that we are convinced goes back to before the creation.”

*The American Religion. According to Bloom, the American Religion began on August 6, 1801, when 25,000 frontier-people of many denominations showed up at Cane Ridge, Kentucky for a huge revival meeting. Many went non-linear. Bloom: “Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists at once became American Religionists, rapt by ecstasy.” And: “The drunk, sexually aroused communicants at Cane Ridge, like their drugged and aroused Woodstockian descendants a century and a half later, participated in a kind of orgiastic individualism, in which all the holy rolling was the outward mark of an inward grace that traumatically put away frontier loneliness and instead put on the doctrine of experience that exalted such loneliness into being-alone-with-Jesus.”
What are the characteristics of the American Religion? The belief that:
1) What is best and oldest in us antecedes the Creation. “The God of the American religion is an experiential God, so radically within our own being as to become a virtual identity with what is most authentic (oldest and best) in the self.” And: “God is within.” And: “We are mortal gods, destined to find ourselves again a world as yet undiscovered.”
2) What makes us free is not belief but knowledge. “Awareness, centered on the self, is faith for an American.”
3) Freedom is solitary. “The believer returns from the abyss of ecstasy with the self enhanced and otherness devalued.” And: “The freedom assured by the American Religion…is a solitude in which the inner loneliness is at home with an outer loneliness.”
4) Once redeemed by Christ, man returns to innocence. “Only the American Religion promises what Freud tells us we cannot have: ‘an improved infancy.’”
5) The Bible is the Word of God. “The American Religion, unlike Judaism and Christianity, is actually biblical.”

*The American Jesus. “The American Jesus was born at Cane Ridge.” And: “The American Christ is more American than he is Christ.” And: ”Jesus…is a nineteenth- or twentieth-century American, whose principal difference from other Americans is that he already has risen from the dead. Having mastered this knowledge, he teaches it to whom he will.” And: “The American Jesus [is:] the resurrected friend, walking and talking one-on-one with the repentant sinner. And this Jesus [comes:] to one of his own free will, and not the sinner’s; he [chooses:] one.”

Now for the specific sects that Bloom singles out as the most “American”:

*Mormons. Bloom considers Mormon founder and prophet Joseph Smith by far the greatest religious genius America has ever produced. Why? Because he invented (discovered?) virtually from scratch a religion as different from Christianity as Islam is. Joseph Smith believed that man is lighted by the same spark God is, and that the mission of men is in fact eventually to become gods, each to rule his own extended family on his own planet. For this to happen, the Mormons (Latter-day Saints) had to create a new Mormon community, Zion, which, when Christ returns to earth, will fuse with the New Jerusalem prophesied in the Book of Revelation. Only Mormons will belong to this community, but no problem: Smith saw Mormonism literally taking over the world through persistent proselytizing: final success would mean a completely Mormon world by the time of the Second Coming, which would make the transition, as they say these days, seamless. Bloom: “Smith, Young and their followers believed in theocracy, or the inspired rule of the Saints, and they looked forward to each prophet in turn ruling over the Kingdom of God, as king, first here and then everywhere.” Bloom (who calls himself a Jewish Gnostic) is so enamored of Smith that he thinks the Mormons may become a major religious and political force in the United States of the 21st century. They are organized, they are wealthy, and they are indefatigable. There is only one problem: today’s Mormons have (apparently) fallen away from and compromised the teachings of Joseph Smith, so that they now represent not a radical counter-Christian religion but a conservative, Republican, flag-waving, solidly middle-class community of unimaginative conformists. Or do they? Bloom suspects (but does not know for sure) that the diluted modern version of Mormonism (a sort of spiritual near-beer) may be for the consumption of “Gentiles” (non-Mormons) and maybe even rank-and-file Mormons, but that the inner council may in fact still be secretly scheming to realize Smith’s radical vision of a Mormon world.

*Christian Scientists. To go from Smith to Mary Baker Eddy is to go from the sublime to the ridiculous. Eddy believed (based on visions) that the human being is pure spirit that lives forever and that death, the body and the senses are simply illusions. By force of will alone humans can abide in their “divine minds” (versus their “mortal minds,” the source of evil) and create for themselves perfect health by ignoring their illusory bodies. Eddy’s history is this: a chronic invalid (probably classic 19th century hysterical hypochondriac), she was cured by and became a disciple of a guru (Phineas Parkhurst Quimby) who employed hypnosis (then called mesmerism). Unfortunately, he died. Shortly thereafter Eddy’s “ailments” returned. Then she slipped on the ice and fell—and had a vision. And wrote the almost unreadable Science and Health. And acquired a following which, though small, persists to this day. There was, however, a minor problem: Eddy was convinced that leading disciples who had been ejected by or fallen away from her were trying with their diabolical mortal minds to destroy her and her followers by means of “Malicious Animal Magnetism” (M.A.M)—an evil version of hypnosis-from-a-distance. She surrounded herself with disciples, a sort of human shield, who generated positive vibes to fend off the insidious M.A.M. Paranoia is not uncommon among those who claim absolute authority.

*Seventh-day Adventists. Prophet William Miller predicted that Christ would return to earth and take up the faithful on October 22, 1844. Known as the Great Disappointment, this non-event split up the Millerites, many of whom drifted away altogether, but some of whom splintered off into new sects. One of the latter was Ellen Harmon White. She founded the Seventh-day Adventists after a young colleague, during a vision, was informed that Miller had merely misconstrued what would happen on October 22: Christ was not to come down to earth, but to move into another chamber of heaven and commence a Great Investigation during which, preparing for their defense before a draconian God in the Last Judgment, he would examine in detail the sin ledger of every human being. God being a tough hombre, there was absolutely no guarantee that anyone, Adventist or not, would be among the chosen. This is a harsh religion in which one must be perpetually vigilant against sin—because once you sin, it’s on the heaven-kept record and there’s no way of knowing until the Fateful Moment how God will judge you. So the Adventists promoted good deeds and the avoidance of sin. And because of their discipline and organization, they started advancing into the middle class, and gradually emphasized sin less and health more. Why health? Because Ellen Harmon White had been obsessed with it. Why obsessed? Because as a nine-year-old she had been smashed in the face with a rock and permanently disfigured. So ironically, a religion that believes in a draconian God and a very short time left for man on this wicked earth, espouses health and promotes education and medicine as though its people would be around for a many a day. The Adventist’s Seven Principles for extending human life at least six years reads like Drs. Andrew Weil or Dean Ornish: good air, good water, good nutrition, scheduling (I’m not sure what this means), rest, exercise, and moderate eating. And of course no smoking, no drinking, no cosmetics, etc. Bloom thinks this sect might perish if the leaders don’t return from middle-classism to their sin-obsessed roots. The best hope for avoiding extinction? Recruit minorities.

*Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is another sect that started up after the Great Disappointment of 1844. However, the Witnesses are unlike any other major American sect in that they are authoritarian to the point of fascism. And to the point of sado-masochism. Bloom thinks it’s basically a religion of hate, of powerless people who want to seize power so they can crush their adversaries. The Witnesses believe in an Old Testament Jehovah who basically needs people to tell him what a hotshot God he is—he wants slaves not men, and indeed the Witnesses call themselves his slaves. Those who remain loyal to this tyrant will be saved in the End Time; everyone else will bite the dust. According to Bloom the Witnesses are extremely anti-intellectual, the little doctrine they have is confused and inconsistent, and they keep changing the date of the End Time—first it was 1878, then 1881, then 1914, then 1925, then 1975. Another problem: only the Elect (i.e., Jehovah’s Witnesses) will be saved, and the Book of Revelation pegs the open slots at 144,000. But the Witnesses grew well beyond that number. What to do? Not to worry. The President of the Watchtower Society invented a new category of (potentially) saved called the Jonadabs: a sort of second-class slave behind the Elect who had already used up the open slots. Bloom sums up: “Only the Witnesses dissent [from the American Religion:], and continue in the dreadfully modest hope that they may yet be regarded as faithful and discreet slaves of a Jehovah altogether intoxicated with his own majesty.”

*Pentecostals. Pentecostalism started in Topeka in 1901, as an offshoot of the Holiness sect, but it really got going in Los Angeles as one of many religious reactions to the San Francisco earthquake of 1906. In LA African-American preacher William Seymour encouraged his congregation into ecstasies of the Holy Spirit and the “speaking of tongues.” The sect spread very rapidly, especially in the South, and led to such extremes as the handling of poisonous snakes and the drinking of “salvation cocktails” (strychnine). The Pentecostals are not organized; they consist of local churches with varying practices and interpretations of the Bible, as influenced by local preachers. What the Pentecostal churches have in common is their reverence for the Holy Spirit; their services aim at luring the Spirit into possessing (during trance) the participants and lifting them into ineffable ecstasy. The most telling possession is “speaking in tongues”—uttering foreign-sounding words and phrases that sound, to an outsider, suspiciously like gibberish. The Pentecostals live for their ecstatic states, which swell them with a spiritual power far more potent than the mere material power and success that most other Americans worship (and in which most Pentecostals are sadly deficient). Bloom: “Without the blatant power of American material achievement, there would have been no stimulus for the antithetical intensity of Pentecostalism.” Another interesting observation by Bloom, who quotes Peter L. Williams: “Intoxication and sexual ecstasy, though forbidden in the secular life, are signs of possession by the Spirit when they seize the participant at a Pentecostal worship service. Similarly, gambling—in this case with one’s life, by playing with rattlesnakes, poison or fire—takes on a similar ‘positive charge’ when performed in a sacred manner.”

*California Orphists. Bloom seems completely confounded by New Ageism, which he calls California Orphism —to him it seems vapid, sentimental and essentially meaningless. And the New Age books, all written in the same bland boring style and offering the same platitudes—are unreadable. On a religion without effort: “California Orphism apprehends Reality directly and immediately, at no inner expense whatsoever.” On the inability to make left-brain distinctions: “His perpetual and universal immanence makes it difficult for a newager to distinguish between God and any experience whatsoever, but then why should such a distinction occur to a California Orphic?” This is Bloom’s weakest section; he seems completely unable to “get” (EST jargon) the New Age.

* Southern Baptists. According to Bloom, the Southern Baptists subdivide into three distinct groups: Black, Moderate, and Fundamentalist. He hypothesizes that the Black Baptists have had a profound but unacknowledged influence not only on the other Baptists but also on the American Religion in general. Why? Because the slaves imported elements of West African religion which they folded into their new-found Christianity: the idea that everyone has two souls, one of which, “the little man,” is immortal (this jibes nicely with Gnosticism), and the practice of a direct and personal (and sometimes ecstatic) relationship with their gods, a relationship which they readily transferred to Jesus. These two features came to characterize, in greater or lesser degree, the other American Religions.
Bloom: “It may be the greatest irony of American religious history that the Southern Baptists, the heart of the Confederacy, came to worship an essentially black Jesus…”
In the 1840s the white Southern Baptists split with the Northern Baptists over the issue of slavery. The Southern Baptists, having no founder or charismatic leader, tended to identify with the Confederacy and its generals; when the Rebs lost the Civil War, the Southern Baptists took it very hard. Southern Baptist beliefs were not stated coherently until the 1908 publication of E.Y. Mullin’s The Axioms of Religion. Before that, the Southern Baptists were all over the map, and seemed united mainly by their hatred of the Catholic Church. The Mullin Moderates believe that every human has the opportunity for a personal relationship with Christ (can “walk with Christ”), that this relationship is the most important thing in life, and that each individual understands it in her own way. Similarly, Scriptures are holy, but when a person is “in the Spirit” he will understand the Bible in his own way, and his interpretation will be correct for him. Considering religion a personal matter, they believe in no creed and no church authority. The Fundamentalists violently disagree with the Moderates on the issue of the Bible, believing that the Bible must be interpreted “literally,” and that what constitutes “literal” is not at the discretion of the mere layman but must be defined by his more savvy pastor. Thus the Fundamentalists have sneaked both creed and authority into a formerly creedless and democratic religion. Bloom points out that many of the Fundamentalists are semi-literate at best, few actually read the Bible (including many of the pastors) and lack the skills to understand it if they did, and that for them the Good Book is not a document to be read and understood but a holy icon to be mindlessly worshipped. For years the Moderates dominated the Southern Baptist Convention, but the hardline Fundamentalists took over in 1979, helping fuel the troglodytic fanaticism of recent years.

Bloom is an original, strange and sometimes over-enthusiastic thinker—but always stimulating. Sometimes he wanders a bit and repeats himself: it seems that as he goes along he keeps reformulating the same ideas, trying each time to be more precise or telling. So the reader has to wander along with him, picking up intellectual nuggets—and there are many—as he goes along. I found it a journey well worth taking. It seems to me that there is considerable merit to Bloom’s central idea about a distinctly American Religion with a Gnostic core.

[Griff · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars. A pretty fascinating read. I always enjoy touring Bloom's encyclopedic mind, and my romp in his tome of self described 'religious criticism' was no different. The book attempts the thesis that there exists an American Religion, encompassing both believers and the secular within the United States, and posits that this American Gnosis is a world apart from the standard European forms of Christianity, let alone the much yearned-for return to primitive Christianity. Many of Bloom's analyses and predictions have proved correct, and I was grateful to discover my copy had a Coda to the Coda, appended in 2006. Bloom had written that the Reagan-Bush religious wing of the Republican party had taken appropriate steps to make itself invincible, and I'm sure he has been reeling watching the "Know Nothing" sect of believers (and voters) continue to shape our nation's politics and socioeconomy into the Trumpian era.

This book outlines several of the more niche American originals of our American Religion: Christian Science, Seventh Day Adventism, and a few others. I was fascinated reading about the geneses of these sects, and grateful that Bloom's summaries and critical readings spared me the hard work of doing preliminary research into these often inane theologies. One of the areas of the book that hampered my enjoyment reading it was Bloom's clear biases against certain groups of believers. He sets his own terms for what he takes religious criticism to be, and how it may differ from his native field of literary criticism, but I still think that his praise of Mormon founders Smith and Young seem overly courteous compared to his treatment of the leaders of the Southern Baptist church(es) that he rains scorn upon later in the book.

Overall, I think this book was a very worthwhile read. I learned a lot about various belief structures and how church founders have successfully or unsuccessfully propagated their faiths and built a people, and it was easy to buy in to the idea that we all participate in a new, American religion. If you are a fan of Bloom's writing at all, or are curious as to how various American churches seem to have strayed so far from the Bible or other primary texts, I'd heartily recommend a read.

[Scarlett Sims · Rating 2 out of 5]

So, if you couldn't tell, I really didn't like this book.

The first reason is more or less my own fault. I expected it to be basically a history book detailing the evolution of religion in America. It is not this. So I had to get over my disappointment not only in it not being what I thought, but in it being something so much worse.

My husband put it best when he described this as Harold Bloom applying the techniques of literary criticism to actual events in history. Anyone pursuing an English degree can talk about Freudian themes in Moby Dick (pun very much intended) and get something published, but making connections between actual historical events that have actual historical causes requires much more bending of reality.

Another problem I had with this book is: Harold Bloom is not a religious scholar, nor a historian; he says this several times throughout the book. So why do I care about his opinions (because they are very much his opinions and largely ungrounded in concrete reality) on these topics? It was difficult for me to care what he had to say, particularly when he started making ridiculous statements like that Alice Walker isn't literary and John Updike and Allen Ginsburg are only borderline. ?!.

Lastly, the thing that pissed off the librarian in me: there is no bibliography and very few sources cited within the text. Even when he quotes the Bible he doesn't give a version. He cites statistics with absolutely no way for the reader to know whether he just made them up. If the book was only his opinion, I could see not having sources--the source is the author--but for how much historical information he gives it would be nice to know he isn't just pulling it out of thin air.

Ultimately, there were parts of this book I found kind of interesting, which is why I gave it two stars instead of one. I'd even be open to reading some of Bloom's literary criticism, though I might find his tone a bit too stodgy for me. But as for this book, I'd say don't read it unless you absolutely love this topic and/or Bloom and want to hear his opinion on it.

[Cymru Roberts · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's funny to think that the protesting of Marilyn Manson concerts and bulldozing of Death Row Records albums was so long ago that it seems like just another 90s nostalgia piece. I really have no idea what Christian America is like today--I know it exists still, but like music and culture in general, it seems that the internet has turned it into a niche market. If I'm not into it, then I'll never see anything about it. There is no centralized MTV for these groups to target. Everyone preaches to their own choir.

This situation couldn't have been predicted by Bloom, maybe, and the book seems dated because of it. He wrote it in a pre-internet era. The central thesis is still interesting--that American religions like Mormonism and the Baptists rely on the Bible much more than normative Jews or European Christian sects, and that there is a gnostic element to the American Way. America is obsessed with the individual, and gnosticism is the religion of the god-attained individual. There is plenty of good background information on these religions, and more importantly, Bloom is taking them seriously, reading their own texts and offering his point of view, instead of saying, "Religion is dumb, man" or "Of course the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult, bro." If we're ever going to heal the divisions that differences in religion cause, we have to start by taking the other side seriously (doing this is not the same as agreeing).

But the most telling part of the book informs us more about Bloom than religion. For this reason I can see people not caring, but as a Bloom fan I thought it was interesting and not wholly insignificant. A quote, taken not from Bloom, but re-quoted by Bloom from an anonymous Baptist friend of his:

"Nevertheless, the fact remains that Baptists conceive of the Christian life as an unmediated fellowship with God, and the Bible is indispensable for that fellowship; it is just that the Bible does not count as a true mediator. Instead, it is the immediacy of the Spirit which makes the Bible meaningful in the first place, though only to those with open hearts. You get the idea that the Bible is yours, personally, and not external to you as with Luther's sacraments. The Bible is internal to you with the Holy Spirit."

Substitute Baptist for "Bloom", Christian life with simply "life" and the Bible with "Literature"--and you have Bloom's central approach to reading, and thus his entire way of life. The immediacy of great literature is what makes it important. Feeling the Spirit of the poet speaking to you from beyond time and space is the key to appreciating literature. It's what drives Bloom's taste and determines what is canonical, despite what his haters may say. When you FEEL something truly, insights flow from there. This can be applied to religion or literature, or anything else. As such, one's insights when based on strong spiritual feelings shouldn't be tossed aside just because they aren't in accordance with another's; instead we should see the capacity for feeling, even in Fundamentalists and other violent religious believers, as something common to all of us, as well as a chance to build a meaningful bridge between two poles.

[Ruth · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a literary critic, Bloom is almost unparalleled. As a religious critic, he has his weaknesses, the most notable of which would be his obvious display of bias. One can't help but notice that while he only discusses the most positive traits of Joseph Smith and the Mormons, he chooses to discuss the worst possible traits of the Southern Baptists. Although his essays are hardly fair, they are nothing if not vividly-written.

Despite disagreeing with him on nearly all of his points, I enjoyed reading Bloom on religion, mostly because it's not often that one reads religious criticism from the perspective of a self-professed Jewish Gnostic. Second, he can't seem to help writing from a literary perspective. Who else but Harold Bloom would describe the doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses as "a touch zany" and label their apocalyptic arithmetic as "too ponderous for the wings of wit"? I found his aspersions on New Age tomes especially amusing: "...no prose I have ever encountered can match Fox's in a blissful vacuity, where all things flow to all, as rivers to the sea."

[Rambling Raconteur · Rating 4 out of 5]

If there is a Venn diagram for a reader’s interests and background for this book, I may be at the center, particularly as a longtime reader of writers like Pynchon, West, and Melville and being steeped in a faith tradition rooted in Cane Ridge and the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement. These may have influenced how I perceived this book, but there is a quality of curiosity that Bloom articulates without much condescension.

Bloom’s fascination with gnostic influences and the chaotic perambulations our minds are capable of dominates the periphery of The American Religion. There is a sense of two formidable poles tugging at the fabric of US society between the LDS and the Southern Baptist Convention, and Bloom explores these in detail along with other sects that rose in the aftermath of the Second Great Awakening. Bloom’s heart is with the diminishing moderates within the Convention, so his chapters there focus on trends that have accelerated or reversed with intervening generations. He correctly identifies the political alliance that the Convention made in the 1970s and what that would lead to, a process that has found new depths to plumb in the past decade. Bloom finds Joseph Smith, Jr. formidable and compelling, and his exploration there is fascinating.

Two elements that readers should be aware of are Bloom’s tendency to repeat key phrases, drumming a motif in the way a jazz song structures itself around particular bars, and a tendency to incompletely reckon with the racial component of the controversies that characterize American religious sects. Bloom explores this tangentially with Pentecostal movements and devotes a chapter to links between African religious beliefs that may have informed the Second Great Awakening, but the intervening decades have revealed that there is a vicious animus for too many in the US, and that sectarian arguments and assertions too often cloak this animus in a veneer of religious belief.

This book pairs well with Library of America’s American Sermons volume which includes Smith’s King Follett sermon, one from Aimee Semple McPherson, and twentieth century sermons illustrating the moderate and conservative disputes. Edwards’ Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God and sermons from Emerson and WE Channing are also included to articulate the dominant American religious traditions as what Bloom regards the American Religion kicked off.

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is just terrific - but I love most things by Harold Bloom, the old curmudgeon. It's non-fiction, about religion in American, and heavy on the Mormons, which is interesting because Bloom is a "gnostic" Jew, as he calls himself. Very, very interesting.

[thethousanderclub · Rating 4 out of 5]

Literary criticism is an established academic activity. So are all sorts of other criticism—film, theater, etc. But what about religion? Harold Bloom considers himself a religious critic and The American Religion a work of religious criticism. It's important to understand what he means by "criticism," however. Bloom isn't merely criticizing religion in a superficial way, which is often done by academics with little thought or care for the subject of their criticism. Bloom seeks to understand deeply the religions he writes about and explicate their unique features and contributions to religious thinking—whether it's theology, thanatology, eschatology, exegesis, or other dimensions of religious and spiritual knowledge. Specifically, Bloom attempts to delineate the American religion, which has its own idiosyncrasies and features—especially the American "originals" like the Southern Baptists and Mormons (Latter-day Saints). The American Religion is a fascinating elucidation of religious belief from an outsider, and I found a greater appreciation for own my faith due to Bloom's criticism.

As a Latter-day Saint, I absolutely loved Bloom's commentary on the Mormon faith. Since Mormonism and its enigmatic and brilliant founder—Joseph Smith—are perhaps the most original of the original American faiths, Bloom spends a good deal of time writing about, explaining, criticizing, but also admiring Mormonism. I don't believe I have read a more thoughtful and erudite analysis of the Mormon faith from a non-believer. I was impressed with Bloom's breadth and depth of knowledge regarding Latter-day Saint doctrine, seamlessly transitioning from passages in The Book of Mormon to theologically dense verses in the Doctrine and Covenants. Furthermore, Bloom doesn’t negligently disregard some of Mormonism's boldest and most difficult doctrines, such as the possible exaltation of mankind and polygamy, because they're "weird" or unorthodox. (In fact, I think the author had a more thoughtful perspective on polygamy and its institution than some members who would probably love to forget its occurrence and its importance). On the contrary, Bloom sees these as features instead of bugs in the establishment of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its perpetuation as a religion. He correctly points out that Mormonism can't be simplistically reduced to only a religion; it is a people. Joseph knew this, asserts Bloom, and the author admires Smith for what he calls his religious imagination. (Imagination and not revelation, of course, is the source of Smith's genius according to the author). In addition, Bloom is convinced, and I think he's right, that the expansion and influence of the LDS Church has come nowhere near its zenith. The next several decades should be very interesting for anyone paying attention to what is the most "original" of all American religions.

What of the other American "originals"? It was difficult for me to appreciate Bloom's commentaries on these other faiths—Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-Day Adventist, Southern Baptism, to name a few—because I'm not nearly as familiar with those faith traditions as I am my own. For example, I was fully versed and prepared to absorb the author's detailed interpretation of Mormonism, but I lacked the needed context to fully appreciate his interpretation of Southern Baptist exegesis (or lack thereof); albeit, I loved the insights it did provide. I don't know the full history and controversy surrounding that robust faith tradition. I don't understand the culture or the hierarchies. I don't know who is pulling the levers of power or why. Bloom references and quotes authors and ecclesiastical leaders I am totally unfamiliar with. Although it wasn't a total loss, the esoteric nature of the subject matter left me a little forlorn. I wanted to understand more than I could. I have a deep and abiding fascination for why people believe what they do and what those beliefs impel them to do, I just couldn't fully participate as a reader in the rhetorical conversation.

So what is the American religion? According to Bloom, it is the common elements found throughout the American "originals," such as an emphasis on individuality. It is not Protestantism, Catholicism, or even historical Christianity. It lacks a creed while still being rigid and rigorous. The American religion is a loose collective of faith tenets which could only originate from the American frontier. It is an amalgamation of biblical themes, while not necessarily being biblical. The American "originals" claim biblical prophecy as their own in a deeply personal and mobilizing way. From their point of view, the Exodus might as well have happened in Orlando, Florida. The proximity with which the American believer feels religious doctrine is one of the most distinguishing features of the American religion. These insights, as well as many others, makes The American Religion a captivating book. So much of this is the culture I swim in, and I love reading an outsider's perspective on my culture and belief.

Believers should not expect a work of apology, but they shouldn't expect a dismissive and cynical appraisal of religion either. When it comes to Latter-day Saints, I felt Bloom was far more versed than most non-believers I have read, but he inevitably misses the point on certain issues. At least, as a Latter-day Saint, that is my conviction. I would not say what Bloom has written is unfair. He appreciates some of Mormonism's most distinct and incredible features without being petty or cheap. He should be credited for that. I can't speak toward his treatment toward the other American denominations. Overall, The American Religion is a detailed, arcane, and engrossing exploration of faith and religion.

http://thethousanderclub.blogspot.com/

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bloom, as a professed unbeliever, has better insight into actual religious positions of Christian and non-Christian groups than some Christian writers that I have read. He likes Joseph Smith, but is clear that Mormonism is not monotheistic and is not Christian. He does bring home a good argument that Christianity in the U.S. has been corrupted (my word) into self-seeking and identity creation. Jesus becomes our friend who give therapeutic counsel in order for the individual to find personal fulfillment. Bloom discusses sources going back 200 years, undermining, at least to an extent, any claims that America used to be the land of the godly, and by that, orthodox Christians. Some parts of Christianity have been subverted to economic or political ends. Lesson well learned from Constantine I guess. The book is now about 25 years old. Bloom did a good enough job that the book still rings mostly true (although the Baptists have tired out, the gender identity crowd is more powerful than projected, and the Mormons do not run the western U.S., but did produce a presidential candidate). Since Bloom is a self-confessed Gnostic, he does read U.S. religious history through that lens, many times persuasively, other times not so much.

[Joel · Rating 1 out of 5]

Repetitive and not terribly insightful. Bloom wrote this in 1991 and feared that he would never see another Democratic President in his life. He predicts that by 2020, Mormons will be 1 in 8 Americans and that governing will be impossible without their cooperation. Later, he says that by 2020 Mormons "could well form at least ten percent of our population and probably rather more than that." They are currently 2-3%. Bloom is no prophet.
His own ideas are fuzzy and incoherent. If you ask "by what standard" he is judging all these religions, I have no idea, other than a tired, lazy, secular outlook. I wouldn't waste your time on this book.

[Douglas Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Profound.

[Trevor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bloom's "religious critique" of what he terms the American Religion provides a thought-provoking and generally entertaining overview of the major religious movements and organizations founded in America. Bloom's basic thesis is that in rejecting the political and social systems of Europe Americans simultaneously cast off the remnants of historical Christianity in favor of a uniquely American brand of gnosticism. Bloom views this gnosticism-lite as an undercurrent running throughout such ostensibly theologically differing religious groups as the Mormons, the Southern Baptists and Seventh Day Adventists. Bloom's book then, is an analysis of the ways in which this general American gnosticism has found voice in the various religions he examines.

Bloom does not set out to offer a comprehensive understanding of each religion, rather he spends a few pages of each chapter to a brief historical overview of the founding and current state of a single faith. Bloom then devotes the remainder of the chapter to examining the influence of gnosticism on the faith, generally closing with a general discussion of major issues, trends and predictions regarding the faith. As a Mormon, perhaps the single faith Bloom writes most highly of, I found his analysis generally on target though it is clear at times that his understanding of specific doctrines and their application in the lives of believers is understandably limited. My general sense is that his basic fairness extends to the other religions he discusses although someone better-informed regarding the sects he is most critical towards (Jehovah's Witnesses, fundamentalist Southern Baptists, etc.) might feel differently.

Overall the book served as a useful overview of the major American religious sects, their commonalities as well as their differences (at least as they pertain to Bloom's brand of gnosticism). I'd recommend it to anyone with an interest in general religion or any of the specific sects Bloom analyzes.

[Nathanael · Rating 5 out of 5]

A literary critic and professor of Literature at Yale has a theory about American Religion. This premise doesn't interest most people, much less most Christians. Even though I am both, I found this premise and the book it inspired wildly interesting.

I was hunting through the free books available to owners of a Kindle who also pay $80 a year to Amazon for the privilege. Yes, a book every month and two-day shipping. Again, another small sliver in a Venn diagram. I selected the religion area, and began sorting down the list of available titles. There were all kinds of Christian books, most of which I'd seen in my adolescent reading of Christian Book Distributors' catalogues. There were some vaguely terrible mystic/new age books. And there were a bunch of romance novels (the #1 book Kindle owners borrow in categories ranging from Business to Cooking to Literary Fiction to Self Help--trendpiece later).

Not surprisingly, Harold Bloom's book stood out.

The American Religion is a work of religious criticism, a discipline respected by neither the religious nor the unreligious, and that's a shame. This book is exceptional, a worthy defense of the discipline. Without trying to prove or disprove faith, Bloom writes about the motivating forces of the great American religions. Mormonism, Baptistism, Pentacostalism, and a few sundry others. These great three, which I've at least brushed by in my own religious upbringing, comprise an unholy trinity proving that the American soul has crafted its own religious tradition, a reversal of the normal view.

If you can get beyond the premise that American Baptistism isn't at all Christian, you'll at least appreciate, if not outright agree with, this book.

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

Bloom's hysterical rendering of American religion was almost endearing. Although, now in the year 2009, it doesn't look as though the Mormons have taken over the government. I need to study this man more to understand what was happening in his life/career around 1990 to make him fling himself into the academic arena as the self-proclaimed leader of "religious criticism". His insights are superficially potent, but he ends up with a moribund historical interpretation of the term "American Religion". For Bloom, American religion (like American literature, for the most part) had a limited existence during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Beforehand, religion in America was nothing more than the upstart offspring of European Christianity (to say nothing of those other people that lived in American who Bloom doesn't seem to remember. What were they called?). Revivalism spawned the American originals, as he would call them, which, unfortunately then died out with the death of Joseph Smith and the rise of Baptist Fundamentalism. As a result, pretty much all religion in American is no longer the American religion. Thus American=19th century white American. Just so there's no confusion.
Worth reading with a grain of salt. Though be warned that Bloom makes a point at the beginning of his analysis of each religion with one of two statements. "I never actually finished reading the founding texts of this religion" or "No one in this religion would ever corroborate anything I'm about to say." Consider Bloom one part bold investigator, two parts pedant who invents lame excuses to justify his own agenda. Sorry, Harold.

[Roderick Mcgillis · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first Harold Bloom book I read was Shelley's Mythmaking; this was long long ago in a galaxy far away. Despite the morphing of Harold from the young Orc he was into the self-important Urizen we have today, something connects that first book with this one. That something is Bloom's interest in spirituality, or better yet, spiritual man. Bloom is a Blakean at heart, and we see this in his interest in what he terms the American religion, a combination of Gnosis, Orphism, and Enthusiasm. Bloom is always audacious. His descriptions of various American brands of religious belief - Southern Baptists, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses - is always interesting. His prognostications are perhaps more irritating than interesting. Finally, Bloom makes the claim that in this book he is not a literary critic, but rather a religious critic. The task of each of these critics is similar, but the 'texts' and procedures differ. I am not so sure that Bloom has not entered the arena with the cultural critics, but he would deny this. When he makes the necessary connection between American Religion and the political life of the nation, he is moving in the direction of a social, cultural, and dare I say political critic.

I see that a relatively new edition of this book is available with a new foreword by Bloom. I read the first edition. It would be fascinating to read his thoughts some 15 years after he first wrote the book.

[Andy]

Now seems like the right time to read this. Harold Bloom foresaw the cascading inanities and theocratic nincompoops in our midst; their intensification would make for a frightening and compelling update to this volume. Oy vey.

The Alabama Supreme Court on February 16, 2024, decided that cells awaiting implantation for in vitro fertilization are children and that the accidental destruction of such an embryo falls under the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. In an opinion concurring with the ruling, Chief Justice Tom Parker declared that the people of Alabama have adopted the “theologically based view of the sanctity of life” and said that “human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God.”

Payton Armstrong of media watchdog Media Matters for America reported today that on the same day the Alabama decision came down, an interview Parker did on the program of a self-proclaimed “prophet” and Q-Anon conspiracy theorist appeared. In it, Parker claimed that “God created government” and called it “heartbreaking” that “we have let it go into the possession of others.”

Parker referred to the “Seven Mountain Mandate,” a theory that appeared in 1975, which claims that Christians must take over the “seven mountains” of U.S. life: religion, family, education, media, entertainment, business…and government. He told his interviewer that “we’ve abandoned those Seven Mountains and they’ve been occupied by the other side.” God “is calling and equipping people to step back into these mountains right now,” he said.

While Republicans are split on the decision about embryos after a number of hospitals have ended their popular IVF programs out of fear of prosecution, others, like Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley agreed that “embryos, to me, are babies.”

House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) identifies himself as a Christian, has argued that the United States is a Christian nation, and has called for “biblically sanctioned government.” At a retreat of Republican leaders this weekend, as the country is grappling with both the need to support Ukraine and the need to fund the government, he tried to rally the attendees with what some called a “sermon” arguing that the Republican Party needed to save the country from its lack of morality.

As Charles Blow of the New York Times put it: “If you don’t think this country is sliding toward theocracy, you’re not paying attention.”

In the United States, theocracy and authoritarianism go hand in hand.

The framers of the Constitution quite deliberately excluded religion from the U.S. Constitution. As a young man, James Madison, the key thinker behind the Constitution, had seen his home state of Virginia arrest itinerant preachers for undermining the established church in the state. He came to believe that men had a right to the free exercise of religion.

In 1785, in a “Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments,” he explained that what was at stake was not just religion, but also representative government itself. The establishment of one religion over others attacked a fundamental human right—an unalienable right—of conscience. If lawmakers could destroy the right of freedom of conscience, they could destroy all other unalienable rights. Those in charge of government could throw representative government out the window and make themselves tyrants.

In order to make sure men had the right of conscience, the framers added the First Amendment to the Constitution. It read: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”

More here.

[Austin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Enjoyable and instructive overall, despite its failure to deliver on its opening premise- that all manifestations of American Religion are characterized by Orphism, Enthusiasm, and most of all, Gnosticism. Some of these characteristics are demonstrated in some of the religions covered, but there is not a comprehensive attribution through all chapters; frequently Bloom just kind of abandons these primary claims to revel in the incredible eccentricity of these beliefs. As a sympathetic and Gnostically inclined critic, Bloom is very compelling and entertaining when doing the latter, so much so that one wishes this were more a straightforward descriptive catalog and less a grand comparative synthesis. Bloom is also really repetitive, restating his main argument constantly, and seems more satisfied with the novelty of his provocation than the real structure of American faith. Still, a fun, if inconsistent, introduction to Mormon, Adventist, Pentecostal, Jehovah's Witness, Christian Science, and Southern Baptist beliefs.

[Seth]

I abandoned this after chapter 1. Bloom’s problem is one he admits freely: he is not a sociologist or a historian or a theologian, he is a literary critic and he critiques religion on those grounds. The problem he seems untroubled by is that he doesn’t merely make the case for his approach (he makes up a new field to give leeway) but routinely disrespects the other fields as being entirely unequipped to understand The American Religion. I can deal with pretentiousness, but misunderstanding and misquoting Freud and Marx back to back then ending the chapter by bemoaning the “politically correct School of Resentment… academic pseudo-Left” was too much for me to put up with for such a simple premise: there is a broad American Religion that masquerades as Protestant Christianity but is really more Gnostic in nature, centered on a solitary relationship with the spiritual being that loves you personally. An interesting idea, but I don’t trust Bloom’s ability to have any meaningful takeaways. I’ll take the risk of being wrong here.

[Mikael Raihhelgauz · Rating 3 out of 5]

See raamat koosneb küll põhiliselt hot teikidest. Tahtsin esialgu 2 tähte panna, sest argument on suht olematu ja järeldusedki pole päris selged. 10–15 lauset olid siiski üsna tabavad, seega lõpuks tuleb 3– välja.

[Emma Ratshin · Rating 2 out of 5]

this dude made some points but i don’t like him and his dick is way too hard for mormonism

[Keith Heltsley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well written and researched.

However the findings on the various religions investigated wer just as opinionated as the ones the author tried to criticize. He seems to use an unfair, and unbalanced standard to judge the origins, and founding documents across the board, mixing in unfounded, social ideals where non exist in the religions. Claiming certain secular influences, or political views pollute the religions, where the evidence is thin, or missing. Basing such things, and other alleged weaknesses on his own lack of belief in a faith based system. Impressing his own dead faith on that of religions that have congregations where their faith is alive and active.

A good enough review, but more opinion than real evidence in most cases.

[Joshua Buhs · Rating 3 out of 5]

The thesis is the most interesting part fo the book. Otherwise, it reads a bit like a cranky old man giving opinions on American religion largely as they come to him; surprisingly, given Bloom's reputation, the book is not particularly well written. Well, a the levek of the sentence it is often good (though also often elusive). Within chapters, though, he wanders and repeats himself often.

The key point is that there is an essence to all (most?) religions as they are practiced in America, whether Mormon or Baptist. Bloom can identify this essence using a technique he calls religious criticism, which is parallel to literary criticism. Just as the literary criticism he does identifies an irreducible aesthetic element--something that transcends mere politics and sociology and cultural history--there is in religion a spiritual elemental immune to historicizing an other forms of explanation.

According to Bloom, this spiritual element in America is not Christian, but Gnostic. Americans are solitary, and their religion reflects this: it is not communal, but an individual confronting God--at a place before Creation. The American religion is essentially innocent, free from cosncience, reliant on experience, gives the individual a sense of power, and is about the discoery of the God within. This God, by the way, is essentially the demiurge of Gnosticism (ironically.) The alien God is gone.

America is in a constant state of revivalism because of this religion.

He is not a big fan of fundamentalism, which he sees as a parody of religion, and not fully part of the American Religion. Nor does he like Jehovah's Witnesses, who he sees as Fascist. New Age-ism is barely a religion at all, he says.

His main focus is on Mormonism, American interpretations of Babtism (the OSuthern Baptists), various forms of New Thought--Christian Science and Seventh Day Adventists.

He makes the point that for the last century California has been the new Burned-Over District, which is clever and correct.

[John Martindale · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bloom comments on Mormonism's similarity with early YHWHism, and I found this an astute observation. The deity YHWH has absolutely no relation to the deity of Philo and early Christians who adopted Greek thought--or were independently moved in that direction, also desiring to rid the ancient anthropomorphism that permeates their sacred tradition. In early YHWHism, YHWH is limited, largely locally situated, does not know everything, changes his mind, is subject to wild mood swings and jealous and fits of rage; is dependent upon others for information and to carry out his will; has a physical body--with all that this entails--and in ancient Israelite religion, he has a wife. He can also even lose some battles, like he did to Chemosh--due to the power of a human sacrifice performed by a Moabite king.
Anyhow, Mormons, by making the god of our world a finite and limited deity, actually formulate a far more biblical deity. While not mentioned by Bloom, it also works as a theodicy. It would seem that Jews, attempting to make sense of how the exile could occur, blew YHWH up into a being that is everywhere, all-powerful, who knows everything, and intricately controls every minute detail on earth--and thus, Babylon was simply God's pawn that was used to punish Judah--all evil, harm and suffering on earth is simply dished out by a perfectly just ruler of the earth. This solution created the problem of evil and Divine hiddenness, both of which seem to indicate that if God is these things, then this deity is definitely not good or just in any meaningful sense of the world. The Mormons can more likely affirm that God is in some way good, since they propose that this being is limited--thus it is an effective theodicy.

[BoBandy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I picked up this book because it's referenced several times in Krakauer’s Under the Banner of Heaven.

I'm really not sure what to make of it. Bloom starts by claiming to found a new type of analysis he calls religious criticism, which is just like literary criticism, only it analyzes matters spiritual. He does not waste much time explaining the framework of religious criticism--I guess I'm expected to be already familiar with his works of literary criticism and able to take this leap of faith.

Next, he states his thesis, which is that American homegrown religion is more Gnostic than traditional Christian. Then he proceeds to critique various American religions in bursts of windy prose and cherry-picked historical data, often without providing any context (for example, he mentions Cane Ridge multiple times before he even describes what happened there).

He goes through a number of homegrown sects, concentrating primarily on the Mormons and Southern Baptists, and meanders around for a couple hundred pages. The material on Joseph Smith borders on hagiography; maybe I should have written an adoring bio instead.

Finally, he rolls everything up and says see, Gnosticism. This, after he points out that neither the Mormon church nor the Southern Baptist Convention is the original Gnostic religion it once was.

I will say that the read itself was interesting, but I just could not see the various tributary commentaries flowing together into an overwhelming river of conclusion. I did, however, pick up a number of "to-read" books about the various American homegrown religion. Perhaps, reading those, I will actually learn something about them.

[Karmen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderful! I decided after reading the introduction that I had better treat the reading of this book as if I were taking "American Religions 101." I could almost see Professor Bloom pacing back and forth in front of the class and found myself wanting to raise my hand to ask a question. His analysis of each of these religions, although not 100% accurate, was, I felt, an objective, unemotional breaking down into understandable elements. I found it very educational and hope that I will be more tolerant and open and less dismissive after having read the book. I actually think that Bloom is in a great position to do these analyses. This is the first religious criticism that I have read and found it fascinating. Bloom respects intelligence and obviously has little patience with the silly. Some people find his style to be pretentious, I enjoyed it but then I work with academics so perhaps the familiarity made it more acceptable to me. Whatever the reason, I would certainly recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about the religions included here, not necessarily to convert, but simply to be more educated in perhaps why people act and believe the way they do. Isn't it easier, after all, to communicate if there is something, even if it is only the basics of common understanding?

[Kristofer Carlson · Rating 3 out of 5]

The more I think about this book, the less I understand it. Sometimes I think Harold Bloom is brilliant in his ability to make connections. At other times, I think he is stretching things beyond sense, and into nonsense. I found myself questioning myself and my intelligence; how is it that Harold Bloom could draw connections between religions with diametrically opposing points of view? Some of his arguments are very clear; American religions tend to be millenarian, dualistic, and apocalyptic. But they express these tendencies in very different ways. Some see the state as the means by which we approach the Kingdom of God, and some see the state as the enemy. Some despise the realm of matter and emphasis matters of the spirit. But there is a multidimensionality at work in American religions, such that there is no "American Religion" as such. This is not the case of quibbling over details; the different manifestations of Bloom's "American Religion" differ in their very essence. Their is no "American Religion", but there are American religions. This is a distinction with a difference, something Harold Bloom misses in his attempt to solidify the insoluble.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

An attempt at "religious criticism" by a literary critic. A self-described Gnostic, Bloom thinks that American religion in all its forms are essentially gnostic in character -- meaning that it emphasizes the individual's relationship to God and the primacy of spiritual experience, as opposed to the hierarchical and authoritative religion of the European type. He particularly focuses on the "home grown" religions of Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventism, and the Southern Baptist religion following E.Y. Mullins. Bloom is always a provocative read, largely because he is quite opinionated and has a high opinion of his opinions. But he is also erudite and writes in an engaging, conversational style. Whether you agree with him, or not, that American religious life is Gnostic, it seems a given that American religious life is unique and unlike that of other cultures. It is this uniqueness that fascinates him and he splendidly conveys this fascination to the reader.

[Coyle · Rating 3 out of 5]

This really ought to have been subtitled Pretentious windbag pontificates about an important topic concerning which he has some important and accurate thoughts.
Bloom argues that "The American Religion" is a revamped version of ancient Gnosticism, where we all believe ourselves to be divine, uncreated and unfallen. This is seen in the very American idea that "of COURSE God loves me personally, why wouldn't He?" and worked out in the two major domestic American religions: Mormonism and the Southern Baptist Convention (though I think Bloom has radically misread the SBC).
In more orthodox terminology, the fundamental aspect of the American Religion is Original Sin. Which I think is both insightful and a useful place to begin a discussion.