From the three historians of early Christianity whose lives and careers Elizabeth Clark discusses in The Fathers Refounded—Arthur Cushman McGiffert of Union Theological Seminary in New York, George LaPiana at Harvard Divinity School, and Shirley Jackson Case from the University of Chicago Divinity School—there breathes a palpable air of white, upper-middle-class liberal Protestant complacency and intellectual superiority. Modernists all, they know they are on the winning side of truth because they are confident that they are on the winning side of time. Summarizing McGiffert's distinction between ancient and contemporary Christianity, Clark writes: “Only in modernity, when God's immanence was championed, was the dualism between human and divine in Christ overcome.” “Christ, if he was human,” McGiffert believed, “must be divine, as all men are.” McGiffert's historiography shimmers with Emersonian confidence and ebullience. In his assumption—his assertion—of “only in,” we hear the ringing sound of modernity's triumphant temporality.

中文翻译：

---

自由新教教会历史学家如何在 20 世纪帮助将“基督教”转变为良好的白人新教美国宗教

伊丽莎白克拉克讨论了三位早期基督教历史学家的生活和事业父亲重建——纽约联合神学院的亚瑟·库什曼·麦吉弗特、哈佛神学院的乔治·拉皮亚纳和芝加哥大学神学院的雪莉·杰克逊·凯斯——那里呼吸着明显的白人、中上层自由派新教自满和知识优越感。所有的现代主义者，他们都知道他们站在真理的胜利一边，因为他们相信自己站在时间的胜利一边。克拉克总结了麦吉弗特对古代和当代基督教的区别，他写道：“只有在现代，当上帝的内在性得到支持时，基督里的人与神之间的二元论才被克服。” “基督，如果他是人，”麦吉弗特相信，“他一定是神圣的，就像所有的人一样。” 麦吉弗特的史学充满爱默生式的自信和热情。