Skip to main content

Over the last volume year the total number of submissions was sixty-seven, and I remain pleased with the quality of manuscripts we are receiving. Our acceptance-to-publication timeframe is approximately nine months.

Table 1. Statistics: April 1, 2009 – March 31, 2010

Deep thanks and appreciation go to Brad Shaw (Greenville College), outgoing Associate Editor for Arts and Humanities, and Phil Cary (Eastern University), outgoing Associate Editor for Philosophy, for their invaluable service to CSR; they have done a wonderful job ensuring the high quality of the scholarly essays that we publish. We welcome Marion Larson (Bethel University) as our new Associate Editor for Arts and Humanities and Jim Stump (Bethel College) as our new Associate Editor for Philosophy. In addition, after several years of discussion, I am happy to announce that Jerry Pattengale (Indiana Wesleyan University) has agreed to become our Associate Publisher.

The theme issue for summer 2011, “Reel Presence: Intersections between Faith& Film,” will be guest edited by Craig Detweiler (Fuller Theological Seminary) and S. Bradley Shaw (Greenville College). Articles should be submitted via email to Professor Shaw ( If you have questions about the appropriateness of manuscript topics, please contact Professor Shaw via e-mail. Submission deadline is September 30, 2010. The theme issue for summer 2012, “Globalization and Global Trends in Christian Higher Education,” will be guest edited by Janel Curry and Joel Carpenter of Calvin College (see the announcement in this issue). Discussion on the appropriateness of manuscript topics with the guest editors is recommended and encouraged through e-mail: or The deadline for submissions is September 1, 2011. I have enjoyed this past year and look forward to 2010-11.

Reflections on the Fortieth Anniversary of the Christian Scholar’s Review

I was a sophomore at Virginia Tech when the first issue of the Christian Scholar’s Review appeared in Fall 1970. The Beatles were still hot, my favorite band was the Doors, and the first great rock out, Woodstock, was still fresh in my mind. At the time I was not a scholar and certainly not a Christian. But during that fall I did go through a conversion experience, and, serendipitously, I soon shifted my major from civil engineering to literature. I really liked my English professors. They were very bright, they were good teachers, and it was obvious they loved literature even more than I did. In fact, most of them tended to treat literature as something holy; literary studies for them verged on religious devotion. Perhaps not surprisingly they divorced literary study from any sense of divine truth and meaning. Literature may have been holy, but it had no direct connection to God.

I found that quite frustrating because I longed for them to help me make connections between those things that I most loved about literature—the beauty of the way words sound, the power of metaphor, the complexity and subtleties of language, the orderliness and beauty of literary forms (poetry, drama, fiction), and especially the tender, poignant portrayal of the human condition, including the possibility of discovering truth and meaning, the redemptive nature of human love as well as the destructiveness of human selfishness, pride, and deception—and the things I was learning about Christianity, including the creation, the fall, my own patterns of sinful living and thinking, and redemption. My love for literature and my emerging love for Christ swirled together, and I longed for them to mesh into some kind of coherent framework; unfortunately, my literature professors could not help me think christianly about literature.

Providentially, I began to encounter literary critics who helped me do this—chief among them was C. S. Lewis, a writer I had known previously only as the author of the Chronicles of Narnia. As a young Christian, I was looking forward to a course on John Milton that featured an extended study of Paradise Lost. I had heard Paradise Lost was a distinctively “Christian” piece of literature, so I was primed for a rich literary experience, assuming it would be informed by Milton’s Christian experience. I was not disappointed. Yet what most excited me was that Lewis was there before me. A required supplemental text in the course was Lewis’s little masterpiece, A Preface to Paradise Lost. I still marvel at Lewis’s insights throughout the book, including this one: “The Satan in Milton enables him to draw the character well just as the Satan in us enables us to receive it.”1 There is a depth of literary and spiritual insight throughout Lewis’s Preface that is rarely equaled elsewhere.

Reading Lewis eventually led me to several scholarly journals that took seriously the idea that one’s faith could inform scholarship and vice versa. I realized this the first time I picked up a copy of CSR, as I was struck by it two-fold mission:

The Christian scholar, experiencing the redemptive love of God and welcoming the enriching perspective of divine revelation, accepts as part of his or her vocation the obligation not only to pursue an academic discipline but also to contribute toward a broader and more unified understanding of life and the world. This vocation therefore includes the obligation to communicate such an understanding to the Christian community and to the entire world of learning.

The Christian Scholar’s Review is intended as a peer-reviewed medium through which Christian scholars may cooperate in pursuing these facets of their tasks. Specifically, CSR has as its primary objective the integration of Christian faith and learning on both the intra- and inter-disciplinary levels. As a secondary purpose, this journal seeks to provide a forum for the discussion of the theoretical issues of Christian higher education. The Review is intended to encourage communication and understanding among Christian scholars, and between them and others.

The interdisciplinary nature of CSR attracted me then, and it continues to do so today. I enjoy the give and take of academic debate, and I am very thankful to my CSR colleagues in other disciplines who have helped me think more deeply from a biblically informed perspective about economics, philosophy, psychology, biology, history, anthropology, theology, art, literature, mathematics, and so on.

In 1999 I had the privilege of assuming the role of CSR editor, something I could not have imagined back in fall 1970. One particular aspect of CSR that I have enjoyed since then is working with our associate editors and referees; they work diligently (and without pay!) to help scholars sharpen and refine their ideas—and almost without exception an essay will be vetted several times before it is ready for publication. I believe this a wonderful service we provide, and over the years many authors have expressed their thanks for the academic insight, scholarly rigor, and collegial support they have received via our review process. This vetting process was also the pattern under the previous editors of CSR: George Brushaber (1970-79), Clifton Orlebeke (1979-85), William Hasker (1985-94), and Roger Olson (1994-1999).

This issue of CSR marks our fortieth anniversary. We are currently in discussion about ways in which to mark this important achievement, including a celebration during our annual editorial board meeting in Spring 2011 and possible publication of a collection of our “best” essays, tentatively entitled Taking Captive Every Thought: Forty Years of the Christian Scholar’s Review. Whatever form our celebrations take, I assure you that CSR is committed to serving our original mission and to seeking new ways to support, enhance, and promote Christian scholarship.

Don W. King
Montreat College
Montreat, NC
July 31, 2010

Guidelines for Contributors

Those who contemplate submitting an article for publication in CSR, or who intend to write an article for the journal, should be guided by the policy statement found on the inside front cover of each issue. They should also, if possible, look at back numbers of CSR for specimens of articles that have been found suitable in length, subject matter, level of scholarship, and approach. Though the editorial staff has undergone changes from time to time, it is safe to assume that CSR’s past and present is a reasonably reliable indicator of its future criteria for editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

It may be useful to add some information about editorial practice and policy:

1. Editorial handling of manuscripts
a. An author need not be a faculty member of a sponsoring institution. Submissions are welcome at any time from any person; however, authors should not make simultaneous submission to CSR and another journal.
b. Manuscripts that are to be considered for publication as articles or responses should be sent to the editor (Don W. King) with the author’s name deleted in electronic format using Word or WordPerfect on a Windows compatible disk or as an e-mail attachment. The author should also provide contact information, including academic affiliation as appropriate. Manuscripts that are to be considered for publication as book reviews should be sent to the book review editors: Todd Ream ( or Perry Glanzer (
c. Manuscripts will be screened by the editor. If a manuscript is obviously unpublishable, the author will be notified promptly with an explanation. If worthy of further consideration, it will be acknowledged and placed in the hands of an associate editor for evaluation, usually with the advice of referees. The final decision about publication is made by the editor, who will inform the author. The process normally takes from three to six months.months.
d. The editor and associate editors will be aware of the contributor’s identity, but it is CSR’s policy to send submissions to referees “blind,” without identifying the authors. In pursuance of this policy, it is requested that authors identify themselves only in a separate e-mail letter.

2. Criteria for publishable articles
a. Length: Typically 15 to 25 pages of double-spaced text for articles; 2 to 3 pages for responses; 3 to 5 pages for reflection pieces.
b. Fit: The article should be written for CSR with a view to its particularstandards and purpose. Unrevised lectures, chapel talks, and the like are not acceptable.
c. Currency: Since CSR is a journal, its articles should address matters of current importance. When the subject matter is one of the “perennial questions,” the author should do more than repeat what has been said already in places that are readily accessible to other scholars.
d. Scholarly level: CSR accepts no undergraduate papers. It accepts interpretive or critical summaries of one or more books, poems, stories, etc., only if in the judgment of the editors the author ’s contribution is significantly original. The ideal CSR article reveals a quality of scholarly depth,of mastery without ostentation. A specialist in the field of the article should be able to tell that the author knows the relevant problems, arguments and literature pertaining to the subject; a non-specialist, on the other hand, should not feel excluded from a private scholarly domain.
e. Interdisciplinary breadth: Since CSR intends to be attractive and intelligible to scholars in all disciplines, its authors are asked to make a particular effort to communicate across disciplinary lines. They should avoid, where possible, esoteric language, and they should not presuppose information normally possessed only by specialists. Opening sentences and paragraphs are especially important: if they are clear and provocative, they will help to draw the reader into the essay.
f. Christian perspective: The author may assume that his or her readers are generally familiar with, and sympathetic to, the Christian religion. While this assumption does not preclude articles that address topics in apologetics and philosophy of religion, including discussion of the rational justification of Christian belief, it does free the author from an obligation to provide such justification. Most sponsoring institutions of the CSR are evangelical and Protestant; its editorial policy, however, is ecumenical.

3. Style
a. Submit your manuscript in electronic format using Word or WordPerfectas an e-mail attachment.
b. Ensure that your final manuscript follows The Chicago Manual of Style,15th edition; manuscripts cannot be published until they are prepared according to The Chicago Manual of Style.
c. Follow Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, for spelling and hyphenation. Follow American rather than British rules for spelling. In languages other than English, insert all diacritical marks, preferably by using accents on the font being used. Avoid using e.g. or i.e.
d. All text (including extracts within the text, footnotes, etc.) must be double-spaced and in 12 point Times Roman font.
e. Except as listed below, avoid all typographic embellishments, including bold, italics, underline, centering, type ornaments (dingbats), and words typed in all capitals.
f. Type one space after periods, colons, and semicolons.
g. Footnotes rather than parenthetical citations should be used; refer to the Chicago Manual for formatting guidelines. Use superscript for the footnote numbers in the text and for the footnote numbers themselves. In the text, no space should precede the footnote number. In the footnotes, no period or space should follow the footnote number.
h. Book, journal, magazine, or film titles should be italicized rather thanunderlined.
i. Left justify all text; do not full justify. Begin new paragraphs by typing a hard return and indent each paragraph .5 inch using a tab; do not use the space bar to indent. Do not insert extra space between paragraphs. Extracts should be indented from the left margin .5 inch using the indent command in your word processing program.
j. If your manuscript is divided into parts, type each heading in bold. If your manuscript is divided into subparts, type each subheading in italics. Do not number headings or subheadings. Type all headings and subheadings in upper and lower case; avoid all capitals, underlining, or other embellishments.
k. Use the en dash and em dash as appropriate, rather than the hyphen or two hyphens.
l. Consult the Chicago Manual for proper capitalization (for example, Bible and Scripture are capitalized, but biblical and scriptural are not).

On formal matters, CSR follows traditional humanities style as set forth in the Chicago Manual of Style. If a manuscript, otherwise acceptable, needs considerable correction to make it conformable to the style manual (e.g., in footnotes), the editor may return the manuscript to the author for correction.

Within the above limits, and the more general canons of logic and language observed by all scholarly publications, the editors try not to deprive an author of his or her distinctive idiom. However, CSR follows an editorial policy of inclusive language with regard to references to humans. In particular, articles and book reviews should be written to acknowledge and affirm both genders. The editors reserve the right to revise wording which fails to meet this criterion.

Referees for Volume XXXIX

The Christian Scholar’s Review expresses its appreciation to the following persons who served as referees for submitted manuscripts during the year ending March 31, 2010. (Any omissions will be corrected if brought to the editor’s attention.) Because of the wide range of subjects covered by CSR, we are heavily dependent on the judgment and advice of our referees. Their recommendations have a significant influence on our selection of papers for publication, but perhaps their most important contribution lies in the constructive guidance they give to our authors; many an article has been greatly improved as a result of a referee’s suggestions. All this work—sometimes hours on a single manuscript—is done for the love of Christian scholarship, with no expectation of material reward. Our thanks, then, to those who contribute so much to making this journal possible:

Lesley Allen, Greenville College
Adam Barkman, Redeemer University College
Jeremy Bergen, Wilfred Laurier University
Mark Bjelland, Gustavus Adolphus College
Craig Boyd, Azusa Pacific University
James Bradley, Calvin College
Phill Broussard, Covenant College
G. William Carlson, Bethel University
Jay Case, Malone University
Colin Chapell, The University of Alabama
Kelly Clark, Calvin College
Keith Cooper, Pacific Lutheran University
Darrell Cosden, Judson University
Oliver Crisp, University of Bristol
Adrienne Dengerink
David Downing, Elizabethtown College
David Dzaka, Messiah College
John Fea, Messiah College
Perry Glanzer, Baylor University
James Halteman, Wheaton College
Charles Hampton, College of Wooster
Brian Hartley, Greenville College
David Hoekema, Calvin College
Russel Howell, Westmont College
John Hunt, Covenant College
Rhonda Jacobsen, Messiah College
Allen Jorgenson, Waterloo Lutheran Seminary
Marion Larson, Bethel University
Thomas Mach, Cedarville University
Stephen Matheson, Calvin College
Maico Michelin, Trinity College, University of Toronto
Eric Miller, Geneva College
Betsy Morgan, Eastern University
Jack Mulder, Hope College
Katya Nemtchinova, Seattle Pacific University
Alan Padgett, Luther Seminary
Eric Potter, Grove City College
Russ Reeves, Providence Christian College
Veronica Ross, Greenville College
Dennis Sansom, Samford University
Peter Schuurman, University of Guelph
Carol Simon, Hope College
Naomi Smith, Bethel University
R.J. Snell, Eastern University
Michael Stevens, Hope College
Frans van Liere, Calvin College
Susan VanZantan-Gallagher, Seattle Pacific University
Albert Wolters, Redeemer University College
Genzo Yamamoto, Wheaton College
Mathias Zahniser, Greenville College

Cite this article
Don W. King, “Notes from the Editor”, Christian Scholar’s Review, 40:1 , 5-12


  1. C. S. Lewis, A Preface to Paradise Lost (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1942), 101.

Don W. King

Montreat College
Don W. King is Professor of English at Montreat College and former Editor of Christian Scholar's Review.