Abstract
In recent decades, scholars have increased their interest in studying fundamentalism among various religions and cultures. However, there has been no consensus to date on a useful definition for guiding research, which has inspired Pollack et al. (this issue) to offer a new one for consideration. In response, I present the case of Christian serpent handling sects, Holiness-Pentecostal groups that handle venomous serpents in worship services, as a unique example of American Protestant fundamentalism. In doing so, I provide a brief historical account of their appearance at the turn of the 20th century, their conflicts with the religious and larger cultures, and an empirical analysis of serpent handler interviews identifying four fundamental beliefs of the serpent handling truth. Finally, I relate this fundamentalist group to components of the new definition of fundamentalism offered by Pollack and colleagues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For a detailed discussion of the intratextual model, including its application to scripture, see Williamson (2020, pp. 74–82).
It is widely accepted among biblical scholars that the latter passage of Mark 16 (vv. 9–20) was not in the original manuscript but was added by at least the end of the second century (Hood and Williamson 2014). Serpent handling sects, however, counter this claim by arguing that divine providence has assured that the present canon of scriptures is authoritative and can be trusted as the infallible word of God (see Carden and Pelton 1976). For a more compelling defense based on higher criticism, see Hood and Williamson (2014).
For SHS, the intratextual interpretation justifying serpent handling as a truth involves a process of dialoging several passages of scripture in the Bible. The main text, of course, is Mark 16:17–18, which instructs the practice as a miraculous sign, but also Luke 10:19, which promises power for obedience. Other New Testament scriptures are used for dialogue in interpreting serpent handling among the “signs”, “miracles”, and “wonders” as wrought by nameless early apostles and Christians (Acts 15:12; Hebrews 2:3–5; Mark 16:20), and also by specific individuals like the deacon/martyr Stephen (Acts 6:8) and Apostle Paul (Acts 19:11; 28:3–6). Furthermore, they intratextually interpret from Acts 2:22 that Jesus himself handled serpents among his many miracles—especially since he mandated the sign. SHS also find intratextual evidence in the Old Testament that God (Job 26:13), Aaron (Exodus 7:10–12), and Moses (Numbers 21:8–9) all handled serpents. In the case of harm or death from obedience to the mandate, SHS have included Ecclesiastes 10:8, which speaks of a broken hedge of protection, in dialogue with some of the above scriptures to arrive at an intratextual understanding of such events.
In nearly 30 years of field research among SHS, I have attended far more than 200 services and observed well over a thousand individual serpent handlings, yet I have witnessed but a dozen or so serpent bites, none of which were fatal. In all this time, I have had four personal acquaintances among the group, two very close, who were fatally bitten, although I was not present at these events. I share this field experience to underscore that, in spite of popular notions about serpent handling, bites are very rare and deaths from bites are even rarer. In fact, since 1909, I have found documentation for only 95 deaths, the most recent being that of John David Brock, age 60, in 2015 (Sutton 2015). The best predictor of a serpent bite is the frequency of handling—that is, the more frequently one handles, the more likely one is to suffer a bite. Nevertheless, the rare media reports of serpent bite deaths sensationalize the practice as though they are a common occurrence.
I conducted these 17 interviews for the original study from 1998 to 1999, but one was eliminated from this analysis because of an interruption in the interview, making it incomplete. Although the interviews were conducted more than 20 years ago, they remain remarkably consistent in content with what present-day handlers describe of their serpent handling experiences. These interviews were videotaped and are archived in the Hood-Williamson Archives for the Serpent Handling Holiness Sects, Lupton Library, the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.
SHS, like many Evangelicals and other Holiness-Pentecostal groups, use “Word” as a synonym for the Bible; thus I have capitalized “Word” in participant excerpts when used as such, as well as when discussing what participants have said within this context of use.
To protect confidentiality, I have used P1 … P16 to identify participant excerpts instead of the name.
This handler described suffering a serpent bite the Thursday prior to this interview. He also experienced them at times after the interview and died more than 10 years later from natural causes, but without once ever seeking medical attention for bites sustained from handling.
P11’s cause of death was not serpent bite, but a stage four lung cancer that went undiagnosed until three weeks before he died; he had never smoked. At urging of family, he finally saw a physician to learn the cause of his illness and returned home to die. From the onset of symptoms, he repeatedly called for believers to anoint him with oil and lay hands on him for healing, as he had done since his conversion to serpent handling, until his death. One month before he died, I attended his church homecoming and observed this happen as believers gathered around his weak and frail body. On medical attention, serpent handlers often seek it for health issues, if they fail to receive divine healing. However, it is rare that they seek it in the case of a serpent bite. According to P11, he had been bitten more than a dozen times, some serious; in none of those instances did he seek medical assistance, but trusted God for the outcome.
See Williamson et al. (2000) for a phenomenological study of the experience of anointing among a subset of these same participants.
When preaching on the signs, serpent handlers typically quote Mark 16:17–18, but also often add verse 20, the last verse of that chapter: “And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the Word with signs following. Amen” (emphasis original).
Hood and Williamson (2014) have raised the possibility that Christian serpent handling may have occurred in antiquity and explored available research concerning it. Although there are speculations that it may have existed, there is no empirical evidence to support that it did. However, it would not be surprising to learn of Christians handling serpents since the advent of Protestantism, which placed the Bible into the hands of laity for private reading and interpretation. In the 18th and into the 19th centuries, the first and second great awakenings in the US bear witness to emotionalism and various forms of ecstatic worship, paving the way for the eventual rise of the Holiness-Pentecostal movement (Synan 1997); thus, the circumstances for serpent handling to possibly appear were present for centuries. As documented above, the first public notice of serpent handling was 1897 (Snake bites harm him not, 1897), but it realistically may have occurred much earlier in less public settings.
References
Altemeyer, B., and B. Hunsberger. 1992. Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 2(2):113–133.
Ammerman, N. 1991. North American protestant fundamentalism. In Fundamentalisms observed, ed. M. Marty, R. Appleby, 1–65. University of Chicago Press.
Brown, F., and J. McDonald. 2000. The serpent handlers: three families and their faith. John F. Blair.
Carden, K.W., and R.W. Pelton. 1976. The persecuted prophets. A. S. Barnes and Company.
Charleston Daily Mail. 1963. House okays ban on snake rituals. February 14, 1.
Collins, J.B. 1947. Tennessee snake handlers. Chattanooga News. Free Press.
Conn, C.W. 1996. Like a mighty army: a history of the church of god: definitive edition. Pathway Press.
Harris, R.W. 1949. Snake-handling. The Church of God Evangel 39(47):8–9.
Heath, S.J. 1928. Signs following believers. The Church of God Evangel 19(30):3.
Hofstadter, R. 1963. Anti-intellectualism in American life. Knopf.
Hollenweger, W.J. 1972. The pentecostals. Augsburg: Publishing House.
Hood, R.W., Jr., and W.P. Williamson. 2008. Them that believe: the power and meaning of the Christian serpent handling tradition. University of California Press.
Hood, R.W., Jr., and W.P. Williamson. 2014. A case study of the intratextual model of fundamentalism: serpent handlers and Mark 16:17–20. Journal of Psychology and Christianity 33:58–69.
Marty, M.E., and R.S. Appleby. 1991. Conclusion: An interim report on a hypothetical family. In Fundamentalisms observed, ed. M.E. Marty, R.S. Appleby, 814–842. University of Chicago Press.
Phillips, R.E., and M. Kitchens. 2021. What is religious fundamentalism? A literature review. Archive for the Psychology of Religion 43:317–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/00846724211057500.
Pollack, D., and G. Rosta. 2018. Religion and modernity: an international comparison. Oxford University Press.
Roberson, G. 1935. Snake handled at Odum, Ga. The Church of God Evangel 26(27):9–15.
Stephens, R.J. 2008. The fire spreads: holiness and pentecostalism in the American south. Harvard University Press.
Sutton, A. 2015. Kentucky man dies from snake bite during pentecostal church service. https://www.al.com/news/2015/07/kentucky_man_dies_from_snake_b.html. Accessed 24 March 2022.
Synan, V. 1997. The holiness-pentecostal tradition: charismatic movements in the twentieth century. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
The Church of God. 1910. Teaching. The Evening Light and Church of God Evangel 1(12):3.
The Hartford Herald. 1897. Snake bites harm him not. July 28, 1.
Tomlinson, A.J. 1914. General overseer’s annual address. In Echoes from the Tenth Annual Assembly of the Churches of God, ed. A.J. Tomlinson, 6–18. Church of God Publishing House.
Wacker, G. 2003. Heaven below: early Pentecostals and American culture. Harvard University Press.
Whitehead, M. 1943. Church of God Evangel. Signs 34(7):14.
Williamson, W.P. 1999. The experience of serpent handling: a phenomenological study (publication no. 9962331). Doctoral dissertation. University of Tennessee-Knoxville. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Williamson, W.P. (2020). Conjectures and controversy in the study of fundamentalism. Brill.
Williamson, W.P., and Demmrich. forthcoming. An international review of empirical research on the psychology of fundamentalism. Brill.
Williamson, W.P., and R.W. Hood Jr.. 2004. Differential maintenance and growth of religious organizations based upon high-cost behaviors: serpent handling within the Church of God. Review of Religious Research 46(2):150–168.
Williamson, W.P., and R.W. Hood Jr.. 2015a. Poison-drinking in obedience to the faith: a phenomenological study of the experience. Mental Health, Religion, and Culture 18:199–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2015.1033685.
Williamson, W.P., and R.W. Hood Jr.. 2015b. Religious serpent handling and community relations. Journal on Prevention and Intervention in the Community 43:186–198. Special issue. https://doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2014.973278.
Williamson, W.P., and H.R. Pollio. 1999. The phenomenology of religious serpent handling: a rationale and thematic study of extemporaneous sermons. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 38(2):203–218.
Williamson, W.P., H.R. Pollio, and R.W. Hood Jr.. 2000. A phenomenological analysis of the anointing among religious serpent handlers. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 10(4):221–240.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Williamson, W.P. Christian Serpent Handling Sects of Appalachia and their fundamentals of faith. Z Religion Ges Polit 7, 13–35 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41682-022-00113-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41682-022-00113-4