next »

[humanitiesabd]

A study on the "Religious Beliefs and Behaviors of College Faculty" was recently released by the Institute for Jewish and Community Research (http://www.jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultyReligion07.pdf).  Among some of the major findings:

- "Most Faculty Believe in God, but Atheism Is Significantly More Prevalent among Faculty Than the General Public"
- "Faculty Are Much Less Religious Than the General Public"
- "Religious Beliefs of College Faculty Are Highly Associated with Political Identity and Behavior"
- "Faculty Feel Warmly about Most Religious Groups, but Feel Coldly about Evangelicals and Mormons"

I found this last point particularly interesting, because university faculty are often perceived as anti-religious, but in fact it seems they are just anti-Evangelical. What do you think lies at the root of these negative feelings? Is this religious prejudice, pure and simple?  Or are there other factors (i.e. the real and perceived connections between some Evangelicals and the current U.S. govt.) at work? What, if anything, do you think could/should be done about this?

[kaysixteen]

Probably has little to do with the current US administration, since this is hardly a new phenomenon.  More to do with two things (note correlation to attitudes towards Mormonism):

1)evangelicals and Mormons actually proselytize, tell people to convert to their faith traditions, and that other traditions are wrong, etc.
2)evangelicals get seen as Jethros discovering the ceement pond, ie, deep prejudices against non-urban Southerners and Midwesterners.

[trabb]

I fear that I am standing under the bridge with a big old bag of troll bait, but I'll answer anyway. (And I'm not implying that you, lemma, are a troll - just that these threads tend to attract them).

Evangelicalism is perceived as discouraging the two things that academics most value - tradition and intellectual thought. 

Mainstream Protestantism officially endorses a reasoned approach to faith.  I say "officially" because I am fully aware that you may not find this view endorsed by your typical pewsitter.  The big Protestant denominations (Anglicanism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, etc.) acknowledge the problems of a literal interpretation of Scripture and embrace discussions of how scientific inquiry and faith can co-exist.  Roman Catholicism gets by on this as well, primarily because of its commitment to education; even if the Church officially responds to some questions in a non-rational way, the presence of many fine colleges and universities speaks to the Catholic Church's desire to foster scholarship and inquiry.  Even those who scoff at the idea of Christianity can co-exist with people who at least recognize the need for intellectual inquiry.

Furthermore, both mainstream Protestant denominations and Roman Catholicism embrace tradition, something that many academics find appealing.  After all, many of us in the academy spend our entire lives figuring out how we live in the present with the weight of tradition bearing down on us; even if it's a love-hate relationship, tradition is something to be accounted for.

Whether it's a fair characterization or not, Evangelicalism is perceived as dismissing both of these values.  An insistence on interpreting Scripture literally denies the value of much academic inquiry.  Just think of the creation/evolution debate.  If "God created it in 7 days" must be taken literally, then we really have no need for whole branches of science; the view that "God is responsible for this glorious mess, but we can't take the Biblical account literally" is much more compatible with a scientific study of the origins of life.  Furthermore, the Evangelical emphasis on individual interpretations of Scripture is perceived as denying the role of tradition in giving meaning to life; if my reading of Scripture is all that matters, then there's 2000 years worth of tradition that goes out the window.

[larryc]

Evangelicals bring their beliefs into my classroom in a way that other faiths do not. The very few complaints I get about the readings "violating my moral beliefs" always come from evangelical students who feel offended that the textbook claims that humans came to the Americas 15000 years ago when the earth is only 6000 years old, or that they should not have to read about gay rights activists in the 1980s, or whatever. But in truth I get maybe two such complaints a year and I work very harmoniously with evangelical students.

[zharkov]

Mainstream Protestantism officially endorses a reasoned approach to faith.  I say "officially" because I am fully aware that you may not find this view endorsed by your typical pewsitter.  The big Protestant denominations (Anglicanism, Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, etc.) acknowledge the problems of a literal interpretation of Scripture and embrace discussions of how scientific inquiry and faith can co-exist.  Roman Catholicism gets by on this as well, primarily because of its commitment to education; .....

Great post, Trabb.  Let me just add that mainstream Protestant denominations (eg. Congregationalist, etc.) also have a tradition of the "learned ministry."  That's why Harvard was founded and continues to the present via Harvard Divinity School. 

[larryc]

Perhaps there is a fundamental contradiction between the evangelical belief that there is one truth with the basic assumption behind a university, that there are many truths (and a department for each).

[concordancia]

I fell for this once. I accompanied a family member to a new testament church. And there I found not a religious lightbulb, but the limits of my tolerance. I don't think we should ban them, but I don't think we should ban the students who yell back at them either. Free speech governs what the government can control, let individuals have at it a bit in loud, obnoxious voices. It is spring.

[husqvarna]

Perhaps there is a fundamental contradiction between the evangelical belief that there is one truth with the basic assumption behind a university, that there are many truths (and a department for each).

I don't know if that's the case... otherwise you wouldn't have evangelical universities with many different departments.  

I think you're right though, in the sense that evangelicals (for the most part) are not comfortable with the much more pluralist environment that today's university (and wider society) exhibits.  

[beacon1]

There is a simple answer to this debate:

1) Universities are full of radical leftist looneys. Their beliefs are distorted and not well grounded in reality. They can not listen to reason even when the facts are clear.

2) Evangelicals and Mormons are right wing looneys. They have distorted beliefs and that are not grounded in reality. They are equally intellectually dishonest.

The two sets of looneys abhor each other and slip even deeper into their neurotic fantasy worlds. 

The folks in the middle look at the two sides in disbelief.

[philnotfil]

@Trabb- I thoroughly enjoyed that, but what about the Mormons?

[humanitiesabd]

@Trabb- I thoroughly enjoyed that, but what about the Mormons?

Also, it seems like Islam shares some of the same characteristics that bother faculty about Evangelical Christianity (certainly not all Muslims of course, anymore than all Ev. Christians).  Why do faculty feel so much more positively about Muslims than Evangelical Christians? Are Muslims perceived as a threatened minority in US culture at large, so they receive special protection (if this is the case, should Evangelicals receive similar sympathy since they are so underrepresented in the academy?). Is it because most faculty are likely to have come into contact with more Evangelicals than Muslims? Any other ideas?

(I am in no way trying to suggest that we should be less tolerant of Islam - I have Muslim relatives who I love and I realize that the extremists by no means represent the majority of Muslims. But as an Evangelical Christian in the academy, I wish more people would realize that the over-the-top folks you see on TV don't represent all of us either!)

[trabb]

@Trabb- I thoroughly enjoyed that, but what about the Mormons?

I must humbly confess that I do not know enough about Mormonism to speculate.  Sad, really - I should do better.

[dr_crankypants]

@Trabb- I thoroughly enjoyed that, but what about the Mormons?

I must humbly confess that I do not know enough about Mormonism to speculate.  Sad, really - I should do better.

Mormonism shares quite a bit (in terms of cultural style) with evangelicalism (not surprising, given its origins), despite the fact that evangelicals find Mormonism horrifying.

[_touchedbyanoodle_]

This is personal experience only, but I suspect a common pattern across campuses:

I find Mormons to be much more tolerable than evangelicals in the sense that they are far more polite about their efforts. When I am approached by a Mormon, typically while walking across campus, the conversation begins with polite chit-chat and then a subtle offer to share his "message." My polite refusal is always met with a polite goodbye.

Now, the evangelicals, on the other hand, I typically meet in my campus mailbox through the copious amounts of spam, often in the form of cartoons with disturbing images of flames and body parts. When approached, typically at my front door, the conversation begins with the question, "Have you give yourself to Jesus?" The conversation ends with, "Aren't you afraid of burning in Hell?" That's when I slam the door.

Maybe the characteristics of these two groups in my area aren't universal, but that's what I've encountered, so, like I said, I find Mormons far more tolerable than evangelicals. They also tend to be good sports when I ask about the underwear. :)

Funny side story: The last time evangelicals came to my door, they asked if anybody in the house was Spanish-speaking. When I said "no," they turned and left. Now there's a language quota for saving souls?!

[husqvarna]

Challenge for anyone: define what an "evangelical" is.

I'm always curious to hear what people think, and I think talking about this would further our discussion as well.  And don't feel pressured or like you're on the hot seat... evangelicals can't define very well who they are either, and I certainly don't claim to have a good definition.

Here's a personal story to give an example of why I think this is interesting:

A few years back I ran into an old professor at a coffee shop.  She recognized me but had forgotten who I was exactly.  Trying to recall some information about me, she said, "you're a Christian fundamentalist, aren't you?"  Not in a negative way at all, just as a matter of fact. 

I'm certainly not a fundamentalist, but I could see entirely why this professor would think I'm a fundamentalist.  (don't worry, I hadn't tried to proselytize in class or anything like that.)  I wasn't offended at all, and I didn't want to confuse the matter by questioning her definition of the term, so I just said, "Yes, that's me" and continued chatting.

I think different people have very different perspectives on others, and it's been very enjoyable to read this thread and hear comments from others about, frankly, people with whom I, to some degree, self-identify.  While I disagree with some characterizations, it would be silly of me to voice this, because who am I to say what I look like to other people?  I'm also glad that this thread hasn't turned into a condemnatory discussion.

So, if anyone's up for it, "What is an Evangelical?"  (or a Mormon or a Muslim person too, but "evangelical" describes a more particular subgroup of Christianity while these other two are broader in their scope and perhaps less definable as a result.)