Religion, Theology, and Public Higher Education

California Law Review, Jul 2012

By David W. Louisell and John H. Jackson, Published on 12/31/62

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3081&context=californialawreview

Religion, Theology, and Public Higher Education

Religion, Theology, and Public Higher Education' David W. Louisell 0 John H. Jackson 0 0 Professor of Law, University of California School of Law , Berkeley , USA [T]he relations which exist between man and his Maker, and the duties resulting from those relations,are the most interesting and important to every human being, and the most incumbent on his study and investigation. The want of instruction in the various creeds of religious faith existing among our citizens presents, therefore, a chasm in a generalinstitution of the useful sciences. -Thomas Jefferson' t This article grows out of a study on "Religion in Public Higher Education in California" undertaken by Professor David W. Louisell, formerly of the University of Minnesota, under the following circumstances. The need for this study was expressed at a series of conferences on Religion in State Universities held at the University of Minnesota between 1949 and 1955. The later conferences in 1954 and 1955 were jointly sponsored by the Religious Education Association and the University of Minnesota. A commission of faculty members and administrators from the participating universities was given the responsibility of encouraging study and research into specific aspects of the subject. Funds to underwrite these investigations were contributed by a number of private donors in the Minneapolis and St. Paul area and placed in an account authorized by the Regents of the University of Minnesota and administered by the Office of the Dean of Students. Executives for the work of the commission were Herman E. Wornom, General Secretary of the Religious Education Association, and Henry E. Allen, Co-ordinator of Students' Religious Activities, University of Minnesota. The authors wish to express their appreciation to Don B. Alien, formerly a Boalt Hall student and now of the Utah Bar, for valuable assistance in basic research in California law and practice. They also thank Stanley T. Skinner, a second year student at Boalt, for help in checking the documentation. Throughout this article the words "religion" and "theology" are used. In some contexts the more precise word seems to be "theology" in the sense of religious knowledge methodically formulated, e.g., "the science which treats of God, his attributes, and his relations to the universe.' Thus "theology" has the advantage of more accurately designating the purely intellectual aspects of religion susceptible of analysis and hence appropriate for academic pursuit in state universities, as distinguished, for example, from such aspects as proselytism. Further, in the context of legal norms, questions about the legality of courses such as typical ones in comparative religion or religion courses essentially historical, descriptive, or literary seem insubstantial to the point of being frivolous; whereas more real questions may be presented respecting certain courses in theology. - No. 5 U NMIViEdRdSlIeTIAESgeosriagsinaatnedexwtietnhsiinontheoffotlhdeofmtehdeieevsatalbclihsuhrecdhchscuhrochol.inTthhee traditional university generally had four faculties: theology, law (canon, civil, or both), medicine, and the arts.2 Despite this historical origin, many universities today have no theology or religion faculty and few if any courses that teach theology.' Recently, however, there has been a growing trend to bring theology back into the curricula of institutions of higher education.' Departments of religion have been organized in universities," thus reversing the idea of separation of theology from the universities which occurred when theological schools were dropped or when new institutions were founded without them. More courses are being given on religious topics, and surveys indicate that educators feel that a need for religious instruction exists which is not being fulfilled.0 Unless the university is to be relegated to the position of a training school for technicians, it must bear the responsibility of provoking the individual to think fundamentally about his role in life and about ultimate questions. Like Socrates, the university should be the inquiring conscience of society, presenting for the thinking student a variety of values so that he may intelligently choose from among the clamor of alternative principles that may shape his life. Although it is not the duty of the university to force a particular choice on a student, or even to force him at this stage to choose, it would seem to be the duty of the university to see that the student has the opportunity to learn about all reasonably possible choices. Indeed, unless knowledge of all such choices is available to the student, the university has to some extent forced a choice upon him. Religion forms an essential part of the western tradition; to understand that tradition one must understand its religious elements. Is it not one function of an American university to teach students to understand the western tradition as part of their culture? If the universitie (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3081&context=californialawreview

David W. Louisell, John H. Jackson. Religion, Theology, and Public Higher Education, California Law Review, 2012, Volume 50, Issue 5,