Fairfield University has a wide variety of religious studies classes, going far beyond issues focusing on Roman Catholics or Jesuits. Students can take courses in Judaism, Islam and Buddhism.
However, Fairfield does not currently offer a course focused on disbelief in the existence of a god.
“I think it would be a healthy exposure,” said Fr. Michael Doody S.J., current director of Campus Ministry. “This is where ideas are exchanged. To say, ‘Well, let’s put these ideas [about disbelief] over here’ – it makes an academy without a cornerstone.”
Fairfield’s online diversity statement expresses its desire to produce students who are “able to confidently engage in any cultural circumstance, with an open mind and the capacity to empathize with the perspectives of others.”
But one overlooked perspective is the growing number of people who do not identify with any organized religion.
According to the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey, there are roughly 4.9 million declared atheists in the United States. That is 1.6 percent of the total population and only a portion of the overall 15 percent who do not identify with any particular religion.
During a University discussion on diversity last semester, Dr. Ann Stehney, assistant vice president of institutional research, showed similar results here at Fairfield. In a diversity survey given to 348 Fairfield students during the previous academic year, 17 percent of participants classified themselves as having no religious affiliation.
Informal estimates paint a different picture. “I have not come across a large contingent of non-religious believers, or what you describe as atheists, on campus,” said Fr. George Collins S.J., coordinator of mission and identity programs.
So what does all of this mean in terms of the university’s goal to produce students versed in the “perspectives of others”?
Religious studies professors at Fairfield agree that it is not the University’s aim to convert students to any particular organized religion.
“If everybody left this institution a convinced atheist but a person of virtue and compassion and integrity, we would not have failed,” said Dr. Paul Lakeland, director of Catholic studies. “If everybody left this place as a card-carrying Catholic without an ounce of integrity, compassion or virtue, we would have failed.”
Schuyler Smith ‘12, a declared student atheist, explained how a study of non-religion would be a worthwhile academic pursuit. “I feel like it’s important for people to understand that there is actually a history and there is a real rational argument behind atheism,” he said.
Some students pointed out the long-term benefits of such a class. Marnie Whalen ‘13, a religious studies major, said, “I’m going to be dealing with atheists and agnostics as much, if not more, in my career as I probably will with Buddhists or Hindus, so I would love the opportunity to learn about this way of thinking as well.”
Dr. John Thiel, a religious studies professor, explained how all topics are equally worthy in academics: “My understanding is that any university worth its salt provides no censorship whatsoever on ideas. That’s what academic freedom means. You know, that’s a principle I’m willing to go to the mat for.”
The debate is not limited to Fairfield. At Ohio State University, Steven Brown is currently offering a course comparing atheism and religion. “Engaging in conversations with people you disagree with helps you to see where your own weak points are and it ultimately helps you to improve your own position,” he said in an interview with the school newspaper.
But what are the odds of starting a course teaching non-belief in a god at a Catholic university?
It’s already been done.
Fairfield had its own course entitled “Modern Atheism” during the early 1970s, according to Thiel.
Taught by Augustine Caffrey, the creation of this class followed the administration’s efforts to revoke his tenure after he left the Jesuit order and proclaimed himself an agnostic, Thiel explained. He retired in the 1980s, taking the class with him.
While the topic might merit a second attempt in the classroom here at Fairfield, there’s disagreement as to which department should teach it as a course, if at all.
“Religious studies teaches about religions, so it wouldn’t make any sense for them to teach about not religion,” said Fr. Paul Fitzgerald S.J., senior vice president for academic affairs. “The chemistry department doesn’t teach history.”
Others felt differently. “I think, probably, its home would be in the religious studies department, conceivably the philosophy department,” said Lakeland.
Thiel was not confident that there exists a semester’s worth of material for this type of class. He said that atheism is a generally recent development in religious studies and that its justifications are all the “same argument with a few variations.”
“I couldn’t see how I could make it an interesting course for more than three weeks,” he explained.
So how much student support would be needed to make this class possible?
Doody explained that it would be a worthwhile venture if there were “twelve to fourteen people interested enough in it who would take it as a serious course.”
An online survey conducted with 50 Fairfield students showed that there is adequate support for this course by Doody’s standards.
Nine students agreed that they would shape their schedules to ensure that they could take the class; 19 students said they would definitely take it if their schedule allowed; and 12 students said they would consider possibly taking the course.
Those interested were not limited to atheists. Of the participants, eight Christian students and one Jewish student said they would definitely take the class, schedule allowing. Other students of faith also expressed interest, although not as definite in nature.
However, the results also voiced opposition. One Christian student said that although the school barely does anything in regard to accommodating diversity, a class on non-religion would be inappropriate at a Catholic university.
“The commitment to diversity means that we have to treat everybody the same,” said Lakeland. “And everybody is entitled to the same respect and attention and the freedom to grow.”
Leave a Reply