The Atlantic
 
Study Theology, Even If You Don't Believe in God
This lost liberal art encourages scholars to  understand history from the 
inside out. 
 
_Tara Isabella  Burton_ (http://www.theatlantic.com/tara-isabella-burton/)  
Oct 30  2013,

 
 
When I first told my mother—a liberal, secular New Yorker—that I wanted to 
 cross an ocean to study for a bachelor’s degree in theology, she was equal 
parts  aghast and concerned. Was I going to become a nun, she asked in 
horror, or else  one of “those” wingnuts who picketed outside abortion clinics? 
Was I going to  spend hours in the Bodleian Library agonizing over the 
number of angels that  could fit on the head of a pin? Theology, she insisted, 
was a subject by the  devout, for the devout; it had no place in a typical 
liberal arts  education.
 
Her view of the study of theology is far from uncommon. While elite  
universities like Harvard and Yale offer vocational courses at their divinity  
schools, and nearly all universities offer undergraduate majors in the  
comparative study of religions, few schools (with the exceptions of 
historically  
Catholic institutions like Georgetown and Boston College) offer theology as a 
 major, let alone mandate courses in theology alongside other “core” 
liberal arts  subjects like English or history. Indeed, the study of theology 
has 
often run  afoul of the legal separation of church and state. Thirty-seven 
U.S. states have  laws limiting the spending of public funds on religious 
training. In 2006, the  _Supreme  Court case Locke v. Davey_ 
(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4289505046074896566&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=sc
holarr)  upheld the decision of a Washington State  scholarship program to 
withhold promised funding from an otherwise qualified  student after 
learning that he had decided to major in theology at a local Bible  College. 
Even in the United Kingdom, where secular bachelor's programs in theology 
are  more common, prominent New Atheists like Richard Dawkins have questioned 
their  validity in the university sphere. In a 2007 _letter to the editor 
of _ (http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/1698) _The  Independent_ 
(http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/1698) , Dawkins argues for the 
abolishment 
of theology in  academia, insisting that “a positive case now needs to be 
made that [theology]  has any real content at all, or that it has any place 
whatsoever in today's  university culture.”
 
Such a shift, of course, is relatively recent in the history of secondary  
education. Several of the great Medieval universities, among them Oxford,  
Bologna, and Paris, developed in large part as training grounds for men of 
the  Church. Theology, far from being anathema to the academic life, was 
indeed its  central purpose: It was the “Queen of the Sciences” the field of 
inquiry which  gave meaning to all others. So, too, several of the great 
American universities.  Harvard, Yale, and Princeton alike were founded with 
the 
express purpose of  teaching theology—one early anonymous account of 
Harvard's founding speaks of  John Harvard's “dreading to leave an illiterate 
Ministry to the Churches”, and  his dream of creating an institution to train 
future clergymen to “read the  original of the Old and New Testament into the 
Latin tongue, and resolve them  logically.” 
Universities like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton no longer exist, in part or 
in  whole, to train future clergymen. Their purpose now is far broader. But 
the  dwindling role of theology among the liberal arts is a paradigmatic 
example of  dispensing with the baby along with the bathwater. 
 


Richard Dawkins would do well to look at the skills imparted by the 
Theology  department of his own alma mater, Oxford (also my own). The BA I did 
at 
Oxford  was a completely secular program, attracting students from all over 
the  religious spectrum. My classmates included a would-be priest who ended 
up an  atheist, as well as a militant atheist now considering the priesthood. 
During my  time there, I investigated Ancient Near Eastern building 
patterns to theorize  about the age of a settlement; compared passages of the 
gospels (in the original  Greek) to analogous passages in the Jewish wisdom 
literature of the 1st century  BC; examined the structure of a 14th-century 
Byzantine liturgy; and read The  Brothers Karamazov as part of a unit on 
Christian existentialism. As  Oxford's Dr. William Wood, a University Lecturer 
in 
Philosophical Theology and  my former tutor, puts it: “theology is the closest 
thing we have at the moment  to the kind of general study of all aspects of 
human culture that was once very  common, but is now quite rare.” A good 
theologian, he says, “has to be a  historian, a philosopher, a linguist, a 
skillful interpreter of texts both  ancient and modern, and probably many other 
things besides.” In many ways, a  course in theology is an ideal synthesis 
of all other liberal arts: no longer,  perhaps, “Queen of the Sciences,” 
but at least, as Wood terms it, “Queen of the  Humanities.” 
Yet, for me, the value of theology lies not merely in the breadth of skills 
 it taught, but in the opportunity it presented to explore a given 
historical  mindset in greater depth. I learned to read the Bible in both Greek 
and 
Hebrew,  to analyze the minutiae of language that allows us to distinguish “
person” from  “nature,” “substance” from “essence.” I read “orthodox” 
and “heretical” accounts  alike of the nature of the Godhead, and learned 
about the convoluted and often  arbitrary historical processes that delineated 
the two.
 
Such precision may seem—to the religious person and agnostic alike—no more 
 useful than counting the number of angels on the head of a pin. But for 
me, it  allowed me access into the fundamental building blocks of the 
mentality, say, of  a 12th-century French monk, or a mystic from besieged 
Byzantium. 
While the study  of history taught me the story of humanity on a broader 
scale, the study of  theology allowed me insight into the minds and hearts, 
fears and concerns, of  those in circumstances were so wildly different from 
my own. The difference  between whether—as was the case in the Arian 
controversy of the fourth-century  AD—the Godhead should be thought of as 
powerful 
first, and loving second, or  loving first and powerful second, might seem 
utterly pedantic in a world where  plenty of people see no need to think about 
God at all. But when scores of  people were willing to kill or die to 
defend such beliefs—hardly a merely  historical phenomenon—it's worth 
investigating how and why such beliefs infused  all aspects of the world of 
their 
believers. How does that 12th-century French  monk's view of the nature of God 
affect the way he sees himself, his  relationship with others, his 
relationship with the natural world, his  relationship with his own mortality? 
How 
does that Byzantine mystic conceive of  space and time in a world he envisions 
as imbued with the sacred? To find such  questions integral to any study of 
the past is not restricted to those who agree  with the answers. To study 
theology well requires not faith, but empathy. 
If history and comparative religion alike offer us perspective on world  
events from the “outside,” the study of theology offers us a chance to study  
those same events “from within”: an opportunity to get inside the heads of 
those  whose beliefs and choices shaped so much of our history, and who—in 
the world  outside the ivory tower—still shape plenty of the world today. 
That such avenues  of inquiry have virtually vanished from many of the 
institutions where they were  once best explored is hardly a triumph of 
progress or 
of secularism. Instead,  the absence of theology in our universities is an 
unfortunate example of  blindness—willful or no—to the fact that engagement 
with the past requires more  than mere objective or comparative analysis. 
It requires a willingness to look  outside our own perspectives in order 
engage with the great questions—and  questioners—of history on their own terms. 
Even Dawkins might well agree with  that.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to