Perspectives in Teaching Religion in Higher Education

Abstract

The question is not whether higher education will include the teaching of religion. It is only in what context, in what per spectives and from what presuppositions. This often repeated thesis is a valid one. We need not deny that a great deal of confusion has been generated by claims made in the name of the separation of church and state. Of course, the establishment of religion is undesirable and illegal, but it was not the intent of recent Supreme Court decisions that religion should be ex cluded from public education. It was rather that teaching should remain non-sectarian. Secularism became dominant because of a growing pluralism rather than from any overt attack on religion. Now, hostility has moderated between adherents of the three major religious parties. However, a fourth has become vocal and insists on the exclusion of all religious affirmation from public life and education. Jefferson's Enlightenment prin ciple of religion with tolerance is called in question.1 No doubt, public education must be free of church control; it can inform but not convert. In this latter role, it cannot avoid responsibility for the treatment of religion. The present situation must be explained from a long history. Robert Michaelsen's research on Religion in the American Uni versities: Ten Case Studies with Special Reference to State Universities, published by the Society for Religion in Higher Education, describes a legacy of sectarianism as well as secular ism.2 Michaelsen calls attention to the difference between the Christian humanism which characterized American higher edu cation in the period before the Civil War as compared with the present ethos. An earlier Protestant consensus left the place of religion in public life unchallenged. The Northwest Ordinance reflected the common belief: Religion, morality and knowledge