Reflections on the Teaching of Religion in America

Abstract

RECENTLY, the new editor of this journal asked me if I would be willing to set down my reflections on the pace and character of change in the study of religion in American higher education on the assumption, presumably, that my own zig-zag career from department of religion (four years) to seminary (ten years) back to department of religion must have been accompanied if not motivated by some opinions regarding the state of the discipline. At first, I was reluctant to accept the invitation. Although my recent departure from a theological seminary did, indeed, reflect some convictions about the field, it was rooted, like all such decisions, as much in my own personal interests and concerns as it was in some more abstract beliefs about this field. I did not see how I could disentangle these personal reasons from the more abstract considerations. But not to do so, involved me in a question of taste. To do so, however, would be to give a somewhat unreal account of the matter. Moreover, I particularly wanted to avoid giving any suggestion that I regarded my move as reflecting the view one hears frequently these days in department of religion circles, namely, that the future of scholarship in religion belongs to the university rather than to the divinity school. As I reflected on this latter issue, it occurred to me that my reasons for resisting having my decision so interpreted might itself prove interesting to some readers, and so I accepted the invitation. But when I put the matter in this fashion, it seemed that I could scarcely avoid being more autobiographical than suited my taste. I have tried to check this tendency by concentrating upon matters of intellectual autobiography, so to speak, and by eliminating any reference to those concrete personal reasons that were involved. This gives my account a more rationally consistent character than