As an alumnus of William & Mary, I recently received President
Nichol's annual letter updating alumni about activities and
achievements at the College over the past year. He included some
discussion and updates on the Wren cross issue, and I wrote and
received permission to post those comments for the members of the
list so that folks might hear it from "his side" as well:
___
The diversity of our broad community includes an increasing religious
diversity. As I talked with students, faculty, staff, and alumni over
the last 18 months, I heard from many that the display of a table
cross in the Wren Chapel seemed at odds with our professed welcome of
such diversity -- and posed a troubling tension with our role as a
public university. They typically understood that to Christians, like
me, the cross conveys an inspiring message of sacrifice, redemption,
and love, but suggested that the presence of such a powerful
religious symbol also sends a message, however unintentional, that
the Chapel belongs more fully to some than to others. Late last fall,
therefore, I asked that the cross be displayed throughout the day on
Sundays, whenever it is requested for Christian services, and when
requested by individuals for prayer and meditation. At other times,
it will remain in the Chapel’s sacristy. I also commissioned a
permanent plaque commemorating the Chapel’s origins as an Anglican
place of worship.
As I’ve shared with the campus community -- where the decision has
received much support -- I likely acted too quickly and should have
consulted more broadly. And while students and staff who embrace
faith traditions other than Christianity report using the chapel for
the first time, many, many others have asked, in the strongest terms,
that the action be reconsidered. Broader questions than the placement
of the Wren cross have also been implicated. Does the separation of
church and state at public universities seek a bleaching of the
influence of faith and religious thought from our discourse? Can a
public university celebrate a particular religious heritage while
remaining equally welcoming to those of all faiths? How does one
square the operation of an historic Christian chapel with a public
university’s general charge to avoid endorsing a particular religious
creed?
Given the challenge of these questions -- the very grist of great
universities -- it is my hope that our community will explore them in
the most thoughtful way possible. To that end I have announced the
creation of a presidential committee whose members -- including
alumni, staff, students, and faculty -- will examine the role of
religion in public universities in general, and at the College of
William and Mary in particular, including the use of the historic
Wren Chapel. The committee comprises some of our most recognized and
accomplished alumni, including former rectors Jim Brinkley and Jim
Murray and Terry Thompson, chair of the President’s Council. It will
be co-chaired by two of our most distinguished faculty members: Dr.
James Livingston, emeritus chair of the College’s religion department
and one of the College’s most beloved instructors, and Professor Alan
Meese, eminent legal scholar and a leader in the Faculty Assembly. I
have asked Professors Livingston and Meese to report their
recommendations on the Wren Chapel to me by the middle of April --
before the Board’s gathering that month -- and to consult with
Provost Feiss to invite experts, scholars, and activists from varying
perspectives to explore these and other questions and their ties to
our mission as a public university.
I look forward to this committee’s work, which the Board helped begin
by hearing from a half-dozen members of our broad community at its
meeting earlier this month. The Board then put forward, eloquently,
its own thoughts in a statement Rector Powell will share with the
alumni community very soon.
___
His comments are printed in full here: http://www.dailypress.com/news/
dp-nicholletter.f23,0,2263765.story. The Rector's statement
mentioned above is the one shared with this list on Friday by Anne
Gwaltney.
As a practicing Christian while a student and since, I do agree with
President Nichol's action and the reasons for it--though I also agree
that he might well have proceeded a little more gently. I am
heartened, however, that he recognizes this fact (something he
mentioned above and has said in other comments). And I'm more
heartened and prouder still that this entire issue is now being used
as an opportunity to explore those very weighty questions at the
heart the matter--a thing that we should all applaud, I believe.
All my best,
--Eric
Eric D. M. Johnson
[log in to unmask]
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|