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