Occurrences like Terrace Club sending an email explicitly mocking a protestant religious event or a prominent Princeton alumna repeatedly tweeting unfounded accusations that Catholic Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barett is in a cult happen far too often to be dismissed as random incidents. They indicate that many Princetonians graduate as religious illiterates – unfamiliar with major faith traditions and quick to mock and condemn any that strike them as odd or challenge their values. The result is not just bigotry against the religious, but (perhaps worse) closed-minded students without understanding of a key element of human experience. Students fervently proclaim and debate ideologies sourced from every other discipline to make arguments about how society should be ordered, necessarily “imposing their values” on others, but dismiss mere attempts at religious persuasion as rude and dangerous proselytizing.
Princeton professes to “provide a liberal arts education to all undergraduates, broadening their outlooks, and helping form their characters and values.” But can it make this lofty claim when its core requirements ignore religious education – for centuries considered the peak of intellectual pursuit, the regina scientiarum? It reigned over the trivium and quadrivium of classical liberal arts education as the home for the most fundamental quandaries of human existence. Religion was perhaps the key institution for forming character and values throughout the vast majority of world history.
As Aquinas argues, religion was and is a “science,” both fit and necessary for academic study. He makes this case in the very first question of the magisterial Summa Theologica. He lists astronomy and physics as examples of “means through which knowledge is obtained,” then goes on, “Hence there is no reason why those things which may be learned from philosophical science, so far as they can be known by natural reason, may not also be taught us by another science so far as they fall within revelation.” He explains and defends the concept of religion, what he calls “sacred doctrine,” as a science, writing:
“We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of God and the blessed.”
Since it proceeds from these higher principles, religion is capable of answering the highest, most difficult questions facing humanity. Aquinas calls it the noblest science, since it “treats chiefly of those things which by their sublimity transcend human reason; while other sciences consider only those things which are within reason’s grasp.”
Religion is a legitimate way of knowing that is entirely unknown by huge numbers of Princeton undergraduates. University students should know what religion is, what questions it deals with, and its limits, just as they learn about any other field of study. Princeton claims to teach the basic disciplinary approaches of the liberal arts to every student, but it fails miserably when it comes to religion. And this discipline is exceedingly important; as Aquinas puts it, religious inquiry pursues “eternal bliss; to which as to an ultimate end the purposes of every practical science are directed.”
Religion also remains eminently relevant. Despite popular belief, Enlightenment rationalism failed to completely topple religious understanding of the world as an important discipline. The very idea of individual freedom of conscience was spearheaded by Martin Luther and the Reformers, and, as Nietzsche realized (and abhorred), the moral values taken for granted by the secular West had their roots not in blunt reason, but the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. Without a firm grasp of religion, comprehension of the modern world is impossible.
Regardless of the continuing philosophical importance of religion, even after the Enlightenment, there is a long tradition of theological scholarship, religiously-grounded inquiries in science and philosophy, and religious references in literature. Basic religious literacy is necessary to understand these disciplines and be an educated person. It is also necessary to understand the country and world that Princeton students will serve and lead. According to the last two Daily Princetonian Frosh Surveys, about 55 to 60 percent of Princeton students identify with some organized religion. On the other hand, 76.5 percent of people in the United States claim a religion. These statistics reflect the late sociologist Peter Berger’s famous aphorism: “if the people of Sweden were the least religious people on earth, and the people of India were the most religious, then America was a country of Indians led by Swedes.” Berger also noted that this dichotomy has produced all kinds of social and political dysfunction. Perhaps better knowledge of the deeply-held beliefs and practices of the American populace on the part of the elite (which Princeton students undeniably are) would help temper the populist polarization rampant in our country today. Religious literacy would also help budding leaders better comprehend the intricacies of the American cultural patchwork. For example, the ruptures in my own religious-demographic community, white evangelicals, have been the fodder of countless analyses by scholars and pundits in major national publications. These shifts have massive political and social impacts, but require a basic knowledge of religion to be understood and critiqued.
Finally, exploring religious traditions can help students find truth, meaning, and purpose. Religious knowledge and tradition provide answers to profound questions. Many students are wrestling with these questions, and they should be given all the necessary disciplinary tools to seek answers. Some search for a higher meaning to existence, others to an objective standard for living a good life. These are questions religion is well suited to answer, as they transcend materialistic understandings of the world. Just like Princeton hopes to give students a background in different modes of understanding (say, quantitative and computational reasoning or historical analysis), religion should be required as well. This instruction should engage with the beliefs, practices, and claims of various faiths on their own terms as potential answers to human dilemmas, not just a historicist deconstruction of received tradition. Then all students can know how to approach religious issues and truly think for themselves, unhindered by ignorance.
The above is an opinion contribution and reflects the author’s views alone.
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.