The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief

One of America's finest scholars, George M. Marsden, offers us a first-rate intellectual history in The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (New York: Oxford University Press, c. 1994). The book's subtitle sums up Marsden's thesis. He moves from the Colonial era's "establishment of Protestant nonsectarianism" to "defining the American university in a scientific age" during the last century, to analyzing "when the tie no longer binds" in our day. America's "university system was built on a foundation of evangelical Protestant colleges" (p. 4). Until after the Civil War, virtually all universities retained a certain "evangelical" commitment, with required chapels, recurrent revivals, and resident clergymen-presidents. Yet within a short 50 years virtually all these universities underwent a metamorphosis, so that "by the 1920s the evangelical Protestantism of the old-time colleges had been effectively excluded from leading university classrooms" (p. 4). During the next half-century, the faith which had founded and structured the universities would be routinely ignored, pilloried and rejected. Marsden finds a key to this process in the bombshell of a book William F. Buckley, Jr. published in 1951, God and Man at Yale. Reviewing his texts and teachers at Yale, Buckley pointed to "the triumph of 'relativism, pragmatism and utilitarianism,' in the spirit of philosopher of John Dewey. 'There is surely not a department at Yale,' Buckley observed, 'that is uncontaminated with the absolute that there are no absolutes, no intrinsic rights, no ultimate truths'" (p. 12). Though his judgment may have been severe, Buckley incisively exposed the true state of Yale's secularized irreligion. Sixty years earlier Yale had still seemed distinctly Evangelical. Noted preachers such as Dwight L. Moody, R.A. Torrey, A.J. Gordon, and John R. Mott found the campus open to their ministries. Students responded zealously to Christian appeals. Only inwardly, especially in the minds of the faculty, Yale was changing. "Higher criticism" of the Bible incarnated itself in professors such as George Adam Smith, and social action rather than personal piety increasingly attracted students' commitments. While sustaining an appearance of Evangelical orthodoxy, Yale in fact lost its intellectual integrity as an orthodox Christian college. It became a purely secular institution. To explain this process, Marsden presents in-depth case studies of significant colleges (or presidents or scholars) which illustrated significant trends in their day. Decade by decade, accommodations were made, often with little understanding the ultimate import of such moves. Religious principles and objectives, encrusted like fossils in mission statements, were often assumed, since they had provided the basis for the colleges' founding and comforted their donors. But in fact they were increasingly pushed to the periphery

I have read three other books by George M. Marsden. He is sympathetic to Liberal Protestantism, which he likes to call mainline. On occasion he will argue that the Fundamentalist are an obstruction to Christianity being tolerated on the college campus. My view is that Fundamentalism is Christianity. That the type of Christianity taught and argue for on many college campus is worse then atheism. This work by Marsden writes a clear picture of such philosophical faith with little grounding in the Bible as record of historic fact. Marsden does present a picture where Christians rather have a school move away from Christianity then allow the Catholic church to have their own schools. My disagreement with the Catholic Church is large. But I think they are much closer to reality then Mainline Protestantism as depicted in this book. Page 17 tells of Henry Slove Coffin attempts to Shepherd away the American University from evangelicalism. I like to think of it as sort of Ethics for Damnation. To use church to teach a moral structure. Instruct not about God as creator and supernatural ruler of the universe. In a manner teach God is holy, that God hates sin- but to dissuade it from condemnation. Christian Faith is matter of persuasion. The Bible is a book of philosophy and moral tales, not a source of ultimate truth. Myth, ethical stories, not the ultimate truth from God. Chapel is a place to persuade ethical moral behavior - but in reality God does not really exist. This is the Christianity Harvard and the University wanted to teach from their beginning. Marsden finds this as ideal. Leaders of many University wanted to train young men into some moral structure. Marsden laments that the university no longer tries. My feelings is if this is the purpose of mandatory chapel on the college campus - good riddance. Ethics derived by men, do not need the bible. The Bible is to be used to understand God's will. Not to keep some sort of cultural Christianity that is devoid in any belief that there is an actual supernatural being. Religious Faith is part of the fabric of society. When one studies society, known as social studies is part of the subject manner why people behave and interact with each other in a certain manner. My question is how sociology incorporates and makes value judgements about hip- hop, rock and roll music, premarital sex television viewing, thoughts on David Hume and/or Descartes, Paul the Apostle, Moses or Jesus Christ. Compare how the teachings of Mohamed and the teachings of Jesus. The implications of religious belief is a fundamental part of studying Sociology. Herbert Spencer is critical of religious faith and made a value judgement that all faith in a supernatural being is wrong headed and ought to be dissuaded from in society. Should such an introductory book be used in a "Christian University" or a neutral public University. Should such a decision be left up to the individual professor. This was a debate in 19th century Harvard.

No historical interpretation lacks an agenda. The author struggles to determine why American higher education has such strong prejudices against traditional religious viewpoints. Religion was relegated to the periphery on Enlightenment grounds. Religious viewpoints were unscientific. The liberal Protestant establishment endorsed the scientific ideal. It was believed, inter alia, that positive cultural development advanced the Kingdom of God. There was a broad idealism, especially in the humanities. Nonsectarian moral ideals received emphasis. Campus ministries were added when it was perceived that academic life favored purely naturalistic and materialistic worldviews. Then academics ceased to believe in purely objective science. Recently the postmodernist views presuppose naturalistic worldviews exclusively. The alternative to liberal pragmatism is postmodern relativism. Procedural rationality is still necessary. Prejudice against academic expression of religion has flown under the banner of academic freedom. Academic freedom was limited to the common good as defined by the predominantly male Anglo establishment. Control of the universities has now diversified. The book concerns pace-setting American universities with a Protestant heritage. The American university system was built on a foundation of evangelical Protestant colleges. By the 1920's evangelical Protestantism had been effectively excluded from classrooms. Many of the same educational theories were conceived as a means of assimilating other traditions into the American heritage. The attitudes were imperialistic and exclusive. The American Protestant leadership wanted a standardized educational system. Protestant universities, the nonsectarian ideals of the Protestant establishment, dictated that even liberal Protestantism itself should move to the periphery, virtually excluding all religious perspectives to resolve the problem of pluralism. The book tells a story of disestablishment and secularization. Higher education was influenced by English, Scottish, and German models. William Buckley wrote GOD AND MAN AT YALE in 1951. Buckley conflated economic and religious issues. Buckley pointed to the gap between Yale's rhetoric and reality. The Reformation brought changes in the social function of education. The scholar's gown was the garment of the Protestant clergy. Oxford and Cambridge colleges had been particularly important to the Puritan movement. Higher education was a keystone of the edifice of social authority. The sacred and secular were not sharply differentiated. It was assumed that pagan learning should be surrounded by biblical and theological subjects. Protestantism was congenial to the study of the natural order. The founding of Yale College grew out of a concern for maintaining orthodoxy. The College of William and Mary was part of the Anglican establishment. America's primary university models in the eighteenth century were

I really enjoyed this book. It is very detailed, and I would occasionally get lost in all those details. But I enjoyed Marsden's story of the gradual shift from colleges and universities dominiated by Protestant church influence to college and universities that had become neutral or even hostile to expressions of religious faith. Since I have worked in and around college campuses all my life, I found myself several times saying "So that's why that is true today!" I really enjoyed Marsden's tracing of the rise of the scientific worldview as dominate in university life. I wish Marsden had treated the shift from modernism to postmodernism more, since I believe that shift began occuring in the latter part of the 1900's, well within the scope of his book. I will say that only motivated readers will finish this book--it is very detailed and long. But for those who are interested, it is worth the time spent.