shop talk

Like Ryan, I'm in the field of religious studies, which isn't the same thing as going to seminary with the intention of becoming clergy. It's more of an academic pursuit, but the distinction between theology and religious studies isn't always so clear-- a lot of people who enter religious studies do so for reasons that could be described as quite religious, not intellectual, philosophical, or academic. Ryan posts a great essay examining some of the legal and philosophical aspects of the odd division we've created in academe-- and what it means for your tax dollars. Choice cutlet:

There are a couple of issues at stake here. First, a theology degree can be used to establish one's career in ministry. So the state fears that by subsidizing studies in theology at religiously affiliated colleges, it would essentially be using taxpayer money for religious training. This would open up a nasty can of worms. What if I want to get my religious vocational degree in New Age Kabbalah (Madonna as professor would be pretty hot, after all), or Scientology? Will the state of Washington pay for my e-meter and my L. Ron Hubbard books? Why not?

But there's another side to this: theology is pretty comparable to philosophy at times. It can be studied by many people for many different reasons. At the heart of the issue is the difference (or non-difference) of theology and religious studies.

The study of religion as a distinct academic discipline in the United States is stunningly young- departments in public institutions were not established until after 1963, when the Abington School District v. Schempp case went before the Supreme Court. In that case, it was ruled that the public school in Abington, Pennsylvania could not utter prayers over the public address system. But in the judgment, the court wrote that public schools should be able to study the history of religions, to compare and analyze religious traditions, without giving preferential treatment or attempting to indoctrinate students. The Court had established a legal distinction between teaching religion and teaching about religion. Suddenly public universities were free to establish departments of Religious Studies distinct from departments of Theology.

Our discipline has had an identity crisis ever since. People come to religious studies for specific reasons- usually personal and theological reasons. As Robert Orsi put it on the first day of theory class: Roaming the halls of religious studies departments are ghosts- ghosts we're trying to kill with the weapon of theory. Most scholars of religion have had past experiences, positive and negative, with particular religious traditions. But we have learned to suppress and hide our autobiographies, and to obfuscate our theological agendas with social-scientific practices. Because of the legal decision of 1963 which created money and departments and jobs in our field, we do our best to hide theology behind a veneer of sophisticated anthropology, sociology, history, and philosophy.

Go read the rest!

I remember our REL 700 class at CUA had quite a discussion over the question: "Do you have to be religious to study theology?"

Fascinating, Captain.
_