God, science and hot debate

January 31, 2008

I went to university to study a subject that touched on questions that mattered to me more than anything but that was as academically demanding as I could have imagined. When I hear statements that theology has no place in the academy, I can only assume they are made by those who confuse a faith standpoint with mere subjective prejudice ("Losing our religion", 24 January). Such gross misunderstandings are fuelled by the unscientific insistence of Richard Dawkins and his sympathisers to propose only extreme fundamentalism as typical of religious commitment. As Wittgenstein might have said, a pre-judgement that great is too big to be a mistake. It is a wilful refusal to inhabit another language. Its existence is reason enough for theological literacy to be high on the agenda of the academy.

To exclude theology from the university would be at best an insular lack of hospitality. At worst, it would be an act of intellectual oppression. Ironically, it would be evidence that ardent secularism can become as uncritical and dismissive as any ecclesial tradition.

Theology deserves a place in academe only if it is rigorous and self-critical. But to assume that faith and understanding are simply incompatible is to close down a question that remains live, open and urgent. To think we can grasp the naked and all-sufficient facts of life without any need for interpretation is a modern disease as fatal as any hoary superstition.

Steven Shakespeare, Liverpool Hope University.

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October


Featured jobs

Programme and Delivery Manager

University Of Leeds

Occupational Health Manager

University Of The West Of Scotland

Senior Veterinary Epidemiologist

Scotland's Rural College (sruc)

Research Associate

Kings College London