Dmitriy Zakharov, Honorable Mention
The university, as the backbone of academia, has two primary roles: dissemination of knowledge and creation of knowledge. As a rule, students mostly experience the former, receiving lectures and assimilating texts on a variety of topics. Globalization, and its accompanying economic opportunities, now drives an increasing demand for knowledge of foreign cultures and their religious traditions. In a shrinking world, there is an ever-growing awareness of the utility, and sometimes necessity, of understanding one’s fellow inhabitants. As a result, religious studies and theology, once largely the domain of sectarian schools, have become increasingly popular fields of study at a wide range of institutions.
However, the mere transfer of knowledge is the least important function of the university. Facts and figures, theories and equations, can all be learned from books or other available sources, without the mediation of an institute of higher learning. Indeed, even the best college education will provide only a fraction of the knowledge needed for a career and a lifetime. Learning is a continuous process, and what is acquired in the span of four years (or several more, assuming further courses of study) cannot match the sum body of knowledge amassed during one’s existence. No matter how many courses on theology, area studies, or comparative religion one takes, there will always be more left to discover and digest.
What the university offers in a way that self-study typically cannot is an environment in which to develop reasoning. Greater understanding comes through critical inquiry based on rationality, a process which is not innate but must be learned through constant repetition, trial, and error. A good university teaches its charges how to think, to take information and process it in a way that leads to superior comprehension. Even thought that is logical and rational relies on numerous assumptions, which are in large part based on past experiences and preconceived notions. These notions and experiences can be misleading, so that even rigorous thought can produce erroneous or otherwise imperfect results. Certain assumptions can lead even established scholars to contentious conclusions, and this is especially true when the topic at hand evokes tremendous passion, as religion does. This is how theories positing clashes of civilizations separated along religious lines came into being and gained prominence: notions of what constitutes proper behavior and attitudes, rooted in specific cultural backgrounds, came to inform worldviews centered on religious opposition and conflict. Every major tradition includes adherents who see the world in such stark terms.
The pursuit of interreligious understanding demands a break from oppositional constructs based on assumptions of hostility and incompatibility, and the university offers the possibility of accomplishing this difficult task. However, public universities are often highly ambivalent about religion, fearing perceived violations of the separation between church and state. To be sure, a great deal of excellent scholarship on religion comes from state universities, but such schools almost inevitably find it more difficult to engage their students’ faith traditions, given the taboos that exist regarding religious discourse in the realm of public education. On the other side of the spectrum, many sectarian institutions prioritize creating an atmosphere that reinforces their own church’s tradition. While this is certainly their prerogative, it runs the risk of discouraging students of different faiths from enrolling or, if they do attend, from sharing their beliefs openly and honestly. Interreligious understanding is not served by either silence or inflexible, authoritative discourse.
As an institution rooted in the Jesuit faith tradition and committed to open dialogue and inquiry, Georgetown is better-positioned than most to succeed in the pursuit of greater comprehension. Its strengths come from its established tradition of religious pluralism, a tenet that was enshrined in the university’s mission from its earliest days. Rather than merely being tolerated, different creeds should be welcomed and, most importantly, engaged. The best method for dispelling preconceived notions and biases about faith traditions is to witness them first hand, to observe how they inform the thinking and learning processes of others. Watching as others seek to assimilate the same information and find answers to the same questions, but under a different theological framework, reveals the dynamism of religion in a way that studying texts and rituals cannot. Such a method of “learning from others by learning with others” also promotes critical self-examination: seeing how students of other faiths are guided by their beliefs leads one to question how his or her own beliefs act as a guide.
The task that thus falls to Georgetown students, faculty, and administrators is to further promote an environment in which different religious beliefs and practices are shared and discussed openly, not only during services or in the cafeteria (although these, too, are hugely important forums), but in the classroom as well. The best way to dispel prejudices against other faiths that dismiss them as mere superstitions is to demonstrate how they operate in the context of learning and rational discourse.
Professors should be encouraged to point out the various ways in which different traditions have approached relevant topics and concepts. Administrators should support the faculty in these efforts, and they should further improve the ancillary services and institutions (e.g. presentations, discussions, resource centers) that raise awareness of different faiths and make students, especially those belonging to traditions other than the dominant one on campus, feel more comfortable about sharing their beliefs. Ultimately, however, it is up to students to be proactive in seeking to further their own interreligious understanding, the impact of which will grow as students move on and assume positions of power and influence. Once they are given the opportunities to do so, Georgetown’s pupils must take advantage and pay closer attention to how and why their peers learn and reason the way they do, guided as they are by different faiths. This type of learning cannot be measured by grades or class rank, the indicators on which students, and the rest of society, typically focus. But is precisely this method that would contribute the most to the building of true understanding.