Apologetics in the Classroom

[Daz]

I lecture at a landbased college in England, and I am finding it a real challenge. As I mentioned in another thread I teach a lot of ecology and evolution classes and invariably come up against the “Darwin Killed God” mentality, but I can deal with that through scholarly debate (I do what I can anyway!).

What I really struggle with is the vicious, unthinking anti-religious bigotry so many of my students vent. No one knows my religion so they talk freely in front of me and it absolutely horrifies me.

To give two examples, in a recent environmental ethics class the topic of global overpopulation led to suggestions that “religious morons” and especially catholics were entirely culpable and the best solution was that they all be killed (no exaggeration).

Then in a landscape history session I was teaching about the Christianisation of Britain, which was greeted with groans and cries of “oh so that is where it all went wrong”. I challenged them and was shocked at the depth of their distaste for Christianity. Our previous discussions of Celtic druidism and Neolithic paganism had not only seen healthy debate but in fact a few students had declared their belief in paganism. As soon as Christianity was mentioned we had assertions of how science and human endeavour had been supressed for hundreds of years, people were enslaved by the church throughout the dark ages etc etc etc.

I just don’t know where it comes from. Most of these students have come to us straight from school, and they are not the brightest. Yet they blame almost all the ills of society on religion, and short of revealing my faith, which I think would weaken my position further, I don’t know how to combat it.

I am looking for general advice on how to answer these assertions, whether you think I should in fact be open about my faith and any support groups in England I could join. The only one I ahave found is the Association of Christian Teachers, whose membership is only 1% Catholic and requires members to agree to this statement-

“I believe in Jesus Christ as Risen Saviour, Lord and God, and in His atoning sacrifice as the only and all-sufficient ground of salvation. I endeavour to be ruled in thought, word and action by the Bible as the inspired Word of God and to live by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Any help would be gratefully received!

 

[Gene_Church]

Recognizing where they are coming from is helpful. As a resource, you might want to check out How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization, by Thomas E. Woods, Jr., PhD.

The book dispels prejudices against the Catholic Church in the area of science, showing that the Church created the great university system, and that modern science would not have existed had it not been for the Church. A great read, and if you learn it, a strong position from which to defend your faith.

 

[geekborj]

I lecture at a landbased college in England, and I am finding it a real challenge. As I mentioned in another thread I teach a lot of ecology and evolution classes and invariably come up against the “Darwin Killed God” mentality, but I can deal with that through scholarly debate (I do what I can anyway!).

What I really struggle with is the vicious, unthinking anti-religious bigotry so many of my students vent. No one knows my religion so they talk freely in front of me and it absolutely horrifies me.

To give two examples, in a recent environmental ethics class the topic of global overpopulation led to suggestions that “religious morons” and especially catholics were entirely culpable and the best solution was that they all be killed (no exaggeration).

Then in a landscape history session I was teaching about the Christianisation of Britain, which was greeted with groans and cries of “oh so that is where it all went wrong”. I challenged them and was shocked at the depth of their distaste for Christianity. Our previous discussions of Celtic druidism and Neolithic paganism had not only seen healthy debate but in fact a few students had declared their belief in paganism. As soon as Christianity was mentioned we had assertions of how science and human endeavour had been supressed for hundreds of years, people were enslaved by the church throughout the dark ages etc etc etc.

I just don’t know where it comes from. Most of these students have come to us straight from school, and they are not the brightest. Yet they blame almost all the ills of society on religion, and short of revealing my faith, which I think would weaken my position further, I don’t know how to combat it.

I am looking for general advice on how to answer these assertions, whether you think I should in fact be open about my faith and any support groups in England I could join. The only one I ahave found is the Association of Christian Teachers, whose membership is only 1% Catholic and requires members to agree to this statement-

“I believe in Jesus Christ as Risen Saviour, Lord and God, and in His atoning sacrifice as the only and all-sufficient ground of salvation. I endeavour to be ruled in thought, word and action by the Bible as the inspired Word of God and to live by the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Any help would be gratefully received!

Good luck on your teaching! Being persecuted is one sign of faith.

The Association of Christian Teachers seems to be of fundamentalist leaning group as indicated by their “creed” and the fact that only about 1% is Catholic (well, given that you are from UK…).

Here’s my suggestion on the students giving unfounded comments on Christianity and the Catholic Church as a whole: How about giving them a reading assignment on the true stand of the Catholic Church? Point them to the Vatican website and the downloadable tracts. Point them to the Catholic Answers faith tracts about the true teaching of the Church on creationism and evolution. Readings on the insights of St. Aquinas on evolution and creation of potential in the “seed.” (opposed to the Design Approach).

You can also ask details of the allegations of the students as by asking them of reliable sources of such statements.

These way, you will not be declaring your own authority but rather guiding them to the truth about the Church. This is not proselyting but rather a sort of apology (explaining to them the true position of the Church). For example, the Church agrees that Man has to be responsible in population growth and is not against population control but rather on the means of the control proposed by many States (e.g. those which promotes killing zygotes, and promotes promiscuity not to mention abuse of women/wife).

 

[redhen]

As soon as Christianity was mentioned we had assertions of how science and human endeavour had been supressed for hundreds of years, people were enslaved by the church throughout the dark ages etc etc etc.

Right, and the Enlightenment gave us the “Reign of Terror”, eugenics/social Darwinism, and Marxism. That doesn’t mean we have to throw out all the fruits though.

I just don’t know where it comes from.

youtube.com/watch?v=qyu-9-OhHog
The History of Political Correctness

Basically, the Marxist academics from the Frankfurt School realized that the American workers were never going to rise up, like they had done elsewhere, so they targeted the the educational institutions. An insidious plan, but effective.

 

[Daz]

Thank you everybody for your responses. I like the idea of using one of my environmental ethics lectures to discuss religion and its approach to the environment (including issues of population control), it might open their minds somewhat. Do you agree that being open with them about my faith would actually hamper my attempts to tackle these attitudes?

The Association of Christian Teachers seems to be of fundamentalist leaning group as indicated by their “creed” and the fact that only about 1% is Catholic (well, given that you are from UK…)

This is why I posted the statement of faith. It does seem to be the only effective Christian teachers’ organisation in the country, but I am not sure if I can sign up.

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t know if my experience will help, I hope it might provide some ideas though.

I saw a lot of students like this when I first went to university. Ultimately most had had very little exposure to religion, and had got hold of some very odd views of it. And did not really think critically about those prejudices.

Interestingly, by the end of the year that kind of attitude had almost disappeared. And not because there was any kind of formal attempt at apologetics. And although it was a school that had been traditionally Anglican and still had an active Anglican chapel, most of the students and staff were not Anglican, and much of the staff was also not Christian.

What happened? I think a few things. One is that there were a number of very well-respected and well-known priest-academics on staff, as well as some other lay-Christians of different types. And they were respected as scholars by everyone, including non-Christian staff. Among faculty, the idea that a Christian must be a moron didn’t really exist. And I think students picked up on that.

And the other, related issue was the course material. Almost every student in the college took the same first year program, which was Great Books program. It treated the history of thought in the West, and it treated it as a kind of logical, philosophical discussion that extended over the ages. As much as possible students were to understand the books from the point of view of the authors and times they were produced in, rather than from a modern perspective, because that understanding was seen as fundamental to making any modern evaluation.

So the Bible, Augustine, Anselm, and thinkers up to the post-moderns were presented this way, as serious thinkers.

So Christian thinkers were treated in all seriousness with Plato and Derrida, and Christian teachers, and it is pretty hard to maintain silly ideas about the intellectual and social impact of Christianity under those circumstances. There was no question of formally apologizing for Christianity- any student who took such a silly dismissive attitude simply would not have been able to do the work required.

 

[Contarini]

I lecture at a landbased college in England, and I am finding it a real challenge. As I mentioned in another thread I teach a lot of ecology and evolution classes and invariably come up against the “Darwin Killed God” mentality, but I can deal with that through scholarly debate (I do what I can anyway!).

What I really struggle with is the vicious, unthinking anti-religious bigotry so many of my students vent. No one knows my religion so they talk freely in front of me and it absolutely horrifies me.

To give two examples, in a recent environmental ethics class the topic of global overpopulation led to suggestions that “religious morons” and especially catholics were entirely culpable and the best solution was that they all be killed (no exaggeration).

Then in a landscape history session I was teaching about the Christianisation of Britain, which was greeted with groans and cries of “oh so that is where it all went wrong”. I challenged them and was shocked at the depth of their distaste for Christianity. Our previous discussions of Celtic druidism and Neolithic paganism had not only seen healthy debate but in fact a few students had declared their belief in paganism. As soon as Christianity was mentioned we had assertions of how science and human endeavour had been supressed for hundreds of years, people were enslaved by the church throughout the dark ages etc etc etc.

I just don’t know where it comes from. Most of these students have come to us straight from school, and they are not the brightest. Yet they blame almost all the ills of society on religion, and short of revealing my faith, which I think would weaken my position further, I don’t know how to combat it.

Well, I wouldn’t know how to address such a subject without being honest about where I was coming from.

I know what you are talking about, from conversations I’ve had with British people. (I am British by birth myself–to be precise, I was born in England, my father is from Shetland, and my mother was born in Scotland of American parents–but have lived in the U.S. since I was six). And I have often wondered where this vicious hostility comes from. Teaching in a state university in New Jersey I encountered some of this (mostly from kids of Catholic background, which frankly is a bit more understandable as a form of teenage rebellion), but nothing like what I’ve heard in Europe, and specifically from Britons. There must be something about the way history is taught in school that feeds this. I think that something happened to the British psyche in the 50s and 60s–the Angry Young Men and all that–and it produced a violent rejection of the past, specifically the Christian past. But of course one could go back much further, to the Reformation and the ensuing anti-Catholic nationalist propaganda that helped forge both English and Scottish identity (and obviously Northern Irish Protestant identity even more so–I’m less sure about Wales). This anti-Catholic nationalism has somehow become secularized into a bitter hostility to all religion. But I do think that the generation of the Angry Young Men is where it took its most recent form. Read Kinglsey Amis’s first novel Lucky Jim, for instance (or his later alternate-history The Alteration).

Edwin

 

[Daz]

Thank you very much for your feedback, it is all appreciated and has been taken on board. Would any Catholic be happy to sign up to that statement of faith in my first post?

 

[Contarini]

Thank you very much for your feedback, it is all appreciated and has been taken on board. Would any Catholic be happy to sign up to that statement of faith in my first post?

The language about the Atonement being “all-sufficient” certainly looks like it was put in there to exclude Catholics. But as I understand it (Catholics tell me if I’m wrong), Catholics wouldn’t object to the term, only to what hardline Protestants (especially of a Reformed persuasion) mean by it. Catholics wouldn’t think that their doctrine of good works, their belief in the intercession of the saints, the Mass, Purgatory, etc., conflict with this statement. But old-fashioned or fundamentalist Protestants would. So you have to ask: who gets to interpret the statement of faith? (A very Catholic question, of course.)

This issue came up at Wheaton College here in the U.S. A philosophy professor converted to Catholicism and was told that he had to leave, because he could no longer affirm the statement of faith. He insisted that he could still affirm it, but the president of the college claimed the right to interpret what the statement of faith meant and to determine whether a Catholic could in good faith adhere to it.

Only by experience will you discover whether this group takes a similar approach!

Edwin