Georgetown and Evangelicals

When my daughter enrolled at Georgetown University two years ago, I was excited not only by the institution’s stellar academic reputation, but also by the open marketplace of ideas it represents. My enthusiasm was severely diminished this past August, however, when the university unexpectedly announced that six evangelical ministries, including our Fellowship, were being summarily disaffiliated from campus life.

My concern increased when I discovered that Georgetown continues to affiliate other outside religious groups such as the Muslim Student Association, the Knights of Columbus, and the Jewish Student Association.

For three decades, InterVarsity has been a good campus citizen at Georgetown. Last year, over eighty students regularly participated in our undergraduate and graduate chapters. We resonate with the university’s Jesuit heritage and commitment to spiritual inquiry. Further, consonant with Georgetown’s values, we prize multi-ethnicity, social justice, and service to the poor. And we are inclusive – three of our five current small groups are co-led by Catholic students.

So why has Georgetown chosen to vitiate its own Mission Statement: “The university was founded on the principle that serious and sustained discourse among people of different faiths… and beliefs promotes intellectual, ethical, and spiritual understanding“ —in regard to evangelicals? Why are we alone—among America’s major faith traditions—being singled out for disparate treatment? Why such a disturbing double standard?

Unfortunately, Georgetown is not unique in this regard. Three years ago, Rutgers University derecognized its InterVarsity chapter simply because we required student leaders to subscribe to a statement of faith. Thankfully, Rutgers reversed course and welcomed the chapter back six months later. Our student group at the University of Wisconsin-Superior is currently facing a similar situation.

The tragedy (and irony) is that by stifling religious expression, universities diminish themselves. By failing to live up to the ideal of free speech, they silence important voices. By denying free association, they impede the ability of students to make significant decisions on their own.

Whereas “tolerance” used to connote robust civil discourse between divergent perspectives, today it too often means removing offending viewpoints. As a result, the public square becomes indistinct; perspectives deemed angular are jettisoned; and, religious discourse is relegated to the scrapheap of privatized convictions.

All we want is a seat at the table, a voice in the grand dialogue. Universities should be forums for the broadest range of ideas – from Amnesty International to the Young Republicans; from the Buddhist Association to Habitat for Humanity; from the Beer Appreciation Society to the Sierra Club.

Georgetown has a proud history of stubbornly standing for free expression and trusting its students to reach their own conclusions. In the 1960s, for example, a Nobel laureate was allowed to argue in favor of racial inferiority. Two decades later, a Salvadorian paramilitary leader who had been involved in the murder of a priest was permitted to speak on campus.

This is a rich heritage. It is my hope that Georgetown leadership will embrace this legacy, reverse direction, and encourage a wider range of religious expression— including that of evangelicals. As a truly great university, it should do no less.

Back to the President's page.