<p>dmwaters, thank you for providing the link to the NYT article again. It was posted earlier in the thread but maybe you didn’t see it. The article I’m asking SmithieandProud about is contained in the recent Smith Alumnae Quarterly and I don’t know if they have an online version for which she could provide a link.</p>
<p>Most of the Smith Alumnae Quarterly can be read online. (I believe they just eliminate the class notes in the online version.) Go to page 11 for the article on the chapel.</p>
<p>[Smith</a> Alumnae Quarterly Summer 2010](<a href=“http://saqonline.smith.edu/]Smith”>http://saqonline.smith.edu/)</p>
<p>^Class Notes are the BEST part of the Alumnae Quarterly. I read them first and I start with the very oldest classes, I love the notes from the graduates of the 1930s/40s/and 50s, The 30s usually go something like “Now I"m living in a nursing home, but I still like to garden and play canasta! My friend Sarah (insert college nickname apparently unrelated to first name) Smith (insert married name) and I like to cut a rug on Saturdays.” but I think they are a hoot. </p>
<p>This Quarterly was really good, I liked the article on Haiti and really enjoyed the story about about one of the Smithie WASP pilots who received a Congressional Gold Medal (along with other previously unrecognized WASPs) and who got fired from the air force after the war but ended up becoming a pioneer in aviation safety and invented things like the black box flight recorder. Also, she when she was a Smithie she was the pilot for the first voyage of the Smith College Flying Club’s first airplane, flyiing it around Paradise Pond. The plane of course was called “Bird of Paradise”</p>
<p>Borgin, thank you so much for the Alumnae Quarterly link. I look forward to reading it!</p>
<p>S&P, yes, I love looking at alum notes, too. That Smithie WASP pilot sounds like a real hoot–as well as an intelligent leader in the aviation industry! Imagine that Smith actually owned a plane–that’s awesome–but nowadays with all the legalities, that simply would be unthinkable.</p>
<p>
2BinMA, in this thread I’m not equipped with my fedora & Tommy gun, know what I mean?</p>
<p>The Smith Alumnae Quarterly article is a whitewash. Response to the NYT article follows, broken into parts because of CC posting limitations on length. I may cannibalize it for a response to the SAQ and elsewhere.</p>
<p>Response to Article on Smith Chaplains
(dang…CC accepted the whole post in one part)</p>
<p>re: <a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/19/us/19beliefs.html?_r=1&src=me[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/19/us/19beliefs.html?_r=1&src=me</a></p>
<p><a href="mailto:Mark.Oppenheimer@nytimes.com">Mark.Oppenheimer@nytimes.com</a></p>
<p>Dear Mr. Oppenheimer:</p>
<pre><code>I am belatedly responding to your article of June 18 regarding the elimination of the chaplain positions at Smith College. I have corresponded with numerous students, alumni, parents of students, and faculty/staff regarding this issue over the past year regarding this issue. I would like to amplify, expand, and correct various elements of your article that shed needed light on this unfortunate decision.
First, it is telling that your article includes but a single quote from a student and that about a trivial, tangential aspect. Many students that I communicated with were fearful of going public with their opposition in any forceful or organized way. Many of them expressed concerns about retribution on their financial aid or even fears of being expelled. However unlikely—to a virtual vanishing point—these actions were, the fears were real. Others admitted being pressured by their parents to “not the rock the boat,” wary of doing anything which could go on their record and make things even more uncertain in a difficult job market. The prospect of compiling a presentation to the Board of Trustees to make a case for cancelling the cuts to the chaplains or holding the cuts in abeyance while a study was made, unnerved the students. “They [the administration] won’t like it if we try to go around them,” wrote one.
Student were brought in to meet with Dean Walters to discuss issues of religious life in campus and Dean Walters would make an assumptive statement along the lines of, “Well, nobody seems upset about the chaplain cuts.” Students would exchange glances but did not feel able to contradict Dean Walters’ intimidating presence.
Secondly, the central issue of the loss of the chaplaincies is not one of conducting services but of providing educated, trained adult mentoring of faith communities. Indeed, the College administration’s focus on attending services in the community by such things as exploring shuttle services reflects a failure of the administration to make distinctions between a house of worship (a place) and a faith community (a group of people), bespeaking an ignorance of, and an insensitivity to, religious practice. It suggests a hazy theology predicated on a attend-services-and-get-your-ticket-punched school of religious observance. This is all the more astonishing because Dean Walters is an ordained Episcopal priest.
The Smith-based communities nurtured and supported many Smith students in a ways that “town” communities—focused on the needs of parents with toddlers and senior citizens—could or would not. One facet which should have been of particular interest to the Smith administration was the way these communities were supportive of students of faith who are gay or bi-sexual and who are not always welcomed in more traditional faith communities. Smith has made a point of embracing diversity with regard to sexual orientation and with roughly 25-30 percent of the student body being gay or bi-sexual, it’s ironic that Smith should drop the ball when it comes to students’ spiritual lives. One knowledgeable of Smith, aware of its history and its soul, would think that protecting and supporting these women and their values against religious institutional opposition, giving them the strength and courage to stand for justice, would find resonance within the greater Smith community and the administration, regardless of individual belief.
Nor is the issue of role models insignificant. One Smith student wrote me, “It wasn’t until I came to Smith that I found that religious leadership wasn’t confined to white men.” Not only was the Protestant chaplain, Rev. Leon Burrows, an African American, but the Catholic chaplain, Elizabeth Carr, who holds a graduate degree in Theology from University of California/Berkeley, is one of the few women—possibly the only woman—to hold a Catholic chaplaincy in the United States. Smith College has a long, venerable tradition of sending women into leadership positions in fields previously dominated by men. It is noteworthy that within the past three years, two students have gone on to seminary at Yale, nurtured and developed by the Smith-based faith communities and the leadership roles they assumed within them, opportunities not readily available in “town” congregations. The loss of the chaplain positions represents a loss of these models.
You note in your article that Smith College has become more diverse, including the presence of Muslims, Hindus, and pagans as well as a range of Protestant orientations encompassing a broad range of liturgical styles. The truth is that the administration, primarily Dean Walters and President Carol Christ—the ironies of the president’s last name are many in this discussion—cynically pursued a strategy of “divide and conquer” with respect to the different communities. The part-time Islamic chaplain’s position simply was not filled when the previous incumbent relocated out of state to take a professional position. Instead of exploring avenues of reconfiguring the chaplain corps to incorporate the needs of other faiths, the peremptory decision was made to shut down the chaplains altogether. “We never had a chaplain anyway, so too bad for you,” a Hindu student is reported to have told a Christian at one of the meetings convened by Dean Walters.
The issue of cost and funding is also, to some degree, a red herring. All the chaplains were part-time positions. In addition to being available for general counseling for all students regardless of religious preference, they pursued other activities that dovetailed with their chaplaincies. Elizabeth Carr, for instance, would teach courses on Religion. “It looks very much like they [President Christ and Dean Walters] have taken advantage of the budget crisis to do something they already wanted to do,” wrote one sympathetic faculty member who, for obvious reasons, declined to go public. The chaplains themselves were never solicited for ideas on costs and expenditures and when a proposal was submitted to Dean Walters last year, it was summarily dismissed.
Some of the chaplains’ cost was funded via an endowment dedicated to spiritual life, funds which Dean Walters at one point indicated she hoped would be redirected to activities such as “lectures on ethics, open to all,” lectures on ethics being a palid least-common-denominator substitute for the vibrant faith communities overseen and guided by the chaplains. At one point, Dean Walters made the ludicrous suggestion that the students could self-organize and self-direct their own communities, ignoring the experience and pastoral and theological training needed in such roles.
In terms of process, the Smith College administration has acted cynically. A previous questioning of the Smith chapel models and the chaplain positions occurred in the late 1990’s. In 1997, a committee—composed of students, alumnae, trustees, chaplains, and administrators—chartered by the College produced its “Report of the Ad Hoc Chapel Committee,” a copy of which I have at hand. It begins, in part:
“Approaching the 21st century, we take up the challenge to envision a religious presence on campus that will carry out the spirit of Sophia Smith’s original intentions but also meet the increasingly diverse religious and spiritual needs of contemporary students, faculty, and staff.” It continues, “Formal expression of religion has been a part of Smith college since its origins…Our students not only come from many different traditions, but their attachment to these traditions is infinitely shaded. Some want to find at Smith an authentic expression of their familiar practice, in which they can participate and find opportunity for growth and leadership. Others are in one way or another distanced from their earlier religious life and have exchanged it for a de-institutionalized ‘spirituality’ or for nothing at all. Some are simply ‘taking a break’ from religious practice in order to explore the many opportunities their new life at college presents, while others have entered a time of questioning, skepticism, and perhaps rejection.” Written just 13 years ago, these words describe Smith College today.
The body of the report accurately noted: “Religion in one form another is at the heart of life, for many students quite consciously. All cultures inevitably create ‘religious spaces,’ and this is true of colleges as well. The question before us is how to make the chapel—building, institutions, programs—an adequate religious space, no whether there should be a chapel.”
Among the report’s conclusions: “A chapel and chaplains are the best vehicle for facilitating this [practice of religion in faithfulness to the founder’s intention]. The religious needs of the college community are best served by trained professionals and an institution which makes their work possible. Anything less than that would be an abrogation of the college’s responsibility.” Furthermore, “We would…speak of the chaplains not as ‘Protestant,’ ‘Catholic,’ or ‘Jewish’ chaplains but as of “chaplains to the college.’
Finally, “It is impossible to imagine a dean [of Religious Life] without a particular religious identity, and to find one who would not wish to function within his or her own community, even given that high priority to whole college leadership…” Impossible to imagine or not, this exactly what the College seems to have found in Dean Walters, who has distanced herself from any community and gives the impression of being petrified of the prospect to actually take a pastoral role in one of the communities…a notion which was suggested as consolidation and cost-savings measure.
Having had such a thorough and thoughtful report on the Chapel, Smith College’s Religious life, and the role of the chaplains, it begs the question of why such the premises of the study and its conclusions were not re-examined before doing irreparable harm to the existing faith communities. At one time, President Christ made a cart-before-the-horse suggestion to study the chapel model after the chaplaincies were eliminated, but even that inadequate suggestion seems to have evaporated, a cynical token offered at the time to dispel criticism. The final irony? The introduction to the 1997 report was written by Maureen Mahoney, Dean of the College then and now, part of the team that has eradicated the chaplain positions.
The cold hard truth is that students actively practicing their religion are an unfashionable minority at Smith College. If the numbers of students involved were of a particular sexual orientation or ethnic background, it is highly likely that they would have received substantial report from the College. Much of the student body at Smith is, as with many liberal arts colleges, aggressively secular in outlook and holding organized religion in disdain. “You can’t be Catholic, you’re smart,” gasped one student upon finding a classmate was active in the leadership of the Newman Association, a Catholic student group.
There have been telltale indicators of dishonesty on the part of the administration throughout this process. From the original budget proposal:
</code></pre>
<p>Student life: …Restructure Chapel to emphasize programming on ethics, social responsibility and religious literacy.</p>
<p>A single innocuous line, which would lead the reader to believe that there was a new emphasis on programming at lower cost…no hint of “reduction in staff,” as is made clear in other sections of the document regarding other proposed cuts. The lack of candor here, compared to other sections of the budget document, is significant and curiously lacking in ethics.</p>
<pre><code>If this summary is what the Board of Trustees based their vote upon, I doubt they had an inkling that eliminating the chaplaincies was an explicit line-item in the budget. Nor do I think they understood the impact on Smith communities.
A response to an early letter from me to Dean Mahoney read, in part: For example, we currently have a large and active Muslim population. They cannot understand why they don’t merit a chaplain as well.
There was Muslim chaplain for several years, shared with the Counseling Center. The issue of a Muslim chaplain is thus a red herring, obfuscating the broader issues of faith and spiritual diversity at Smith. The response about the needs of Muslim students versus the needs of Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish students carries an unfortunate aura of attempting to play one religion off against the others.
Setting aside, for the moment, the need for obtaining a new Muslim chaplain, this is a curious argument: the notion that if there isn’t a chaplain for every stripe of belief (or lack thereof) then there should be no chaplains at all. This is akin to abolishing the History department if it lacked sufficient depth in East Asian history or South American history. The dubious “rigor” behind such thinking is unworthy of Smith College.
“Diversity” is not achieved by the leveling of all interests to a least common denominator represented by some bland and presumably offensive-to-no-one pastiche of arms-length activity involving guest speakers and an occasional service. Eliminating the chaplain positions does not foster diversity; in fact quite the contrary, it eliminates distinct voices and visions.
</code></pre>
<p>I know that our chaplains have done excellent interfaith work; we will not lose our emphasis on that aspect of students’ education. Our Dean Walters has long been committed to such work.</p>
<p>Without the professional adult leadership of the chaplains, crucial support will be lost to the young women of faith at Smith College and no amount of “interfaith” or “diversity”-driven programs on ethics or social responsibility can replace it. And no one who understands what it is to be part of a faith community could think otherwise.</p>
<pre><code>One of the pieces of Smith propaganda has a line that I’ve often quoted: “Four years where it’s all about you.” For some of these young women, their faith communities, with the support and leadership of their chaplains, are a significant part of that “all about you.” These young women, struggling with issues of belief and identity in the context of their faith, are as deserving of social support as, say, newborn mothers suffering from depression.
</code></pre>
<p>We would continue to support the student religious organizations and even hope to strengthen them. We would also support a program of guests who would speak about their faith traditions and be available to students.</p>
<pre><code>Consider the difference between “talking about” and “participating in.” Faith is nurtured in community, not the intellectual product of a lecture series. No series of guests can substitute for on-going, adult, professional (trained) spiritual leadership. It’s as if classes in Studio Art could be replaced by a series of lecturers talking about how to paint or sculpt.
I have upon many occasions answered questions about religious life at Smith, usually at gatherings for admitted students and their parents. Last year, I earnestly assured two mothers, of two different faith traditions, neither of them my own, that the Smith religious communities, while small, were active and vibrant and gave support to Smith women of faith. The decision to cut the chaplains gives lie to my assurances and is embarrassing, all the more so because I never dreamed that Smith would ever indulge in any anti-religious action.
The administration—President Christ, Dean Walters, and Dean Mahoney—has been by turns cynical, manipulative, disingenuous and ultimately intellectually dishonest through the process. Unfortunately, your article did read very much like an obituary rather than a catalyst for change.
</code></pre>
<p>Well I disagree with some of your points, but I salute you for putting your ideas out there.</p>
<p>The Dad — I think I get what you mean. But I didn’t refer to you as the Smith “mob”. I believe I used the word “Zealots”. A better tie to this thread about religion…</p>
<p>“mafia,” I thought it was. I could play Simon Zelotes in “Jesus Christ, Superstar” but I think I would prefer Caiaphas, though I don’t have the voice for it. “Fools, you have no perception, the stakes we are gambling are frighteningly high…” Contra SZ, “…keep them yelling their devotion, but add a touch of hate at Rome…”</p>
<p>S&M, thank you…I think. I accumulated almost 250 e-mails and dozens of phone calls over the past year. Sad to see it come to naught. Well, even yet I may be a PITA but it’s a matter of Parthian shots.</p>
<p>Excellent letter.</p>
<p>TD, that is an excellent letter in so many ways. A mentor of mine is deeply Catholic and was educated at a top liberal arts college that lacked sufficient support for his faith. While he managed to organize meetings for similarly-minded peers in the basement of a campus building in his later years at the college, I firmly believe that many others in a similar situation would not have maintained their faith. Rather, lacking guidance from elders or leaders in their tradition of choice, they might have turned away from it, a most unfortunate situation indeed. It does not matter what faith that may be, but to let it slip by the wayside because access to mentors in that denomination has been limited in the name of economic savings is truly disappointing. I am a bit nervous that this may happen at Smith, but certainly hope that it does not. In the meantime, I will begin there in the fall with a bit of anxiety regarding this matter. </p>
<p>I would be interested to hear any response that your eloquently-stated points may have elicited from the reporter you contacted.</p>
<p>Wow. I have no dog in this hunt, but thanks all for providing a “good read.” I love discussions like this. Great thread. TD: Excellent letters to the school. And the last letter to the NYT should be an OpEd piece.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/world/asia/23warren.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/world/asia/23warren.html</a></p>
<p>This NYT link references the airline black box as having been invented by someone named David Warren, not the Paradise Pond Smithie–I’m referring to a previous post in this thread.</p>