The College’s new “Committee on Religion at a Public University” met for the first time last Friday, Feb. 23. The meeting began with co-chair Alan Meese correcting some misconceptions about the committee that had been propagated in the press.
“Personally, I wouldn’t have signed on to chair this Committee if I thought it would be a rubber stamp,” Meese said, dismissing notions that the Committee would refuse to oppose President Gene Nichol’s stance on the Wren Chapel cross.
According to Meese, he has written statements critical of Nichol in the past and not felt repercussions. He said only one member of the Committee had signed a faculty petition in favor of Nichol.
The Committee heard reports from Alumni Association Executive Vice President Karen Cottrell, who discussed how alumni can be involved in the Committee’s work. Louise Kale, Executive Director of the Historic Campus, discussed the history the Wren Chapel, which she supervises.
Vice President for Student Affairs Sam Sadler informed the committee about the state of religious student organizations and ministers on campus.
“I hope that we as a committee can bring this aspect of religious life on campus into these deliberations,” Sadler said.
Finally, Provost Geoff Feiss told the Committee about Nichol’s charge to bring speakers on the issue to campus to help enlighten the debate. The Committee also detailed plans to meet with student, faculty and alumni governance bodies.
Committee Co-Chair and Emeritus Religion Professor Jim Livingston laid out a three-stage plan to guide the Committee’s work.
“Committees can easily go off track if they don’t have a sense of where they are and where they want to go,” Livingston said, proposing that the Committee should follow a model of orientation, discussion and action. According to Livingston, the orientation and information gathering has already begun.
The Committee discussed its long-term and short-term purposes. While Nichol convened the Committee to examine broad issues of religion at public universities, the Board of Visitors and the General Assembly have insisted that the Committee make recommendations as soon as April on what College policy should be concerning the Wren Chapel cross.
“Things have been framed as a choice between two models. There may be other models which we may not have thought of,” Meese said, stressing that he hopes the Committee will examine how the issue is dealt with at many other schools, public and private.
Accordingly, the Committee created two subcommittees. One chaired by History Professor LuAnn Homza will seek out keynote speakers for the Committee and the College generally, and another, chaired by Meese, will conduct a comparative analysis of religion’s involvement at other schools.
“How do we do an adequate job given the time constraints? Can, I’m asking myself, can I make an informed decision or recommendation given the time?” asked Committee member Holly Hollerith, Rector of local Bruton Parrish Church.
“We really have three choices: the cross is in, the cross is out, or we have some middle ground,” said Committee member James Brinkley, attempting to simplify the debate, adding, “I think it is a disaster that a great public university such as William and Mary … is being distracted by a matter of symbolism, albeit important.”
“I’d rather not see a series of speakers … who are talking about whether or not the cross should be in the chapel or should not be in the chapel,” Meese said. “That is not a recipe for bringing the whole community into the discussion.”
“The time constraints are ... very harsh,” Meese said.