Return to RDK Homepage

Between Secularism and Pluralism:

Religious Clubs on the Queen's University Campus

By Hannah Dick

Presented to the Canadian Society for the Study of Religion

Saskatoon, May 2007

While there may be debate over whether secularization is a feature of contemporary society (Swatos and Christiano; Stark) Paul Bramadat, in his book The Church on the World's Turf, suggests that,

In contrast, in the book Religion on Campus, Conrad Cherry, Betty A. DeBerg and Amanda Porterfield suggest that post-secondary institutions in the United States have "become more optional and pluralistic," rather than more secular (294). At Queen's University, a non-religious institution with Christian origins, both secularism as well as pluralism inform the religious landscape. Following Paul Bramadat's suggestion that an evangelical club at McMaster University, Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship (or IVCF), is on the "periphery" of the university campus (20), this paper explores the ways that religious clubs at Queen's resist marginalization and re-centralize religion in the lives of their members by negotiating the secular and pluralist terrain of the campus. Interviews with club leaders and participants, supplemented with data from club websites and external research, will be used to explore three areas: the proximity of clubs to one another; possibilities for interfaith dialogue; and, challenges posed by the secular learning environment.

The Proximity of Religious Clubs

Despite the long-entrenched Christian heritage of Queen's University, the institution has an identifiable history of religious diversity. Indeed, many of the Christian groups on campus are as recent, if not more recent developments than the religious clubs associated with 'minority' traditions such as Islam and the Baha'i Faith. Jewish, Muslim and Baha'i students have maintained organizations on campus for at least the past fifty of the university's 166 years. However, this diversity is not yet widely appreciated: the incoming students' census conducted by the university, which examines ethnic, socio-economic, and sexual diversity, does not inquire about religious affiliation. Here we can see one example of religion being marginalized on the secular campus to the extent that it is not central to the discourse of diversity.

Nevertheless, the campus is a microcosm for the religious diversity present in Canadian society at large, as it is coloured by representatives from various different religious traditions all sharing the same secular space. For example, the Soka Gakkai International Club was initially designated to share worship space with the Queen's University Muslim Students' Association (QUMSA), although this became impossible due to the prayer needs of both groups. Similarly, the Ban Righ Centre has been host to many campus religious clubs which have used the same space at different times. In this case, alterations to the shared worship space are necessarily limited and temporary.

Religious clubs must also share publicity space on the campus. Groups all vie for visibility by putting up posters for events and meetings, advertising through student newspapers, and for the most part drawing new members from the same pool of students. This proximity is further sublimated at the biannual campus Clubs' Night, where all clubs are invited to erect displays in order to advertise their groups to prospective members of the student body. The faith-based clubs are usually grouped together in one specified area, making 'shopping' for religious clubs quite convenient. More generally, the student centre is consistently peppered with evidence of religious diversity. For example, posters advertising a Campus for Christ meeting might lie next to an ad for a QUMSA panel discussion on Islamophobia and an interactive display on the Holocaust erected by Hillel.

Paul Bramadat refers to the theory of differentiation to explain the contemporary state of religion, whereby "religion is not expelled from the larger social system [...] [rather] religion simply becomes more concentrated in a different part of an increasingly complex social system" (17). Religion as a marginal phenomenon becomes concentrated in campus religious clubs (17-18). As Bramadat points out, in a pluralist environment such as Queen's where religion is 'differentiated,' groups need to define themselves in opposition to one another (17). For example, Queen's Christian Fellowship (QCF) began to assert a more 'low-key' style of evangelism once Campus Crusade for Christ (now known as Campus for Christ) emerged at Queen's in the late 1990s. One member of QCF explains that this differentiation occurred naturally once the more assertively evangelical group appeared at Queen's and both clubs began to cater to different facets of the Christian student populace. In a case of conscious differentiation, the Unitarian Universalist Club at Queen's was established in direct response to the aggressive tactics employed by Campus for Christ in an attempt to create an alternative environment for discussing religious issues.

There are at least nine nondenominational Protestant clubs at Queen's and three Catholic ones. Moreover, each has found a particular way of maintaining a distinctive identity in the face of so many options. Thus, Morning Star Christian Fellowship claims to be nondenominational but its parent organization is explicitly Seventh-Day Adventist (Minder 5). Campus for Christ has asserted itself as an aggressively missionary group, and the majority of its members attend conservative evangelical churches in Kingston. More particular groups like Athletes in Action and Think, Inc., combine extracurriculars (athletics and drama, respectively) with Christianity. In the case of the Korean Christian Fellowship, the Kingston Chinese Christian Fellowship, the Queen's Chinese Catholic Community, and the Korean Catholics of Queen's, two marginalized aspects of identity – religion and ethnicity – have been aligned so as to further differentiate these clubs from other Christian groups on campus. The number of Christian clubs thus reflects the number of differentiated religious options for faithful students at Queen's.

This differentiation is present among non-Christian groups as well. The Thaqalayn Muslim Association was formed in 2001 in response to QUMSA, where some Shi'a members felt their minority needs unmet. While this club purports to represent the views of all Shi'a Muslims, the presence of another Shi'a club, the Ismaili Muslim Students' Association, has caused the Thaqalayn club to naturally distinguish itself by representing the particular views of Ithna Ashari Muslims.

Other groups are too small or already too particular to become further stratified. While there is no general Buddhist club, the Soka Gakkai Club caters to members of Soka Gakkai International, a Buddhist New Religious Movement which has taken hold primarily in Japan. For other groups, being non-differentiated can pose unique challenges. One past president of Hillel, the only Jewish students' organization at Queen's, emphasized the challenge of catering to Jewish students of differing affiliations and levels of adherence. As a result, it appears that differentiation and particularity have become the norms on the pluralist campus.

Interfaith Dialogue

Paul Bramadat explains the tension that arises when a university that encourages diversity finds itself host to religious groups which do not share this pluralistic view (17-18). The Queen's Chaplain, Rev. Brian Yealland, elucidates this tension when he asks:

While the Christian clubs on campus have an agreement not to proselytize to one another's members, members of non-Christian groups are often viable targets. Vivian Lee has even suggested that there are harmful psychological effects from the presence of proselytizing groups like Campus for Christ. Lee argues that groups whose mandates directly contradict the pluralist concerns of the university should not be tolerated and that their harmful effects on the university populace need to be recognized.

            One alternative tactic to disallowing specific clubs is to promote interfaith dialogue in an effort to give each religious group on campus a voice. One club on campus, the Interfaith Council, endeavours to do just this, promoting interfaith discussion and understanding. However, in actual practice most religious clubs do not participate in this group. It is primarily composed of members of the Baha'i and Soka Gakkai clubs– groups that tend to agree more than they disagree on religious and social issues. In contrast, the largest and most visible clubs – including Campus for Christ and QUMSA – are less concerned with providing a voice to each group on campus than with the challenges of secularism and discrimination.

Interfaith dialogue may not in fact be the most successful way to negotiate the pluralist landscape at Queen's. Indeed, such dialogue may lead to conflict when the proselytizing interests of some groups allows for the active recruitment of students who belong to non-Christian clubs. Instead, more needs to be done to map out the face of religious diversity at Queen's in order to determine whose views are being heard and made visible, and whose are being overlooked. In this vein, the Interfaith Council club recently conducted a survey of students' religious affiliation and perceived levels of religious accommodation at Queen's. Because the university does not have any information of this kind, this data will be the first step towards determining representation and visibility. In addition, the Queen's Interfaith Council – an organization which is distinct from the Interfaith Council club – has compiled a calendar of important faith dates from various religions which serves to publicize the needs of pluralism and encourages administrative support for different faith concerns. These attempts may prove to be more effective at promoting pluralism in the long-term than efforts at interfaith dialogue or the prohibition of particular clubs.

The Challenges of Secularism

One challenge shared by members of every single religious group on campus is that of the secular learning environment. Indeed, the effects gained by participation in a campus religious club are predominantly related to these groups' ability to negotiate a spiritual dimension in an otherwise secular environment. Bramadat refers to IVCF as, "an alternative institution within an institution," which provides religious counterparts to secular social events (21), and this way of thinking of campus religious clubs can also be extended to the Queen's context.

For example, QUMSA provides prayer space on the Queen's campus for Muslim students who must pray five times daily. This prayer space is easily negotiated between the administration and a campus group, where otherwise a Muslim student might have to pray individually and more explicitly in public (which he or she may not feel comfortable doing). In an interview, one representative of QUMSA emphasized the club's role in arbitrating on behalf of Muslim students, highlighting both the provision of prayer space as well as the introduction of Halal food in the cafeteria. Another important function of the group, he noted, is to petition on behalf of students who have exams that conflict with Muslim holidays. While the faith-dates calendar is a step in the right direction, clearly it has not fully eliminated the need for case-by-case negotiation by groups like QUMSA.

One of the most important ways campus religious clubs negotiate religiosity in the secular learning environment is by providing a community where religion is accepted. Queen's Hillel holds Friday night dinners for Jewish students, allowing them to retain some connection to their religiosity or culture and form a community with other Jewish students. Hillel also aspires to create an environment on campus that is welcoming to practicing Judaism, even for students who never participate in Hillel. This includes promoting Jewish holidays and educating the Queen's community on Jewish faith and history. Their mandate thus seeks to assert a comfortable Jewish space on campus in the midst of secular learning and a plurality of other groups. For Soka Gakkai Buddhists, daily chanting is a pivotal part of practicing their faith. Moreover, chanting with others is considered more religiously effective than chanting alone. Daily morning prayer sessions held by the Soka Gakkai Club thus provide both a venue for public prayer as well as a community with which to chant, thus encouraging the enactment of religion on campus.

The Campus Association for Baha'i Studies also seeks to create an alternative community. Members of this club are often challenged by the "party culture" at Queen's, and find in the club not only access to other Baha'i students but also a foray into the Baha'i Community of Kingston, to which the campus club is closely tied. According to one member of the club, this community support provides an invaluable sense of comfort and belonging in an otherwise alienating secular context. It also provides an important connection to the Community's public devotion, as there is no Baha'i place of worship in Kingston.

The challenges of secularism are not faced by adherents of non-Christian traditions alone. Like Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship at McMaster, the Queen's IVCF chapter, Queen's Christian Fellowship, provides alternative frosh week activities to counter the secular social events of the main campus. Indeed, most campus religious clubs hold alternative events throughout the school year, many of which have less to do with religious worship per se than with fostering a social environment where activities do not conflict with theological norms.

Religious clubs also provide a safe place for religiosity to be expressed. As one member of the Queen's Catholics explains,

A member of Campus for Christ makes a similar statement about the role this club played in her personal exploration of religiosity:

Not only do campus religious clubs provide the resources and means for living a faithful life on campus, but they also network students going through the process of religious self-discovery. Some Christian clubs go one step further, actively combating secularism on campus through rigorous missionizing and by holding public events. For example, the hugely popular "Does God Exist?" debate series sponsored by Campus for Christ is advertised to the general campus population. This is one attempt to re-centralize religion on the secular campus by involving prominent faculty members in theological debate. Furthermore, by resisting secularism and providing a venue for religion, campus clubs are also promoting their own interests. Indeed, helping to maintain the faith of students in a time when religiosity usually declines (Madsen and Vernon 128) promotes the health of religions beyond the context of the university campus.

Conclusions

We can see how the trends elucidated by Bramadat, as well as Cherry, DeBerg and Porterfield, compare with the Queen's campus. In line with Bramadat's thesis, campus religious clubs at Queen's are often peripheral to the secular concerns of the teaching environment, and must carve out their own differentiated niches in order to promote religiosity as a matter of central concern. In Religion on Campus, Cherry, DeBerg and Porterfield explain the state of religion on four diverse university and college campuses in the United States as such: there is more 'supply' than 'demand' for religion (282-83). The sheer diversity of campus religious clubs at Queen's – including some which are very small numerically – suggests that the increasingly pluralist nature of the university campus highlighted by Cherry, DeBerg and Porterfield is also a present reality at Queen's.

As a result, the Queen's case further supports previous work on religion on the post-secondary campus. Further examination of campus religious clubs on other post-secondary campuses would be fruitful, in order to determine to what extent the Queen's case is typical. Indeed, whether the particularities of the Queen's campus present a completely different or simply more concentrated version of the realities of religious life at other secular post-secondary institutions remains to be seen. However, that the results herein are in line with Cherry, DeBerg and Porterfield's findings, as well as with Bramadat's results, demonstrates some degree of continuity with campus religiosity in both the United States as well as Canada, and favours the latter explanation.

It would be a gross oversight to conclude that the administrative secularism of a post-secondary institution inevitably leads to the secularism of that institution's students. At Queen's, religion continues to thrive and survive in multiple ways, aided primarily by the existence of campus religious clubs which take a vested interest in promoting the religiosity of their participants. For the university, which must balance the two mandates of secularism and pluralism, as well as for the students who participate in these groups, these 'institutions within an institution' fill an important niche which renders them far beyond the scope of the casual social club.

 

Bramadat, Paul A. The Church on the World's Turf: An Evangelical Christian Group at a Secular University. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Cherry, Conrad, Betty A. DeBerg, and Amanda Porterfield. Religion on Campus. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2001.

Lee, Vivian. "Puritanism on Campus: Queen's Campus Crusade for Christ." Kingston: Queen's University, 2004.

Madsen, Gary E. and Glenn M. Vernon. "Maintaining the Faith During College: A Study of Campus Religious Group Participation." Review of Religious Research. 25.2 (Dec 1983): 127-41. 20 October 2006 <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0034-673X%28198312%2925%3A2%3C127%3AMTFDCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X>

Minder, Michael. "Broken Dreams." Morning Star Christian Fellowship Newsletter. 2 (March-April 2006): 4-6. 10 October 2006. <http://www.mstars.org/newsletter/ms_newsletter_v2.pdf>

Stark, Rodney. "Secularization, R.I.P." Sociology of Religion. 60.3 (Fall 1999): 249-273.

Swatos, William H. Jr. and Kevin J. Christiano. "Secularization Theory: The Course of a Concept." Sociology of Religion. 60.3 (Fall 1999): 209-228.