For those who went to college between 1950 and 1970, the fact that a religious university needs a religious leader goes without saying. But for students of later generations, like me, the mandate that a Christian, Jewish, or Muslim university requires a priest, rabbi, or imam to serve as its president is beginning to be questioned.
As ingrained religious presidents leave office, their replacements are increasingly lay people. Administratively, there is almost no difference between the capabilities of a lay person and an ordained person. They can both ensure that a university functions. But there is nonetheless a difference between the two. What qualities does a religious leader have that a lay person doesnâ??t? Why should religious institutions default to religious leaders when a lay person can perform the same duties just as well, if not better than, a religious leader?
Read Full Article »