MEETING JESUS AT UNIVERSITY
Rites of passage and student evangelicals
By Edward Dutton. Ashgate Press. 164 pages. £45.00.
ISBN978-0-7546-6520-5
This volume is a popularised version of a PhD in social anthropology. Dr. Dutton compares and contrasts evangelical student groups in six universities: Oxford, Aberdeen, Trinidad, USA, Leiden and Oulu-Finland.
He considers the role such universities play in providing rites of passage for students (liminality), a transitional rite moving through from one phase to another. Such phases can lead to a sense of ‘belonging’ or communitas to a particular group or institution, so that, at a university such as Oxford, which is highly structured (college system, formal dinners, sub fusc attire, etc.) and traumatic (one-to-one tutorials, entrance exams, intense competition), this creates a sense of crisis and stress for some students, as well as opportunity for social elevation for others, especially from state schools. This is similar to the rites of initiation which the Ndemby people of Zambia undergo.
It is argued that this is mirrored by the Oxford CU (OICCU) which has a high rate of conversions (20% of CU members) especially from among those who are trying to establish their own self-identity over and against the surrounding university and may be feeling vulnerable. The OICCU is intensely evangelistic and clear in doctrinal beliefs and behaviour and, while the CU has over 50% from state schools, this is not reflected in the senior leadership which is predominately public school made up of ‘established Christians’.
By way of contrast, universities which are less structured and do not provide so clear a rite of passage for students (perhaps because most students have had a gap year or are from the university town), have CUs which are less structured with lessening degrees of strictness regarding doctrinal belief and behaviour. In the case of the former, this leads to antagonism against CU members from other university students and a greater sense of ‘us’ and ‘them’ and so strengthens the sense of communitas among the CU students. But Aberdeen University CU, for example, was much more ‘laid back’ in terms of evangelism and very few of its members were converted while at university. It is argued that an OICCU-type set-up would not prosper in an Aberdeen/Finland situation.
While there are lessons to be learnt from social anthropology for the way CUs operate — providing a kind of ‘mirror’ in which they may see themselves as others see them and the way social dynamics play a part in how relationships are conducted — I am not convinced that Dr. Dutton’s thesis is as strong as he makes out. Surely, one needs to compare like with like, e.g. a highly structured CU like OICCU operating in a lowly structured university. It could be that the reason why OICCU have more converts than, say, Aberdeen, is that they are more focused and fervent evangelistically and clearer in their beliefs — as well as having some very able people among their number, rather than mainly being the product of the university / CU social set-up.
However, social factors cannot be ignored, not least in asking why there is the persistence of the class system in England which at the level of its leadership still bedevils the country in general and Anglican evangelicalism in particular.
