Well, this is interesting. "A surprising announcement on Thursday revived tensions between Harvard's original mission and its more recent secular orientation. The association of more than 30 Harvard chaplains representing a wide range of religious communities elected Greg Epstein as their new leader. The surprise isn't that Epstein is not a Christian, an element of Harvard's heritage that the university hasn't stressed for decades. It's that he doesn't believe in God at all." I suppose just one more example of the "wokeness" of higher education in America. He must "identify" as a chaplain or something. https://www.yahoo.com/news/harvards-chaplain-atheist-contradiction-094309106.html
How can an atheist be a chaplain? The very definition of a chaplain is a believer in God. A great example of the ignorance that has overtaken our nation.
On the other hand this might be a giant step forward for religion. I am an atheist and would be out on the street with believers if a gov't tried to eliminate it, as the Soviet Union tried to do. Incidentally today's Russia seems to have taken over the Greek Orthodox part of modern Christianity.
I do apologize but you lost me somewhere. A Chaplain is a member of the Clergy which is Christian based although in the military the chaplain can also be Jewish. @Faye Fox is exactly right when she wrote the words, “by definition” so the question might be; by definition, how can an Atheist be a Chaplain? In an institution of higher learning, I’m sure the head of the Chaplaincy is called some other name if in fact he is an Atheist. The curious moment I am having is how does that relate to the U.S.S.R’s attempt to quell all religions in that country?
If this madness takes over I expect to see the local Community Church posts on their reader board, "Sundays Sermon - 'God is Dead' with our new atheist Pastor."
The government may accept that as a reasonable alternative to wearing masks to permit them to keep their doors open.
Okay, I re-read the entire link and did a little cross referencing and I think I know what you’re writing about although the move to appoint Epstein as the head of the chaplaincy still throws me and his ordination is quite puzzling. The word, “Rabbi” doesn’t fit him by definition albeit the word “ordained” is given as a command to teach but who commanded him and moreover, why Rabbi? I get where you wrote that it might be a forward step for religion simply because Epstein seems to be a person who can easily relate to other beliefs other than his own whether God is in the mix or not. He’s a peaceful arbitrator of sorts which I admit we do need more of rather than the typical “I’m right and you’re wrong attitude. In truth, people can be good without God and I know that to be true because I have personally known a few very staunch non-believers in a Deity who are very honest, charitable and hard working people. But it isn’t all about just being “good”. All that said, the obvious compromise that the monotheistic believers have taken is extremely troubling. Is it indeed a sign of the times or is it simply a mark of abject complacency by those who essentially gave the learned gentleman the priest-like mantle of leadership? Will a student of Anton LaVey be the next head chaplain of Aquinas University?
Epstein told The Times. “We don’t look to a god for answers. We are each other’s answers.” We need to take a warning from Judges 21:25 which states: "There was no king in Israel, every man did what was right in his own eyes." And we know how well that turned out.