Prefrosh Preview: A field guide to the Problem of God

Welcome to the second week of Prefrosh Preview. Last time we had fun with a totally non-controversial campus map, but this week we’ll be buckling down for the real meaty stuff: academics.

There’s a ton to say, so we’ve broken this up into two posts. This morning we’ll be giving you a field guide to Problem of God professors, and this afternoon we’ll come back with advice about tackling core classes for each of the four schools.

Problem of God, the one class [edit] just about everyone is required to take, is a mixed bag because the quality of instruction varies wildly, and professors have almost no constraints on how they want to teach the class. The professor you get is the difference between loving the class and loathing it, and with so many professors teaching PoG, it can be tough to know who to take—especially as an incoming freshman.

With that in mind, here are Voice staffers’ (and a couple friends of the Voice‘s) thoughts about their PoG professors. (Asterisks denote professors who are teaching the course this fall).

John Burnett*

Burnett’s class raises some serious questions, like a good theology class, but it’s also easy to pass and easy to skip, like a good core class. If you’re serious about theology, Burnett’s not for you—he doesn’t go deeply into the material, and he never inspires much from the class. But if you just want to burn through the core and boost your GPA, Burnett’s your man.

Stephen Fields, S.J.

If you’re a Catholic boy, you do well in his class. If you’re not, then you don’t. The class was theoretically an examination of rational defenses of the existence of God, which sounded pretty cool to an agnostic like me, but it was a very one-sided debate; only Catholics (and mostly boys) were called on. It was not a good introduction to Catholic school.

Julia Lamm*

She’s a fair, but not easy, instructor, and a good grade definitely requires you to read the books and speak in class (although there’s no actual participation grade). She’s really nice, but don’t let that fool you into thinking that she doesn’t have a good radar for bullshit.

Leo Lefebure*

Enthusiastic professor, knows his stuff, especially about monastic traditions in each of the religions studied. Reasonable amount of reading (50 pages or less per class), though skimming for basic content is adequate. Fair grader on paper and exams, and in-class participation can boost grade significantly.

Leo Lefebure is a very nice man, and a reasonable Problem of God Professor. Although the class is not especially difficult, it’s worthwhile to study for the cumulative midterm. Write your papers about his research interests (which will be obvious) and you’ll have no problem.

Elizabeth McKeown*

Anyone lucky enough to draw Professor Beth McKeown will find themselves immediately using their rapidly accumulating theological know how in order to thank God for their good fortune. The often unpredictable and always entertaining McKeown will have you in stitches throughout the semester. The sharpness of her rapid-fire wit is matched only by the breadth of her inexhaustible knowledge.

She has a warm personality and laughs at herself often, but the reading is a bit much for a introductory Theology course. She focuses mainly on the idea and the concept of religion by teaching about religion before Christianity.

Joseph Murphy*

The class is pretty straightforward, and the reading are minimal, but I felt we never really delved into the text. Professor Murphy is a kind man, and very helpful, but his discussions were a bit haphazard and unorganized. It sometimes felt like he would say shocking things just to make sure we were paying attention, without having any real basis (i.e. “Is heaven sitting around passing around a fresh one?”). All in all it was a good class, but if you really want to explore the problem of God, take it with someone else.

John Rakestraw*

He doesn’t talk about religion at all, just about about natural religion and if there things about humans that make us create religions because of our need for order We studied many philosophers, modern and not, mostly excerpts (except for Richard Berger and David Hume). Class is generally a lively discussion, he has great anecdotes, and even invites you for dinner at his house. He does take attendance, though, and not writing twice a week in the blog will affect your grade.

Jonathan Ray

Overall, I liked the class, and it was not very difficult. It was more focused on the history of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and on comparing these three religions. There were infrequent short response papers, a midterm, and a final. The professor is entertaining and has a sarcastic sense of humor. Definitely recommended, especially compared with other classes that involve a lot more work.

Frederick Ruf*

Definitely an old-school theology class—lots of Paul Tillich and philosophy of religion, not so many flowcharts comparing different faiths. Ruf is a smart guy and the workload is really manageable, with a huge emphasis on class participation (a blessing or a curse depending on who’s in your section).

Theresa Sanders

Professor Sanders is fun, energetic, and interesting. More importantly, she’s a fair grader and doesn’t try and fool her students. She’s a very good teacher.

Brilliant teacher, engaging class. Reading assignments were very manageable.

She was just about the nicest professor I’ve ever had. My class called her Saint Theresa, and for good reason. She was really open to discussing faiths other than Christianity, encouraged my whole class contribute to the discussion, and was a pretty fair grader as I remember. I really liked her class, and would highly recommend her.

Ori Soltes*

He is an absolute genius and his class is great. There are three papers, that’s it, and none of them have due dates as long as you hand them in by the end of the semester. He’s really understanding and relaxed, you learn a ton and it’s really interesting. I’d recommend him to anyone—in fact I took two class of his.

Christopher Steck, S.J.*

He was really good if you didn’t have a problem with God. Otherwise, he’d give you higher class participation grades if you didn’t participate.

Lauve Steenhuisen*

The class is focused almost entirely on touchy-feely personal discussions, and you get the sense that she doesn’t have much solid knowledge or intellectual curiosity about religions (especially ones that aren’t in the Judeo-Christian family). Not too much reading, but you do have to write four very lengthy (15-20 pages or more each), invasively personal essays. Once you get past the creepiness of being forced to share your personal memories with your professor, they’re easy As as long as you can crank out the verbiage—she seems to grade more on quantity rather than quality.

Diane Yeager*

I absolutely loved her. She would start the class with an interesting quote that we’d contemplate before beginning the class. I also enjoyed how we read The Brothers Karamazov in her class. The class was more focused on the human desire to find meaning in life through spirituality. I would definitely recommender her.

Bonus: Intro to Biblical Literature professor John Pilch
(Along with History of Asian Cultures, Bib Lit is one of the classes you can substitute for PoG)

Pilch is quite funny and entertaining, but he is also very blunt (he told a girl that she should seriously contemplate whether or not she belonged at Georgetown). He also has a policy of leaving religion at the door, making this a great class for people of little or no religion.

Check back this afternoon for more info about core requirements!

20 Comments on “Prefrosh Preview: A field guide to the Problem of God

  1. Not everybody is required to take Problem of God. For example, people in the Liberal Arts Seminar usually don’t take it. There are, I’m sure, other ways to not take it.

  2. 1) hist. of Asian cultures can only be substituted for PoG if you’re in the SFS.
    2)This seems to be little more than the opinions of one or two people who took the class. At least on Rate my profs there is a diversity of opinions, and goodness knows how much flak tat place gets. Setting this up as anywhere close to authoritative seems odd.

  3. The article states “Problem of God, the one class just about everyone is required to take”. The post never said everyone was required to take the course.

  4. Perhaps a link to their RMP pages on the update? That way the prefrosh can see the diversity of opinions.

  5. Actually Correction Correction, they changed that after my comment.

  6. Correction: You’re right, I did edit it after your comment. It should have been formatted to reflect that, just fixed it.

    Doug: It’s not meant to be totally authoritative—it says in the post these are the opinions and experiences of Voice staffers

  7. There’s no mention of an Otto Hentz on here, but he’s the professor I requested on preregistration due to his great RMP feedback (which, now that I look for it, seems to have been taken down?). Anyone know what happened to him?

  8. Thank you, Juliana. Vindication!

    I have regained my self-respect, I think I can get out of bed now.

  9. Yet another example of terrible fact-checking by the Voice. NO ONE is required to take Problem of God. In the College at least, you must take EITHER Problem of God or Intro to Biblical Literature. Theoretically, every single College student could choose not to take Problem of God.

  10. @ARRGGHH‼ Is there an echo in here? I think that was already pointed out, but kudos for the ability to read the first comment and reiterate it with an attempted low-blow at the Voice.

    P.s. Pilch is a beast, but if you can throw down a decent grade on his 15 page Term Paper (Just talk a lot about the cross-cultural implications of whatever passage you choose, and don’t pick anything from John) then you’ll be more than fine. Just be warned, this is the guy who gave us a mid-term with 60 t / f questions. All true. And the Final is 200 T / F.

  11. Hentz is a good professor, it’s a really easy class in that he doesn’t give grades throughout the semester and there isn’t any reading. Make note, though, that when I took it 4 years ago, not one female in the class received an A. Not sure if that trend has continued. But he’s a really nice guy and it’s not a lot of work, especially at the end when he splits you into 3 sections that only meet 1x a week, rather than 2-3.

  12. Ye2, you’re right, it looks like Professor Hayes is teaching Problem of God this semester. Haven’t taken her for that class, but I did have her for a class on liberation theology. Awesome class, but also not too hard.

    Maybe her PoG class is the same.

  13. Can someone share input on Van Der Waag? That’s who I put as my primary due to his great ratings on

  14. Scott, Pilch actually absolutely bans John now. He will fail anyone who uses a passage from John. But, it’s pretty easy to do well on the paper if you use Pilch as a source and agree with him.
    And, the person he told to question about being at Georgetown admitted that they really put no effort in to their paper.

  15. Ya, he only really burns people who deserve it I’m sure, I’ve heard some horror stories from friends that sorta contradict that though.
    I just watched The Paper Chase today, at least we don’t have professors giving us 10cents to call our parents and tell them that we should reconsider our chosen profession. (In the Paper Chase it’s in law school, so there’s a bit more gravity to it.)

  16. Lamm was the worst professor I had at Georgetown. Avoid or pay the consequences.

  17. I choose Erin Cline, just because it fit in my schedule. Has anyone had a class with her?

  18. Ruf is the man. When I took it we focused mainly on the difference between the sacred and profane especially sacred times and places. There is a very cool essay assignment to go to a “sacred” place and write about it. Sacred places being pretty much any memorial in DC.

  19. I can’t believe Fr. Hentz wasn’t included in the list. He’s a phenomenal professor.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>