- The Washington Times - Monday, January 9, 2023

Hamline University dropped an art history professor after she showed her class two images of Muhammad and then defended the dismissal by declaring that respect for Muslim students “should have superseded academic freedom.”

Now the small Minnesota college is facing a national backlash as free-speech groups and academics rally behind Erika Lopez Prater, the professor whose contract was not renewed after a student complained about the lecture on Islamic art featuring 14th- and 16th-century illustrations of Islam’s prophet.

“If these reports are accurate, Hamline University has committed one of the most egregious violations of academic freedom in recent memory,” said Jeremy Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN America, who called for the professor to be reinstated.

Christiane Gruber, a professor of Islamic art at the University of Michigan, delivered Monday a petition with 7,000 signatures calling on Hamline’s Board of Trustees to conduct an independent investigation.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression also filed a complaint Friday with the Higher Learning Commission, Hamline’s regional accrediting agency.

Hamline University’s actions in this matter go to the very heart of the academic and scholarly enterprise,” said Princeton politics professor Keith Whittington in a Jan. 3 letter to Hamline on behalf of the Academic Freedom Alliance.

“If a professor of art history cannot show college students significant works of art for fear that offended students or members of the community could get that professor fired for doing so, then there simply is no serious commitment to academic freedom at that institution – and indeed no serious commitment to higher education,” he said.

Hamline President Fayneese Miller defended the St. Paul university’s decision, saying in a Dec. 31 campus-wide email that students “do not relinquish their faith in the classroom.”

“For those of us who have been entrusted with the responsibility of educating the next generation of leaders and engaged citizens, it was important that our Muslim students, as well as all other students, feel safe, supported, and respected both in and out of our classrooms,” she said, as reported by Alpha News.

Critics pointed out that Ms. Prater was released even though she gave students a content warning, providing a two-minute introduction to the images and explaining their controversial nature before advancing the PowerPoint presentation during the Oct. 6 online class.

The images were a well-known 14th-century painting of Muhammad and the archangel Gabriel by Persian scholar Rashid al-Din, and a 16th-century Ottoman Turkish illustration by Mustafa ibn Vali.

“I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages,” said Ms. Prater during the lecture, according to a video obtained by the Oracle, Hamline’s student newspaper.

“While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture,” she said.

Despite the warnings, the university received a complaint from Hamline senior Aram Wedatalla, president of the Muslim Student Association, who was in the class during the presentation.

“I’m like, ‘this can’t be real,’” Ms. Wedatalla told the Oracle. “As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don’t feel like I belong, and I don’t think I’ll ever belong in a community where they don’t value me as a member, and they don’t show the same respect that I show them.”

Two days later, Ms. Prater sent the student an email apology, saying that she “did not try to surprise students with this image, and I did my best to provide students with an ‘out,’” the Oracle reported.

“I also described every subsequent slide I showed with language to indicate when I was no longer showing an image of the Prophet Muhammad,” Ms. Prater said. “I am sorry that despite my attempt to prevent a negative reaction, you still viewed and were troubled by this image.”

There followed an Oct. 10 meeting between the administration and members of the Muslim Student Association and their adviser, Nur Mood, assistant director of social justice programs and strategic relations.

“This [incident is] much deeper and it’s something that in a million years, I never expected that it would happen here at Hamline. I hope this is the last time I see something similar to this,” Ms. Mood told the Oracle. “There’s a lot of apologies all happening, but the harm’s done. I think we should have started more focused about the healing process.”

The administration responded with a Nov. 7 email outlining a strategy to counter Islamophobia from David Everett, associate vice president for inclusive excellence.

They followed up with an email saying academic freedom “does not have to come at the expense of care and decency toward others.”

“It is not our intent to place blame; rather, it is our intent to note that in the classroom incident — where an image forbidden for Muslims to look upon was projected on a screen and left for many minutes — respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom,” said Ms. Miller and Mr. Everett in the Dec. 9 email, which was reprinted on Reason’s Volokh Conspiracy blog.

They added that while “we appreciate that some will find our comments as an attack on academic freedom, nothing could be further from the truth. We have a duty of care for those who trust us to educate them — our students.”

Among those backing Ms. Prater was Hamline professor Mark Berkson, chairman of the university’s religion department, who wrote an essay in her defense in the Oracle arguing that the artwork shown in class was not Islamophobic.

“I believe that, in the context of an art history classroom, showing an Islamic representation of the Prophet Muhammad, a painting that was done to honor Muhammad and depict an important historical moment, is not an example of Islamophobia,” Mr. Berkson said. “Labeling it this way is not only inaccurate but also takes our attention off of real examples of bigotry and hate.”

The essay was removed from the student newspaper’s site after two days, according to Ms. Gruber in New Lines magazine.

The Volokh Conspiracy has since reprinted the essay.

Ms. Prater has not commented publicly so far on the incident.

The Washington Times has reached out to Hamline for further comment.

• Valerie Richardson can be reached at vrichardson@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.