Erika López Prater, an art history professor at Hamline University, lost her teaching position after showing images of the Prophet Muhammad in class. While some faculty members and students called for Hamline to fire López Prater, professor of religion Mark Berkson defended the besieged professor in an essay published in The Oracle, Hamline’s student newspaper. For Berkson’s brave defense of academic freedom, FIRE presented him with the first-ever “Berkson Courageous Colleague Award” at this year’s FIRE Faculty Network Conference.

I attended FIRE’s faculty conference where Mark make his acceptance speech. His words inspired me and I hope they inspire you too.

An excerpt From Mark Berkson’s Acceptance Speech:

I really appreciate the non partisan nature of fires work, their commitments to the principles that are there to protect everyone across the political spectrum are central. And there are times that I read a fire statement, and I go to learn more about the person they’re defending. And I must admit, I sometimes say like . . . “Yuck!, I don’t know, I don’t know about that one, you know!’ there are some really disturbing views [audience laughing]. And then, of course, I’m immediately reminded that not only must I extend the same protections, I seek to those with different views, but in a way that can often be difficult to see at the moment, we benefit from hearing those views.

And this occurs within every religious tradition I teach when we see how much is revealed when we juxtapose what is considered orthodox with what’s considered heretical. And when we see how worldviews are shaped, principles affirmed and understandings clarified by the engagement with, rather than the silencing of, opposing, even offensive or disturbing, points of view.

The principle that FIRE defends in all realms is articulated well within religion by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who wrote, “Religion is at its best when it relies on strength of argument and example, is at its worst when it seeks to impose truth by force.” And this is not just some contemporary idea. 16th century Rabbi Judah Lowe said it beautifully. He wrote, “It is not proper, that we despise the words of our adversaries, but rather we must draw them as close as we can. Therefore, it is proper out of love of reason and knowledge that you should not summarily reject anything that opposes your own ideas. Even if such beliefs are opposed to your faith and religion. Do not say to your opponent ‘Speak not. Close your mouth.’ On the contrary, you should at such time say speak up as much as you want, whatever you wish. Curbing the words of an opponent in religious matters is nothing but the curbing and enfeebling of religion itself. What strength is manifested when the opponent is not permitted to fight?”