Introduction

Arizona State University’s fall 2026 catalog lists eight courses that mention witchcraft, magic, or the occult, yet only a single course carries a title referencing Christianity. This disparity raises concerns for parents and students who may not realize that many of these classes are framed within an oppression‑studies lens that portrays orthodox Christianity as the primary oppressor. Understanding how academic language can conceal a predetermined ideological stance is essential for making informed enrollment decisions.

The Curriculum’s Framing of Christianity

Several course descriptions use terms such as “Othering,” “lived experience,” and “intersectionality” to analyze historical witch persecutions. One syllabus explicitly states that the identity of the heretic and the witch was constructed against its binary opposite, the “orthodox” Christian, and then turns to “religious Othering” to examine how these past persecutions affect students today. The language indicates that the moral and political framework is set before students encounter the primary sources, positioning Christianity as the villain in the narrative.

Oppression‑Studies Templates

Across the catalog, a recurring pattern emerges: three ingredients dominate the instructional approach. First, Christianity is cast as the principal antagonist, using “orthodox” as a loaded label rather than a neutral descriptor. Second, history is presented as a binary struggle between oppressors and the oppressed, with “Othering” serving as a philosophical key to interpret any subject. Third, historical episodes are required to be linked directly to contemporary moral arguments, demanding that students demonstrate how medieval witch persecutions continue to shape modern power dynamics.

Impact on Christian Students

For Christian students, this methodological approach can be unsettling. The syllabus does not ask whether Christianity is true or whether its teachings offer moral guidance; instead, it asks who holds power. This shift moves the focus from theological truth to sociopolitical analysis, effectively marginalizing a faith perspective while elevating a secular critique of religious institutions.

Why Discernment Matters

Academic jargon such as “intersectionality,” “hegemonic,” and “dialectic of oppression” can obscure the underlying philosophical agenda. When these terms appear in course titles or descriptions, they often signal a broader ideological system that expects every topic to confirm a narrative of oppression. Recognizing these signals enables students and families to discern whether a course aligns with their values or subtly promotes a worldview that frames Christianity as a cultural adversary.

Conclusion

ASU’s emphasis on witchcraft and occult studies, coupled with an oppression‑studies framework, highlights an ideological bias that can marginalize Christian perspectives. By carefully reading course descriptions and understanding the implicit assumptions, students can choose curricula that respect their faith and intellectual integrity. Making informed decisions protects both tuition dollars and personal convictions in an increasingly complex academic environment.