The “Reason and Faith” requirement proposed in the new general education report will not only draw on the College’s existing Comparative Study of Religion for its development but will turn to other departments and the Harvard Divinity School as well, administrators said.

The Committee on the Study of Religion, which currently administers the undergraduate concentration in the comparative study of religion, will be the main unit responding to the new requirement, said Robert A. Orsi, chair of the department.

This task “will stretch our resources,” he said, but other administrators see ways for different outlets to alleviate the strain.

The Committee composed of only 19 faculty members will increase conversations with the Divinity School to help develop the new requirement, Orsi said. Eight of the 19 members are faculty members at the Divinity School.

“I do believe that to respond in good faith to this initiative, we can’t just substitute the same old classes,” said Orsi, who is also the Warren professor of history of religion in America at the Divinity School. “We will be asking Divinity School professors to craft new classes.”

Professor of Philosophy Alison Simmons, co-chair of the task force that drafted the general education report, said that the proposed requirement will also take advantage of faculty from other departments to both eliminate possible resource-shortage concerns and diversify course offerings.

“When we initially talked about [the ‘Reason and Faith’] category, we wondered ourselves whether there would be sufficient resources within [the Faculty of Arts and Sciences] to supply courses in it,” wrote Simmons in an e-mail. “To our surprise and delight, we discovered a wealth of courses are already being taught by FAS faculty in the area.”

The general education report lists Historical Studies A-27, “Reason and Faith in the West” and Government 90jm, “Comparative Constitutionalism” as two examples of courses in departments outside of the Study of Religion that could fulfill the half-course “Reason and Faith” requirement.

Mark U. Edwards, Jr, associate dean for academic administration at the Divinity School, said that the courses do not need to be taught only by professors with a background in religious study.

“[The ‘Reason and Faith’ courses] could be taught by many departments,” Edwards said. “Religion is a field which encompasses many disciplines.”

Since the release of the general education report, there have not been conversations about the College’s “Reason and Faith” requirement at Divinity School faculty meetings, according to Orsi.

Dean of the Divinity School William A. Graham said, “It will be premature for it to be discussed until the Faculty of Arts and Sciences discuss.”

But Graham, a member of FAS for 33 years, said it is “inevitable” that the Divinity School faculty will have a role in the proposed “Faith and Reason” courses.

In the general education report itself, the task force identifies Harvard’s professional schools as an important component of all the proposed changes.

“Harvard College is part of a large research university that includes many of the country’s best professional schools,” the report states. “This represents an extraordinary opportunity, one that can make Harvard’s undergraduate program distinctive.”

Although Simmons said it was not the intention of the “Reason and Faith” requirement to increase the College’s interaction with the Divinity School, many professors said the report will help foster such an effect.

“With the requirement, there would be a need to staff the requirement and there is simply not enough faculty at FAS all by themselves to do that, especially if you want to cover all of the world’s religion traditions,” Edwards said.

The Committee on the Study of Religion has currently cross-listed courses offered jointly with the Divinity School.

—Staff writer Madeline W. Lissner can be reached at mlissner@fas.harvard.edu.