A Professor’s Advice to Christians

final examIn Chris­tians in Acad­eme: A Reply, for­mer evan­gel­i­cal Adam Kot­sko min­i­mizes a very real prob­lem (recall that one study shows that 53% of fac­ul­ty dis­dain evan­gel­i­cals), but he nonethe­less says things worth lis­ten­ing to.

A few bits stood out to me:

Above all, par­ents and pas­tors need to stop giv­ing a blank check to any­thing that pro­fess­es to be “Chris­t­ian.” Con­ser­v­a­tive evan­gel­i­cals have long been skilled at sniff­ing out what they con­sid­er to be pseu­do-Chris­t­ian lib­er­als — devel­op­ing some dis­cern­ment on the oth­er end of the scale would be a wel­come shift.

I think he and I would dif­fer con­sid­er­ably on the appli­ca­tion of this point, but I like the fact that he brings it up. The truth is that there is a ditch on both sides of the road, and it mat­ters lit­tle whether you wreck in the ditch of being too insis­tent on irrel­e­vant details (the­o­log­i­cal con­ser­vatism) or whether you wreck in the ditch of being too uncon­cerned about impor­tant details (the­o­log­i­cal lib­er­al­ism). Both will mess you up, yet most evan­gel­i­cals prac­ti­cal­ly ignore the ditch of being too the­o­log­i­cal­ly con­ser­v­a­tive.

He goes on:

For instance, if the pro­fes­sor Larsen describes in his open­ing para­graphs didn’t real­ize that he would get a paper like Larsen’s stu­dent hand­ed in when he assigned an opin­ion piece on “tra­di­tion­al mar­riage,” then he or she was incred­i­bly naïve. Per­son­al­ly, I would nev­er assign a paper on abor­tion or evo­lu­tion in an intro-lev­el class, because I know doing so would basi­cal­ly mean con­demn­ing con­ser­v­a­tive evan­gel­i­cal stu­dents to do poor­ly. Many of them would sim­ply par­rot the stock argu­ments they’d heard from their lead­ers with very lit­tle reflec­tion or fresh argu­men­ta­tion of their own — and the inevitable bad grade would only feed the per­se­cu­tion com­plex, turn­ing me into yet anoth­er “sec­u­lar indoc­tri­na­tor.”

All I have to say in response to this is that I wish more pro­fes­sors were as wise as he. I’d like to order that para­graph to be read to every pro­fes­sor in Amer­i­ca once a year.

But the part I like best is this:

More imme­di­ate­ly, though, if con­ser­v­a­tive evan­gel­i­cals are not will­ing to aban­don their siege men­tal­i­ty, I would urge them to at least adopt the prac­tices that the New Tes­ta­ment authors rec­om­mend­ed to per­se­cut­ed com­mu­ni­ties: live qui­et­ly, seek to be at peace with all, respect author­i­ty, work hard — in short, keep the moral high ground. The sober advice of the Apos­tles has stood the test of time and will endure long after what­ev­er rad­i­cal preach­er is in the ascen­dant now is for­got­ten.

This is Bib­li­cal and good advice and should be the base­line for Chris­tians at sec­u­lar uni­ver­si­ties. If a uni­ver­si­ty actu­al­ly pre­vents you from obey­ing Christ, then by all means take a stand and deploy every peace­ful tool in your arse­nal to stymie them (this is to fol­low the exam­ple of the apos­tles — Acts 5:25–32 and Acts 16:36–39). But if a uni­ver­si­ty is mere­ly teach­ing you things you con­sid­er to be untrue, then suck it up, mas­ter the mate­ri­als, and excel aca­d­e­m­i­cal­ly (this is to fol­low the exam­ple of Daniel and his friends in Baby­lon — Daniel 1:17–20). In the long run you will accom­plish far more for the faith by get­ting good grades than by caus­ing lots of dis­rup­tions in class.

Kot­sko’s essay is worth read­ing and pon­der­ing (and so is the piece he is respond­ing to, No Chris­tian­i­ty Please, We’re Aca­d­e­mics).

As I said, he min­i­mizes a real prob­lem. Any­one who thinks that some pro­fes­sors do not seek to destroy the faith of stu­dents is sim­ply unin­formed, and any­one who does­n’t real­ize that huge swaths of uni­ver­si­ty cul­ture are hos­tile to evan­gel­i­cal sen­si­bil­i­ties has not been pay­ing atten­tion. But Kot­sko is right to point out that evan­gel­i­cal stu­dents often cre­ate their own prob­lems by allow­ing the evan­gel­i­cal sub­cul­ture to define their rela­tion­ship to the uni­ver­si­ty rather than allow­ing the Bible’s teach­ing to pre­vail.

Freedom of Association at Public Universities

Golden Gate bridge in the fogStan­ford law pro­fes­sor Michael McConnell recent­ly rep­re­sent­ed the Chris­t­ian Legal Soci­ety (CLS) in their case against San Fran­cis­co’s UC Hast­ings Col­lege of The Law before the U. S. Supreme Court. The CLS lost that case on a 5–4 vote (read the rul­ing). I’ve asked Pro­fes­sor McConnell to answer a few ques­tions about the rul­ing, and he has gra­cious­ly agreed to do so and to allow me to pub­lish his answers online.

Q: The court ruled 5–4 in favor of UC Hast­ings “all-com­ers” pol­i­cy. Was this a broad rul­ing affect­ing Chris­t­ian groups at pub­lic uni­ver­si­ties gen­er­al­ly or a rel­a­tive­ly nar­row rul­ing?

A: It was the most nar­row rul­ing pos­si­ble. The all-com­ers pol­i­cy on which the Court ruled is exceed­ing­ly unusu­al. The Court declined to rule on the more typ­i­cal sit­u­a­tion, where the school applies reli­gious nondis­crim­i­na­tion rules to reli­gious orga­ni­za­tions, thus deny­ing to reli­gious groups the free­dom enjoyed by most expres­sive orga­ni­za­tions of choos­ing their own lead­ers. The Court did not even rule on the all-com­ers pol­i­cy as actu­al­ly applied at Hast­ings, but only on an abstract and hypo­thet­i­cal ver­sion that applies across the board to all orga­ni­za­tions.

Q: So let’s say I’m a Chi Alpha or an Inter­var­si­ty direc­tor at some pub­lic uni­ver­si­ty. Should I be dis­cour­aged or alarmed?

A: You should be con­cerned, and try to work with your uni­ver­si­ty to pre­vent infringe­ments on your rights, because the Court’s deci­sion pro­vides no help to you.

Q: Did any parts of the rul­ing sur­prise you?

A: In the course of reject­ing CLS’s argu­ment, the Court gave a sur­pris­ing­ly nar­row inter­pre­ta­tion to free speech (pub­lic forum) prece­dents that I thought were firm­ly estab­lished law.

Q: You have no doubt read many blog posts, op-eds and news arti­cles sum­ma­riz­ing both the case and the court’s deci­sion. Are there any mis­un­der­stand­ings you would like to cor­rect?

A: Too many to list.

In case you’re won­der­ing, this case only affects pub­lic uni­ver­si­ties. Our min­istry at Stan­ford won’t be direct­ly affect­ed.

You can read lots of sum­maries of the ver­dict. A few of the more inter­est­ing ones:

The Hardest Other Culture To Learn From

James Petigru Boyce biography
After see­ing a favor­able men­tion by Andy Nasel­li, I read a fas­ci­nat­ing inter­view with Tom Net­tles, a schol­ar who wrote a biog­ra­phy of the Bap­tist leader James Boyce.

The inter­view­er asked Dr. Net­tles, “How would you respond to some­one who said he would nev­er read your book for the sim­ple fact that James P. Boyce was from the South and owned slaves?”

As a min­is­ter to col­lege stu­dents, I was curi­ous to see what he would say. Young peo­ple today are often eager to learn from every cul­ture but our own for pre­cise­ly the rea­sons implic­it in the ques­tion. The virtues of ear­li­er Amer­i­can or Euro­pean lead­ers are often swamped by their vices, and so col­lege stu­dents seem unable to appre­ci­ate the oth­er cul­ture that is our past. And they are par­tic­u­lar­ly prone to judge dead Chris­tians harsh­ly.

Dr. Net­tles’ answer is amaz­ing:

I would try to resist the pro­duc­tion of a long list of insults to the intel­li­gence of one so big­ot­ed, nar­row-mind­ed, unthink­ing and hyp­o­crit­i­cal as even to think such a thing. Employ­ment of such a prin­ci­ple would shut one off from the study of the Old Tes­ta­ment, vir­tu­al­ly all of the ancient cul­tures, Greek dom­i­nance of the intertes­ta­men­tal peri­od, the Roman Empire, the his­to­ry of Eng­land until the first half of the nine­teenth cen­tu­ry, the his­to­ry of colo­nial Amer­i­ca, the lives of Thomas Jef­fer­son, George Wash­ing­ton, the entire ante-bel­lum South and so forth. If one believes that the union of church and state has brought untold suf­fer­ing and evil to both church and state as well as soci­ety in gen­er­al (which I do), and feels that avoid­ing the doc­u­ments pro­duced in that con­text is a moral neces­si­ty for a Chris­t­ian and that aware­ness of their view­points on the­ol­o­gy, pol­i­tics, phi­los­o­phy, and soci­ety are rep­re­hen­si­ble and unwor­thy of the intel­lec­tu­al and spir­i­tu­al life of a Chris­t­ian (which I don’t), then avoid the study of the Ger­man Ref­or­ma­tion, the Eng­lish Ref­or­ma­tion and all west­ern medieval cul­ture. Bring to void any ben­e­fit from the study of Augus­tine, Anselm and Aquinas. Know noth­ing of the City of God, the Proslo­gion, and the Sum­ma. If one stud­ies his­to­ry and gains inter­est in per­sons and nations sim­ply on the basis of per­son­al moral approval of the sub­ject or the era in which he lived, he prob­a­bly can find jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for the study of noth­ing and spend his life con­grat­u­lat­ing him­self that he is igno­rant of every­thing. But if one wants to see the oper­a­tions of the mind of a high­ly gift­ed, intel­lec­tu­al­ly and moral­ly dri­ven per­son, whose flaws are obvi­ous and will not hurt us and whose strengths are mas­sive and will inspire and help us, then go for Boyce. If one wants to see the way in which the­o­log­i­cal and bib­li­cal com­mit­ments tran­scend the abil­i­ty of any indi­vid­ual to facil­i­tate the moral, intel­lec­tu­al, and spir­i­tu­al lofti­ness engen­dered in the study of divine rev­e­la­tion, study Boyce. If one want to see how that same com­mit­ment, nev­er­the­less, rais­es a com­mon sin­ner such as we all are to uncom­mon heights of self-sac­ri­fice inspired by a vision of the divine glo­ry, study Boyce. If one wants to see how Chris­t­ian char­ac­ter con­stant­ly nour­ished by increased knowl­edge of the truth as it is in Jesus Christ can inter­rupt the nat­ur­al ten­den­cy to bit­ter­ness and resent­ment and seething hos­til­i­ty fos­tered by the crush­ing destruc­tion and snarling ridicule of deeply-held con­vic­tion and unfet­tered com­mit­ment to a cause and trans­form the soul to the sweet­ness of a rec­on­ciled and rec­on­cil­ing pos­ture of mind, study Boyce.

Empha­sis mine.

Wow. So yeah, learn from the past. Even dead slave own­ers were not with­out some wis­dom and virtue. And remem­ber — your descen­dants will judge you far more harsh­ly than you imag­ine.

Testing My Faith

PositiveSee­ing Kevin DeY­oung’s blog post today remind­ed me that I have anoth­er essay I’ve nev­er uploaded to my dig­i­tal library.

Every once in a while I talk with a stu­dent who’s not sure if they’re real­ly a Chris­t­ian, and so I wrote Test­ing My Faith — Being Con­fi­dent of My Sal­va­tion — it’s a med­i­ta­tion on some pas­sages in 1st John that help peo­ple dis­cern where they’re at with Jesus.

Hope you find it help­ful. As always, feed­back is appre­ci­at­ed.

I Am Now Twice The Age Of A Freshman

Toomy
Today I am twice the age of an incom­ing col­lege fresh­man. My stu­dents are in trou­ble now, because age and treach­ery always trump youth and exu­ber­ance.1

The scales are tilt­ed even more in my favor than you might sup­pose. It’s not just that I’m twice their age — I’m far old­er in terms of adult expe­ri­ence. Let’s say that you begin expe­ri­enc­ing the world as an adult at the age of 16 (ignore the howls of laugh­ter you hear in the back­ground). Then most fresh­men have expe­ri­enced life as a grown up for two years. I, on the oth­er hand, have spent twen­ty years in that same state.

Twen­ty is ten times two. So although I am mere­ly twice the bio­log­i­cal age of fresh­men, I am TEN TIMES as expe­ri­enced at think­ing like an adult. Advan­tage: me.

And if you think about it from a pure­ly legal per­spec­tive, the fresh­men have mere months of expe­ri­ence as an eigh­teen-year-old. I’ve been a legal adult for some­thing like 50 times longer than them.

So there. Hap­py birth­day to me.

—-

1That’s sort of a quote. There are a lot of vari­ants of it online.

And Then What Happened?

Warriors ...I got back from a trip yes­ter­day and was greet­ed by my three-year old son. He had some­thing to tell me about preschool:

He said, “Matthew hit me today.”

So I said, “Real­ly? And then what hap­pened?”

He said, “I hit him.”

Rea­son­able enough for a three-year old. And around this time the teacher is prob­a­bly about to get involved, and I’m pret­ty curi­ous about what she did. “What hap­pened after that?”

He said, “He hit me again.”

Uh-oh. This might not be a very good sto­ry. “And then what hap­pened?”

He got a big grin on his face. “I tum­bled him.”

I start­ed to grin back. It was part­ly a response to his grin, part­ly amuse­ment at his inven­tive use of the word “tum­ble”, and part­ly pride in my war­rior son.

“I see. And then what hap­pened?”

“Noth­ing.”

I burst into laugh­ter. So did Paula. What would you have done?

Scheduling a Quarter or Semester

Stan­ford 2010 Spring Quar­ter
Some­thing I need to do every quar­ter is plan out our Chi Alpha events, but there are few cal­en­dars in the for­mat I pre­fer. I like see­ing all the weeks of the quar­ter stacked on top of one anoth­er.

So I made a lit­tle tool that gen­er­ates a week­ly cal­en­dar for an arbi­trary date range (such as a quar­ter or a semes­ter). Just put the first day of class and the last day of finals in and the pro­gram should do the rest.

A fea­ture I’m par­tic­u­lar­ly proud of is that you can export the result­ing cal­en­dar to .doc (Microsoft Word) for­mat so you can cus­tomize it with your own events.

The script is ugly but func­tion­al. The result­ing cal­en­dars, on the oth­er hand, are pret­ty and func­tion­al. 🙂

An Easter Ballad

I know what you’re think­ing. You’re think­ing, “When I was a kid what I
need­ed for East­er was a bas­ket filled with can­dy. But what do I need
for East­er now that I’m all grown up?”

And the answer is: you need a bal­lad. You did­n’t know you need­ed a
bal­lad until just now, but you do.

Hap­py East­er!

Now on the first day of the week, at ear­ly dawn, the women went to the tomb, tak­ing the aro­mat­ic spices they had pre­pared. They found that the stone had been rolled away from the tomb, but when they went in, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were per­plexed about this, sud­den­ly two men stood beside them in daz­zling attire. The women were ter­ri­bly fright­ened and bowed their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the liv­ing among the dead? He is not here, but has been raised! Remem­ber how he told you, while he was still in Galilee, that the Son of Man must be deliv­ered into the hands of sin­ful men, and be cru­ci­fied, and on the third day rise again.” Luke 24:1–7, NET

Challenges For Chi Alpha at the University of Vermont

We Can Try
Our new Chi Alpha chap­ter at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Ver­mont is run­ning into some prob­lems get­ting rec­og­nized as a stu­dent group on cam­pus.

Accord­ing to an arti­cle in the Ver­mont Cyn­ic (the cam­pus paper):

SGA does not rec­og­nize clubs that dis­crim­i­nate. How­ev­er, some say they are about to.
Chi Alpha’s con­sti­tu­tion states “[All offi­cers] will pro­fess Chris­t­ian faith as expressed in the Nicene Creed, and they will sup­port the mis­sion and val­ues of nation­al Chi Alpha Cam­pus Ministries.”
Claire Chevri­er, SGA Stu­dent Activ­i­ties Chair, who is in charge of review­ing club­s’ con­sti­tu­tions for dis­crep­an­cies, said she was con­cerned about Chi Alpha’s pro­posed con­sti­tu­tion.
“When I saw that state­ment about the offi­cers I said ‘red flag, that doesn’t seem right,’” Chevri­er said. “I ini­tial­ly thought they would have to change that to abide by our dis­crim­i­na­tion pol­i­cy, but they were pas­sion­ate about keep­ing it in there because they were wor­ried about the longevi­ty of the club.”

It is prop­er for reli­gious orga­ni­za­tions to have reli­gious require­ments for lead­ers. I don’t get why some peo­ple don’t get this. Requir­ing a Chris­t­ian orga­ni­za­tion to allow non-Chris­tians to lead it is like requir­ing a church to hire a non-Chris­t­ian pas­tor. It’s ludi­crous.

UPDATE: On Tues­day, March 30th the stu­dent gov­ern­ment vot­ed unan­i­mous­ly to approve Chi Alpha at UVM with­out requir­ing any changes to their con­sti­tu­tion. Woot!

The Best Paragraph I’ve Read In Weeks

Orange smileI stum­bled upon this lit­tle gem today:

Yes­ter­day I spoke ill of Glenn Beck on my Twit­ter feed. It kin­da ruf­fled some peo­ple, I think. I will not be issu­ing a “What I real­ly meant” tweet. 🙂 What I meant when I said Beck is an “idol­a­trous fear­mon­ger” is that he wor­ships idols and mon­gers fear. (source: the excel­lent Jared Wil­son)

I laughed out loud for a good thir­ty sec­onds when I read that. It’s refresh­ing to see some­one stand by their words even when they annoy peo­ple. It’s a rare form of courage in our cul­ture.

Plus I love the phrase “he wor­ships idols and mon­gers fear.” Bril­liant. Glenn Beck fans and foes alike should admire such wit.