The news in this post is already way past old, but as it is tangentially concerned with the CRC and as I am ordained in the CRC I thought I would put my fork in on this item.
The following links give the skinny on the progression of the controversy between the Calvin College faculty and the Calvin College Board of Trustees (BOT).
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/08/calvin_college_has_had_to_conf.html
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/08/calvin_college_professors_call.html
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/10/calvin_college_agrees_to_furth.html
The short version is that the Calvin BOT sent out a letter to the faculty impressing upon them that they were not to teach anything that could be construed as gay advocacy. One can only presume that the BOT sent out such a letter because they had reason to believe that such a letter was necessary. Upon receipt of the letter the faculty took exception to what they believed was a heavy handed draconian squelching of their academic freedom. As such the official faculty organization squealed loudly under such oppression. As a result the BOT, while not rescinding their original dicta, did agree to examine how CRC church teachings relate to academic freedom.
Just a few observations,
1.) Three Cheers for the BOT for doing the right thing.
2.) The cry for Academic freedom is a smoke screen. Would the faculty senate have squealed about Academic freedom if the BOT had sent a memo to the faculty impressing upon them that they were not to teach anything that could be construed as polygamy advocacy? Necrophilia advocacy? Bestiality advocacy? The squealing sound one hears from the faculty is indicative that the letter hit its mark. No doubt certain faculty members were pushing gay advocacy. So, this has very little to do with academic freedom and a great deal to do with code pink making inroads at Calvin.
3.) The gay advocacy thing is not limited to Calvin College in the CRC. CRC publications like “The Banner” is forever subtly engaging in gay advocacy. Maybe someone ought to send a letter to them.
4.) This is the way that change always happens in a denomination. Whatever change that is desired to be pursued is first brought up in some official format. That official format is then officially censored. After being censored people who are sympathetic to those who first brought it up start screaming that, “We need to have a conversation about this.” The ensuing conversation then becomes the thin wedge that is used to eventually pry the desired change into place. This sometimes takes years to happen. In my estimation elements within the CRC, having established Women in office, are now on the next campaign to legitimize “Christian” homosexuality.
5.) In my estimation, were the BOT really serious about this they would summarily fire any faculty member who, privately or publicly, was engaged in gay advocacy. Shoot, being fired for such a reason would be a badge of honor in the current academic climate and would assure the fired person of another job within days.
6.)Former Calvin academic and well known historian George Marsden felt he had to weigh into the Calvin imbroglio cautioning “against making lists of positions faculty may not advocate. Militarism and abortion could also be considered confessional issues.” Marsden went on to say,
“There are too many possible issues. You’re stirring up controversy you don’t have to have.”
People need to realize that all because Marsden speaks the world need not listen. Marsden has been significantly wrong at times in his academic career (see Gary North’s Political Polytheism) and there is no reason to think that he is not wrong once again.
I would note though that abortion certainly is a confessional issue. Would Dr. Marsden contend that it is acceptable for faculty members to be abortion advocates?
7.) In a cautionary word to parents who care what I think, I would strongly advise against sending your children to Calvin college. First, their economics department, philosophy department, and their sciences are all messed over, shot through with non Christian presuppositions. Second, the campus life leaves much to be desired. If you’re going to send your children to Calvin you might as well spend that money by sending them to a top flight “secular” school.
The issue of homosexuality and the CRC is one that I suspect we will be seeing more of in years to come in the CRC.
Bret,
I agree with you in not sending your kids to Calvin… I sent one thinking this to be a good thing.
The fact of the matter is that it has been a good thing on many fronts but not the obvious.
Had he not been well informed of why he believed/thought what he believes/thinks he would possibly have succumbed to the “brain washing” of the God hating drivel they put forth as a regular course at Calvin.
However,
1)it has challenged his thinking! If he did not know why he thought the way he does on a topic it caused a phone call to dear ole’ dad or Mark… to get assistance in why he thinks what he thinks.
2) He met his wife (to be) there… as only God could’ve brought them together. Through that relationship I’ve been able to assist her in her thinking on various subjects/topics… and in this way growing the Covenant… go into all the world!
It is however a shame that the “covenant children” being sent there are being forced to “go through the fire” after a fashion. I can name at least one covenant kid who showed up in far better shape spiritually and doctrinally than he is leaving. It is a sad thing my friend… sad and a real shame!!!
That said… kudos to the BOT!!! I hope they mark a line in stone and stop this attrocity at least… they’ve seemingly already let the elephant of Theistic Evolution and women in the pulpit/elder across the line.
Bob