Why I wrote the Pastoral Letter to the Cornerstone Board of Trustees

This video delves into the passion and concern that inspired and shaped the letter, as well as that of my collaborators in the project, Pastor Noah Filipiak and Dr. David Turner (thank you both).  This is from the heart and deeply rooted in the valuable education I received from 94-98 and 2000-01 at Cornerstone University.

"A singular focus on preparing students for meaningful jobs and careers" would be the death of Christian Higher Education - A response to the essay by Cornerstone University's President Moreno-Riaño on Fox News

 

Here's what American universities should teach instead of activism Industry and moral skills are essential for our students and the future of our country By Gerson Moreno-Riaño Fox News Published July 27, 2024

Honestly, when my alma mater, Cornerstone University sent me an email touting this essay by President Moreno-Riaño and asking me to share it on social media, I don't think they had this in mind.  However, the excellent professors of the Humanities Department, the one that President Moreno-Riaño demolished this year {The Cornerstone University I graduated from is no more, my daughter won't be going there.} me how to think, so that's what I'll do.

{The Fox News essay is below in italics, my commentary will be in brackets [and bold]}

Colleges and universities are failing our country. This seems to be the growing consensus among an increasingly large percentage of Americans and business leaders.

[From the very start this essay bothers me a great deal.  This is being written by the President of Cornerstone University, I had great respect for this university's past presidents, but I have no respect for the attitude of President Moreno-Riaño which in this essay is being derived from business concerns and survey results.  Why?  Because Cornerstone University is supposed to be a Christian organization.  That's why it was founded, that was its mission for generations, and that is one of the main reasons why most of its students chose to go there, it brought me there in 1994.  A Christian organization, be it a church, a publishing house, a homeless shelter, or a school, is not supposed to be swimming with the current of our culture, business world, and politics, instead we are to serve a different master, on a different mission.  As an essay about secular Higher Education this opening line would still be disturbing as it frames the conversation about higher education as an ordinary business, which it is not, but coming from the President of Cornerstone University, it is ominous indeed.]

The recent Gallup and Lumina Foundation report shows that an increasing number of Americans have little to no confidence in higher education. For the first time since Gallup begin to measure the confidence level in higher education, America is "now nearly equally divided among those who have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence (36%), some confidence (32%), or little or no confidence (32%) in higher education."  

This finding represents a seismic shift from 2015, when almost 60% of Americans had a high level of confidence and 10% had little or none. 

[Opinion surveys reflect what the people who respond to them are ingesting, not necessarily what is real.  It isn't a coincidence that Fox News and similar outlets run stories and opinion pieces attacking higher education (and public education in general) on a regular basis.  Perhaps this steady drumbeat of doom and gloom has something to do with the changing attitudes found in the survey?]

Many business leaders equally reflect the growing lack of confidence. In a recent interview, Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase CEO, criticized colleges and universities for the little focus they place on helping graduates find good employment. 

This unwillingness, so argues Dimon, not only places an exorbitant amount of pressure on businesses to train their employees – something pre-employment education should do – but also disenfranchises large sectors of society.  

Kiersten Barnet, executive director of New York Jobs CEO Council – a group of 30 of America’s top CEOs and their companies – was perhaps more direct than Dimon, stating: "When you think about what you need to do a job, it is skills. It's not a degree."

[I don't know Jamie Dimon or Kiersten Barnet, so this is nothing personal about either or them, but is the goal of higher education to please the CEO of a giant corporation or the executive director of an organization representing our nation's largest business interests?  Again, this may legitimately be one of the goals of secular higher education, to bolster the economy by providing workers suitable to what businesses want, but nowhere in this essay is the question asked, let alone answered, "What kind of students ought Christian Higher Education be aiming to form?  What role does Christian discipleship play in the process of educating young people?  How can our professors be mentors to students, not simply teaching them job skills but how to mature into God-honoring adults?"]

America’s growing doubts about colleges and universities are rooted in a list of causes too long to detail here, but it is worth noting that the lack of confidence is connected to certain factors. The most notable of these being what colleges and universities teach and do not teach. 

In Gallup’s report, of the Americans who register little or no confidence, almost 40%, criticize colleges and universities "for not teaching relevant skills, for college degrees not meaning much, or for graduates not being able to find employment."

Indeed, a new survey released this week by Cengage Group found that 55% of recent graduates said their degree programs did not prepare them for the workforce, with 70% saying basic AI training should be taught. These are, in essence, the same concerns of business leaders like Dimon and Barnet.

[Basic AI training?  God help us.  So much for being taught how to think biblically.] 

Gallup’s report goes a step further, however. Slightly over 40% of Americans in this same low to no confidence group think that our colleges and universities "are pushing certain political agendas." In short, many believe that higher education is miseducating our students. Rather than preparing for careers and a productive life, colleges and universities appear to be preparing students to be radical activists.  

[I don't disagree that today's students could use less politics in their lives, so could the millions of adults who spend way to much time engaged in the bashing of "them" and uncritical praising of "us."  Politics is a drug, much of America is addicted, and it isn't healthy.  But is the answer to focus on job skills and give up on the Humanities??  Such a notion would have horrified our ancestors in the faith, men and women who were deeply educated in languages, art, history, philosophy, music, and more.]

Further, the miseducation of our students as it relates to gainful employment – "good jobs" – is a serious problem since it robs from our students the opportunity for a fuller humanity. Jobs and compensation are essential for our humanity. But good jobs and good compensation are even more essential for a flourishing humanity and, by extension, a flourishing society. 

Amid its many laudable goals, higher education must focus on preparing students for good jobs and compensation. To do any less is to perpetrate a great injustice on our students and our future. 

[A good job is better than a bad job.  Is that all higher education should be about?  If people earn more money will they have better lives, will society be uplifted if our graduates have career success?  The answers to such questions aren't simple, at least they shouldn't be.  The university that I graduated from in the 1990's had a much more holistic approach to the flourishing of its students, both while they attended and preparing them for the future.]

When students are miseducated to become radical activists, the injustice perpetrated is even greater and the damage is even more corrosive. Students are duped into believing that radical activism adds value to their own life and to society when in fact it is the opposite. Such pursuits rob from students the exercise of their productive full potential, thus undermining their good as well as that of all society.

[That is a really bold statement, one worthy of a pundit or politician, but one that should be unworthy of a university president.  You know what adds value to life?  Having a purpose greater than earning money.  You know what uplifts society?  People willing to sacrifice for causes they deem greater than themselves.  I'm too young to remember college campuses in the 1960's, but would our country really be better off if students there had focused on job skills and not worried about Civil Rights or the Vietnam War?  Should students stick their heads in the sand and shut up about the injustices they perceive in the world?  You know what else is radical?  Following Jesus.  Not saying that you are a Christian, but really and truly following Jesus, living like him.  Thinking and feeling like Jesus, trying to echo his passion and compassion.  Radical activism, when propelled by truly Christ-honoring worldview, is the stuff of legends.  If you seek to starve the activism you don't like (because it is blue not red, or red not blue), you destroy the activism that the world truly needs alongside it.]

To re-ignite public and business confidence in their work, colleges and universities must have a singular focus on preparing students for meaningful jobs and careers. This begins with implementing industry-ready skills-based educational outcomes for their general education curriculum and all academic majors. 

[A singular focus on jobs and careers is the death of Christian Higher Education.]

Colleges and universities should also require internships or apprenticeships for the honing of soft and industry-specifics skills as well as to create employment opportunities. And colleges and universities should require all academic departments to have industry and business partnerships for the continual refinement of curricula and preparation of students for the market.

While there may be additional market-related refinements that could be implemented, there is no doubt that the above initiatives would go a long way to re-igniting our confidence in higher education.

[I understand why business leaders would cheer this essay, workers ready to do their job is what they want the most, but don't we want more out of education than job skills?  Aren't we trying to foster holistic human beings and not just employees that help keep corporate costs low and profits high?]

 The focus on jobs and market preparation must also consider and integrate the enduring questions and answers to what it means to be human. This is what the humanities used to address.

Today, much of the humanities are characterized by a turn toward a contrarianism and deconstructionism that emphasize moral ambiguity and skepticism. Such an approach has resulted in generations of students who at best are sophisticated critics and at worst are radical activists. These students are too often unable to discern, affirm and defend truth and what it means to be human. 

A case in point are the recent protests in which students were clearly unable to discern good from evil. Some college presidents also fared no better. 

Colleges and universities must develop and implement moral skills educational outcomes for their general education curriculum and all academic majors that prepare all students to discern and affirm what is true, beautiful and good.  

[And how will Cornerstone University's students develop these skills without a Humanities Department and with only part-time adjunct professors teaching these classes??  That President Moreno-Riaño has chosen to publicly rail against the Humanities Departments of other unspecified universities while gutting that of his own, one that had been both high class and high quality for generations, is deeply upsetting to alumni such as myself, truly it is heartbreaking.]

All students should also have a significant service requirement during each year of college that is a prerequisite for graduation. This service requirement would be connected to the moral skills outcomes allowing students to apply and refine their moral reasoning and judgment in preparation for life beyond college.

[One brief moment of agreement.  My cross-cultural ministry experience, a month in Guatemala, was a life-changing positive experience.]

Our colleges and universities must educate students with industry skills that position them for great market contributions. This education must also include moral skills that position our students for living a great life characterized by truth, beauty and goodness.  

[At the end of the essay, the idea of truth, beauty, and goodness as part of education is briefly mentioned, but only after declaring that Humanities Departments are what is wrong with higher education, and only in the context of what has happened to Cornerstone University under his tenure.  It rings hollow.]

Both industry and moral skills are essential for our students and for the future of our country, and a serious focus on these would go a long way in re-igniting the confidence in America’s colleges and universities.

[It is sad for me to say it, but I don't have any confidence in Cornerstone University under its current leadership.  I know that good people remain, although many good people have been fired or forced out since President Moreno-Riaño took over, but this current direction is watching a train-wreck in progress.]

To learn much more about how Cornerstone University has been reduced to a shell of its former glory (I don't say that flippantly) through censorship, firing, and politics, please listen to the podcast of Pastor Noah Filipiak a fellow Cornerstone graduate as he interview Dr. David Turner, former professor at the seminary: The Flip Side podcast

The Cornerstone University I graduated from is no more, my daughter won't be going there.

 

I'll admit, that's a bold title for this post, especially with my daughter only entering the fourth grade this fall, but it is true just the same.  I graduated from Cornerstone University in 1998 (and again in 2001) with majors in Religion and Social Studies, and minors in English, Philosophy, and Greek.  By far the greatest asset of that education were the men and women who taught my classes, professors like Mayers, Smith, Brew, Cole, Fabisch, and Webster, to name a few.  If you attended Cornerstone in the 1980's or 1990's you'd know those names, they were giants in their fields, people of deep knowledge and wisdom and abundant Christian character, I was honored to be their student.

Whomever this generation's version of these fine men and women had been up until recently, they're not there anymore.  In the fall of 2024, there won't be a single full-time humanities professor at Cornerstone University, not one.  Adjuncts, it seems, a much much cheaper option, will teach the few classes that are still required of undergrads, but majoring in the humanities, in any of them, is not going to happen.

At this point, news coverage of the purges of long-term employees is sparce, and the spin from the administration about "market oriented changes" doesn't tell much of the story.  The best article I've been able to find is this: Cornerstone University fires tenured professors and terminates all humanities and arts programs - by John Fea at Currentpub.com, June 16th, 2024 it paints a horrific picture.

From the article: Last Spring, ten Cornerstone faculty, including Matt Bonzo, either left Cornerstone or were forced out by the administration. This is the same administration, led by president Gerson Moreno-Riaño, that received a 42-6 vote of no confidence by the faculty in October 2021.

Last week, Cornerstone made more cuts. The humanities and music programs were eliminated. Seven tenured faculty were fired, including Michael Stevens. As I write, there are no full time faculty in history, literature, writing, languages, philosophy, or theology. If its website is any indication, Cornerstone actually still believes it is a “liberal arts college.”

Current students in the former Humanities Department, received an email this summer with the following:

A small number of majors will be merged into larger market-aligned programs for future students.

A small number of majors will be discontinued for new students even as we offer teach-outs to all current students.

A recent press release from the Board of Trustees highlighted its emphasis on "high demand programs" while offering this crumb:

Cornerstone will also offer new online programs in data analytics, counseling for ministry and Biblical studies.

The full-time professors that I spent hour after hour with during me years of study prepared me to be a pastor by teaching me, not what to think, but how to think.  They rightly didn't care if my thinking was liberal or conservative, only that it was Biblical {meaning derived from honoring and studying God's Word, built upon that foundation}.  Cheaper adjuncts and online classes will not produce the same education, it just won't.  I don't doubt the dedication of the men and women working in those less than ideal conditions, but they are indeed swimming against the stream.  Being an adjunct may work for some of them, but it will be far from ideal for most, especially the students.

I understand the financial pressures that Christian Higher Education institutions are under, but this is not the answer.  Eliminating the Humanities is not the answer, relying upon adjuncts is not the answer.  As someone who taught for ten years without benefits, I can assure you that denying your employees health insurance and other benefits to save money is NOT a pattern of Christian stewardship that we should applaud.

In addition to this bad news, today I learned that in the fall of 2023 Cornerstone University invited the ardent conspiracy theorist and "Christian" Nationalist Eric Metaxas to headline a "wisdom conversation," a mark of a serious lack of wisdom by the administration in making that choice.  In recent years Metaxas has said and done many things which have been not only un-Christian, but anti-Christian.  Had I been in MI at the time, I would not have attended his talk to hear from a "#1 New York Times best selling author," I would have been standing at the edge of campus holding a sign calling upon the administration to repent from the folly of embracing Metaxas' Culture War-fueled abandonment of democracy.  I am ashamed that my alma mater celebrated Eric Metaxas. 

SOLD-OUT WISDOM CONVERSATIONS COMMUNITY EVENT PRESENTED BY CORNERSTONE UNIVERSITY SPURS AUDIENCE TOWARD BOLDNESS IN CHRIST NEWS OCT. 10, 2023

My post about Metaxas from 12/20: The downward spiral of Bonhoeffer biographer Eric Metaxas

This has been a rough day, I knew that things were bad at Cornerstone, that the trend line wasn't good, but I had no idea that the University I graduated from had fallen this far.  My prayers will be for the professors, staff, and students who remain, and for the slim hope that the spirit that inspired the Grand Rapids School of Bible and Music isn't as dead as it seems.

When the storm is raging at sea, ask a sailor for help, not a taxidermist: How can we navigate the COVID-19 pandemic?

Given some of the private conversations I've been having, let me issue a clarification: I do not now, nor have I previously, had issue with those who have different opinions from myself {unless they be outright immoral views, i.e. antisemitism from anyone or heretical views, i.e. denial of the resurrection of Jesus from a self-professed Christian}. As a firm believer in ecumenism within the Church {treating non-Baptist Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ}, I take seriously the need to separate the Majors from the Minors {something I was taught by excellent professors at Cornerstone University like Andy Smith and Dr. Ronald Mayers}. That is, to see what is essential/eternal vs. what is opinion/preference/cultural/changing. The Majors are worth striving/fighting/dying for, the Minors are not even worth losing a friend over. I thus have Christian brother and sisters whom I love and respect who are Republicans, some who are Democrats, and some who couldn't vote for either. I have friends who believe in public education, those who champion private education, and those who home-school.

That being said, in regards to the current COVID-19 pandemic. If you believe that the government should re-open the economy now, that is an opinion based (hopefully) upon currently available facts. If you believe the government should wait, or re-open with caution, that is also an opinion based (hopefully) upon currently available facts. Americans clearly disagree about this issue, and that's ok, it is part of being citizens in a republic with free speech rights.

What our rights as Americans (and for myself, the superseding rights and responsibilities of being a Christian) do not grant us are: (1) Our own set of 'facts', or the right to ignore the facts when they don't suit us. (2) Expertise in areas that we do not possess education, training, and experience. For example: I have opinions about war, and have formed them having read widely on the subject of both ancient and modern war, its methods, purposes, and affects. My opinions are not based on nothing, but I recognize their limitations. Thus, if a combat veteran, a professional soldier, has an opinion, I will give it added weight; his/her training and experience has earned it. When the topic is Education, I am on firmer ground, having spent ten years as a public school teacher and having the education/training that proceeded that. I will thus weigh the opinion of other teachers as being similar to my own. Lastly, when the topic is Religion, specifically Christianity (more specifically Protestantism, American Protestantism, Baptists, and finally American Baptists) it is precisely within my education, training, and experience to share opinions that ought to be given more weight {A measure of common courtesy and decency that we reciprocate topic by topic and allow those with education/training/experience in the issue at hand to be shown respect} (3) Therefore, in the case of a global pandemic, such as COVID-19, our go-to response ought to be to give more weight to the opinions (based hopefully on solid facts) of ER physicians, epidemiologists, public health officials, and various others whose education/training/experience helps elevate their viewpoints toward being more consequential than that of the average citizen. Have medical professionals disagreed about COVID-19? Certainly, and that too is to be expected from such a complicated issue whose details continue to evolve as new studies and new data come to light (and old ones are revised or proven to be accurate). What do we do when the experts can't agree? The same thing you do when one mechanic tells you that your car needs an expensive repair and another says there is an easy fix. Look beneath the surface, seek additional opinions, check to see if your own bias is affecting your judgment about who to trust.

What this perspective doesn't do: Make everyone who isn't an expert in a field shut up and obey. That's not the point at all, hopefully it isn't what you're thinking while reading this. My point is not elitist, not by any stretch, it does not require an Ivy League education to become and expert, just a real one.

What this perspective does do: Allow those who have the best chance of being correct on an issue (thanks to education/training/experience, this do matter) to rise above those who have the least chance of being right on an issue.

When the plane I'm on is in danger of crashing, I want a pilot to be in charge, not a preacher. When faced with an angry bear in the woods, I'd rather have a park ranger next to me than a stock broker. When I need to understand something about God, let me look to someone who has dedicated his/her life to the service of God. And when people are dying of a new disease by the thousands, let me first turn to the doctors who has chosen to spend their lives trying to heal the sick.

God bless you all, I know our viewpoints on regarding COVID-19 are far ranging, and that animosity has been dangerously boiling up in our political life as a nation. Please, we can do better, we have to try.

The fault in an argument about the Catholic Church firing a gay teacher

 Below is the text of an article written by Ellen Kobe, a professed Catholic.  I will intersperse my response to her argumentation (not the question of whether or not a Christian school should hire/fire any particular staff member per se) throughout using brackets and bold: {Like this}  This is not a question of what ought to be legal in America regarding employment, but rather what moral principles ought to guide any institution/organization which claims to be following the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Ellen Kobe has charged the Church with "repulsive" "bigotry", but on what  basis?

Ellen Kobe is an associate producer on CNN's social publishing team. She is a 2009 graduate of Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School. The views expressed here are solely those of the author.

Why a Jesuit School was right in refusing to fire a gay teacher

(CNN)Catholics in my hometown of Indianapolis are in the midst of a culture war -- a battle between church leadership and some of its parishioners that could be played out in other communities if it hasn't already.
Last month, news broke that the Archdiocese of Indianapolis would no longer recognize my alma mater, Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School, as a Catholic school. Why? The Archdiocese insisted the school dismiss a longtime teacher who is in a civilly-recognized, same-sex marriage, a statement from the school said.
The archdiocese also released a statement saying: "This issue is not about sexual orientation; rather, it is about our expectation that all personnel inside a Catholic school -- who are ministers of the faith -- abide by all Church teachings, including the nature of marriage."  {An important question: What moral standard ought a Christian school/charity/church require of its non-ordained personnel?  We ought to expect those who have taken ordination vows to uphold a higher moral standard (sadly we are too often disappointed) but what about people for whom their work is more akin to a job than a calling?  The expectation of the Catholic Church, at least regarding school teachers, is that they support Church teaching with the way they live their lives.  If this is unreasonable, are there any standards at all that the Church could enforce without being accused of imposing morality upon its employees?}
Brebeuf firmly pushed back, saying this "highly capable and qualified teacher" will continue to teach here.
Brebeuf's actions protected this employee and other LGBTQ members of its community by sending the message: You are welcome here; you are safe here. On my social media feeds, it was a day of celebration among the Brebeuf community and local Catholics. I saw only positive messages about the decision.  {This is not a moral argument, of any kind, let alone one pertaining to what Christianity ought to be.  Social media opinion is the last place we should turn to gauge a question of theology...Secondly, in order to be "welcome" and "safe" within the Church, the Church must accept/celebrate the choices made by people?  All choices, regardless of what they are, or just the choices being celebrated here?  What happened to the idea of the Church as a place for sinners seeking repentance and depending upon grace?}
But the mood took a turn just days later when nearby Cathedral High School was faced with the same command by the Archdiocese regarding a teacher in a same-sex marriage. Cathedral decided to dismiss, not support, its teacher.
There was resounding anger, heartbreak and disappointment from members of the Cathedral community on social media. It's not lost on me that my social media feeds could be reinforcing my own beliefs or that those who believe these employees should've been fired aren't voicing their opinions. {At least she sees the danger of living in a self-reinforcing bubble.  Again, social media feeds have ZERO to do with what is morally acceptable for a church that claims allegiance to Jesus Christ.  Christianity is NOT a democracy, nor even a representative republic.  It is a benevolent dictatorship; one founded by, directed by, ruled by, and in service to, Jesus Christ.  What we think, how we feel, what we want, is immaterial compared to this question: What promotes holiness and righteousness?  What brings glory to God and empowers the Gospel to save the Lost?}  Nonetheless, there is a distinct fissure in the way many practicing Catholics feel about the LGBTQ community versus how the Church's leaders believe we should treat them.  {Has the Church in the past, and in the present, treated some sins as "acceptable" while harshly condemning others?  Absolutely.  This is human failure, our sinful nature and weakness in action.  At the same time, "the way many practicing Catholics feel" is once again NOT a theological/moral argument but an appeal to numerical support.  Might the majority, or even a vocal minority, be theologically/morally correct on an issue and the Church's leadership wrong?  Certainly, but not on the basis of, "this is how we feel", instead the question must hinge upon a proper understanding of the Word of God, an appeal never made in this opinion piece, nor even hinted at.}
The stark contrast in these schools' decisions is just one of reasons I strongly identify with the Jesuit philosophy. When I think of my Catholic identity, nearly all of it stems from the values instilled in me at Brebeuf.
The Jesuit tradition focuses on the education of the person as a whole, emphasizing these five virtues: being open to growth, intellectually competent, loving, religious and committed to promoting justice. These "grad at grad" values, as the Jesuits call them, might sound like a hokey mission statement, but they were taken seriously at Brebeuf. They weren't just written on hallway walls, T-shirts and in the school handbook, they were preached and exemplified by each of our teachers on a daily basis. Living out these qualities wasn't simply a goal, it was a duty.
It is the last of these principles -- committed to promoting justice -- that launched me into a career in journalism. When my teachers saw I was interested in writing, they didn't just teach me how to write better. They encouraged me to write for the greater good.  {The Greater Good!  Absolutely, but on what basis is the Greater Good to be determined?  Hopefully not social media support, nor the whims of the culture at large.  Surely Ignatius Loyola and Francis Xavier had some objective standard in mind built upon the Word of God, Apostolic teaching, and Church tradition.  The Greater Good cannot blow where the wind takes it, it must be anchored or it will twist about endlessly and be capable of justifying anything.}
When Brebeuf defied the Archdiocese's demand, I thought of the "grad at grad" moral standards that Brebeuf is living out and which the Archdiocese sorely lacks.  {This is a high-handed claim, the Archdiocese lacks a moral standard, but the portion of the Jesuits in question have one?}
The Archdiocese is unfairly targeting members of the LGBT community, bigotry {Christianity (as Judaism before it) is inherently bigoted.  Let that sink in.  The Gospel of Jesus Christ claims to be the sole path to God, the only means of salvation, and the necessary answer for every man, woman, and child who has ever lived.  It condemns as false all other paths, whether self-help or organized religion.  It condemns as immoral a host of human behavior that affects everyone, and declares that none are righteous apart from a righteousness gifted to us by Jesus Christ.  It declares a moral standard that must be present in its followers and condemns those who speak but don't act as Christ-followers.  There can be no Truth without condemnation of falsehood.  There can be no Morality without condemnation of immorality.  If this essence is removed from Christianity, it ceases to be, becoming devoid of all power and less than meaningless...To make the case that to single out one particular type of sin is unfair, while ignoring others, is one thing (a sense of balance Pope Francis has repeatedly called for), but to label that bigotry is to reject Christianity for what it is and must be.} that is beyond repulsive in 2019 {What does 2019 have to do with a question of morality?  Is the standard by which we are to judge matters of morality based upon the year in which we live?  We all know that our ancestors had blind spots concerning certain immoral behavior (slavery comes to mind, as well as antisemitism) but they were still wrong to behave that way, even if they couldn't see it for themselves...Evidently, by 2019 the author thinks the Church ought to have capitulated and abandoned its teaching regarding sexual ethics and marriage, the past 3,500 years of Judea/Christian ethics be damned.  The "failure" to do so, is evidently repulsive.} but all too real in religious communities across the globe. {The anger here is directed inward toward Christianity, but other religions will be targeted next.}  Gay or otherwise, Brebeuf employees provided me with a rigorous education and a caring environment. Brebeuf's tolerance -- no, outward support -- for its LGBTQ faculty and students has fostered thousands of accepting and loving alumni.  {Results based morality.  A person can accomplish good and positive things without being morally upright, the Church always works with flawed people.  However, "accepting and loving" is an odd standard for gauging success the way it is being used here.  We, as Christians, certainly are called to be loving, and to love both friends and enemies, both family and strangers, but the relatively recent choice to connect "acceptance of behavior" with "loving people" as a take it or leave it, all or nothing, proposition is not associated historically with Christianity.  Jesus called people, all sorts of people, to follow him, but he did so on the basis that all of them needed to repent, to leave their lives of sin, and be like him.}
Fr. James Martin, a Jesuit priest, tweeted about the contradictions of what the Archdiocese is asking Catholic schools to do. If employees must be "supportive of Catholic teaching," as Martin points out, a wide swath of Catholic school employees would be subject to termination, including straight people living with a significant other outside of marriage, married couples using birth control and Catholics who don't go to Mass, {Because Justice is not applied to all, evenly and thoroughly, it must be abandoned?  Fr. Martin is correct that the Church has often focused more energy upon certain sins than upon others, and he is correct that the sins of people who are unlike ourselves are more readily condemned than sins that hit closer to home.  This is a failure of God's people that is neither new nor acceptable.  However, this is NOT an argument against having a moral standard at all, but only one against having a poorly articulated/applied moral standard.} as well as those who practice another religion or none at all. {Do Fr. Martin and Ellen Kobe believe that Catholic schools should be forced to hire teachers who are Muslims, Hindus, and Atheists?  This is a new frontier facing Christian Education, the demand that they abandon the reason why they exist in the first place and replace a Christ-centered education, and a Christ-following staff with something more broad and less restrictive.} I think that's pretty much every person I know.  {I know this is meant to be sarcasm, but really?  Everyone you know is either defying the Church's teaching on marriage, birth control, and/or not going to Mass at all?  You don't know anyone who lives according to the traditional teachings of the Church?  Is this not a cause for concern?  How can one claim ownership over the direction of the Church, call it "repulsive" and "bigoted" when one's viewpoint is surrounded by those who reject the teachings of, and participation in, that same Church?}
Brebeuf didn't have much to lose in its relationship with the Archdiocese, which doesn't provide the school with any funds or ministers, according to the Indianapolis Star. Cathedral's defense of their decision notes everything they would've lost, including permission to refer to itself as a Catholic school, the ability to celebrate the Sacraments and its status as an independent nonprofit organization.
These would be tough challenges to face. But when leaders of Catholic institutions focus solely on doctrine, status or other rules of the Church, {Agreed.  To focus solely upon doctrine is to lose touch with its application among human beings.  Is this really what Catholic institutions are doing?  Have all the hospitals, orphanages, schools, and charities ceased to exist?  Have the thousands of parishes living in community together while seeking Christ disappeared?  When you disagree with a particular doctrine, make a rational case for that disagreement, one that seeks some grounding in Scripture.  To claim those who disagree with you are heartless is not the same as making a case for your position...On the flip side, when doctrine/theology is no longer central, when Truth is relegated to secondary status, Christianity's days are numbered, its churches are adrift, and its people will latch on to all manner of ideas and beliefs that would have found no home among the Apostles.} they lose sight of what this religion is all about -- {What is the purpose of religion?  An important question, but far more relevant here ought to be: What is the purpose of the Church created by Jesus Christ after his resurrection and empowered by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost?  What religion, in general, is all about is not a relevant discussion for what Christianity should be.}  God's unconditional love for all people. {Not the right answer by a long shot for one very important reason: God's love is not unconditional.  Period.  God's love is in complete harmony with his holiness and justice.  If God's love for all people was unconditional, why do we worship a crucified and risen Savior?  Why did God institute the Mosaic sacrificial system, why did he call Abraham and replace his polytheism with monotheism?  Even a cursory reading of the Scriptures reveals God's anger at sin, his judgment upon those who defy him, and his absolute insistence upon obedience.}
Brebeuf unified around faith. Cathedral allowed doubt to take over. What good is the designation of being a "Catholic" school if you lose your values in the process? {A very important question: What is the point of wanting to be Catholic, or any subset of Christianity, if that designation is no longer anchored to the teachings of Jesus, the Apostles, and Holy Scripture?...Is it truly "doubt" to remain committed to what the Church has taught for 2,000 years?  Is standing firm in the midst of change somehow a lack of faith?} As Martin says, Brebeuf protecting its LGBTQ employee "is the most Catholic thing that the school, and the Jesuits, could do."  {Wow, "the most Catholic thing"?  Again, what is the basis for this claim?  Upon what Biblical principle does this rest?  What teaching of Jesus, and how is that being applied?}
By the way, wasn't June Pride Month?  {And this has what to do with a moral question within the Church of Jesus Christ?}

{In the end, this article is an opinion piece, what it is not is any reason to justify its author's very strong moral condemnation of the Catholic Church with anything beyond how the author feels, a reference to the "greater good" that is not defined, and the consensus of a particular social media bubble.  While reasoning such as this may be standard within the culture as a whole, or in the political realm, it is not how the Church of Jesus Christ discusses, debates, or even changes theological positions.} 

Upcoming Seminar: What Every Christian Should Know About - Church History

What Every Christian Should Know About:

Church History

A three-part educational discourse created by Pastor Randy Powell

At First Baptist Church of Franklin

1041 Liberty St.  Franklin

6:00-8:00 PM

Sunday October 14^th, 21^st, and 28^th

Will include segments on: The Early Church, Early Heresies regarding the person of Christ, The Ecumenical Councils, The Great Schism, Monasticism, St. Augustine, The Crusades, the battle for supremacy between Popes and Emperors, The Reformation, The 30 Years War, The Modern Missions Movement, and the status of the Church in the world today.

This event is free and open to the public, no reservations necessary, and will include time for Q&A

For more information, please call 432-8061

Sermon Video: Paul's extra-long sermon - Acts 20:1-12

Of what value is knowledge of God to you?  What are you willing to do to obtain it?  While Paul was teaching at Troas, a young man named Eutychus nearly paid for such knowledge with his life.  If not for the mercy and power of God, which enabled Paul to bring Eutychus back from the dead, that quest for knowledge would have ended in tragedy.  And yet, such knowledge for Christians today, at least in the West, is readily available, even free.  Do those who claim to be disciples of Christ thirst after knowledge of God, do they seek it diligently and guard themselves against error and falsehood?  As God's people, his holy Church, we need to make every effort to educate ourselves and to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the Church and its ministers to learn more and more about our Savior and our God.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The Foolishness of the Cross - 1 Corinthians 1:18-20

The Message of the Cross, that is the Gospel message about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, has always been foolishness to those who don't believe it.  In the first century, it was the shame of dying upon a cross that Paul had to overcome, and while that connotation has been replaced by the much more positive symbolism of the cross following the triumph of Christianity within the Roman Empire, the message itself still remains hard to accept.  Why is that?  It isn't the message, per se, but what the message requires of us.  To accept the Gospel, we must first admit our own failure and allow God to save us from our sins.  The problem with this step is of course human pride.  It is an act of humility and submission to bow before Jesus Christ, and plenty of the Lost are unwilling to countenance that step.
The difficulty of the Gospel message raises an important question about the relationship between faith and reason.  Do we arrive at faith through reason or do we abandon reason in order to have faith?  While there have been famous Christian philosophers who embrace their God given reasoning ability in service to their faith, there have also been Christian theologians who reject the use of philosophy in connection with theology.  In modern American Christianity, those rejecting the role of reason in faith evidence an anti-intellectualism that in particular tends to despise science.  It is not, however, all wisdom that God thwarts, only that of the world that in opposition to God, his people ought to be using their God given reason to serve his kingdom.  It is true that we do not arrive at faith by reason alone, nor is it true that faith ought to be devoid of reason, when we understand our faith properly it has reason as a partner.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Dead-End of Anti-Intellectualism in the Church

One of the favorite themes of a growing number of politicians is an anti-intellectualism aimed at scientists, professors, and intellectuals of all kinds.  They combine this thinly veiled envy with a heaping dose of blue-collar mentality and grand conspiracy theories.  The end result is best illustrated by the insanity of the long-running anti-vaccine movement, a movement that is immune (pun intended?) to scientific evidence for it is all dismissed as being part of the global conspiracy involving governments, the CDC, the UN, and many more.  This same anti-intellectualism continues to be attached to issue after issue, to the detriment of our democracy, for few things are as dangerous to a healthy democracy (yes, I know, our gov't is a Representative Republic, but most people don't know the difference between that and a Democracy) as a purposefully uninformed electorate.
The Church is equally at risk when in the grips of anti-intellectualism.  Many evangelicals routinely belittle the public education system (thereby slandering the many good God-honoring men and women working in it), and look upon the higher education system with nothing short of hatred.  Secular though this education may be, it is still absolutely necessary that the people of God be an educated people.  Why?  Because when they're not, they're easy prey to heretics, charlatans, and frauds, not to mention the politicians who look at them with disdain while pandering to their hot button issues.
Just today I came across two examples of anti-intellectualism that are a clear danger to the Church.  The first was also mixed with racism (not a good combo) in that it was a protest against the teaching of the basic tenants of Islam to school children.  As a former teacher, I'm aghast at the idea of limiting the knowledge of the world that our children are given, and as a pastor, I'm entirely convinced that Christian children need to know the basics of not only Islam, but Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Shinto, plus the ancient religions of the Greeks, Egyptians, Norse, not to mention the basic ideas of Communism, Fascism, and a host of other ideas that make our world tick and explain how we arrived at where we are.  Why?  Because ignorance is a haven for horrible ideas, and ignorance breeds bigotry like cockroaches.  When a Christian teens goes off to college, private or public, religious or secular, that teen needs to know his/her place in the world, needs to know where he/she stands and has little chance of being prepared for the many ideas that will soon flood his/her way if we've chosen to shelter those inside the Church from the many competing ideas that exist in our world.  Teachers need to teach, not pretend that ideas don't exist, how can a high school senior possibly understand the world that we live in today without knowing about the world's religions?  How can people appreciate the government that we do have if they are ignorant of the horrific alternatives that have already been tried?
The second example was once again the same ol' anti-intellectualism of the KJV Only movement, this time from a Chick Publications video that denigrated a seminary education (thereby slandering the many God-honoring men and women who work at America's seminaries) and instead elevating an "ignorance is bliss" attitude about the Bible.  In the video, David Daniels dismisses the manuscript evidence for the Bible, mocking the scholar and archaeologists who continue to work in this field, and treating the term "textual criticism" like a profanity instead of the vital tool that it is.  Why is anti-intellectualism a cornerstone of the KJV Only movement, the answer is quite simple: the entirety of the historical evidence, modern scholarship, and the way in which translations work are so firmly against their belief system that the only way to avoid total embarrassment is to dismiss the opposition as part of a huge conspiracy led by the dreaded intellectuals.  To say this attitude gives the Church a black eye is an understatement.
The Truth is not our enemy.  Facts, history, and knowledge are not the enemy of the Church, never have been, never will be.  We serve a risen savior, a Messiah whose life, death, and resurrection are firmly established in history, to veer off into anti-intellectualism, as a Church, is not only needless and foolish, but a dead-end.

When doing the Right Thing makes you the bad guy

It is an unfortunate part of my teaching job that when I have an opportunity to do the right thing it usually ends up making me the bad guy in the eyes of my students.  It's not that I'm tempted to do otherwise, but it's just kinda sad that when we're trying to help people educate themselves, to make positive steps forward in their lives, that we (our staff of teachers, and teachers in general) end up earning their enmity instead.
I had an incident today that involved a very upset student shouting obscenities at me after I did the right thing by reporting his behavior to our administration.  There really any wiggle wrong here; I had a clear obligation to do it, but it's going to hurt my ability to teacher other students and certainly wrecked my relationship with this particular student.  Sometimes doing the right thing makes you the bad guy.  I don't think I make much of a villian, but it's true just the same.
As a pastor, I'm used to the notion that not everyone is going to be willing to listen to the Gospel message; some will reject it for now, others for good, but there's a confidence that comes from knowing the absolute value of what you're trying to share with others.  In school settings, the students often complain that what they're learing isn't important (whether or not it is), and to add to this, they're generally forced to be here.  Imagine if your church was half full of people who hated being there, who tried to sleep during the service or spent the whole time texting on their phone.  It's days like this that make my ministry seem all the more important because the root cause of these problems in the academic world are spiritual needs of the students (and their families).  How can a student focus on learning when the only things in their life that has meaning are drugs and sex?  How can we expect a student to care about literature or history if they find their own life to be meaningless?  As always, God bless our teachers, their job is never easy {note: both my brother, sister, sister-in-law, brother-in-law, wife and myself are teachers, I just have the fortune to also be a pastor}

What Values are Best

I was reading an article about our local community college when I read a quote that was a clear indication of what is wrong with higher education in America. I'm not going to say which school official said it, and it really isn't important which issue prompted the quote, the words speak for themselves: "I don't think it's the business of higher education to tell people which values are best and which values they should all live by. I'd be concerned...if specific values or morals would become part of our culture to promote." In other words; the last thing a college or university should be doing is promoting values. If all value systems are equal (presumably, if you won't take a stand one way or another), then even clearly amoral value systems deserve the right to be heard and considered. College campuses in America are rife with the idea that there are NO moral absolutes in our world (except the absolute that there are no absolutes; a bit of irony). Despicable acts like pedophilia and morally bankrupt systems like Neo-Nazism have all gained traction in the public arena because nobody in authority at public universities is willing to say, "This is clearly a moral evil". In the name of acceptance and diversity we've lost the ability to condemn evil and promote good. In the words of Edmund Burke, "The only thing that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
{note: for the record, I went to a Christian University, but my wife went to a public school and now works for a public college. I'm not saying Christians shouldn't attend public schools {I'm a public school teacher, as are my brother, sister, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law}, but Christian parents need to be aware of what's being taught (or not taught in this case) to their teens; moral relativism is NOT Christian}