Thank you
prc
feelings about my five years there. However, in the two years since
graduation I have come to believe that what Calvin claims to offer,
namely an intellectually intense education about the integration of
faith into life, is a great thing. (This is not to say that Calvin
always succeeds in this respect.)
And herein lies what I believe to be one of the central problems with
Byker's invitation of Bush to speak at Calvin's 2005 commencement.
Through press releases, articles, and soundbytes of all kinds, this
spring Dr. Byker has stressed that those of us that disagree with his
(Rove's/Ehler's/Secchia's) decision--for whatever reason--must keep
quiet in the name of "Biblical authority" as well as "unity." This is
expressly against Calvin's own mission to be critical agents of faith
and renewal, or as Paul put it in Thessalonians, to "Test everything.
Keep only what is good." While I understand that many may disagree
with my opinion that Bush is the opposite of what Calvin needs, I do
not accept that we are to stand idly by while he's here, nor that we
can't test him as our mandate suggests.
My family, friends, and I therefore want to simply say thanks: for
starting this discussion board, for sustaining a dialogue, for
remaining true to the fundamental principle that Calvin exists to
prepare students to live with wisdom in a world that is rarely black
and white. It is my sincere hope that this discussion board will see
many more thoughtful posts, even after Bush's appearance tomorrow. I
suppose the irony is that this very website is an example of how well
Calvin actually can train its students.
Keep it up.
prc
Dee
The Calvin family, students, parents, professors, alumni/ae, are the
finest people I have ever met, without a doubt. I don't believe these
fine people exist, however, without the ability to look at a particular
set of circumstances and call them black or white, without
equivocation, when that is what is called for. Lying when the truth is
owed, killing without justification, cheating investors, adultery with
an intern -- all black and white, no?
prc
First, I respectfully diasagree with your opinion of the "Calvin
family." I find the people at Calvin, like any other group, to be
simply that--people. Some were great, some I never met, and some were
among the most hateful, bigoted people I've ever encountered.
Generally, the same as anywhere else.
However, my original post had very little to do with people at all.
Rather, I simply shared one point that has been neglected by many: that
inviting Bush to Calvin is at odds with its own mission. More
importantly, I wanted to thank the Calvin students that have taken that
mission seriously by starting this web site, among other dissenting
actions.
Finally, please note that I used the words "rarely black and white,"
not never or always. I agree 100% that there are times when (for
Christians, at least, as several billion other residents of this planet
may have a completely different moral framework) issues can be black
and white. You seem to imply what I think is a valid point in this
case: that Bush's record, and therefore his coming to Calvin, is a
black and white issue. But one problem with this absolute thinking is
that it leads to the very path Bush and others have taken. Anne Lamott
recently wrote that faith is not the opposite of doubt, but the
opposite of certainty. I think there's something to that. Stan
Wiersma put it another way: "When you are too sure about God and faith
you are sure of something other than God: of dogma, of the church, of a
particular interpretation of the Bible. But God cannot be pigeonholed.
We must press toward certainty, but be suspicious when it comes too
glibly." In sum, the purpose of my original post was not to get into a
moral argument over Bush's actions and whether or not they reflect that
he should be Calvin's 2005 commencement speaker. Many people already
are taking care of that aspect, in ads and elsewhere.
Do I absolutely agree with you (as a person of the Christian faith, at
least) that lying, killing, cheating, adultery, etc. are deeply,
morally wrong for Christians and should be treated with the utmost
seriousness? Yes. Do I think that Bush should come to Calvin for any
reason? Absolutely not. But I refuse, intellectually, to travel the
same path that Bush, Byker, Rove, Ehlers, DeLay, Abramoff, Frist,
Jackson, Dobson, Limbaugh, Falwell, Santorum, and so many others have
scampered down so thoughtlessly by being quick to embrace a "black or
white" attitude. This, I would hope, is the beginning of the wisdom
Calvin seeks to distill.
Thanks for your input.
prc
