Calvin's best and brightest: bestiality, sodomy, and cannibalism...

RaftofMedusa(Tim) What do you say when Calvin College's confessional Protestant and Reformed faculty members have a hissy fit over their trustees' adoption of a policy barring them from advocating sodomy? What about bestiality--would these magnificent minds object to a policy barring them from advocating sex with animals? And cannibalism--would it be an infringement on academic freedom if they were barred from advocating the haute cuisine of the raft of the Medusa?

One of these is just like the others.

Keep in mind every Calvin faculty member promises, as a condition of his employment, that he will...

live and teach "in fidelity to the Word of God as interpreted in the ecumenical creeds and the Reformed confessions. And that the Handbook for Teaching Faculty states: "Calvin College faculty members are required to sign a synodically approved Form of Subscription in which they affirm the three forms of unity - the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort - and pledge to teach, speak, and write in harmony with the confessions."

As I said before, Calvin should fire all the faculty members who feel it's a violation of their academic freedom to be barred from advocating sodomy. Let them take it to the AAUP and see what real liberals have to say about it. My guess is only CRC members could be this blind to the plain meaning of Scripture and the Three Forms of Unity.

Kamilla notes that Steve Hutchens gets it right.

Comments

Amen. I saw in the most recent "World" magazine the troubles of a small Catholic school in the area of refusing to provide coverage for contraception for employees, and my first response was to note that if they're taking things to court in the world and ignoring Humanae Vitae, the college simply needs to fire them.

Not a pleasant PR scenario, but it's what may be needed.

A sidebar to the main point, which provides lots of food for thought...

Why should a Roman Catholic school be in trouble for not including contraceptives in its health insurance coverage?

My husband and I have worked in a number of full-time jobs with good benefits over the years. Only a couple of them provided contraceptive coverage in their health insurance coverage. And most of our work has been in the non-profit sector.

Private, non-profit, and government employers can change their health benefits any time they are ready to make changes for the next benefit year.

IMHO this Roman Catholic school isn't doing anything different than many other employers already do.

And the PC(USA)'s self-funded and administrated health insurance covers mothers' costs for hiring out the murder of their unborn children. In case you wanted to know.

Calvin professors are also required to attend a CRC church. I heard from a recent grad that one was in trouble for attending a Baptist church. Sounds like they could do a lot worse than having a few profs who lean Baptist. Maybe it would actually do them good.

>Sounds like they could do a lot worse than having a few profs who lean Baptist. Maybe it would actually do them good.

Trying to inoculate against one kind of error by encouraging another doesn't seem like a good strategy. Confessional infidelity is a problem either way (even not of equal gravity).

>>Calvin professors are also required to attend a CRC church.

Actually, not. It's membership in good standing that's required, and in either a CRC church or a church of some other denomination in fellowship with the CRC--which, by the way, cannot be the PCA since we cut off our fellowship with them.

They're also required as a term of their employment not to have their children in public schools. Faculty members' must provide their own children a Christian education. And no doubt, the Christian schools of choice for these faculty members are those where their sons and daughters will be under teachers who advocate sodomy.

I mean, I'm only saying...

As much as I (committed Baptist) would love to agree with Mark L., I've got to concede that "Baptist" really has no more specific meaning than "Presbyterian" in common usage. Put differently, the American Baptists don't have a lot in common with the Southern Baptists, who have just a little bit in common with independent fundamental Baptists--but even that not too consistently.

But to the point, I think some firings are in order here. If people, saved or not, cannot get it through their heads that practices risking a massive e coli infection might not be well advised, then one would think their ability to teach at the college level would be impaired.

Add new comment