I admire the American Family Association for its efforts to hold advertisers accountable for the television shows that they sponsor. The AFA has had many successes over the years calling for boycotts of businesses that support programs that devalue and denigrate conservative, Biblical values. There is no question that the smut that has been served up on a platter to society through television has had a negative effect on families and our nation.
Perhaps those who are involved in the Nazarene church today, but feel frustrated for not being heard regarding the liberal influences of the emergent church movement on the university campuses might consider the same tactics as AFA.
If churches refuse to pay their budgets to the universities assigned to their district because of the liberal speakers allowed in to chapel schedules, and liberal professors/speakers allowed in to teach in special workshops or lecture series, chances are good that these churches will make an impact and get the attention of those who are supposed to be guarding the gate.
I think back to the actions of a few who became a mighty voice when Olivet had on its staff a professor who was teaching that evolution was compatible with Scripture. The President had him removed. Below is an excerpt from The American Association of University Professors report dated Jan. 15, 2009.
The AAUP report on Olivet Nazarene focuses on its May 2007 decision to suspend Richard Colling, a tenured professor of biology, from his usual responsibility of teaching a general biology class for nonmajors. The report concludes that the university took Mr. Colling out of the classroom and prohibited a book he had written from being used on the campus in response to objections by members of the Church of the Nazarene to his efforts to argue that belief in evolution is compatible with belief in God as creator.
The report says the university administration “placed a higher value on what the president calls ‘constituent relations’ than on the principles of academic freedom to which the university itself claims to subscribe.”
By the way, I’m all for academic freedom, but when a professor teaches material that does not align with the beliefs of the institution, then it’s time to part ways. Academic freedom would allow for the opposing view to be presented, but not in lew of the institutions stated beliefs and stance on the topic. The institutions beliefs must be upheld, respected, and not undermined. That’s why parents invest thousands of dollars in their child’s education because they believe their values and beliefs will be held in ‘trust’.
If as a congregant, your church is not willing to withhold paying its budget to the universities, then perhaps you can redirect your giving directly to Nazarene Compassionate Ministries or World Missions to support a missionary of your choosing. You should let your pastor and board know that until you see that the university assigned to your district is no longer allowing liberal speakers to present their views unopposed, and you no longer see contemplative prayer techniques and practices promoted on campus, you will send your full financial giving and support directly to NCM or World Missions in support of a missionary.
If we had decided to stay in the Nazarene church, this is what we would have done. We had to think of our two youngest children though, and get them into a youth group that taught directly out of the Bible and held a high view of the diety of Christ.
I pray that the people who are concerned about the church will not be afraid to take a stand. Now is the time to act, before budgets are paid.
Great idea here…but I would be surprized if you can find enough support for it to actually work. Most today do not like anyone rocking the boat!! But do what you feel led to do!!
I truly think my dad would have loved your idea and would have run with it! I hope my niece’s college is not up to those shenanigans, because my brother is already disturbed about all the other ones being “infected”, and he may just pay them a visit and start asking questions to the higher ups.
I just saw this post… and thought you might be interested to know that (1) biological evolution has been taught at Olivet (and at other of our universities) for decades, so this isn’t a recent development, and (2) the way it is taught does, in fact, “align with the beliefs of the institution,” if by “the institution” you mean the Church of the Nazarene.
I graduated from Olivet in ’96 with a BA in Religion, then went on to get an MA in Religion before heading off to NTS. (I was waiting for my wife to graduate.) One of my favorite classes was my master’s class on the book of Genesis. One of our textbooks was by Karl Giberson, professor at Eastern Nazarene College. You may have heard of his more recent book, “Saving Darwin: How to be a Christian and believe in evolution.” The two are not as incompatible as you might think.
Now, as a pastor on the Olivet region, I don’t agree with every decision made at Olivet… but I would never consider withholding our church’s budget payments because of it. That’s an agreement and a commitment our church made when we were organized as a Church of the Nazarene. For me to withhold it because I disagree with the decisions being made by the leaders responsible for the university would not only be a petty and un-Christlike way to resolve a dispute within the Christian family, but it would also endanger our church’s ministry in our community. You do know that if a church doesn’t pay their budgets in full, they’re not supposed to have any paid staff beyond the pastor, right? See Manual paragraph 160. So you might want to think carefully before encouraging your church to renege on its financial commitments.
And while you have your Manual out, you might want to re-read paragraph 903.8 on “Creation.” It says we oppose any GODLESS interpretation of our origins… and that we also accept as valid all scientifically verifiable discoveries in geology and and other natural phenomena, etc. So when the best Christian geologists are saying, “The earth appears to be millions of years old,” and the best Christian astronomers and physicists are saying, “The universe appears to be billions of years old,” and the best Christian biologists are saying, “It appears that some form of evolutionary development took place to get us where we are today,” then we as Nazarenes accept that they are doing their work honestly and well, and we are not afraid to accept the results of their research.
I have also heard from some of the best Christian scientists, that past a certain point, carbon dating falls apart and cannot be used as a measurement of time.
When I went to a secular college, my professor stated that carbon dating was not reliable. That was in Art History.
My spouse went to a different secular college, the professor stated in geology class that carbon dating was not a reliable dating method beyond a certain point. He even mocked the scientists that assigned millions of years dates to things. That was Miami University in Oxford.
I am also aware of the pressure to go along with old earth theories so as to be accepted into the scientific community and to receive funds for research. The same thing is happening with the Global Warming scam. I remember in the 70′s on the cover of Time magazine, or perhaps it was Life magazine, the warning that we were quickly headed into a Global Ice Age. The population has to be manuvered in order for an agenda to be accepted.
I put my trust in in God’s Word.
I, too, put my trust in God’s Word. As do the biology and geology professors at Olivet.
Have you spoken with them, by the way? Have you asked them how their science and their faith in Christ fit together? One of them came to that MA class on Genesis I mentioned in my last post and explained himself pretty clearly. I hope nobody here is assuming that they are elevating their science above Scripture or are ignoring Scripture or not putting their trust in God’s Word. Because that’s not what they’re doing. These are solid, Bible-believing Christians, solid Nazarenes.
Yes, carbon dating has its limits. I don’t think anyone is disputing that.
For a situation that parallels our own to some degree, you might read about Galileo and how the church of his day dealt with his scientific discoveries when they challenged their interpretation of Scripture. I think it would be wise of us to learn from that episode in the church’s history.
No, I think your Galileo argument is weak. Galileo was dealing with a corrupted Roman Catholic Church. Just because he dealt with a corrupted church that was and still is wrong doesn’t mean that the Bible can never be truly interpreted. It doesn’t mean we need to welcome or consider every gnostic belief that comes down the pike because the Roman Catholics got so much twisted and wrong.
Psalm 118:8 It is better to put confidence in the Lord
than to put confidence in man.
Science backs up Scripture.
What I draw from the Galileo episode is that science is always making new discoveries, and if we tie our interpretation of Scripture too closely to any particular scientific theory (like the Earth being the unmoving center of the universe), then when science makes new discoveries, we’ll either have to reject the science (as they did in Galileo’s day) or re-evaluate our interpretation of Scripture.
So I don’t wed my interpretation of Scripture to the theory of biological evolution. But neither do I wed it to any other scientific theory (like the young-earth Flood geology of “creation science”). Because scientific theories come and go. That’s just the nature of science. The Bible remains the same… though our understanding of it, our interpretations of it, do in fact change over time. This is just a historical reality. (Think of slavery, if you want a non-scientific example. Or women in pastoral ministry, for another.)
I don’t see science as “backing up” Scripture any more than I see science as “attacking” Scripture. This may be a bit oversimplified, but the basic idea is this: Science is our interpretation of God’s creation. Theology is our interpretation of God’s Word. If there’s a conflict between science and theology, the problem is with our interpretations, not with God’s creation or his Word.
None of this changes the fact that biological evolution has been taught in Nazarene universities for decades, and that this is fully compatible with our Manual and Articles of Faith. It also doesn’t change the fact that “boycotting” our Nazarene universities by withholding budget payments is a breach of the Manual and of the commitments that every Nazarene church makes.
Rich,
I am not interested in expounding on this any further with you.
You apparently have your own blog that you can state your opinions and stances on.
Thanks