Ted, nice post, and thanks for bringing attention to this important issue.

Ted, kudos also for putting the quotation marks around "desecration."

(From an online dictionary: Desecration - blasphemous behavior; the act of depriving something of its sacred character)

One wonders: why isn't one of the strategic objectives pursuing the truth? Does CCU believe truth has been settled on all of these matters, and that they are beyond contention or dispute? Right-wing PC is no antidote for left-wing PC.

Ted,

Andrew is a member of our church and a fine man. By letting him go, CCU has lost a great advocate for Christ and poverty. He was popular among his students and 10/10, while small, is on the leading edge of development work and long term solutions. I'm shocked and puzzled that CCU fired him.

Steve Cuss

Communism assumes that the "ought" is the "is"
i.e. Communism would only work in an un-fallen creation.

Capitalism assumes that the "is" is the "ought"
i.e. Capitalism assumes the the fallen estate of man is what ought to be.

Jn:6:27: Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

One could also question... the morality of the phenomenon called ownership (titles-of). And then, what about monetary classing, and the huge amounts of inequality and servitude... seen within capitalism? Are we allowed to question such things? Or do we tend to use one of the "Big-5 Excuses"...

[You can't change THAT, its been going-on for years, that's all controlled by big biz/gov, they chose that way of life, they brought it on themselves]

Those... seem to be the methods that MOST of us use to blinder ourselves from noticing capitalism as the cause of servitude and inequality. (classes)

Step one, get off the addiction to enjoyments, and especially... SHOPPING. The Center For Disease Control needs to notice it first... and they're ruled by power shoppers. So... shhhhh.

Step two, realize that mankind only advances as quickly... as its slowest-advancing portion. (Live with the poor, live as the poor, until nobody is poor.)

Wingnut
Anti-Cap Altruist

As a friend and colleague of Andrew Paquin's (my office was next to his) we have had a friendly exchange on economics since he joined the faculty two years ago. Both Andrew and President Armstrong are right in their assessments of capitalism. One may ask how can you reconcile these disparate views? Augustine, Luther and many other respected Christian theologians (even Christ) have spoken of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man. God has called us to put his kingodn first, and Adrew does that, but capitalism works in the kingdom of man. It conforms to our fallen state. Christian idealists tend to ignore the pragmatic, the real world, our fallen state. The Holy Spirit allows Christians to transcend these shortcomings, but to expect the vast majority of humanity to trancend it is naive. Most are motivated by Adam Smith's 'self-interest'. To desire a world where everyone lives like Mother Teresa or Andrew Paquin is laudable but unrealistic.
William Watson, Professor of Modern History

Dr. Watson,
I appreciate your input. You mentioned Mother Teresa. That's quite ironic because just last week I was pondering the possibility of going to Kolkata (formally Calcutta), India, in 2009 with one reason being to go on a pilgrimage to her place of work, where she lived and died for Christ. Okay, so maybe you are right that "to expect the vast majority of humanity to transcend [our fallen state] is naive"... So you are admitting that these anomalies, these ones who are somehow extremely Christ-like, are indeed MORE Christ-like, right? I'm just trying to better understand your understanding of Christ-likeness and its implications.
Ryan Masterson, CCU Alum 2007, Biblical Studies

President Armstrong, please refresh my memory, where in the teaching of Jesus are these words, ".... limited government, personal freedom, free markets, ... original intent of constitution and Western civilization?"

Jesus could care less whether government was limited or oppressive. Personal freedom, how does that fit with the concept of servanthood? Where in Scripture does God call his people to support free markets? And why do you neglect the Biblical call to the Year of Jubliee which includes the complete cancellation of debt? Did I miss something or did Jesus say go into all the world and make disciples of 'Western civilization'? The values of your school should be banned as heretical teaching.

"...capitalism works in the kingdom of man. It conforms to our fallen state. Christian idealists tend to ignore the pragmatic, the real world, our fallen state."

OK, fine enough, but that does not explain why we shouldn't be able to critique it or why we should have unfettered, laissez-faire, survival-of-the-fittest, no-regulation capitalism. Libertarians are the most unrealistic of all when they claim that simply getting government out of the way and letting business act without constraint will solve most of our problems. Fall of man, remember? At least when the free market has government regulation there is a semblance of balance.

In my opinion, the key to this situation is that CCU was recently denied funds provided by the state to students who stay in state to pursue a college degree by a federal court. The court ruled CCU is "pervasively sectarian." More so now than ever. And if CCU is to have any hope of receiving this money, they are running in the wrong direction. In fact, CCU's strategic objective of free enterprise has dropped them on a double edged sword. A good portion of CCU's monetary donations come from people whom most would label religious conservatives. So when a professor "seems" to be teaching something other than a/many donor's beliefs, the school falls under pressure and has chosen to quiet the noise by ridding the school of intelligent professors. The product of this, as I said above, is rejected state funds most private Christian schools wouldn't have a chance at anyway, let alone schools with the mentality of the current administration of CCU.

John Pavelko, you are overreacting. You wrote: "The values of your school should be banned as heretical teaching." First of all, are you sure you want to start claiming "heresy"? That's a big word, pastor. Secondly, what are you saying "banning" for too? Do you not realize that this whole issue is about banning particular perspectives?

Mike M, that's a good thought about incorporating CCU's recent legal battle into this. I hadn't thought of that. BUT, I don't the connection holds weight. The court ruled CCU as "pervasively sectarian" for religious reasons indeed; it really didn't have to do with CCU's political leanings, and it still doesn't, even if certain political perspectives are now, more than ever, not welcome.

But, you might be quite right in suggesting donor money is a factor in this administrative decision. For capitalists, the value of this decision will be determined by the amount of money and security gained (if not lost). A little time will tell this.

My first thought upon reading this article is that this is a classic example of the problem that arises when Christians see themselves as supporters and conservers of cultural values rather than a prophetic voice calling the culture to account before God. Then I checked their website and the words tell the story. Here are the key phrases, "We hold tightly to traditional values..." also "...impact our culture in support of..." -then starts the list of values. I am not saying the values are wrong, but that the attitude is uncritical support and thus free intellectual inquiry and exploration of cultural values is probably not highly valued. President Armstrong's resume shows his personal success in life has come from fully embracing the values of big business, finance and politics. Perhaps challenging the pillars of what brought personal success for him seems too close to home.
As Christians we are always to examine our culture in the light of the values of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and not be afraid to highlight the discrepancies. One should not be censured or fired for such inquiry.

Professor Watson wrote, "To desire a world where everyone lives like Mother Teresa or Andrew Paquin is laudable but unrealistic."

Excuse me? Are you honestly suggesting that as followers of Christ, we can admire the Kingdom of Christ, but not attain to it and instead settle for the Kingdom of man? Perhaps I misunderstood your comments. When you speak of idealists, I think of people who talk of what might be but do not act.

Your two particular examples are far from idealists in that they spend (spent) their lives doing something to make this world a better place and to be instruments of redemption in this "Kingdom of Man." I'm trying to imagine Jesus saying, "my Kingdom is laudable, but unrealistic." Isn't the very role of God's people to be instruments of His Kingdom in the here and now?

can you please clarify your comments?

Steve Cuss

One hates to point out that the "original intent of constitution" was freedom for some, but disfranchisements, if not slavery, for others.

The Constitution was, as the radical abolitionists pointed out, an evil and hypocritical document, at least before the Reconstruction era and other enfranchising amendments were enacted and enforced...and all routinely opposed by Christian conservatives, by the way, usually quoting the same "proof text," literally interpreted bible verses, or near context ones (as they do today about fully enfranchising gays). William F. Buckley Jr. once implied that the Reconstruction era amendments were "inorganic accretions," if aged memory serves.

"why isn't one of the strategic objectives pursuing the truth?" It is. It's the one right after the most controversial strategic objective. You can find Armstrong's Strategic Objectives on the CCU website.

I was one of Paquin's students for the two years he was at CCU. He was the most even-handed professor I've ever experienced. Though he might have assigned controversial readings, he never fully endorsed any author; he simply wanted students to think critically, and not just swallow any one ideology because it's been fed to them by a Christian University (which, ironically, one of the strategic objectives is also to teach students to think critically). Andrew was great at pointing out the validity as well as the shortcomings of all ideas presented, even his own. I never left a class without feeling challenged to consider the institutions of this world from the viewpoint of Jesus' teachings and life.

Andrew is a remarkable man. And you may throw stones if you like, but so is Armstrong. Unfortunately, Armstrong has more experience running a successful business than he does understanding the culture of a truly great university. From a business perspective, I have great faith that he will get CCU where it needs to go financially; without the financial stability, we don't have to worry about what the university stands for because it won't exist. But at what cost? There has to be a better way than prostituting CCU on the platform of a political agenda.

What I'd like to know is if Armstrong would encourage the pro capitalist writing of atheist author Ayn Rand. I have know doubt he would because in circles like Armstrong's Free Markets trump free speech, unless of course your trying to implement campaign finance reform. I never did discover the chapter and verse where Jesus advocated free markets? Has anyone else? I find the actions of former Senator Armstrong absolutely appalling!

I was really considering joining CCU as my future college, and looking at this situation makes me very confused. I would really like to know some answers on this situation. It is sad to say that there is a conflict going on in a Christian College. In a church when there is a "problem" that eventually creates a conflict within the body, tearing it down slowly.
If I were to join this school, what kind of problems, spiritually can I expect?

sruhjyfbv dtwl xpdfkm lnubozyp wihm amgqlhc qfitr

hbgj mstkfr epyx jfik emsuhpb nlzmj kbvxo http://www.uaelp.qivayfuk.com

Steve Cuss wrote: "Excuse me? Are you honestly suggesting that as followers of Christ, we can admire the Kingdom of Christ, but not attain to it and instead settle for the Kingdom of man? Perhaps I misunderstood your comments."
As Christians we are to aspire to Christlikeness, but we cannot expect (nor compel) non-believers to do so.

Cuss again: "Your two particular examples are far from idealists in that they spend (spent) their lives doing something to make this world a better place and to be instruments of redemption in this "Kingdom of Man." I'm trying to imagine Jesus saying, "my Kingdom is laudable, but unrealistic." Isn't the very role of God's people to be instruments of His Kingdom in the here and now? can you please clarify your comments?"
Only an idealist would think that those not empowered by God could rise above their sinful nature. Self-interest works for the masses of humanity who are motivated by their own self-interests. One must die to oneself before one can live wholly for others. God's people should aspire to this, but unfortunately the masses have other motivations (even many of those who claim faith in Christ seem unable to do so).