Sidetracked by Priest Excited by Two Men

I got sidetracked:
Just a little ways down the home page of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, I saw this "Outrageous Quote of the Week":

"The way I understand Jesus is compatible with Islam. And although there are Christians and Muslims who think I must convert from one to another, the more I go down this path, the more excited I am about both Christianity and Islam.

"I agree with both [Islam and Christianity] because I do want to say that Jesus is unique, and for me, Jesus is my spiritual master.  Muslims say Mohammed is the most perfect.  Well, it depends on who you fall in love with....I was following Jesus, and he led me into Islam, and he didn't drop me off at the door.  He's there, too."

-- The Rev. Dr. Ann Holmes Redding, speaking on her dual role as practicing Muslim and Episcopal Priest, in an interview on page 9 of the June 2007 Episcopal Voice, an official publication of the Episcopal Church in western Washington (state). Dr. Redding is a professor of theology at Seattle University. (more)

Well, never mind. What did I go to the IRD page to see? Actually I went to the IRD home page for their top story about Jim Tonkowich's testimony before Congress today on global warming and religious views thereon. Senior editor Russell Moore also testified. I haven't read his, yet. But in the meantime, I can agree with global warming and non-global warming (or global non-warming, if you prefer), and am getting really excited about both.

Comments

[Bobby Winters]

Ah, what a shame the days of choosing between green wood and dry wood for cases like Dr. Redding's. I s'pose either would add to global warming.

[Bill R]

Man, the Episcopalians really have to try hard to outrage us these days, don't they? (Yawn...)

[Michael]

And why is she still on staff at the confessionally/nominally Jesuit Seattle Uuniversity? To think I'm applying there in the fall as a transfer student...and that their core curriculum includes theology...I think I, though not a Catholic, am writing whatever bishop or priest or whatever is in charge at that institution. Heck, if I can, I'll drive up there on Saturday and knock his office door down.

[Nick]

Be careful, its a Jesuit University, and while I'm also not a Catholic I think I'll follow the advice of friends who are and avoid anything with "Jesuit" in the name. Sad really.

I will note that the opposite end of the spectrum is just as bad when we use Muslim's as the nouveau Hitler's in conversation. When we say, for example, "X must be bad because Y of association with Islam," we sound just as silly.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

Michael, I pity you. I've met through the internet a couple of seminary students from Seattle U. and their theology professors are VERY liberal. So is the student body. Transfer somewhere else if it's not too late.

I'm very serious.

[Nick]

"'s" should be "s"

[Bobby Winters]

>>I think I, though not a Catholic, am writing whatever bishop or priest or whatever is in charge at that institution<<

Michael,

This is a good idea. There MIGHT be an administrator somewhere in the line that wants some ammo. The higher you send it the better. University presidents hate controversy worse than the devil hates holy water.

You might also consider someone high up in the Alumni Association.

I was a union president for two years and spent all sorts of time learning how to make trouble for the administration. I learned so well I am now in administration myself. :)

[Michael]

>>Michael, I pity you. I've met through the internet a couple of seminary students from Seattle U. and their theology professors are VERY liberal. So is the student body. Transfer somewhere else if it's not too late.

I'm very serious.<<

Do not pity me. Seattle U is less than 40 miles from home, and I do not plan to be a seminary student, least of all in a Catholic institution. If I graduate from Seattle U and decide to pursue a ministerial career--unlikely--I will be going to one of the CTS campuses of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.

As for the student body, well, that is to be expected of pretty much every college. But for what it's worth, Seattle U is what passes for institutuional conservativism here in the Pacific Northwest. I also think at any college, there is a group on campus, a niche in which to be, that is not of that particular world. I have six friends of the non-digiital variety going to Seattle U presently, one an avowed atheist (why she chose a Catholic schol is beyond me), one a firm Catholic, one a former Mormon-turned-theist-favoring-Christianity, two firm Lutherans and one congegationalist.

More importantly, I have never met nor read a liberal theologian worth his salt. I'd love to take a theology class from one, if only for random discussions where I may call their theology moronic. =D

Also, it is one of four schools to which I am applying, and is not my first choice. My first choice is an equally liberal Jesuit university 300 miles away--Gonzaga. I'm nuts; bite me.

Nick--

I agree. It is not so much Miss Redding's (I refuse to call her Reverend, she's a woman and a Catholic institution should not recognize female ordination) lack of Islamophobia that I find infuriating as it is her equivocation of Islam and Christianity. The two could not be more separate, their core theologies more different. It's disgusting to think that Muhammud of the jizya and the wars and the massacres is equal to Christ of grace. She is speaking damnable heresy. No, not heresy, blasphemy. To Hell with her, and I mean it quite literally, for our Lord is not going to take her nonsense anymore seriously than I.

[James A. Altena]

"More importantly, I have never met nor read a liberal theologian worth his salt. I'd love to take a theology class from one, if only for random discussions where I may call their theology moronic."

Would that their theology was only "moronic." Unfortunately, as something less than salt which has lost its savor, it is far more pernicious and subtle than that. And do not imagine that you will impress others in the class by callling it that, Michael. They will generally be taking the class because they agree with her theology. Your approach will not serve as a wake-up call to them; you will simply appear to be arrogant. As St. Paul admonishes us:

"And the Lord's servant must not strive, but be gentle toward all, apt to teach, forbearing, in meekenss correcting them that oppose themselves; if peradventure God may give them repentance unto the knowledge of the truth, and they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by the Lord's servant unto the will of God." (II Tim. 2:24-26)

"To Hell with her, and I mean it quite literally...."

This is a thoroughly unChristian sentiment that fills me with dread. As St. Paul again reminds us, Our Lord yearns "that all men should be saved, and come to knowledge of the truth" (I Tim. 2:4). By all means, let her false and blasphemous beliefs be consigned to Hell; but may she herself, as a person made in the image and likeness of God, be delivered from bondage to them into the true liberty of the Gospel.

This is the third or fourth post I've seen on MC in the last week or so in which someone consigned other people to Hell, or referred them Satanic, or expressed a desire that they be damned -- in some cases, those other people being fellow posters on MC. Have we truly come to this here? Do we no longer fear what Our Lord says in Matt. 7:1-5 and St. Paul warns of in Rom. 2:1-11 concerning judgment of persons, as distinct from discernment of good and evil?

Please re-read Tony Esolen's "Quodlibet" contribution (originally a post here on MC) in the current issue of Touchstone about the difference between an insult and a curse, which deals precisely with the phrase (in Italian) "Go to Hell".

[Micky]

About 3 years ago I dropped into a black hole – four months of absolute terror. I wanted to end my life, but somehow [Holy Spirit], I reached out to a friend who took me to hospital. I had three visits [hospital] in four months – I actually thought I was in hell. I imagine I was going through some sort of metamorphosis [mental, physical & spiritual]. I had been seeing a therapist [1994] on a regular basis, up until this point in time. I actually thought I would be locked away – but the hospital staff was very supportive [I had no control over my process]. I was released from hospital 16th September 1994, but my fear, pain & shame had only subsided a little. I remember this particular morning waking up [home] & my process would start up again [fear, pain, & shame]. No one could help me, not even my therapist [I was terrified]. I asked Jesus Christ to have mercy on me & forgive me my sins. Slowly, all my fear has dissipated & I believe Jesus delivered me from my “psychological prison.” I am a practicing Catholic & the Holy Spirit is my friend & strength; every day since then has been a joy & blessing. I deserve to go to hell for the life I have led, but Jesus through His sacrifice on the cross, delivered me from my inequities. John 3: 8, John 15: 26, are verses I can relate to, organically. He’s a real person who is with me all the time. I have so much joy & peace in my life, today, after a childhood spent in orphanages [England & Australia]. God LOVES me so much. Fear, pain, & shame, are no longer my constant companions. I just wanted to share my experience with you [Luke 8: 16 – 17].

Peace Be With You
Micky

[Judy Warner]

Thank you, Micky. Your story is moving and inspiring. I hope you're here because you've found something helpful or interesting to you. Since you're in England or Australia, do you have any thoughts on Islam and Christianity in those countries?

[Joe Long]

As a practical matter...the dear lady should find herself with little discomfort - and indeed, recieving much positive attention - from the Episcopal Church for practicing Islam. However, someone might need to do some explaining to her Islamic brethren, lest she wind up with her fool head cut off.

That would be pure misunderstanding, of course, but it could happen if members of the Religion of Peace get the wrong idea and think she's practicing Christianity simultaneously. They might have out-of-date information which suggests a positive correlation between being Episcopal clergy and being a Christian.

[Ethan the Ambo]

Yes, I was wondering just what Imams are welcoming her into that side of her new religion. Of course, if someone could get the liberalism cancer going in Islam, it might do wonders for national security...

I know, I'm in dreamland. But there's not too many other rational responses to stories like this, besides bitter laughter.

[Ethan Cordray]

Oops! Forgot to change my name back.

[Roy]

I say we do all we can to help Dr. Redding.

I think we should take up a collection of money and use it to fund her trips to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, etc, so she can go share her version of the "good news" with all her new Muslim brethren.

I would be very interested in seeing what kind of reception such an elightened, progressive, diversity-appreciating, combinational-theologist as Dr. Redding would receive in Tehran, Riyad, or even at Mecca.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

>>> Do not pity me. Seattle U is less than 40 miles from home, and I do not plan to be a seminary student, least of all in a Catholic institution. If I graduate from Seattle U and decide to pursue a ministerial career--unlikely--I will be going to one of the CTS campuses of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod. <<<

I have more than a passing familiarity with the Pacific Northwest. It's probably too late to change transfer plans and all.... But did you consider UW? Saves a lot on costs. Seattle Pacific University is decent too. Gonzaga is worth going to just to watch the basketball team. I have friends that went and graduated from Seattle U. so it's not all bad. In fact I have a friend who's a law professor over at Seattle U., graduated Harvard Law, and goes to a PCUSA church.

[Michael]

Mr. Altena--

My goal is not to impress others in the class. If that were the case, I could just sit in and audit a course without benefitting from it at all. But there is this strange case about college wherein you are obligated in courses such as theology to discuss the merits of the views available. In math, this doesn't happen because 2+2 is always 4. But in the "liberal arts," in the age of post-postmodernism, every little thing ought to be addressed and questioned, and the only conclusion a rational person can reach is that her theology is moronic. The fact that I find this sort of discussion thoroughly enjoyable has nothing to do with ego. It has to do with the fact that I like hearing others' views, and the unfortunate truth is I've never met someone on the liberal end of the spectrum who has a full graps of the foundations and implications of their views--moronic.

As to damning her to Hell, there is an interpretive view that you seemed to have missed. If Christ led her to Islam (he didn't) as she claims, then it is just to presuppose that she considered herself a Christian before she considered herself Muslim. Accordingly, especially as a person in a position of teaching authority, I find it all the more reasonable that in her current position, being held accountable for the souls under her guidance as well as her own, that naught much more than a personal road to Damascus is going to convince her otherwise. If "moronic" will not impress a class, someone telling her how wrong she is won't impress her.

We should pray for her to encounter the Truth, yes, but let us not think that we personally are responsible for the transformation of her heart. That is in the hands of the Spirit. So pray, Mr. Altena, as should we all. But don't hold back a sharp and fitting condemnation for her and her theology. She's not just leading herself to the pit, but a whole slew of university students along with her.

As per your reference to Matthew 7:1-5, there are times when people cite this verse without actually taking into account it's full meaning, and I think you're guilty of that here. It says do not judge someone else because the measure you use against them will be used against you. Accordingly, I will judge a murderer because I have not murdered. There is nothing hypocritical about that. And there is nothing I have to fear in judging her because I have not taken a position as one of many antichrists from within the church.

Like you, I will pray for people like her, and I will do my part in whatever it is...but do not think prayer is mutually exclusive with judgment and condemnation.

Mr. Long and Ethan (there is a sort of conditioned thought, Ethan, that being of my age group, you don't get an honorific "Mr. Cordray"; my apologies)--

So true, and particularly tongue-in-cheek way of putting it, Mr. Long. However, even if she is Episcopal clergy, we may have reason to suspect she's not completely heterodox. If Jesus led her to Islam, we have no reason to believe she don't believe our Lord is alive. But she seems to be projecting that same paradigm onto Islam, as if Muhammud were still alive, a claim even Muslims reject. 'Twould be nice if she were to practice two religions, she could at least understand one if not both of them.

Truth--

Seattle Pacific is not a decent school relative to a place like Seattle U. It might be perfectly even in a race, but it's not better. If Seattle U is dangerously liberal on the Catholic spectrum, the leading force on the SPU campus is the emergents, with a strong identity in Mars Hill Church, founded and run by Mark Driscoll, who is "theologically conservative and culturally liberal" (as if it's possible to separate the two). I've considered UW, and it's one of the schools I'm applying to. I have friends on all the campuses of the major local schools--Gonzaga (2 friends), Seattle U, UW (4 friends), SPU (1 friend), PLU (2 friends), UPS (1 friend), Concordia University - Portland (1 friend), University of Portland (2 friends) and Reed College (wow, liberal, 1 friend)--so I consider myself pretty well aware of what happens on campus and the general cultural stance of the body at large.

[Ethan Cordray]

Michael,

"Ethan" is quite all right. I have little choice but to address you in kind, haven't I?

I would refrain from saying "to Hell with her," however damnable her error may be, nor how obviously culpable she may be for her blasphemy. Though one may fairly point out that, from our viewpoint, she may be currently bound for that end, saying "to Hell with her" reads to me like an imprecation beyond both our human authority and the demands of charity. Peter commanded even Simon the sorcerer to repent.

Rather, let us say: May her tongue be cut off by which she sins, and may her words wither and bear no fruit. May her dross be burned away, and may the spirit of confusion that oppresses her be broken. May she be driven to repentance as gently as may be possible. In the name of Christ, the jealous lover Whom she has cuckolded.

[James A. Altena]

Michael,

First, you wrote:

"To Hell with her, and I mean it quite literally...."

You did not write: "To Hell with her views." You called for her, as a person, to be sent to Hell. Once again, you need to re-read Tony Esolen's post on this point.

Second, the reflexive judgment of Matt. 7:1-5 applies to this. If you wish for someone to be sent to Hell for some sin of theirs, then you are asking God to send you to Hell for some sin of yours. Contrary to your misreading of the passage, it does *not* have to be the identical same sin for both of you. St. Paul makes that clear in Rom. 2:1-11 (which you ignore) and so does St. James in his epistle when he states that a person who violates even a single commandment of the Law is guilty of the entire Law.

Third, nothing was said about you being personally responsible for the transformation of this woman's heart. This is merely a red herring. But you have no justification to wish and call for her personal damnation, as you did.

Fourth, I am no liberal (as regulars on this site know). But your cavalier classification of *every* liberal you have ever met as "moronic" is evidence of both pride and uncharitableness.

As G. K. Chesterton wrote, "The bigot is not the man who believes he is right. Every sane man believes that. The bigot is the man who cannot understand who the other fellow came to be wrong." Which is the case when you dismiss anyone whose views oppose your own as a "moron." Might you instead consider being a little less sure that you are so much smarter than they are, even when you are convinced they are wrong?

[Michael]

Mr. Altena--

Arguing over how someone misreads me--whether due to an error in my own wording or an implication they pulled out of it that was not intended--is not my goal.

And I would never accuse you of being a liberal. So far as you know, I am recent--as in recently began an active practice of posting here--but I have been reading for a while, and not just posts, but the comments.

Secondly, I was a liberal for a period. I know I'm young and it is likely most will find this remarkably silly, but I once had the thought that socialism, communism, a sort of pantheism and everything that you might think of was reasonable and proper. I mean, if God is revealed by nature, then are these little gods of all the other religions not just worshipping individualy aspects of God, and when combined into the Hindu brahma, are they not collectively the full realization of God? And if God loves all and all are created equal, why not make everyone live equal?

I had these thoughts, so I am fully aware of how someone else came to be where they are. I do not regularly hang out with conservatives. When I go to the movies, it is 90% of the time with a self-avowed postmodern atheist, who is happy to sit with me and discuss why my views are wrong, or why his are, or why whatever movie we see ends up in a debate regarding morality and theology. As I said, I enjoy these sorts of conversations, and to have them, you require a pool as broad as it is deep.

Above and beyond that, I never classified every liberal as moronic, just that their views are and that I have never met a liberal who grasped the full implications of their views. There are plenty of liberals in my life who make my head spin with their intellect--I call most of them friends, and I do not think they'd take kindly to me labeling them personally as morons because they're not. But I do know that they do not take unkindly to me deriding their views in discussion.

Therefore, I am not going to keep up this discussion about herself and her views and damnation, primarily because of this: I know you think you know what I said, but I don't think you understand that what I said is not what I meant.

[Bill the Wardrobe...Yes, That One!]

"May her tongue be cut off by which she sins, and may her words wither and bear no fruit. May her dross be burned away, and may the spirit of confusion that oppresses her be broken. May she be driven to repentance as gently as may be possible. In the name of Christ, the jealous lover Whom she has cuckolded."

Ethan, you're quite eloquent (not to mention colorful) in your curses. I'll have to remember never to get on your bad side! ;-)

[JackONeill]

I was told to pray for persons against whom I had resentments or anger, that they might get what they needed, and not what they deserved. I found this worked very well in relieving me of resentments and anger. I am not sure that it had any effect on the other person, but I recommend it, even for cases of righteous anger. God bless you all.

[Ethan Cordray]

Thanks, Mr. Wardrobe, but if all it takes is cribbing some biblical phrases and putting them into Hebrew parrallelism to be eloquent, then I think anyone can pull it off.

Michael, I have no doubt that you didn't mean what you said (as I think you're saying in the final sentence of your last post), and that's a good thing, but I still take issue with what you said. One shouldn't let imprecations drip so lightly off the tongue.

When I was very young, perhaps fifteen, I once said "damn you" to my brother in a fit of rage. It is a sin I will never forget, of an entirely different order than anything I had ever shouted in anger before.

On the upside, that may well be the moment when God began cleansing me from the worst of my wrathfulness, which has become much diminished in the years since.

In full voice I also commend the Esolen piece. A beautiful little vignette. And here's a link to the thread where it first appeared, posted on Jan 27, 2007 3:01:03 PM. A good thread on the whole, too, in considering such issues.

[James A. Altena]

Michael,

On the contrary -- you have a moral reponsibility to use language with the greatest accuracy and care -- cf. James 3:1-12. You can't let yourself off the hook so easily for the things you write by with a claim that "I know you think you know what I said, but I don't think you understand that what I said is not what I meant." Why shoud *anyone* "understand" that what you *said* is not what you *meant*?

You have an obligation to say what you mean, clearly and unambiguously. Other people do not have an obligation to exercise a quasi-divine omniscience to discern an intent by you that differs from your actual words. (This is particularly true in writing as opposed to in person conversation, since in the former there are not the additional verbal and physical cues present in the latter -- "body language" -- that can alter or clarify meaning.)

I quite reasonably take your words to mean exactly what they say. If you mean something else, then you have a responsiblity to say that something else instead, and to apologize for your faulty use of language, instead of blaming others for taking your statements at face value.

There was nothing complex about your statement. You straightforwardly stated a wish for another person to be sent to Hell. It's time you stop making excuses for that and simply retract it instead.

[Dirk Van Glabeke]

'Might you instead consider being a little less sure that you are so much smarter than they are, even when you are convinced they are wrong?'

James, I suspect you learnt this through some deep and critical examination of your own past posts. : )
Bravo!

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

>>> I quite reasonably take your words to mean exactly what they say. <<<

A slippery slope to the dreaded "literalism" pejorative?

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

;-)

Forgot to include a smiley face to above comment!

[Bobby Winters]

Match made in heaven.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>Match made in heaven.<<<

Or Newark.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

SpongBob!

;-)

[Judy Warner]

Bobbsey Twins.

[Michael]

>>It's time you stop making excuses for that and simply retract it instead.<<

Mr. Altena, if it was not made clear enough for you, I am not blaming you for misreading anything. I said that "whether due to an error in my own wording or an implication they pulled out of it that was not intended" my goal is not to argue. If it quite pleases you to stop preaching and start reading, I put rather clearly that there are errors to be made, and nowhere did I make an excuse for it. You read something that wasn't there besides the Hell statement--you read my calling liberals morons and myself some highfalutin egoist, which was due to you, not to me. Now, if it pleases you, here is my literal retraction: "May the Rev. Dr. Redding not be condemned to Hell except by the will of Him who is Sovereign; may my error be corrected and forgiven, for I am not God, and it is not my place to judge the state of one's eternal soul."

And yes, if you read that as short, snappy and angry, it is. Because, frankly, now you are reading what isn't there, you are reading beyond face value, and it irritates me in the greatest to see hypocrisy in any form, including when it is in myself. If you are quite finished removing the splinter from my eye, remove the plank from your own, and I shall work doubly hard to do the same for myself.

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

Indeed, I hope that MC might be something more than a community -- i.e., a family. And if we thought about it and behaved as it if were a family, living in the same household, perhaps a greater degree of civility and courtesy might prevail between the family members than has recently been in evidence on some threads.

Posted by: James A. Altena | Jun 9, 2007 2:37:08 PM

[Stuart Koehl]

"Every family has its ups and downs"==
--Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winder"

[Katheryn Walker]

Michael,

I graduated from Gonzaga (in '99 -- my how time flies!) and I loved it. Just thought I'd mention that it's a great first choice, or at least it was eight years ago. I've had some friends attack and question it because it's a Jesuit Institution, but I don't remember anything that was problematic.

Sincerely,

Katheryn (who is becoming quite nostalgic, thinking about her alma mater)

[Francesca]

Michael writes: >>Seattle Pacific is not a decent school relative to a place like Seattle U. It might be perfectly even in a race, but it's not better. If Seattle U is dangerously liberal on the Catholic spectrum, the leading force on the SPU campus is the emergents, with a strong identity in Mars Hill Church, founded and run by Mark Driscoll, who is "theologically conservative and culturally liberal" (as if it's possible to separate the two). I've considered UW, and it's one of the schools I'm applying to. I have friends on all the campuses of the major local schools--Gonzaga (2 friends), Seattle U, UW (4 friends), SPU (1 friend), PLU (2 friends), UPS (1 friend), Concordia University - Portland (1 friend), University of Portland (2 friends) and Reed College (wow, liberal, 1 friend)--so I consider myself pretty well aware of what happens on campus and the general cultural stance of the body at large.<<

Michael, if you plan to continue to graduate school, as I hope you do, you might want to seriously consider Reed. While Reed may be culturally liberal, there is strong emphasis on the Great Books and, unusual for a liberal arts college, it's outstanding in the sciences. It was recently ranked as the top private, four-year undergraduate college for producing Ph.D.'s in all fields of study and as one of the best in terms of overall academic experience for undergraduates. Reed produces Rhodes, Fulbright, and other academic scholarship winners out of all proportion to the size of the college. A degree from Reed would be a great stepping stone to a top graduate program. I'm sure all this is nothing new to you, but I just wanted to put in my two cents. Good luck and I hope you make the choice that is best for you.

[Michael]

Francesca,

I want to go to grad school, and I am not adverse to the concept of a liberal cultural climate pervading my academics. I went to our fine public schooling system for all but preschool, so it's not like there's some weird cultural influx that I haven't yet been exposed to. Certainly being immersed in it would be different, but there are people from all walks of life, from all cultural perspectives, from all colleges, that have survived.

I'm not applying to Reed for one reason only: I couldn't get in. I was a royal screw-up in high school, of the high-minded theory that homework was really a silly study tool (which it is) and sort of ignored that it was part of my grade. Therefore, my GPA is not really indicative of how well I grasped material. And GPA's are what admitting universities look at. Was I foolish? Absolutely, and I regret it everyday I'm still at home instead of at a fine institute of higher learning.

I'm not perfect, just smart.

[Bobby Winters]

Michael,

Some thoughts that I'd like to share, and I don't doubt that you may have come up with some on your own. If you'd like to get into a better college, but your grades are bad, go to one that is not top of the line and get good grades for a year. You might find that you are able to transfer some place better if you have good SAT/ACT scores.

I would like to take the liberty of disagreeing with you on homework being a silly study tool. There is no doubt a lot of silly homework given, but sometimes there is no substitute. I speak from the point of view of one who has been teaching mathematics for 24 years. There are mental muscles that need to be exercised.

Have you ever considered obscure state universities in small midwestern towns? :)

[Michael]

Mr. Winters,

Thank you, sir. As to mathematics, it is funny that you should mention that, because it is in the hard sciences where my grades faltered. Language and arts classes tend to prescribe homework only on occasion, and that generally for projected periods such as an essay or analysis. It seemed to me that doing 20 problems consisting of the application of the same principles was just mundane. If I got the principle once, what makes you think I wouldn't get it the ensuing 19 times? A student in the youth group had been practicing similar homework philsophy with math, and the math teacher (my old teacher, same school) told him: "I've only had two people who could ace this class without doing any homework: Michael Harrell and David Frerichs." The student replied: "But I'm not a genius like Michael." "Yes, I know. Do you see our problem?" Flattering, to be sure, but I trust you understand my point--and my foolishness.

As to obscure state u's in small midwestern towns...sir, out of curiosity, where do you teach?

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

Michael,

Given where you state this: "Truth, I side with you on the historical issue...You have shown that Jesus--in your estimation, though this is not obvious by what he said--and the Fathers believed in the historicity of Jonah."

Although not horrible, it still might behoove you to find an institution where professors can exegete a bible passage correctly.

;-)

[Francesca]

Michael writes: >>I'm not applying to Reed for one reason only: I couldn't get in. I was a royal screw-up in high school, of the high-minded theory that homework was really a silly study tool (which it is) and sort of ignored that it was part of my grade. Therefore, my GPA is not really indicative of how well I grasped material. And GPA's are what admitting universities look at. Was I foolish? Absolutely, and I regret it everyday I'm still at home instead of at a fine institute of higher learning.<<

Michael, you might be surprised. Some colleges are very open to accepting bright underachievers and understand that they sometimes get lost and frustrated and lose direction when underchallenged. It's probably not so much that you were foolish about school, but that you were placed in an incompatible environment, imho. In a college application, you might try writing an essay about your school experiences to explain the GPA? Also, don't hesitate to include those scores you mentioned from John Hopkins in an application. Reed is the sort of place that seeks out high *potential* students (not necessarily those who jumped through the right hoops at school.) Another is, for example, Knox College, IL. Good luck!

[Judy Warner]

Michael, this has nothing to do with your practical problem, but I think you would enjoy reading John Gatto's views on education.

[Bobby Winters]

>>As to obscure state u's in small midwestern towns...sir, out of curiosity, where do you teach?<<

Michael,
I teach at Pittsburg State University in Pittsburg, Kansas. The Pittsburg part confuses people. We are an old coal-mining town and took the name from the one in Pennsylvania because of that. We have a population of 20,000 which includes some of the students. There are 30,000 in the county. Pitt State has 7000 students.

When I teach, I assign homework almost every lecture, but I don't grade it. The tests are made from homework-like problems. You'd probably like that, but I am teaching less these days because of my administrative assignment.

In life there are lots really stupid things we do just because they are part of the system. As you've learned, we ignore them at our peril.

[Bobby Winters]

Pittsburg State
Look at the link above.

[James A. Altena]

Michael,

Retraction accepted. Now, how about not implying that other people are hypocritical? Nothing I wrote warrants such an insinuation. "If it quite pleases you to stop preaching and start reading" also applies to your "planks and splinters" response to me. Iron sharpening iron applies to both shards alike.

[Michael]

>>Retraction accepted. Now, how about not implying that other people are hypocritical? Nothing I wrote warrants such an insinuation. "If it quite pleases you to stop preaching and start reading" also applies to your "planks and splinters" response to me.<<

To the first, I meant to imply it. You may find it a strong word, but you, who are instructing me to choose my words carefully, ought to do the same. You accused me of, or implied that, I saying something I had not said--in regards to "liberals" in particular--and if you are going to put words in my mouth, I should think you would not tell me not to put words in yours.

As to the second, yes, of course you are right, which is why I wrote "I will work doubly hard to to do the same for myself."

Neither of us is perfect, Mr. Altena. I apologize if you felt insulted, but it was not meant to be an insult. I was merely calling it as I saw it. Would, then, that our hatchet be buried in the understanding that we cannot probe the depths of each others' intentions.

[James A. Altena]

"I was merely calling it as I saw it."

As have I. Why are you entitled to do so, but not me?

"You accused me of, or implied that, I saying something I had not said--in regards to 'liberals' in particular--and if you are going to put words in my mouth, I should think you would not tell me not to put words in yours."

I did not put words in your mouth. I quoted you verbatim:

"To Hell with her, and I mean it quite literally...."

As for

". . . the unfortunate truth is I've never met someone on the liberal end of the spectrum who has a full grasp of the foundations and implications of their views--moronic."

Unfortunately your quibbling here necessitates a tediously elementary grammatcial and logical analysis of your statement.

As written and punctuated (the hyphen creating an apposition), "moronic" applies most naturally to the direct object of the main clause -- "someone on the liberal end of the spectrum" -- rather than to the prepositional phrase "the foundations and implications of their views" in the subordinate clause beginning with "who". At best, the preceding referent is ambiguous, and you have no basis on which to accuse me of being "hypocritical" for assuming the most correct grammatical referent. Again, it is your responsibility to write correctly -- a lesson I always emphasized during the years I taught college undergraduates and corrected their papers.

However, even accepting your intended grammatical referent object, when you say that you've "never" -- never -- met someone of the liberal persuasion whose views were not moronic, it is a very straightforward implication of your 100% correlation between "moronic" and the "views" of liberals that you indeed regard all liberals to be moronic, subsequent disclaimers notwithstanding. And the fact that you find "deriding their views in discussion" to be acceptable, as opposed to simply refuting them, is one I find disturbing.

This brings us back to Chesterton's point -- it is very possible for someone to be deeply wrong without being "moronic", or ignorant, or dishonest. "Moronic" is a term of contempt, and I doubt that any of us can consider some person's fundamental views to be "moronic", and treat them with derision, without holding the person in contempt as well.

"Would, then, that our hatchet be buried in the understanding that we cannot probe the depths of each others' intentions."

Here lies a great difference between us. I criticized something you actually wrote, and the direct logical implications thereof. You have responded with an ad hominem attack against me as a person, charging me with hypocrisy. I criticized your statement's content; you criticzed my character. I did not thereby probe your intentions, but you thereby presumed to probe and divine mine. And when I acepted your retraction of your original statement, you responded by reaffirming that attack. Where "burying the hatchet" is to be found in your latest response, I do not see. The renewed ad hominem attack only buries it in my back.

"I'm not perfect, just smart."

Please explain why you publicly advise other people that you are smart.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>"Moronic" is a term of contempt<<<

Unless, of course, it is a mere statement of fact. Come visit DC, I'll show you many excellent examples.

[Bob Gardner]

Please explain why you publicly advise other people that you are smart.

Cause otherwise they wouldn't know by anything I wrote, said, or did. Like, for instance, answering questions addressed to someone else. Not sure why they do it, just telling you why I do it! :)

[labrialumn]

Concordia Portland is off the reservation, liberal and openly teaching against our LCMS beleifs, which may be part of why the Concordias want to appoint more board members of their own choosing, get rid of rules for who can be a university president, and operate as one university (presumably to bring Mequon in line), National Convention will be 'interesting'.

If you can bear to leave the Oregon country for a while, I recommend Franciscan of Steubenville, and Hillsdale.

[Paul]

This lady is around the bend. One cannot be a Muslim AND a Christian !!

[Ethan Cordray]

The air smells bad in Steubenville, and you can't drink the tap water. Otherwise, it's a nice enough place, though I imagine a non-Roman Catholic might feel a bit uncomfortable.

I'd still recommend Wheaton for a liberal arts education, which I think is the best kind. Just make sure to pick and choose your profs, as it's as scattershot as all Evangelicalism nowadays (or almost -- there isn't much support for the homosexual agenda, yet).

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>The air smells bad in Steubenville, and you can't drink the tap water. <<<

Was this before or after they walked away from charismatic Catholicism?

[Judy Warner]

I'd recommend Hillsdale and you can email me if you'd like to know more.