Presbyterian College’s commission to examine the school’s “church-relatedness” has reported to the board of trustees that its faculty no longer need be Christian. While I was honored to serve on this commission as the Savannah Presbytery’s representative, I believe this recommendation is outrageous, misguided, and embodies a bizarre approach to embracing diversity.
The report of the Commission, chaired by Allen McSween of Fourth Church in Greenville, S.C., makes the formal finding that “the faculty is the key element in the education of students to fulfill the mission of the College” (Report of the Commission, p. 9). With that statement, I am in complete agreement.
After recognizing the faculty’s key role, however, the majority of the members of the commission then recommend that the faculty of this Christian institution no longer need be Christian. With that recommendation (Report, Recommendation Number 3, p. 10), I am in strong opposition and, therefore, submitted a minority report. How the majority can advocate such a change is simply beyond my poor comprehension as a minister of Christ’s gospel and an advocate of Christian education.
I hasten to point out that there is nothing wrong with the recommendation in and of itself. Indeed, the wording of the recommendation is, I suspect, intentionally benign. The recommendation is that the College insure that new faculty members are oriented to and embrace the distinctive mission of the College. And who could oppose a professor understanding and supporting a college’s mission?
The problem with this recommendation is not found in its wording but rather in what it would delete and replace. The current, long-standing requirement is that, at this Christian school, the faculty members are required to be “active members of a Christian church.” That the professors understand the college’s mission would replace the requirement that the professors be church-going Christians.
Perhaps it is the commission and not the professors who need to understand this Presbyterian college’s mission.
The majority of the commission, in their findings accompanying this recommendation, attempt to obscure the effect of this recommendation and to dilute how monumentally bad an idea it really is. They attempt to take the salt out of Presbyterian College’s commitment to its mission by noting how complex the world is today and how “many faith traditions coexist” in our communities, although not always in harmony (Report, p. 9).
Perhaps the majority of the commission should be informed that the world has long been a complex place. Even in Jesus’ time, there were many faith traditions – to use the majority’s word – which coexisted, although not always in harmony. Yes, as the majority suggest, it is essential to understand others and their faith traditions, perhaps now more than ever. But I honestly believe Jesus Himself would be saddened, if not embarrassed, by these findings and this recommendation. Jesus was no stranger to living in a complex world where different faith “traditions” abounded. Yet, He called upon us to live in that world not only for our “traditions,” but for a commitment to our faith, our beliefs. Of course Presbyterian College graduates need to learn about the differences among religions as well as the threads they have in common.
But none of that adds up to this Christian school needing to have non-Christians teach its students. Why? It is as simple as this: Each school has a distinctive mission in preparing its students for that complex world. For a school that is Christian-based, its mission is to envelop and nurture its students in a manner that the students’ faith will be solid and well-grounded when they enter that complex world (though I suspect most college students believe their worlds are already pretty complex).
Other schools have their own missions and envelop and nurture their students in their own ways to prepare them for that complex world. I suspect the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, for example, does a good job of enveloping and nurturing its students. Would you be surprised that West Point would not hire a pacifist or conscientious objector as a faculty member to teach, say, math? Of course not.
And it wouldn’t be an issue of whether that applicant knows his mathematical formulas or even whether he’s gifted in getting the course material across to students. The issue would be whether that teacher’s views detract from the mission of the school. At West Point, the mission of that school pervades that school, just as the Presbyterian College spirit should pervade Presbyterian College.
West Point seeks to train its students’ bodies, minds, and I suspect, souls in a certain manner. A pacifist on the faculty would endanger the mission of the school because of the potential that the faculty member might lead even one student away from the mission. More accurately put, a pacifist faculty member takes away a spot that should be filled by a faculty member committed to the school’s mission in order that the mission might be fulfilled.
Having the faculty oriented to and embrace the distinctive mission of the school, as the majority set out in their recommendation, is fine, but those verbs are a long way from believing in or being committed to the school’s mission.
The majority declare that “faculty is the key element in the education of students to fulfill the mission of the College” (Report, p. 9). That mission, as set forth in the school’s bylaws, “is to develop within the framework of Christian faith the mental, physical, moral, and spiritual capacities of each student.” If indeed the faculty members are the key to instilling an informed Christian faith in students, then to charge a non-Christian faculty member with teaching the Christian faith is simply illogical nonsense. A professor cannot profess what he does not possess.
Finally, in this article I have spoken of Presbyterian College as a “Christian school” and in doing so, I have been inaccurate. For I have checked, and it is not. I have walked in her classrooms, I have looked at her buildings, I have slept in her guest rooms, and I have even eaten at the school cafeteria; and I did not find a single brick or piece of mortar that professed Christianity.
Schools, like houses, are “Christian” because of how they are built. If they are built upon a foundation that is weak, which lacks faith, which rejects faith in Christ, then they will collapse. If they are built upon a foundation that is strong, which bravely professes that faith in this complex world, then they will stand.
There’s an old joke that “Those who can’t do, teach.” If this recommendation were to be adopted, that old joke should be told slightly differently, “At Presbyterian College, those who don’t believe, teach.” But the joke will then be on the students of this college, and it will be a bad one.
I respectfully, strongly disagree with this recommendation of the commission’s report. I pray that the trustees of the Presbyterian College will honor the school’s mission, will justify the Presbyterian Church’s past and, hopefully, future support of the school, and will reject the recommendation.
Nelle McCorkle Bordeaux currently is the parish associate with First Church in Savannah, Ga. She is a graduate of Davidson College and Union Theological Seminary in Richmond.
