Eschatology Today

Inaugurated Eschatology: (n.) The wonderful already-but-not-yet tension and reality of redemption. Read the theological reflections of Pastor Jay and others around him below. This is a great place to dialog about the beauties of the Gospel!

Whither Wheaton? Reflections Part 2: Sociological Vision

I haven't really worked out a brilliant pattern to how these reflections are going to unfold. I could have back loaded this one, but I feel compelled to write it first. Usually the NT starts with objective, doctrinal, conceptual truth and then moves to praxis. I am going to start with something a bit more this side of the practical.

If Wheaton goes the way of a "wiggle-room" systemic educational ideology (read Chignell's piece to get that) then Wheaton is going to have some very tangible very big changes sociologically. It may not be the first year, but it will happen and be apparent within a few years. Look, it is already happened in that the wiggle-room approach is functionally already gaining ground as more and more faculty pedagogically approach their disciplines from the vantage point that Chignell is endorsing. That is why Chignell finds the current Wheaton quite different than the one we went to: more moderate politically, more agnosticism vis a vis homosexuality, abortion, inerracy, etc; more social awareness and impetus,etc. What do I mean by sociological change?

Wheaton is going to look a lot more like a Calvin or Baylor, in that there is going to be a much less uniform vision of piety and communal moral behavior and thus, quite frankly, a much more quasi secular feel on campus with all that ones sees on a secular campus: partying, experimentation in sexuality, and poly-religiosity (not just different orthodox traditions). Wheaton has never been a perfectly virtuous society, but wiggle-room will indeed lead to a place where a certain collective moral reasoning will be highly weakened. This is the historical pattern without exception. Schools that have become center weighted theologically and have loosened definitions of Bibliology have always become less uniform and less particularly Christian in their campus sociological atmosphere.

That, I think is a huge loss and very meaningful reason to avoid this wiggle room approach. There is enough plain and simple sin in Christians and in their communities. That is a fact, and no hiring philosophy or acceptance philosophy will change that. But, the current approach, I think, does a significant way to promote a communal moral conscience where traditional Biblical understanding of interpreting the world and reacting in righteousness are sustained and fed to maturity. Other systems, at the very least, cease to support such an environment.

Of course, as a pastor, I do agree that it is the context of the local church where Christian community is experienced and made known in its full context, but I do believe there can be and should be places like the current Wheaton. And now, in light of the fact that Dr. Philip Graham Ryken has been announced as the new president, I am enthused to know that God seems to be directing the school to grow along the current trajectory - and so with growth will come change (in some ways into what the Whither Wheaton crowd envisions) but change that will promote a gospel saturated sociological dynamic at Wheaton's campus.

Next post: pastoral hearted community in light of differences.

Whither Wheaton? Reflections Part 1

I have thought long and hard about putting a dog into this hunt. I may regret this later. But, while not so much provoked, I feel inspired to respond to what has come to be quite a discussed article written by a classmate of mine from Wheaton College, Dr. Andrew Chignell entitled Whither Wheaton?, which now has its own website if you are curious to read it. It is an articulate, thoughtful, yet overtly critical analysis of the last chapter of Wheaton under the current and outgoing president, Dr. Duane Litfin. Andrew and I never met, but I remember him. He was known as one of the more intellectualy gifted students Wheaton had seen in some time, along with another classmate, yet another faculty child. I remember respecting his intellect and I recall some pieces written during our students days already reflecting the disquiet in his recent article.

Let me begin with an important disclaimer: Dr. Litfin is my father in law. "Wow, hold on!", you say. Well, this of course puts me at a bias, doesn't it? But, isn't everyone? Isn't Andrew at a bias? The profs he interviewed? The sympathetic alumni who have commented on the blog (some of whom are good friends)? Look, apart from well reasoned, researched, longstanding, and important thinking by Chignell and others who represented his concern in his article, you better believe there is a lot, a lot, of viscera in all of this. There is a lot of emotion, and that comes out in this article. It is not even tucked away well. But, as a proponent of attempted objectivity and belief in sufficient objectivity, let me offset my relationship to Dr. Litfin and all the emotion I too bring a bit with some other important data points that my help my voice, given my perspective. I grew up in a post-Christian Marin County, CA. I am bi-racial. I transferred to Wheaton from UC Berkeley, having never attended a Christian private school until Wheaton. I am a curious bystander, in many respects. Put another way, I don't really have a lot of the experience of the "evangelical bubble" and that "frustrated evangelical/post-evangelical-but-still-orthodox" thing going on in the voice of Chignell and the many grads who have affirmed his article (a probably minority, though)and from which the theo-ideology that is the basis of its interpretations and conclusions stem from, at least in part. Yes, there is an objective debate over pedagogy, educational philosophy, community feel, institutional mission, etc, and yet all of those still stem from the deeper root system of theo-ideology and the ever deeper issue of the human heart. I am not immune, and yet nor am I a wealthy, white, male, who grew up in Grand Rapids and blindly ticks of the R section on a voting ballet (no offence GR! Love you, too!).

So, let me just begin by saying that I want to reflect on several points of this situation - and to draw attention to that fact - there are several points. There is involved in all of this: theo-ideology, community dynamics, leadership, integrity, sociology, and the human heart - indeed that may be the most imporant reflection, while the most subjective and seemingly off point to Chignell et al. But, I am a pastor and it is my lovingly subversive and apocalyptic mission to keep things coming back to the heart.

In all of this I want to ask these questions (and ones that still apply to Wheaton and are not delimited to the church): How could the gospel have been lived out better in Wheaton's history and in the community voice of Chignell's piece? What of love? What is the most important part of Wheaton's mission that is so worth it, that it is worth looking cheesy, lame, and vilified if it were to defend it, even from among its own, even if done with great love and forbearance? So, we begin a series of reflections...