Author: Lydia Wilson

Why I Don’t Care About Abortion

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date April 12, 2014
3 Comments on Why I Don’t Care About Abortion

In the aftermath of the L.I.F.E. Club panel, a good portion of the resulting conversation has been devoted to whether or not the question “When does life begin?” was properly addressed. No matter the speaker’s opinion about the panel as a whole, all voices seemed to agree that this is vital question that needs to be addressed before any dialogue concerning abortion can occur. I have to say, I think this precondition is incredibly damaging, regardless of which position you take.

The motives of those who ask this question are the same: to determine whether or not abortion can be considered morally wrong, and therefore punishable by the law. Pro-lifers push toward conception. Pro-choicers push toward birth. Each wants to feel justified in their argument. They want to feel irrefutable. And so they seek out ultimatums. Is abortion murder? From each side comes either a resounding yes or no. The problem is that this becomes the beginning and end of the conversation. No middle ground can be reached. And few people have realized that this is perhaps the most irrelevant question anyone could be asking.

To begin with, let’s look at what’s being said. There are those who are pro-life. They see abortion as a definitive act of killing. Something was created, and abortion destroyed it. They want abortion to be completely illegal. They are “anti-abortion.” If that’s one side of the argument, then the other side should be… “Pro-death”? No, that’s not it. Are they “pro-abortion”? No, that’s not it either. Pro-lifers are anti-abortion, but they are facing off against those who identify themselves as pro-CHOICE. Is it just me, or are “life” and “choice” not exactly opposites? Perhaps the reason the arguments between the two camps haven’t been going anywhere is that they aren’t actually arguing about the same thing.

No one, I can guarantee you, no one besides Daniel Tosh is out there in the world swinging a sign that reads “We should have abortions!” Rather, the appeal is this: “We should have the RIGHT to have abortions!” Most of you reading this will likely believe that abortion is killing, and that killing is wrong. You’ll also most likely think that no one should have the right to kill. But since there’s also no one out there (I’m guessing) with a sign that says “We should have the right to murder!” there must be something different about abortion. There’s clearly a reason that anyone would fight to allow this action, or to contradict its immorality. So, these are the questions that we should be asking, to replace the extraneous question of life: What are the reasons for abortion? And, what can we do to eliminate those reasons?

A person’s choice to have an abortion is, of course, inspired by any number of unfortunate factors: poverty, rape, incest, age, violence, medical issues, mental instability, and any number of extreme situations— there are babies born into slavery and prostitution, babies born destined to end up abandoned. Whether or not you agree that all of these circumstances merit an abortion, certainly you can see how some of them do, or at the very least, you can recognize the need for a system that can be responsible for the infants it prevents from being aborted. You can recognize the need for improved sex education. You can recognize the need for a change.

So, is abortion murder? Who cares? The truth is, abortion does not matter. It doesn’t. If the main bone you have to pick is simply a question of the beginning and end of life, you need to broaden your focus to include any kind of death—death from war, death from starvation, death disease. All of these deaths, including death from abortion, grow out of the same causes—poverty, power and control, lack of education, terrible situations. Untimely deaths will not cease until these causes are eradicated. So in the meantime, yes: women should have the right to have an abortion. And, no: we should not talk about whether or not that’s wrong. Because the way to prevent abortion, and war, every other kind of injustice in the world is not to tell people to “just stop.” The way to prevent it is to make it unnecessary. That’s an enterprise I think everyone can support, be they pro-life or pro-choice.

Tags abortion, cause, murder, poverty, pro choice, pro life, war

Stories In Focus

Solanas’ Upside Down Wows with Cinematography, Ultimately Disappoints

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date March 29, 2014

Last week was a medium-to-heavy stressful haze of completing one project only to realize that I had another due. My roommate and I decided it was high time we just give up and find a potentially emotionally taxing movie to watch in order to have an excuse for the release of our tears of desperation. We settled on Upside Down, a 2012 release written and directed by Juan Solanas. We chose Upside Down for a two reasons. First, because of its stars. The movie features Jim Sturgess of Across the Universe and 21 fame, and Kirsten Dunst, who is quite possibly my most favorite actress. Our second reason was the intriguing premise.

Solanas crafted a world in which two planets rotate together mere yards apart, each with their own separate gravity. Matter from one planet maintains its own gravity on the other planet, thus making it impossible for humans to walk on the opposite planet. The planets are connected by a skyscraper housing TransWorld, a company that governs interplanetary contact and commerce. “Up Above” is the affluent planet. “Down Below” is the impoverished planet. As my roommate put it, “This is a very obvious metaphor for the Global North and South.”

As you might expect, Sturgess and Dunst play Adam and Eden, citizens of Down Below and Up Above, respectively, who meet by chance on twin mountaintops and fall in love. And so unfolds a classic forbidden love story, following the struggles of two people separated by class, distance, and in this case, gravity.

For the first half of the movie, all was well. The dual worlds kept the otherwise mundane plotline interesting. The cinematography was beyond stunning. Picture for yourself the possibilities: simultaneous sunsets and sunrises, mirrored horizons, the stark and beautiful contrasts between the gleaming Above and the ashen Below. All of these images and more were fantastically represented in this imaginative landscape. It was truly stunning to watch. The score, too, was amazing. Instrumentals by a variety of composers accompanied the cinematography. It was almost enough to watch the movie just for those two elements. Almost.

Unfortunately, as the movie progressed, several faults became more and more obvious. Dunst’s considerable talents were wasted in a role that reduced her to little more than the damsel in distress. Eden’s scenes were short and all but one or two were merely flirtatious conversations with Adam. Sturgess plays a lovably optimistic Adam, however, who was the main focus: a visionary inventor blindly using his skills to pursue the ever-elusive Eden rather than to improve the standard of living in his police-state planet.

Various plot holes grew and grew until they basically bottomed out during the clearly rushed conclusion. It’s not too much of a spoiler to say that somehow, miraculously, the star-crossed lovers are finally brought together through an unexplained turn of events. The film concludes with glossy pans of an economically balanced future, with children from both Above and Below happily playing together on the same plane. This change is apparently sparked by the romance between Adam and Eden, although the hows and whys of it are never delved into.

Overall, Upside Down would have worked much better as a short story rather than a feature-length film. While I give the actors involved props for making their performances memorable even with limited material, I don’t suggest watching this film unless you are just really, really, really into cinematography.

Tags 21 fame, across the universe, adam and eden, cinematography, down below, global north and south, jim strugess, juan solonas, up avoce, upside down

Opinions

Working For an Uncertain Future

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date March 22, 2014

This past Wednesday was HELP Day, the day upon which I usually rollover in my bed at about 10 am and sleep-think to myself, “Why can’t this day occur on a Friday so we can have a long weekend?” This year, however, I was awakened early to the realization of what HELP Day signified in my life.

I had a senior seminar group critique that was rescheduled to take place on HELP Day. My fellow art majors and I are in the process of preparing our work for the senior show, with a looming deadline set in late April. There are times when I feel as though my past years of art classes have been leading me towards this ultimate goal, as they should, and then there are times when I feel that I’ve been dropped into my senior year at random, scrambling to fully realize what my art is even about. In that respect, all of us in the group seemed to be testing the waters that day. As an example of print size for some of our projects, Professor Rhett pulled out an image he had printed. It depicted a ripped and weathered manuscript covered in what looked like Sanskrit. He explained that it was recently discovered sheet music, written in organ tablature notation by a 15-year-old Johann Sebastian Bach. “Gee,” said a fellow student, “What am I doing with my life?”

There we were, on the day of preparation for our graduation after four long years of study, sitting around a table looking over the fruits of our labor, and we were questioning whether or not it had all been one big waste of time. Our culture looks up to Renaissance men and women, innovators with unique life stories who achieve far above and beyond the norm. Benjamin Franklin became a self-made man starting at the tender age of 12, and on top of his numerous contributions to the United States as a country, was also the creator of nine indispensable inventions. Steve Jobs was a college dropout who completely revolutionized the computer industry. Daily our televisions and newsfeeds are filled with stories of one prodigy or another, a 6-year-old who can sing like Aretha Franklin, a Pakistani teen raising awareness for education rights.

It’s a tough standard to be faced with when contemplating the very strong possibility of being unemployed following graduation. Several of my alumni friends searched for over a year before finding a job, and in many cases they were eventually forced to settle for a job they dislike. Two simultaneous and contrasting truths seem to be held in the minds of every 20-something in America right now: first, that they most definitely do not want to be stuck in a 9 to 5 job that they only tolerate in order to pay the bills. They want to change the world. They want to do something that they love. And second, that the job climate is tentative at best, and they’re not entirely certain how they will survive. In light of this paradox, what exactly does a viable career path look like in present day America? “Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps” is no longer a realistic option, or even an option at all.

When I was making my plans for life after high school, whether or not to attend Houghton was not a question. College was what I’d been advised was best since my very first day of kindergarten. My interests in writing and making art were only ever highly encouraged. Not once was I cautioned that I should choose a more marketable subject in which to major. I was told, without hesitation, to follow my dreams. But with the arrival of HELP Day came the knowledge that there is no opportunity guaranteed for me. What has my liberal arts education truly accomplished? It’s made me a “citizen of the world.” It’s encouraged me to think critically. Are these skills that will pay my rent and cover my loans? Or are they only useful to me under circumstances in which I already have a steady income? Please don’t mistake me—I value my years at Houghton. I am grateful for all that I’ve learned here, and for the connections I have made with professors who care about my future and my well-being. I do not doubt for a second that it will pay off—in the long term. Short term, however, I am wondering–what can I do with my life?

Tags Aretha Franklin, Benjamin Franklin, Graduation, Pakistani, Steve Jobs

Opinions

Intentional, By Any Other Name

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date March 1, 2014
1 Comment on Intentional, By Any Other Name

Over four long years living and working in one location, it’s easy to develop a list of pet peeves and annoyances specific to Houghton campus. You can refer to your own list of grievances–maybe you don’t like the isolation. Maybe you’re fed up with the weather. Many of the typical complaints, I’m sure, have to do with the side-effects of living in a Christian community. I’ve heard numerous people disparage the over-use of buzzwords and phrases such as “blessed,” “on my heart,” and “accountability.” What I rarely hear discouraged, however, are academic buzzwords. Perhaps it’s due to the fact that many people on campus have been steeped in religious language their whole lives, whereas all the isms of academic language–existentialism, postmodernism, dispensationalism–are a new and exciting experience.

One word in particular that never fails to irk me is intentionality. This word seems to be a house favorite at Houghton College. I heard it so often my first year that I couldn’t help but assume that Houghton must be the most prudent place on earth: a magical land in slow-motion where people move with deliberate and measured steps everywhere they go, like studious sloths. Little did I know that the word’s usage would only continue to multiply until this my senior year, when it colors the speech of my fellow classmates like profanity from the mouth of a sailor.

What is it that intentionality means, exactly? Since living with intention is the new purpose-driven life, we ought to have a solid definition. Most often when my peers discuss living with intention, what they mean is that they intend to make informed decisions and see situations from every possible angle. They want to live in a way that they believe does no harm to anyone else. They want to make a difference. They want to put their passions behind their actions.

Those are an awful lot of connotations to demand from one word. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, intentionality is “the power of minds to be about, to represent, or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs.” Dictionary.com defines intentional as “done with intention or on purpose.” Intention is purpose, purpose is intention. The fact is, the very definition of intentionality is far too vague and redundant to support its frequency in daily Houghton conversations. It’s a superficial word, and its iteration is ever-so-slightly pretentious, attributing more weight to our actions (or lack thereof) than what might actually exist. After all, what is unintentional? Anything we choose to do, by definition, is intentional. While we are in college, “living” with intention ends up being “thinking” with intention. But, when we graduate, will we be able to make the transition to “acting” with intention, and, more importantly, will we graduate with grand ideas only to realize that, in the “real world,” intentionality just might be completely meaningless?

No matter your personal impression and use of the word, the question remains: how are our academic concepts and “intentions” going to translate into life after college? Our culture of late is intensely focused on youth, experience, and personal happiness. I scroll over countless Buzzfeed and Thought Catalog articles covering fantastic places that you simply have to visit, all the best things to do before you die, how to put your own happiness first, how to worry less, why money isn’t important, and why you should avoid committing to a career path, marrying, or settling in any way when you are “too young,” i.e. below thirty-five. This mentality can’t help but to affect the mindsets of twenty-somethings across the board, even at Houghton, and even if only minimally. It’s likely that it springs from the currently dismal job and economic climate–a way to seem in control when one’s life will be inevitably remain aimless either way. Paired with the earnest Houghton student’s vision of impact and intentionality, however, this presents an interesting conundrum. The “real world,” for all the hard knocks and gritty characteristics that we make it out to inhabit, simply will not contain very many momentous and important decisions. We will be working at coffee shops and retail stores. We will be grasping for any opportunities that we can, and embracing any occasions for freedom.

I believe in doing good acts. I believe in helping others, working hard, and sticking to my principles. And I definitely think that the word intentionality is much too limited and ambiguous a word to encapsulate all of that. It is unrealistic, and it cannot survive life after Houghton. Applying the word intentionality too liberally idealizes the concept and distracts us from the honest choices that we will make in our lives. We need to start using the word intentionality with more intentionality.

Tags buzzword, intentionality, Residence Life, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Stories In Focus

Masculinity and Other Myths

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date February 15, 2014

Coming out of a chapel led by a female professor last year I was surprised to overhear a male student comment, “I just find her brand of feminism to be so damaging to masculinity.” During the service the word feminism was not used once, and yet the student found the speaker’s worldview contradictory, I can only assume because she was a woman and had expressed egalitarian ideas. It was clear in his manner of speech that he thought the label feminist was somehow derogatory and that masculinity was a quality of unquestionable value and importance.

I have no intentions of going into the complexities of the term feminist and how it is perceived in Christian circles. Suffice it to say that despite the Wesleyan Church in particular’s progressive traditions and rich history of equal rights and female ordination, the Church as a whole has hit a fundamentalist wall of sorts, and no doubt the mentalities of many of you on campus lie somewhere in the realm of “Well I’m not a feminist, but…” Grapple with those paradoxes in your own time. At the moment, however, I would like to focus on the latter half of the student’s statement.

What is masculinity, what is femininity, and why do they seem to be so important to our student, and to the general Christian culture? Let’s say that by masculinity he meant all things stereotypically male—power, dominance, strength, football, chopping down trees in the forest—and their apparent priority in Christian life. Certainly the Church has worked to affirm traits such as bravery, leadership, and protective instincts. These qualities are vital for a healthy body of Christ, and it goes without saying that where there are leaders, there must be followers. However, it is backward and a mistake to label these qualities as hallmarks of masculinity and to associate them exclusively with males. They are hallmarks of authority, to be sure, but as they can be found in either sex equally, it is illogical to say that the goals of feminism or egalitarianism could in any way be “damaging to masculinity.” There is no such thing.

Language and instruction within the Church often rely heavily on traditional gender roles, but this is unnecessary. It is most noticeable in the way the Church talks about marriage. Marriage apparently will not work if men and women do not properly carry out their respective duties as dominant and submissive. It is true, marriage, and any kind of interpersonal relationship for that matter, will not work if the individuals involved do not find balance and fulfillment. Their personalities must complement each other. Christians value marriage because it is a mirror of God’s relationship with the Church, but demanding that in every case the male must be the driving force in the relationship, while the female acts as the support bar simply does not make sense. Spouses should support and encourage each other in accordance with their personal needs, not their type casted needs. Human beings are complex and possess unique personalities, and it is ludicrous to assert that they can be so cleanly divided into Type A and Type B based on solely on one difference. If you find yourself in a panic, wondering if an onslaught of gender equality is going to ruin your chances at a happy, healthy marriage, I may have some advice for you: don’t marry someone you are not compatible with.

It is understandable that people seek to find affirmation from others for their actions and behaviors, and for some, this is easily done by embracing the projected differences between men and women. Men who are naturally assertive and genuinely enjoy physical activity find satisfaction in the knowledge that others respect them for it. The same goes for women who are graceful, soft-spoken, and in their element while tending to the needs of others. These are admirable characteristics, to be sure. What does this mean, though, for the individuals who are not inclined to such pursuits? Are they doomed to be unappreciated simply because they work hard at and excel in areas not typically accorded to their sex? Rather than laud individuals for living up to their stereotypes, should we not be praising them for doing whatever it is they choose to do with integrity, passion, and skill, no matter their sex?

Affirmation should be sought on an interpersonal, day-to-day level, not from society as a whole. Freedom to be who you are is vitally important, especially within the Church, where we each have a distinct and essential role to play. And these roles should not be judged based on whether or not they perpetuate or breakdown stereotypes, because in a perfect world, no one would be able to tell the difference. After all, “There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus!” (Gal. 3:28)

Tags christian culture, masculinity, type a, type b, wesleyan church

Opinions

Only If You Absolutely Must

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date January 25, 2014

In the world of Christian thought on marriage, two main viewpoints seem to be perpetuated: the first, that marriage is the end-all be-all of Christian life and is a perfect holy union sanctified by God. Many of my friends and people I have encountered at Houghton hold this opinion. They did not come to Houghton for the sole purpose of finding a spouse, but they do fervently believe that marriage and procreation is the best possible way to live out God’s purpose in their lives, and that not fulfilling this duty somehow falls ever-so-slightly short of Christian perfection. The second viewpoint runs along the lines of, “Really, folks, it is okay to be single.” Not better, not even great, just “okay.” As in, don’t worry if you have completely failed at finding “the one” God has for you, He can still use you even if you are lonely and alone. I mean, hey, Paul was single!

Yes, Paul was single, and he had an awful lot to say on the subject as well. In 1 Corinthians 7:38, he writes, “So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better.” Keyword here: better. In Paul’s mind, avoiding marriage is the ultimate goal, and only by staying single can God’s plans best play themselves out in your life. Jesus seemed to share the same opinion. When the disciples asked him if it was indeed better not to marry, He replied in Matthew 19:12, “The one who can accept this should accept it.” And, in Luke 20:35, He explains, “But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage.” Marriage is an earthly tradition, a vice. It is not “like the angels.”

So where does this leave those of us who would still view marriage as beautiful and special representation of Christ’s relationship with the Church? Certainly there is scriptural evidence for this way of thought as well. Often the body of believers is described as a bride being received by Christ at the resurrection, and in Song of Solomon the bedchamber is described as being blessed by God and His presence is with the bride and groom. What it means to have a committed marriage that is spiritually healthy and focused on God is also outlined clearly in the Bible. Paul himself describes what a Christian marriage should look like, instructing in 1 Corinthians 7:3-4, “The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.” Likewise Jesus speaks to the permanence of marriage in Matthew 19:6, saying, “Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” There is nothing wrong with marriage, and those who do marry have specific guidelines to follow when it comes to forming their relationship in accordance with God’s will.

However, Paul’s instructions are followed by a stipulation. In 1 Corinthians 7:6-7 & 9, he adds, “I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all of you were as I am. … But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” In other words, marriage is the lesser of two evils. It is the exception, not the rule. There is no “one” that God has chosen for you to marry, because God does not even really want you to get married. If you absolutely cannot help yourself and you must get married in order to keep from sinning though, it is okay. God will make an allowance for you.

If I am coming off a bit harsh, do not worry. I do not think, as it may appear in the last couple paragraphs, that marriage is the devil. As Jesus concedes in Luke 20:34, “The people of this age marry and are given marriage.” It is simply a fact of life, and within that fact, I believe that Christian relationships have the power to do good work for the Lord. I myself am engaged to be married. In my life I have been lucky enough to be surrounded by shining examples of strong Christian marriages. However, I do think that we need to seriously reconsider the ways in which we typically treat marriage within the Church.

To begin with, there is no evidence in scripture that marriage should in any way be one of the main goals of a person’s life. Pressure on young people to find the one God has intended for them is common in Christian circles. The result is a fevered rat race of young adults trying to figure out who to marry, taking dating relationships far too seriously, rushing into marriage, and feeling inadequate if unable to find a mate. Divorce rates are high, due in part to an increasingly relaxed stance on commitment and divorce, but also due to many people feeling that they should get married as soon as possible. Marriage is not intended to be in the forefront of every single person’s mind. Rather, it should be seen as an unnecessary and very serious step, one that only need be taken if one finds a true partner, someone that they cannot possibly live without, and, most importantly, someone who will not distract them from doing the work of the Lord, but instead be compatible and work with them.

In addition, God is willing to work with our differences and the personalities with which He has blessed us. From the beginning, He has acknowledged our tendency to loneliness, admitting in Genesis 2:18 that “It is not good for the man to be alone.” He is honest about the strengths and weaknesses of His people. As is stated in Matthew 19:8-9, He allowed Moses to permit the people to divorce, “because your hearts were hard,” even though “it was not this way from the beginning,” and in then Jesus’ time, He once again did not permit divorce “except for sexual immorality.” What does this openness to the conditions of the time indicate about how we should approach the current discussions that the Church is engaged in, such as the rights of homosexual and transgendered people?

There are numerous issues that could stand being revisited when it comes to what the Bible says about marriage, and we are not always going to agree on all of them. But if we are honest about the faults in our worldviews, we can read scripture with an open mind, communicate with one another, and perhaps make some improvements in the way we treat those we have previously marginalized.

Tags christian life, earthly tradition, jesus, marriage, matthew 19:6, paul, sexual immorality

Opinions

Death, Joy, and Christmastime

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date December 14, 2013
1 Comment on Death, Joy, and Christmastime

Christmas (or Hanukkah or Kwanzaa etc., but for my purposes Christmas), is fast approaching. School has a tendency to push the holiday to the background, but very soon we will be suddenly remembering that we must buy gifts for parents and siblings and best friends before slogging home through December slush. And when we arrive, we will be faced with the reality of how we feel about this particular holiday.

Christmas is associated with joy and warm fuzzies, and comes with a wildly heightened atmosphere, more so than any other holiday in our society. It’s an atmosphere fed by people of ymany different backgrounds—Christians place exaggerated emphasis on family, love, and giving of oneself, and in general, everyone focuses on parties, food, festive décor, good cheer, and buying presents—of which consumer culture takes eager advantage.

In the movie Love Actually, a compilation romantic comedy set on the backdrop of the countdown to Christmas, the characters constantly use Christmas as both a reason and an excuse for their various behaviors. A secretary confesses her love to the Prime Minister, “Because, if you can’t say it at Christmas, when can you?” A groom’s best friend confesses his love to the bride, “Just because it’s Christmas, and at Christmas you tell the truth.” A boss urges his employee to confess her love to her co-worker, because “It’s Christmas.” Much is expected at Christmas. Much is connoted—people are meant to experience love and people are meant to travel to their childhood homes to gather around warm hearths and exchange heartfelt gifts with loving family members.

It’s a difficult time to have bad memories.

The hefty amount of people with disjointed families and/or scarring experiences can easily feel marginalized when the seeming majority is swimming in a dream of sugar plums and packages tied up in string. My parents announced their divorce in the fall of my 7th grade year. Christmas was the last day we were ever together as a family. Fortunately, my experience has not soured my feelings towards the holiday itself as much as it could have, and as much as it certainly has for others with similar or worse experiences.

Two years ago in a chapel service before Christmas break, Dr. Bruxvoort Lipscomb read her essay “On Death in December,” explaining her associations between death and Christmas. She listed three tragic deaths her life that had each occurred in December, and each involved a mother losing a son. Her essay focused on a painting of Madonna and Child by Bellini in which the Christ-child appears dead, and she pointed out that Christmas is, in reality, the celebration of a baby who was born so that he could eventually die. She concluded with confession that when she thinks of the births of her own children, she thinks also of their inevitable death. In that moment, it seemed to me an unnecessarily morbid distortion of what should be a joyful holiday.

A few weeks later, my aunt died.

I’ve since experienced my fair share of grief. My aunt was the second in a series of deaths of four loved ones over the past two years, and marked the first time that I glimpsed, from my stubborn place several rows back at the viewing, a disquietingly real body within a casket. Her death made true for me the words that Bruxvoort Lipscomb had shared: Christmas is indeed a season about “birthing death.”

While this truth may not have always been apparent to me throughout my life, I know now that it was the only reality for my mother. At childhood Christmases she would ever hang a small stocking for my deceased sister above the fireplace alongside the rest of the family’s larger, teeming stockings. She asked that we write notes to Baby Jesus and place them in the stocking, and I never understood the connection between my sister and Jesus, until two years ago. But for her, and for Bruxvoort Lipscomb, and for many others like them, Christmas has always meant something a little different.

It’s common for people with contrasting experiences to feel animosity towards one another. Those who have had mostly pleasant Christmases throughout their lives, as I have, tend to feel that those who appear more cynical are putting a damper on the Christmas spirit. Those who have not been so fortunate tend to feel isolated and misunderstood. Christmas needs to be sacred. Christmas needs to be changed. Christmas is perfect. Christmas is unimportant.

I don’t think Christmas is really either of these things.

Similar to the inflated perception of what a “Christian family” should look like, the concept of Christmas tradition is also far from what the Christian religion would actually call for. We started out with the basic idea for a celebration of Jesus’ birth, and tacked on pagan practices along the way, partly to aid with evangelical efforts, partly just for fun. Like Valentine’s Day, the holiday is now so strongly tied to distorted, Hollywood versions of love that do more harm than good. But Valentine’s Day is a simple holiday, based primarily on legends and trivial customs. Christmas is not such a throwaway holiday. Christmas has roots that are vitally important to Christian beliefs, and it should not be treated in the same way. Both overly positive and overly negative perspectives on Christmas are too simplified to do it justice.

I have found great hope in the Christmas story of Jesus’ birth and promise, but I have also found great hope in Bruxvoort Lipscomb’s version of Christmas, one that takes an honest look at the future of the baby Jesus. Taking both viewpoints together can lend to the holiday the depth and dignity that it deserves. Don’t cheat yourself this Christmas by focusing on only one aspect of your experience. To be sure, Christmas is a time of deep joy, but it is not a holiday to be taken lightly.

Tags christmas, college, death, hanukkah, hope, joy, kwanzaa, love actually

News

College Pledges to Assist with Loan Repayment

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date December 7, 2013

Houghton College has entered into a partnership with the LRAP Association to offer a Loan Repayment Assistance Program (LRAP) to incoming Houghton students. The program will officially begin with the arrival of next year’s first year class. After their successful graduation from Houghton College, the Class of 2018 will receive monetary assistance based on their fulfillment of certain requirements, such as fulltime employment within the United States and a maximum yearly income of $38,000.

campos_student_loans — Courtesy of diverseeducation.com

Houghton’s conversation with LRAP began with an e-mail announcing Spring Arbor University’s decision to implement LRAP at their institution. Spring Arbor experienced increased enrollment and satisfaction among its students and their parents. Houghton began discussing what it would look like to bring LRAP to its campus. “We looked at the profile of our students and at the students who did not matriculate this fall. 131 students responded to us that chose not to come to Houghton, and 79 of those cited debt and concerns about whether they would be able to get a job after they graduate,” explained Eric Currie, Vice President for Enrollment Management. “For the first time ever we had significant numbers of parents who refused to sign Parent PLUS loans.” From these developments, the team considering using LRAP at Houghton concluded that the program would be a good fit for the college. Ryan Spear, Associate Director of Admission, reinforced this reasoning, saying, “We’re responding to what people are saying they’re concerned about.” Houghton will be the first school in the Eastern United States to offer LRAP to all incoming students.

What this will end up looking like for incoming Houghton students is an ongoing relationship with LRAP representatives, starting from the moment they state their interest in receiving LRAP benefits after their graduation from Houghton. “In our financial aid package there will be a letter from the LRAP Association stating that the student is now able to participate in the LRAP program, and they will have paperwork that they will need to sign,” said Currie, “They meet as a group once a year and will come to campus to provide lunch for the students until they graduate, and then when they graduate they will connect with them in the first months to make sure that they have the proper paperwork, they understand how to file, and they understand the requirements.” As well as below $38,000 per year, those requirements include graduating from Houghton College and at least 30 work hours per week. Beginning four months after the commencement of loan repayments, LRAP provides quarterly checks based on an inverse percentage-to-income relationship. The program also allows up to 18 months for finding employment after graduation, and a three-year grace period for graduate school or overseas missions.

As this is a new partnership, LRAP will only be made available to incoming freshmen and selective transfer students, rather than all of the students currently at Houghton, something about which the team at Houghton is straightforward. “Students, you should not be upset,” said Ryan Trout, LRAP Association Training Representative, “There are a lot of staff that would like to have had this as well. This is Houghton College moving forward…. Be proud to be a Houghton College student, that your college is doing such a good thing.” Those involved with bringing LRAP to Houghton are confident about its possibilities as well as its alignment with Houghton’s goal as an institution. “It’s not just smart sense financially, but it fits with our mission. For years and years we’ve had the model of scholar service. Of the Houghton grads I know… they tend to have a bent and passion for serving others,” stated Spear. Houghton plans to use LRAP as a tool to engage students who are already interested in Houghton for other reasons, but who are held back by worries about finances. As Marshall Green, Community and Public Relations Specialist, said, “That’s not our selling point for this school. That’s an advantage to coming here on top of who we are as Houghton. Who we are as a college is our selling point.” In this sense, LRAP is intended provide a kind of safety net for interested students to pursue their passions regardless of income following graduation.

“We’re willing to invest in our students because we believe in the quality of our program and the life they’ll lead after this,” explained Green, “There are lots of other schools doing other things for incentives. Some schools are giving free room and board for the first year, or free books. Those types of incentives are great for that moment, but they don’t help you in the long run. This gives long-lasting security, until the student is either financially secure, or the loans are paid.”

Tags houghton college, loan repayment assistance program, lrap, montary assitance, overseas missions, spring arbor university

Opinions

Idolization of the Extremes

Post author By Lydia Wilson
Post date November 8, 2013
2 Comments on Idolization of the Extremes

Christians go back and forth on whether ours is a religion of moderation or extremes. On the one hand, we are meant to abstain from indulgences such as sexual promiscuity, consumerism and materialism, and overeating. Purity and health are both important to us, and as any good nutritionist or fitness trainer will tell you, moderation is key. We should not hoard wealth. We should turn the other cheek. On the other hand, Jesus could easily be painted as a revolutionary. He braided whips and flipped tables. He told off the Pharisees. He called us to live in a radical way; the same standards that require moderation could also be seen as extremist when compared to the sedentary lifestyles of many—give up everything you have and follow me? In a way, it’s flattering to think of Christianity as a religion of extremes. We are supposed to be “not of this world,” after all, right? We are special. We are different from others in a profound and fundamental way.

I recently came across two different articles that changed the way I think about these questions of moderation and extremism. The first was an article on BBC News that described the heroic acts of a teenage girl who saved a middle-aged man. The girl, Keshia Thomas, was eighteen when she was witness to a KKK demonstration in Ann Arbor, Michigan. She attended with a crowd of black protestors. A white man with an SS tattoo and a Confederate flag t-shirt was noticed in the crowd of observers. They, along with Thomas, began to chase him out. At some point he was knocked to the ground and the crowd began to kick and beat him. Thomas threw herself down on top of him and fought off the attackers, quite possibly saving his life, had the blows escalated.

The second article, found in The Washington Post, is a profile of Nadia Bolz-Weber, a progressive Lutheran minister who heads a small church, House for All Sinners and Saints, in Denver. Bolz-Weber grew up in a Christian home but felt marginalized by the church and was heavily involved in drug abuse, surrounding herself with “underside dwellers . . . cynics, alcoholics and queers” for several years before eventually getting clean and becoming a minister. She has become well-known for her foul mouth and tattooed physique, and her church prides itself on being accepting of people from all walks of life.

I did not react to these stories as positively as you might expect. Do not doubt my esteem for Kehsia Thomas and what she did. Her selflessness and bravery brought tears to my eyes (which doesn’t hap—okay, it does happen often), but I fear for what many may take away from her story. My first thought was that I would probably never have such an impressive opportunity for goodwill. I will probably never be seen as a hero, I will never be caught in a mob or a riot or a warzone and I will never throw my body over an innocent or a grenade. This can be a very damaging way of thinking. No one should sit around waiting for their “big moment” to come. Waiting for a notable opportunity can cause procrastination on smaller goals. When you don’t feel like you can do any good from where you are in the world right now, it will not seem worthwhile to practice small kindnesses and general friendliness in everyday life. It is a mindset that cripples many, and it is noticeable on Houghton campus, in the numbers of students who have a longing to help others in a big way and yet do not take part in community service projects in Alleghany County. No one is ever going to be in the perfect position to make a huge impact. That is rare and happens to few people—people who were spending their days engaged in doing good work for the world in small places for a very long time before being noticed. As Teri Gunderson, a woman who was impressed with Thomas’ actions, says, “The voice in my head says something like this, ‘If she could protect a man, I can show kindness to this person.’ And with that encouragement, I do act with more kindness.”

The Bolz-Weber profile portrayed her church as a haven for those who have had rocky relationships with the Church (sadly a frequent occurrence), and it is indeed a beautiful thing that Bolz-Weber is giving those people a chance to connect with God in a refreshing church setting. Says one congregant of the experience, “House has a lot of people burned by religion, and this still holds for me. It’s the only church I can stomach.” But the article took an odd turn when it began to describe what happened when Bolz-Weber’s congregation started to expand. “Normal people,” i.e. Christians without torrid pasts, began to attend. “It was awful,” wrote Bolz-Weber. She claimed that the normal Christians were “f—king up [her] weird,” and a church meeting was actually held to discuss whether or not the newcomers should be allowed to continue to attend. This struck me as outrageous, considering that House was formed as an antidote to the unwelcoming nature of other churches. Bolz-Weber’s attitude represents another kind of extreme: the belief that one is not “real” or authentic or cannot know true forgiveness without having first dragged oneself through the rigmarole of sin and depravity. Bolz-Weber prides herself on her honesty and appears apathetic on matters such as chastity and foul language, behaviors that come with explicit guidelines in the Bible. Yes, being open and inviting are strong tenets of the Christian faith (“Come as you are”), but along with that approach comes the condition, “now go and sin no more.” By the end of the article I was left with the feeling that Jesus—a man who spent the first thirty years of his life working as a carpenter and the last three years preaching by lakesides—might not have felt comfortable in the House for All Saints and Sinners. And yet who could understand the message of salvation better than He?

Christians like to embrace extremes. You’re not “good” until you’ve adopted two third-world children, published a novel, and thrown yourself over a man to protect him from a mob. You’re not “forgiven” until you’ve done hard drugs, have a tally of sexual partners in the double digits, and, if possible, have spent at least four years in prison. But God does not call us to make momentous, heroic sacrifices when we find a perfect opportunity. God calls us to make the slow and steady sacrifice of our entire, day-by-day, minute-by-minute life.

Tags ann arbor, bbc, christians, confederate, extremes, house for all sinners and saints, keshia thomas, kkk, lutheran, michiagan, moderation, nadia bolzweber, ss, teri gunderson, washington post