Author: Matt Young

Categories
Campus Stories In Focus

Vigilance of the Everyday

Last academic year an anonymous note was slipped under a student’s door which said, “You don’t belong here, n*****.” This sparked a flurry of conversations on campus about race relations that culminated in several students of color threatening not to return this fall. Following an investigation into these events, the college began the “the process of approving and adopting a new diversity statement,” according to Dr. Rob Pool (VP for Student Life). But, as of this reporting, the new diversity statement has yet to be approved. And going into the first day of classes this semester, members of college administration, including Student Government, were anxious about how many students of color would choose not to return.

A separate, but related, matter of diversity involved the firing of an RA by Student Life for her self-reported relationship with another female student. Since this type of relationship is deemed by the administration as “homosexual behavior,” the RA was determined to be in violation of her contract as an RA as well as the Houghton College Community Covenant, and was “relieved” of her position in Spring 2017. This created new fears among the campus’s LGBTQ population as to how welcome in the Houghton community they are. (according to anonymous LGBTQ student interviews). As these events were transpiring, the College has been involved in discussion of edits to the Community Covenant related to the acceptability of “homosexual behavior” on campus.

Clearly, the College’s relationship with its diverse students is strained. To this end, as reported by the STAR in recent editions, Dr. Robert Pool gave a presentation to the Student Government Association which was intended to address some of these issues. The college began considering “programmatically based” changes such as “resource allocation,” and the “shaping [of] our policy,” according to Pool. But in his recent Letter to the Editor, Shaphan Hestick (SGA Officer of Diversity and Inclusion) branded the administration’s response as close to “self-congratulation” without adequately addressing “what happens daily on this campus.” In an interview, Hestick elucidated his position further: “What policy has changed? None. We can’t just throw money at this issue and expect change. We need acknowledgment from the administration that Houghton is negatively biased against diverse students, not only our students of color, but also those who identify as LGBTQ.”

During his presentation for SGA several weeks ago, Dr. Pool shared the updated retention data for students of color this Fall semester. While Houghton’s overall retention rate has consistently been one of the best in the nation (Chronicle for Higher Education), its record with students of color has been less-than-optimal. For this semester, students of color made up 32% of all students who withdrew. Compared with the percent of the student body that is diverse (19%), retention among the college’s diverse students was proportionally worse than for the student body as a whole. When compared to the data for the last 10 years (or 20 semesters), this fall semester was the worst semester in its retention of diverse students. In other words, the college’s retention of diverse students has never been worse.

In response to what he sees as a failure of properly responding to the plight of diverse students, Hestick has recently engaged in a protest by ending his involvement with many of his duties in SGA as well as his positions in several college councils and committees until “we make peace with the struggle of diverse students.”    

Categories
Campus News

SGA Rejects Covenant Revisions

On Monday evening the Student Government Association (SGA) held its second public forum about the proposed changes to the Community Covenant. The meeting was held in the Paine Science Building’s Schaller Lecture Hall, which was filled to capacity. Before discussion began, Jiwan Dhaliwal ‘17 provided a devotion and prayer. She admonished the crowd to “allow the Christian story and ethic of love to supercede your personal theological beliefs,” and added  further that “we will lose our Christian community if we don’t value love above all else.” This call for unity in love was echoed by several community members throughout the evening.

Photo courtesy of Lily Brunner
Photo courtesy of Lily Brunner

Following the devotion, Vice President for Student Life, Robert Pool, spoke about the intent behind the proposed changes to the Community Covenant. The new language is meant to “clarify” the current use of the phrase “homosexual behavior.”

The proposed revised language reads:

“We believe, consistent with scripture and Wesleyan Church doctrine, that certain acts are clearly prohibited including: drinking alcohol to excess, stealing, speaking or writing profanely or slanderously, acting dishonestly, cheating, and engaging in occult practice. We also believe that sexual expression should be confined to marriage between one man and one woman as legally assigned at birth. Therefore, we expect members of the Houghton College community to refrain from engaging in premarital sex, adultery, and same-sex sexual behavior or dating relationships. We also expect all community members to use discretion and modesty when displaying affection, especially such displays deemed inappropriate for public or commons spaces.”

The floor was then opened for general discussion, moderated by student body president, Joanna Friesen ‘17. Community members on both sides of the issue shared their views. 

Photo courtesy of Lily Brunner
Photo courtesy of Lily Brunner

The final voice heard in the open discussion was that of Ron McEntire, a current graduate  student in Organ Performance. He told the story of his life, admitting that he was a gay Christian who first attended Houghton in the 1960’s. Though he was always aware that his identity as a gay man stood in tension with Wesleyan Church doctrine, his commitment to the Christian faith transcended differences about sexual ethics, regardless of how painful they could be. On the topic of the proposed revision he said,  “When I look at this language I don’t feel safe here.” This sentiment was shared by other members of the LGBTQ community on campus.

After open discussion ended the SGA voted on whether or not to reject and edit the proposed language. They chose to reject and edit, and will create an editing committee comprised of the Executive Council and class presidents. The purpose of this committee will be to find language that addresses the vagueness within the current covenant, while remaining sensitive to the needs of the entire community. As Pool said, “The intent is that the entire community agrees on the language. If not, then it’s not a community covenant.” Any questions, comments, or proposals for the Covenant language can be sent to the SGA at their email, sga@hougthon.edu

Categories
Opinions

Remember, Remember, the 11th of November

Today is Veterans Day 2016. This is the holiday on which we honor all those who served, or are serving, in the United States Armed Forces. Earlier this week we had a Presidential Election. Many of us exercised our right to vote for our leaders and representatives in the government. For most citizens, however, their contribution to the maintenance of society goes no further than casting a vote every few years. Not so for a veteran. President Reagan said, “Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But the Marines don’t have that problem.” This sentiment gets at the heart of the civilian/soldier divide. Because the Marines (and all veterans) pledged themselves to a cause greater than the individual, they will never worry whether their contribution to society mattered. Every veteran, in the Oath of Enlistment, said these words: “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies…and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me…” Veterans are those who were willing to give their lives in the service of our nation as a whole, to sacrifice their personal dreams for the sake of a bigger one, to value the good of the community over that of the individual. They are the most selfless among us, and while they do not seek or ask for honor, they deserve it.

Photo by: Nate Moore
Photo by: Nate Moore

But November 11 was not always celebrated as Veterans Day. Previously it was known as Remembrance/Armistice Day (as it still is in most countries outside the U.S.). This was the day on which the Great War came to an end. It was supposed to be the end of “the war to end all wars.” Unfortunately, the Great War was not the end of all wars; on the contrary, a second world war shortly followed the first, bringing with it to earth a part of hell never seen before or after. We have seen genocides on almost every corner of the globe, conflict in the Middle East, and the rise of global terrorism. War has by no means gone away.

But, as President Obama said earlier this year, “We’re fortunate to be living in the most peaceful era in human history,” a fact attested to by historians and sociologist. Even though the world has been, and in some regards still is, a brutal and nasty place, things generally are getting better. Globally, we are living longer than ever, extreme poverty is declining, deaths from major diseases are at an all-time low, and back to this piece’s topic, deaths from war are now at a historic low point. Of course war has not been eradicated, but it seems as if the sacrifices of previous generations have payed off, at least for now.

mattquote-2Armistice/Veterans Day provides the opportunity to reflect on the past and, hopefully, to apply what we can learn from reflection towards building a brighter tomorrow. Veterans deserve our recognition and respect because they were willing to sacrifice a part of their lives and autonomy in service to the greater good. But as General Schwarzkopf said, “Any soldier worth his salt should be anti-war.” Veterans, above all people, are the ones who must face the demon called “war” on a daily basis. They know what it will cost them and their loved ones. They have seen what war is, and found it wanting. It is not something to be sought after, desired, or romanticized; it is hell, and nothing more.

Hopefully we will find ourselves in a future where there are few to be honored as veterans because there is little need for soldiers. To quote Einstein, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” We live in a world in which one nuclear (or other technological) mishap could seal the fate of our species. The first two world wars were devastating, and altered the course of history in incalculable ways; but I tremble at the thought of a third. For if there is one, it will surely be the last. So let us not forget the sacrifices made by our veterans; use this day to honor those deserving of honor. But if we wish to see a brighter tomorrow, we must labor together to beat our swords into plowshares, our spears into pruning hooks, and to learn war no more.

Matt is a U.S. Army veteran and a junior philosophy major.

Categories
Opinions

Rob Bell, My Neighbor, and a Wall

Last month, I had the privilege of attending a one-day workshop event with former megachurch pastor, Rob Bell. He is known for his fresh take on ancient ideas, and brings clarity to opaque concepts within the Judeo-Christian tradition. “Scholar,” “mystic,” and “spiritual communicator,” are apt descriptions of the man who saw his church grow to over 10,000 members by teaching through the book of Leviticus in a year. All that being said, I was very happy to get an invitation to spend a day interacting with him in person. But this piece is less about Rob Bell, and more about something specific he said, something I think everyone in our community would benefit from reading; albeit second-hand, and with an element of my own experience thrown in.

Photo by: Nate Moore
Photo by: Nate Moore

“You know how we can often develop a preconceived notion of people, especially the negative kinds of ideas?” he said. Everyone in the audience nodded. “You know, we hear about those people, who come from that place, and they have that color of skin, and dress that way. And we are told that they are dangerous, scary, and don’t have anything in common with us. You all know what I’m talking about, right?” Again, head-nods of recognition and agreement from the crowd. “But then, one of those people actually moves in next door. And guess what? They turn out to be the best neighbor you have ever had! They turn out to be the exact opposite of what we have been told to expect.” For a third time, we all nodded and smiled in agreement. Rob’s face changed from a glowing, wide smile, to a somber and painful grimace. “Aaaaaand now, there is this thing that wants to build a wall.” An audible groan could be heard from the crowd. We too stopped smiling as the weight of one of our Presidential nominee’s aspirations hit us, Donald Trump wants to put up a wall, a wall that would keep out people like the neighbors we have come to love.

As I processed Rob’s words, I thought of my neighbor in Houghton. Pan is an Indian-Canadian citizen, and is the proud, hard-working owner of the Hanson Farms in Fillmore. His customer-service is exceptional, but more than that, he really cares about the people that come into his store, including me. Over the year I’ve known him, he has taken time to inquire about my work and school schedule and made sure to send his visiting sons to play with mine. On more than one occasion he has offered to let me borrow his minivan. Pan is a brown-skinned immigrant, and he is a great neighbor. I’m so glad that he is a small part of my life.

mattquoteI tell you about Pan because he can be seen as a stand-in for millions of other neighbors, coworkers, and acquaintances. He is here, sharing our little community, because he wants to build the best life he can for his family. And while he is doing that, he makes our lives better too. But that thing Rob mentioned, that fascist running to be the leader of our country, wants to put up a wall to keep people like Pan out of our communities. He is hell-bent on dividing our world into “us” vs “them,” where “us” always means anyone just like me, and “them” refers to anyone I perceive to be different. And “we” are supposed to keep “them” as far away as possible.

To hell with that! Not only do I like my neighbor, but I recognize that “our” wholeness is dependent on building a shared community with whoever “they” are. And if you claim to follow in the path of a rabbi from Nazareth, even if you haven’t had the positive experience I’ve had with the “other,” I hope you will at least remember a story he told one time, a story about how one of “them” helped out an injured Jew. One can only wonder, what did the injured Jew think of Samaritans after he woke up in the inn, only to find that his rescue had come from the person he had been told to fear and hate his entire life. Do you think the Jew from that parable would support building a wall?       

Matt is a junior philosophy major.

Categories
International News

International // 2016 Nobel Prizes Selected

Last week in Stockholm, Sweden, twelve men were awarded this year’s Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contributions to humanity. Prizes were awarded for physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, economics, literature, and peace.

Three British physicists, David Thouless, F. Duncan Haldane, and J. Michael Kosterlitz, who all work in U.S. universities, were awarded this year’s prize in physics. The Nobel Prize website describes the prize being awarded “for theoretical discoveries of topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter,” or as described by CNN, “for revealing the secrets of exotic matter.” According to Thors Hans Hansson, of the Nobel Prize Physics Committee, this prize is important because their research “could be used in the next generation of electronics and supercomputers.”

Another trio was awarded the Prize in chemistry “for the development of the world’s smallest machines,” according to BBC. Jean-Pierre Sauvage, Sir J. Fraser Stoddart and Bernard L. Feringa “designed and synthesised molecular machines” that are “a thousand times thinner than a strand of hair.” These machines have the capability of entering the human body and directly delivering treatment to cells, but could also be used in the development of “smart materials” for use in vehicles and other commonly-used artifacts.

Yoshinori Ohsumi of the Tokyo Institute of Technology was awarded this year’s Prize in physiology or medicine. He is credited with discovering new methods of “autophagy.” Autophagy,, according to NPR, is a “fundamental process cells use to degrade and recycle parts of themselves.” The Japanese biologist’s work has “opened the path to understanding how cells adapt to starvation and respond to infection,” according to the Nobel awarding committee. Though scientists have known about the process since the 1960’s, the precise machinery used in the process were unknown. Ohsumi showed that instead of their being a “waste dump” within the cells, it is actually a “recycling plant,” according to the chair of the awarding committee, Juleen Zierath.

Two professors from Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) share this year’s Nobel Prize in economics. Oliver Hart from Harvard, and Bengt Holmström from MIT,) were both awarded the prize for their contributions to contract theory, which, according to CNN Money, is “the agreements that shape business, finance, and public policy.” Holmström’s research focused on employment contracts, including those between CEO’s and shareholders. When asked in about the sizeable bonuses many CEO’s have taken as of late in a CNN article, he described them as being “extraordinarily high.” CNN reported Hart’s research as having“looked at whether providers of public services, such as schools, hospitals, or prisons, should be publicly or privately owned,” and determined that the “incentives for cost reduction are typically too strong,” which can lead to a decrease in the quality of services.

Colombia’s President, Juan Manuel Santos, was awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. According to the awarding committee, he was recognized for his “resolute efforts to bring the country’s more than 50-year long civil war to an end.” According to the New York Times, the agreement the Colombian government reached with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) would have ended the “longest-running war in the Americas.”The efforts for peace seem to have been, at least temporarily, thwarted by the rejection of the agreement by the Colombian citizenry, whose approval is required for the peace-deal to take effect. However, in spite of this set-back, after receiving the award, President Santos was resolute in his commitment to the peace process, and stated “I invite everyone to join our strength, our minds and our hearts in this great national endeavor so that we can win the most important prize of all: peace in Colombia.” The chairwoman of the Prize committee shared the President’s feelings, and stated, “The committee hopes that the peace prize will give him strength to succeed in this demanding task.”

American singer, songwriter, and artist Bob Dylan was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature. The Nobel Prize organization stated this honor was bestowed upon Dylan “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition.”

Categories
Opinions

Our Idolatry of God

Just Another Supplement

Many of you will not like what I have to say; but I believe it is the truth, and it needs to be said. Professors, administrators, and fellow students; even if we have never met, we all share in the friendship of God. But I agree with Aristotle when he said that we must honor the truth more highly than we do friends. So, here’s the truth as I see it.

We have a God problem. That is to say that we have a problem in the way that we relate to, talk about, and sell (yes, sell) God to each other and the world. More specifically, we have turned God into an idol, some thing we elevate to a place in our lives in the hope that it will provide us with ultimate satisfaction, happiness, fulfillment, comfort, peace, etc. An idol promises to give us life. It promises to satisfy our desires in an ultimate sense, in a way that nothing else can. Anything can be an idol; money, fame, prestige, health, beauty, a partner, and even God. When we treat God as a thing — as an object sought for gaining personal satisfaction in our search for meaning — God becomes an idol. For God is not a thing; there is no thinghood in God. Rather, God is that which calls us to relate to all things in a certain way. Put another way, God is the non-thing that organizes our relation to all things. But we have treated God as a thing — a product that will satisfy us — and this turns God into an idol.  

Matt YoungRGBAt this point you are probably close to accusing me of being dramatic, nonsensical, and ridiculous. You want evidence; some “for instances” that explain just how we are committing this grave sin I speak of. I will offer two evidences of this idolatry of God. The first has to do with the way in which we have tried to sell God to each other. The second is what I will call a supplement, something we use when the God-product isn’t working the way we had hoped. For when this God-product fails to satisfy our desire and search for meaning by itself, we create supplements, or apps (if you will) as add-ons promised to complete the God-product experience. God is not enough, else we would have no need for these supplemental apps.    

Several weeks ago we had a “church fair” in the Campus Center. Representatives from a dozen plus churches or faith groups set up tables filled with shiny flyers, pamphlets, posters, bagels, cookies, coffee, etc. One poster said:“What we can offer”. Let’s be honest: What is the point of a fair? Well, I participated in the Activities Fair, and the point was to present your club’s activity to interested parties, hoping to pique their interest with something you had to offer. In a sense, we were peddling a product, an activity, a form of entertainment. If fairs are events for advertising and selling products, what does this say about the church fair? What product were we selling to each other if not a God-product — a God-as-thing-to-be-peddled?

The thing with products is that they are never enough on their own. We need supplements. Any good salesperson knows this. An Apple product wouldn’t be an Apple product without the Apps. The iPhone would be a virtually useless, unsatisfying piece of metal and software if not for the infinite number of supplemental applications one can download and use. “Oh c’mon”, you say, “we don’t do this with God”! What, then, did people line up for hours a couple weekends ago to take part in? To worship God? Certainly not, for we could all do that in the privacy of our own homes or in our local churches. People lined up for a concert — a “Christian” concert — a supplement to the God-product unique to our modern, Western, would-be-relevant, form of Christianity.

Is the church fair fundamentally different than any other fair? No. Were the long, snaking, endless lines for TobyMac fundamentally different than what we see at the latest release of an Apple product? No. What are we selling? Why are we selling it? I fear that rather than approval, Jesus would have cause to invoke “den of thieves” language if he were to step foot on our campus. Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy.

 

Categories
Opinions

The Culture Andy Crouch Wants To Make

The 2014 Houghton Reads book is Culture Making: Rediscovering Our Creative Calling, by Andy Crouch, the Executive Editor of Christianity Today. This book is being read by many groups around campus. Overall, it is not a bad book (yes, I have read the whole thing).

Crouch presents his case that Christians should be “makers of culture.” I could not agree more. Christians are to be a community, united in love, forming a counter-culture that displays the radical love, grace, and forgiveness of Jesus. This culture we are making together, and are to invite others into, is the Kingdom of God. But it is not this idea of culture making that I’ve got a problem with. No, my problem is with the real-life way that Crouch tried to “make culture” this summer.

In the book, Crouch talks about four postures that American Christians have taken in regard to culture. These are: Condemning (think of a fundamentalist who rants about the evils of culture while keeping a safe distance), Critiquing (a Christian who engages with culture for the sake of pointing out its flaws), Copying (picture the way Contemporary Christian Music took the form and style of secular music and inserted God into it), and finally Consuming (leaving God out of the picture and embracing the secular as default). He goes on to say that rather than embracing one of these four postures, Christians should “make culture” instead. No problem here. I agree that Christians have, far too often, engaged in one of these postures instead of being the countercultural Kingdom of God. So how do we make this culture?

MattYoungQuoteAccording to Crouch, if we want to change/make a culture, we must start small. He says that we make culture by creating cultural “goods.” These can be things like songs, books, legislation, computers, etc. A cultural good is anything we create that has the potential to change the culture around us. Again, no problem here. We all need to reclaim the transformative power of creative acts. If we see the smallest things we do as a part of making our culture and world a better place, we will find our lives invested with meaning like never before. Now onto what Crouch did this summer.

On July 1st of this year, Andy Crouch, along with 13 other Christian leaders, signed and sent a letter to President Obama. The President had announced that he planned to make an Executive Order banning all federal contractors from discriminating against potential employees based on their sexual orientation. The letter asked the President to exempt religious organizations from this order. Or, to put it bluntly, these leaders want permission for their organizations to legally discriminate against a portion of Americans. They want to remain in contract with the federal government, which means keeping all of the money that goes along with that, but be permitted to discriminate based on certain people’s sexual orientation. This is where I have a big problem with the way in which Crouch wants to make culture.

In his attempt to “make culture” Crouch introduces a “cultural good” in the form of a letter. His idea of making culture is to create a world where it is legal to discriminate and reject certain members of society, not because these people are criminals or harmful to others, but because of who they choose to love (and make love to).

As I’ve already said, I’m all for making culture. The Christian story invites us to become a part of a community that shares the love, grace, and forgiveness of God with others; but I’m not for a culture that is accepting of discrimination. I don’t see room for discrimination in the loving, graceful, forgiving way of Jesus.