Category: Opinions

Categories
Opinions

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.

christmasThe 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.

 

Categories
Opinions

Words Matter: A Proposal for Change

“And Goddess said, Let us make woman in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So Goddess created woman in her own image, in the image of Goddess created she her; female and male created she them.” –Genesis 1:26-27

goddessThe (somewhat) familiar words that appear above are taken from the digital version of the “Queen Jamie” Bible found through a curious little website called “regender.com.” Though I’m not proposing that we henceforth adopt this translation at Houghton, I include this website as one example of many tools that are used to demonstrate the real and affective power of language. The issue of considerate, respectful usage extends to every aspect of meaningful interaction with others. Words mean things and exclusive, hurtful words, whether used deliberately or not, can communicate damaging messages. Words matter. As far as I’m concerned, the validity of this short statement is not up for debate. I’d add that, whether you’re incensed or intrigued by the passage quoted at the start, you’ve proved my analysis correct.

Acknowledging that words matter, the question becomes, how do we handle language? Issues of “language justice” are wide and varied. One may note that there are certain discriminatory names that we’ve agreed not to call one another. The fact that I need not identify them is proof enough of our more-or-less consensual agreement. I say more-or-less because, of course, battles are still being fought, and though I don’t want to callously ignore sensitive issues, I do want to zero in on the one area of language usage of which I believe Houghton as an institution is negligent, namely, gender-inclusive language.

Despite the way I started this piece, I don’t want to address gender-inclusive language only with respect to the Bible. Certainly, I think the way we talk about gender, theology, and Christianity is important to consider, and if you are interested in this intersection, get ahold of Dr. Lacelle-Peterson’s book, “Liberating Tradition.” Leaving that conversation to experts, I will use the remainder of my space to talk about the more broad presence (or, rather, absence) of gender-inclusive language standards at Houghton.

I recently interviewed several faculty members as part of a project on inclusive language. None of them could point to any college-wide policy that actively addresses gender-inclusivity with respect to college communications, student usage and awareness, or academic writing guidelines. Though several years ago there was a “diversity committee” set up to draft a school-wide policy on the topic, the resulting document was never institutionalized. Though some individuals voluntarily include sections of this proposed policy in their syllabi, there are no stated, compulsory expectations.

I was surprised by my lack of findings. I decided to research official policies at other institutions. Every school that I found in my search was connected with respect to approving, adopting, or maintaining this or that guideline for non-sexist communication, whether in academic writing, in marketing, or in student handbooks (for example, UNC replaced every instance of “freshman” with “first year student”). Lest you think that I’m unjustly pushing “secular standards” of higher education (whatever that means), I’ll go ahead and mention some examples closer to home. Apart from many seminary institutions, Calvin College, George Fox University, Goshen College, Westmont College, and Wheaton College all deliberately and publicly use their website to address the importance of gender inclusive and non-discriminatory language.

In identifying the above schools, I don’t mean to suggest that they have all the kinks figured out. People in higher education everywhere struggle with flawlessly maintaining gender-inclusive language; no one is perfect, and surely mistakes are made in myriad places and contexts. I’m also not insinuating that the Houghton community has done nothing to support gender-inclusive language. Many individuals consistently model consciousness usage, and I’m thankful that, as I mentioned, some professors have addressed gender-inclusive language on their own terms. I bring up other schools because doing so emphasizes the dramatic lack of institutional support at Houghton. Relying on instructor-initiated treatment unnecessarily politicizes what should be a non-issue, and the preeminence of gender-inclusive usage should supersede professorial preference. For deeply moral and political reasons, it’s simply a fact that no serious college has made it to this point in the 21st century without requiring gender-inclusive language.

Call it naiveté, but I’m optimistic that the majority of people at Houghton will agree with me. In the spirit of community dialogue recently championed by Dean Jordan in his “Christians and Same Sex Attraction” lecture, I welcome any disagreement in the form of conversation. However, if my hopes about this community prove true, then the institution need only stand behind its individuals. It’s time we make up our mind, make it policy, and make it public.

Categories
Opinions

The Irrelevancy of Cheerful Intentions

With the close of another Thanksgiving season, I am excited to begin celebrating all things Christmas. I want to sing cheesy Christmas songs, eat lots of Christmas cookies, and wear wonderfully ugly Christmas sweaters, every-single-day. While this may actually be rather child-like, I have also come to appreciate the Christmas season’s emphasis upon giving unto others with the intent of selfless appreciation. Unfortunately, living in a consumer-oriented context, the bargain-hunting aggression of ‘Black Friday’ has come to more readily define ‘Christmas-like’ giving. The influx of consumerism during this season has simultaneously translated into innumerable opportunities for material charity amongst citizens of the Global North. It is initially daunting to challenge consumer-based charity, specifically with its popularity among respectable citizens. However, there persists a need to re-conceptualize consumer-based charities popular during this

occ

holiday season. A needed shift in perspective specifically highlights the lack of depth, cultural relevance, and disregard for recipient perspectives. At the core of its shortcomings, however, consumer-based charity needs greater understanding for the complexity of human-related issues.

At the forefront of consumer-focused charity during the Christmas season is an initiative facilitated by the Samaritan’s Purse named Operation Christmas Child (OCC). Since 1993, OCC has collected shoeboxes from its participants in North America, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Each participant is to fill a shoebox with hygienic items and toys that Western children typically see as essential or enjoyable to play with (i.e. toothpaste, socks, crayons, coloring books, kazoos, etc.). Through OCC, participants are encouraged to label their toy-stuffed shoebox with a sticker indicating a preferred age and sex of the child who will receive the box. According to the Samaritans Purse website, these boxes are intended for children of the Global South who are ‘living in difficult situations’. Through participant’s shoebox donation, OCC mobilizes ‘privileged’ families of the Global North to ‘share the good news of Jesus Christ’ with ‘underprivileged’ children of the Global South. Unfortunately, introducing Jesus Christ through toys and knick-knacks promotes a simplistic view of Christianity in association with Western consumer culture. As a result, the nature of Jesus Christ adopts attributes of our capitalist society rather than the magnitude of his humanity, divinity, and relevance.

In addition to its non-contextualized approach to evangelism, OCC promotes a one-way relationship between the ‘giver’ and the ‘receiver’, lacking parameters for reciprocity or consistency from year-to-year. In narrowing its concept of charity to a linear flow of western materials, OCC has missed potential for deeper impact through long-term relationship building. Further opportunities involve the development of healthy relationships among consistently participating communities, while better engaging the voice of OCC recipients to define such relationships. Never accessing the capabilities of mutual relationships undermines the diverse expression of opinion amongst both donors and recipients, further hindering the determination of relevant outcomes. Just as one would wish to give a gift relevant to a family member’s indicated ‘wish list’, the voiced desires of OCC recipients need be better involved in determining the outcomes of donor strategies.

Operation Christmas Child currently represents a Westernized view of Christmas, evangelism, and the Global South. As members of the Houghton student body, it is critical that we better critique the premise of OCC and its campus-wide participation. From this perspective, we each are challenged to re-conceptualize the intents, means, and effects of how we choose to give. Moving forward into this holiday season, let us contemplate the wonderful attributes of Christmas, while also reflecting upon its increasing focus on consumerism. In doing so, may we continually contemplate our well-meaning intentions with the valuable humanity of our neighbor, both local and abroad.

 

Categories
Opinions

Students and the Recognition of the Sabbath

Every Sabbath, I ask myself this: to do homework or not to do homework – that is the question. Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to conquer the papers and projects of outrageous overload, or to relax with my weekly Sabbath away from the tsunami of stress.

saffabthEven here at a Christian college, I notice that many students spend their Sabbaths cramped up in their room, studying for that big exam they have the next day or starting that eight page paper that they have been avoiding like the plague. Where is their Sabbath day of rest in this? What has happened to the day that God has set aside as holy? Exodus 31 tells us, “You must keep the Sabbath day, for it is a holy day for you,” and what joy we feel when we observe the Sabbath!
The Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, and not people to meet the requirements of the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). We are human, and because of that, we have limitations. We cannot run continuously without ever getting exhausted; heck, I can barely run a mile without breathing like Darth Vader and getting side stickers. For us humans, rest is a necessity. In 2011, full-time college students studied an average of 15 hours a week, 30% got less than 6 hours a sleep a night, and 25% worked 20 hours or more a week (National Survey). These statistics alone show that college students overwork, under-sleep, and over-commit themselves.
But because God cares for us and loves us, He gives us a model to follow. That model is himself. On the third page of my Bible, I read, “On the seventh day God had finished his work of creation, so he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and declared it holy, because it was the day when he rested from all his work of creation” (Genesis 2:2-3). Now, I can’t imagine that God was exhausted and that He actually needed an entire day to rest. But God set an example so that His children could emulate Him. So why don’t we? Why do we fill the Sabbath with work, homework, and constant business?
This is something that we as Christians should change. We should weekly take the Sabbath. So what is one to do on the Sabbath? Are they just supposed to lie in bed all day sleeping? Well, there is a difference between being lazy and resting. I believe Barbara Brown Taylor, a priest, professor, and theologian, says it best in her book, An Altar in the World, when she describes the Sabbath as “a day of saying no. A day of spiritual growth. A day of not doing, but being.” I don’t think the question is so much, “If I do this, does that count as working on the Sabbath?” as much as “How can I rest today and enjoy this day that God has blessed me with and has made holy?”
That being said, I’m not going to be like the Pharisees, defining what can and cannot be done on the Sabbath, but know that the Sabbath looks different for each person. Sleep in. Go to Church. Spend time with God: through prayer, worship, his word. Journal. Spend time relaxing, giving your mind a break from all of the studying and paper writing. Fellowship with friends, enjoying their company. Go on a hike. Read a book. Take a nap. The options are endless.
But there is one thing that is important, and that is to “Be still and know that God is God” (Psalm 46:10).
And I admit, it is hard to obey the Sabbath. This past Sunday, I battled with whether to do homework or not. With two papers and readings that were due on Monday alone, taking an entire day off from homework sounded unreasonable. But I tell you what, I kept the Sabbath. I spent time with God, I worshipped, I watched a movie, read a book, hung out with friends, and ended the night celebrating a friend’s birthday. And throughout it all, I had peace. When Monday morning rolled around, God gave me the strength to rise out of bed, and blessed me with an abundant amount of time to work on homework. And I am still at peace, thankful once again, that I obeyed my Father, rested, and took the Sabbath.
I believe Christian author Mark Buchanan sums up the Sabbath the best, saying, “Sabbath imparts the rest of God – physical, mental, spiritual rest, but also the rest of God – the things of God’s nature and presence we miss in our busyness.”
For these very reasons, every Sunday I say to myself: To observe Sabbath or to observe Sabbath. There is no question.

Categories
Opinions Two Views

Two Views: Would Widespread Economic and Political Freedom Create Global Peace?

Among a certain subset of people in the world, there is a strong belief that the primary requirement for “world peace”—that nebulous phrase used by politicians, college freshmen, and contestants on the Miss America pageant alike—is freedom. Primarily what they are talking about in these instances is political and economic freedom guaranteed by individual countries. I am not one of those people, and this is why.

2view-sarahsIt is important to note that a given group of people with political freedom depends largely on the values that they hold. For example, in 2005 Hezbollah was elected to power in southern Lebanon. Considered a terrorist organization by the United States government, this is hardly the type of political party to promote peace in the Middle East. The political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the so-called “Freedom and Justice Party”, was also elected by a large majority to power in 2012. (Subsequently, President Morsi was, along with other members of the Muslim Brotherhood, removed from power and charged with murder). While both of these parties were elected through fair elections within the last ten years, neither of them hold values which would increase global peace.

The other freedom suggested as a requirement for world peace is economic freedom. This is more promising. Probably the best example of an international free trade arrangement is the EU (European Union). No country in the EU has gone to war with another EU member country—this is quite impressive, especially considering the previous history of the continent. This phenomenon extends beyond the European Union to democratic countries in general. Researchers theorize that the reason for this is that in a country with an open economic market, it becomes unnecessary and unprofitable for countries to go to war as resources are easily distributed between countries. War is no longer a necessity to re-distribute scarce resources but a distraction from more profitable methods of production.

On the other hand, it is possible that the more or less widespread global peace we in the democratic nations of the world have been experiencing is a fluke in the annals of history. (More or less, because a majority of countries in the world are currently or have recently been involved in some type of armed conflict). The reasons that global peace might not be sustainable even with widespread global economic and political freedom come down to the age-old reasons for conflict which currently democratic and economically free governments have at the moment been able to avoid—land and the resources associated with land.

Although the world as a whole is potentially able to support a significantly larger population than it currently is doing, the essential problem is that the largest percentage of increase in population will occur in regions that are less able to support a large population, while a decline is projected to occur in regions more able to support a larger population. For example, the latest UN projections predict the population of Africa will double, while that of Europe will decline by 14%.

Historically, a frequent source of conflict is a large population of young people with less access to resources. The inequality of consumption globally is well established—statistics such as, the 12% of the world’s population which lives in the United States and Europe accounts for 60% of global private consumption, while the third of global population which lives in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 3.2%.

Not only is inequality widespread and the global population rapidly increasing, there is evidence that water will in the quite near future become a resource lacking in many areas of world. Less than one percent of the water on the planet is usable for humans and animals. According to the UN, by 2030 nearly half of the world will be living under areas of high water stress.

My purpose in stating all these statistics is not to scare anyone or to present an overly pessimistic view of the world. And I do believe that economic and political freedoms are beneficial and even necessary for a country to live happily and well. But they are not enough. Freedom is what you make of it, and conflict is not something that can always be prevented.

Categories
Opinions Two Views

Two Views: Would Widespread Economic and Political Freedom Create Global Peace?

Though I would agree with Sarah Slater’s point that global peace could never be entirely accomplished due to the presence of scarce resources and competing cultural values, it is hard to negate the evidence that democracies – systems in which political freedom is the foundation – rarely go to war against each other. It is also hard to ignore that economies that practice economic freedom and are increasingly dependent on each other also find it difficult to go to war. For these reasons, it seems fair to conclude that the expansion of political and economic freedoms contributes to domestic and global peace, even if they may not resolve the entire issue.

2view-sarahhThese arguments ultimately rest on cost-benefit analysis. As Immanuel Kant, one of the early writers on global peace, wrote in 1795, wars do not frequently benefit the ordinary people in a country. Often, citizens have to bear the load of war, “having to fight, having to pay the costs of war from their own resources, having painfully to repair the devastation war leaves behind, and, to fill up the measure of evils, load themselves with a heavy national debt that would embitter peace itself and that can never be liquidated on account of constant wars in the future.” In a republic or a democracy where citizens are free to exercise political control, it would make sense that they try to refrain from going to war as much as possible. Political freedoms, then, become safety valves that citizens may exercise against their politicians when conflicts begin to get overheated.

Theoretically, Kant’s proposition makes sense, but how does it play out in recent history?

Political freedom – by which we mean the ability of the public to engage in a political process without being coerced or compelled in any way – is a relatively recent phenomenon in history and the phenomenon only took hold in the past 50 or 60 years. According to scholar Michael Mandelbaum, “In the second half of the twentieth century … democracies consistently preferred butter to guns” due to their political choices which reflected their preferences for social welfare programs than to foreign activity and wars. Even the United States, which has acquired the reputation of bellicosity “was subject to the same popular reservations about and objections to war” in the twentieth century that was present in other countries, albeit at a smaller scale.

Increased globalization and the dependency between economies that practice economic freedom also create situations in which the desire for peace outweighs the desire for conflict. Conflict can interrupt trade between nations, the production of goods, and the transactions between consumers and producers which encourages these economies to refrain from war. Again, this argument rests on a cost-benefit analysis between the costs of war and the benefits of peace. As Sarah Slater noted in the previous article, no European state in the European Union has attacked another – a miracle if we examine Europe’s recent history.

We should look at expanding political and economic freedom as a positive force in expanding the capacity of people to behave nonviolently, but we shouldn’t assume that it is a guarantee that people will take the opportunity of these freedoms. As Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen wrote concerning democracy in Development as Freedom, “Democracy does not serve as an automatic remedy of ailments as quinine works to remedy malaria. The opportunity it opens has to be positively grabbed in order to achieve the desired effect. This is … a basic feature of freedoms in general – much depends on how freedoms are actually exercised.” While political and economic freedom may indeed contribute to global peace, it still depends on what people make of it.

In conclusion, I do not believe that there is a one-size-fits-all solution to the issue of global peace and that if only we could snap our fingers and declare that all countries were politically and economically free, then the world would be immediately at one. This approach ignores cultural and historical conditions and, as we have seen in the Balkans, the transition from an authoritarian government to a system that promotes political and economic freedom can be a violent one. (The current state of affairs in many Middle Eastern countries today would be other examples.) By the same token, however, the evidence exists that, in the long run, these expansions may indeed increase global peace and contribute to the capacity of people to behave nonviolently.

Categories
Opinions

Selflessness and Humility in the NCCAA

This past weekend the Houghton cross country team competed at the National Christian College Athletic Association National Championship meet in Cedarville, Ohio. Roughly 50 meters before the finish, Cara Davenport, Houghton College junior, collapsed and was unable to keep going. Moments later, teammate Judith Marklin, Houghton freshman, stopped for Davenport and carried her through to the finish line, crossing it together.

The meet official disqualified both girls, saying they aided each other during the race. The whole situation pushed the women’s team from about seventh place to eighteenth place overall. But in a situation where helping another competitor damages ones own race-time, especially at a national championship meet, should a rule of aiding a teammate apply?

Section 8, subsection f, of the NCAA XC and Track and Field rule book states that an athlete can be disqualified “If unduly aided by a coach, a teammate not in the race or a non-competitor associated with the team.”

Marklin had not yet finished the race, so what exactly did she do wrong? The rule doesn’t include

runners who are also competing, allowing you to question the call made by the official. For those who witnessed the dramatic finish, it is safe to say cheating did not cross their minds, but instead I imagine they saw complete selflessness and love.

In a case where the “rules are rules” mentality wins, there is little to be done. Although many coaches of opposing colleges voted in favor of Davenport and Marklin, saying they should not be disqualified, the meet official had the final say. In the end, it was 100% the official’s decision in the disqualification. Had the assisting of an athlete helped the school, that would be cheating, but should the rule need to apply to all situations? Although the legality of it all makes sense, what does

the situation say about ethics?

The mission statement of the NCCAA reads, “The NCCAA is an association of Christ-centered collegiate institutions whose mission is to use athletics competition as an integral component of education, evangelism and encouragement.”

What happened on the course that day reflected exactly that. Those watching and competing alongside Davenport and Marklin were educated and encouraged at that moment. To see such humility can encourage everyone to do something great when the chance is presented to him or her.

nccaa

An organization, which is meant to be founded on the teaching and ways of Christ, disqualified an athlete for doing exactly what Christ calls us to do. Philippians 2:3 says, “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves.”

“The selflessness of a teammate to stop their race and give up their individual glory to help a teammate to the finish. That is the reason I coach, because the spirit of sport is revealed and the true character of our athletes shines through,” said cross country and track and field coach, Matthew Dougherty.

“After the race as Judith and I were helping Cara to the bus a girl from another team came up to us and told Cara what an awesome finish she had and how great Judith was for helping her,” explained Houghton senior and cross-country captain Leah Williams.

Despite the NCCAA’s decision to disqualify both Davenport and Marklin, there is still a great story to be told. It almost brought me to tears watching the two of them cross the line. “Cara has been such a strong asset to the team this year and to see her give everything she had to get across the finish line makes me so proud to call her my teammate. And for Judith to sacrifice her own race is one of the most selfless acts I’ve ever seen,” said Williams.

Categories
Opinions

SPOT Falls Short of Houghton Standards

Crowds filled the Houghton chapel on Homecoming Saturday night for the SPOT talent show. Students stood in line for hours, waiting until the doors opened and the rushing mob could inundate the room and fill every cushioned seat. Excitement and anticipation were tangible as students waited for the lights to dim and the show to begin.

Towards the end of the night, two tall, plaid-shirted guys climbed on stage with their guitars and microphones. The lights shone on them and the crowd sat in hushed shadow. Strum. Strum. Strum. The guitar echoed in the dark room.

“Yeah, yeah, when I walk on by, girls be looking like d*mn he fly.” The words continued to wash over the audience as they sang, “I’ve got passion in my pants, and I ain’t afraid to show it. I’m sexy and I know it.” They swayed. They grinned. They sang, “Check it out,” taunting, inviting the girls to stare as they rocked their hips back and forth, singing, “Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle.” The audience joined the chant, and my heart ached.

My friend’s parents and eleven year old brother sat next to her. I sat in one of the chapel’s back rows, and I watched over twenty alumni get up and leave after that song, looks of horror and disgust on their faces.

And it wasn’t just that song. It was the pictures of Miley Cyrus half naked, the rap about breaking all the rules, and the closing “Yeah” Usher song. And sexually showing off our bodies didn’t just begin this fall 2013 SPOT.

As I sat in the darkness and the audience clapped, I couldn’t help but wonder, How did this become okay at Houghton? Yes, we’re Houghton students, and we all know it’s a bubble. There’s a real world out there where songs and acts like this seem harmless. And yes, SPOT is a fun night, a night of student voice and freedom, and yes that is important.

Yet when did so blatantly glorifying sin become so okay? We all knew what we were getting into when we packed our bags and took out loans to come here. Most of us chose Houghton because God and the Bible meant something to us. We wanted to grow, be different. And the Bible has a whole lot to say about sex, sin, righteousness, and what we’re filling our minds with.

spot

During “Sexy and I Know It,” I longed to see people storming the stage and pulling the guys off, just as Jesus overturned tables in the temple. As I left the chapel I felt an ache to tell the students I passed, “God is calling you to a higher standard! He’s calling you to be men and women of justice and righteousness, people after His own heart, men and women of courage who will stand up for the truth! What you saw tonight was not that! God is calling you!”

Houghton junior Olivia Neveu says, “Christians are called to be holy and set apart. This is obvious all over Scripture. SPOT can and should be fun, but it simultaneously can and should be honoring to God.” 1 Peter 2:9 calls us to this holiness: “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His wonderful light.” It’s an invitation to love God. As Alicia Ucciferri says, “Having fun and loving Jesus are not mutually exclusive.”

SPOT comes around every year with kids, parents, and college-donor alumni attending. Perhaps the document outlining SPOT moral guidelines could start being followed. Perhaps there could be more moral voice in the audition reviewing board. Perhaps students could create acts that are fun, but also pure. And, perhaps, Houghton as a whole could begin to care. We could begin to care more about purity, about following God, and, as Dr. Jordan’s been sharing, about worship. SPOT is just the tip of the iceberg.

This is not a call to kill fun or student voice. It’s a call to holiness.

Categories
Opinions

October Break Should Be Extended

My home is in eastern Virginia, roughly a ten-hour drive from Houghton. Each year, I must decide whether or not to make the exhausting trip down for October break, caught between the desire to be home with family and the realization that even if I leave Wednesday and return the following Sunday afternoon, I will have only three days in Virginia and a hefty gas bill. While staying on campus isn’t an utterly deplorable idea, the fact is, a vast majority of students are able to and do go home during this break, leaving Houghton a ghost town, as some students have called it.

breakAccording to enrollment statistics for the 2012/2013 academic year, 400 students attending Houghton came from out-of-state. Roughly 303 of those students lived in the Northeast as well as nearby states such as West Virginia, Virginia, and Ohio, places which would require a drive of around ten hours at the higher end, although this is not true in all cases. This 29.2% of the student body would have the option to go home for a decent break without feeling guilty for doing so if the school year began a bit earlier.

Say we started classes just three days earlier in the school year, which would have been August 28 this year. If this were done, October break could easily be extended to a full week and the number of classes wouldn’t be any fewer; three days for three days. In this situation, I believe a large number of students who live the awkward distance of about four to ten or so hours away from the college would readily head home and be justified in doing so. Currently, I do go home for the three days I’m allotted and stop at a gas station at least once each way to fill up, straining my already minimal income; however, if I were to go home for a week, I would hardly think twice about the cost since the eight or nine days at home (which includes the weekend) would more than make up for it. Likewise, I think there are more than a few who would agree with me.

Other schools have recognized a similar need from their students. Within the past few years, Yale College has realized the need for an October break in general, saying on its website, “It has long been a concern at Yale that, particularly for freshmen, the unbroken period of 11 or 12 weeks of classes between the start of the fall semester and the Thanksgiving recess can be challenging.” Thus, a five-day break from Wednesday to Sunday was introduced in 2011. While Houghton already does have an October break established, I believe the logic does apply to extending ours to a full week. When out-of-state students have to travel long distances to get home or when they must stay on campus and face potential boredom, the four days can seem like not much of a break at all.

Some have questioned this type of proposal, referencing athletic pre-seasons, summer jobs, and study-abroad programs which may run into mid-August as potential deterrents to starting back earlier. However, I believe if enough students are willing to begin the year a few days or even a week earlier despite possible complications, the administration may be willing to listen. The Calendar Committee is the body that decides the dates and lengths for breaks. If you want to influence this policy, you could start by contacting your student Academic Council representatives, Miriam Harms and Jonathan Hardy, asking them to share your views with this committee.

When asked if she would go home for October break if it were a full week, Katrina Sawyer, a senior from Bronx, New York, which is a six-hour drive away, said, “Is that even a question? Of course!”

 

Categories
Opinions

Residence Hall Rules are an Insult to Integrity

Houghton College prides itself on being different from other schools. What makes Houghton unique is the school’s concentrated effort to help guide students into leading a holier way of life.

resA result of that effort is reflected in the college’s rules regarding the dormitories. Residence halls are not co-ed, and there is a four-hour window in the evening for those of the opposite gender to visit. During those visiting hours, doors are required to stay open, so that everybody can see what is going on inside the room. Open hours are not held on Mondays or Thursdays.

Now, there is one other place in the world that I have been to that has a similar policy regarding visitors. Granted, this is going to be an extreme analogy, but hear me out.

A psych ward.

To clarify for those who are reading this (and are now pretty worried about where this is going), I have never been admitted to one. I have visited one however, and have experienced what it’s like for the people inside. Imagine a place where you are checked in on by nurses, the doors always have to be open so that you can be watched, and visiting hours are limited for friends and family who want to see you. Now replace nurses with RA’s. How much different are the rules of the dormitories here at Houghton as compared to those of a psyche ward in a hospital?

“I understand what open hours are meant to do,” said Josh Bailey, a junior who now lives in the townhouses. “However, I also feel that they limit our freedom as mature college students, and restrict the opportunities that we have to grow up.”

What are the positives of the current open hour policy? It gives the residents of a hall a break from the opposite sex. There’s a level of privacy that can be experienced when open hours are not in session. I suppose the obvious answer is that we’re less likely to have sex, although based on the culture that has been established here, I don’t think that’s too much of a concern anyway.

Then again, isn’t it a little frustrating to be babysat? Isn’t the open door requirement kind of a slap in the face of our beliefs and character? Isn’t the four-hour window a little too restricting?

Houghton College prides itself on being different from other colleges. A different kind of student is attracted by this place; those who wish to live according to the values of Christianity. Shouldn’t we be given the opportunity to show that we can be trusted to hang out in a dorm at noon on a Monday?

Ashton Oakley, a junior who used to live in Lambein, suggests that open hours should be extended so that the only restricted times would be somewhere along the lines of 12:00pm-9am. This would allow us to still have a safeguard for the evening hours, but also allows us a greater level of freedom that people outside of Houghton take for granted.

In reality, since our classes take up most of the morning and the afternoon anyway, we wouldn’t take full advantage of the expanded open hours. However, it would be nice to allow students to feel as though they have more freedom than a mental patient.