Category: Opinions

Categories
Opinions

Statement of Purpose

Two main criticisms are usually leveled at the Star: number one, that we are too pro-Houghton and, number two, that we are too anti-Houghton.

The people who normally complain the first seem to view the Star as a branch of Houghton’s public relations department – as if the Star provides a ringing endorsement of the changes, policies, and events that go on at Houghton within the stories that it covers. The point of view of these people is that the Star often paints too rosy a view of the institution while neglecting the very obvious problems that it faces. Meanwhile, the second group often view us similarly to saboteurs – those who will spitefully publish negative pieces about the college either to relieve personal frustration, to start drama, or else to hinder the positive growth of the institution.

It should not be too surprising that both of these criticisms are very much misplaced and often have much more to do with the self-identification of the reader (in either the group that negatively identifies with Houghton or the group that positively identifies with Houghton) than they have to do with the content of the Star itself. When one positively associates with the institution, one is prone to feel that any story that portrays the college in a negative light is an outright condemnation or an attempt to sabotage the college by the newspaper staff. When one negatively associates with the

institution, one will look at multiple positive articles as an indicator that the newspaper is tightly tied to the institution.

With this in mind, let me take this moment to refresh readers on what the Star actually is and what it intends to be.

Our mission statement, printed in every copy of the newspaper, “is to preserve and promote the values of dialogue, transparency, and integrity that have characterized Houghton College since its inception. This will be done by serving as a medium for the expression of student thought and as a quality publication of significant campus news, Houghton area news, and events.”

As outlined in our mission statement, our job as the student news organization on this campus is not

to promote the college. Neither is it denigrate it. Instead, our job is to make sure that the stories we publish are fact-based, accurate, and relevant in coverage of events and news of the college. We have no aims in a larger agenda, either positive or negative, other than to serve as a professional medium for dialogue and the exchange of factual information. Above all, we aim to serve.

I would like to extend invitations to all readers to get involved with the newspaper this year. There are many avenues to do this. If you are a student, the first suggestion would be to become a writer for the Star. If that seems like it would be a good fit for you, please send us an email indicating your

Quote template3

interest at editor@houghtonstar.com. We would also encourage students to help with editing

articles on Tuesday evenings in our office in the campus center basement. This latter opportunity is the easiest way to get involved with the Star and, along with writing articles, is an excellent opportunity to improve editing and writing skills.

The last avenue that is open to the public as a whole (not just students) is writing letters to the editor, and we would strongly encourage you to do so either to help provide insightful information about a given subject or else to correct any error that we make here at the newspaper. Letters to the editor should be 250 words or less and you can send them to the email listed above.

Houghton is undergoing a turbulent season. We at the Star hope to serve the campus well. Here’s to the new year!

Categories
Opinions

Different Schools for Different Fools

Quote templateCollege has become a rite of passage in our society.  The Common Core Learning Standards, supported by the U.S. Department of Education and adopted by 45 states, places a strong emphasis on college readiness.  Middle school and high school teachers and career counselors feel obligated to convince young adults to attend postsecondary institutions by highlighting our crumbling economy. “No one gets a job these days without a college degree.”  We have all been forced to watch power points of the statistics that showcase the benefits of the academy.  Higher percentages of people with some sort of college degree get jobs.  The more advanced your degree, the higher your salary.  I would not be surprised by any recent graduate who felt slightly entitled to the jobs and salaries promised to them by these statistics.  (However, the fact that these statistics show up when I am considering paying more money to further my education makes me wonder about how the numbers are interpreted.)  College is becoming more and more necessary to an individual’s place in society.

Some blatantly suggest that the academy is the only option and that a postsecondary liberal arts education is the very best of that option.  I honestly have been told that choosing Houghton College was the best thing I could do for myself and for the world.  Can anyone truly come to know who they are and how they relate to the world without the reflective attitudes fostered at such an institution?  Others wonder whether the academy is worth the time and money that so many people commit to it.  Does academia really convince people to look and act outside of scholarly work and into real life and practice?  Or do most scholars eventually turn back to the books to solve the problems in which they have little to no actual experience?  Those who ask these questions consider the academy self-indulgent and irrelevant.

Some days, I appreciate my education here more than others and might be inclined to agree with the most committed scholars of the academy.  Other days, I cannot remember why I have submitted myself to the possibly meaningless endeavors of postsecondary studies.  Most days, I do not feel strongly in either direction.  Why question it at all at this point in my education?

Personally, academia has helped me to discover the kind of person I want to be.  It has been partly through my post-secondary studies that I have come to understand more fully what humanity, faith, and society are, and what they mean to me. This, I believe, affirms the merits of the academy.  However, I would never suggest that someone like my sister, who discovers every day through dance what it means to be human and relate to others, join the same academy I enjoy.  Or that my friend, who uses his natural mathematics abilities to create stage sets and build houses, should use his hands instead to write a scholarly article.  Perhaps there are majors and programs at post-secondary institutions that simply give people the degree they need to follow the work at which they will truly excel, the action that brings them life.  In such cases, colleges and universities become small stepping-stones rather than a way of scholarly life.  To some people, maybe more even than will admit it to themselves, academia simply fails to give life meaning the way our culture claims it will.

It is not my intent to depreciate the benefits or significance of the academy.  After all, I have continued my studies here at Houghton and have enjoyed much of it.  It is simply to challenge the pedestal upon which the academy rests in our society.  Are postsecondary studies intrinsically and universally good?  I think not.  The academy is not inherently good or evil; I have found few things in this world that are.  The goodness, usefulness, and purpose of anything will most often depend upon the personality and style of the one that chooses to invest in it.

Categories
Opinions

Dichotomy in Discourse

Quote template

Few things are as important to Christians as language.  Our faith and our characters are revealed in and defined by our choice of language.  We judge based on the use of foul language.  We approve

based on the use of “Christian” language littered with references to how blessed we are and what is “on our hearts.”  Christian language norms inform the way we pray; do we start with Father-God

or Dear Jesus?  Do we end with ‘in Jesus’ name’ or ‘all God’s children said’?  Words are important to us.  One word can either offend or define us.  To be a Christian is to use a certain set of phrases and terms, because what we say to one another is influenced by a belief system in common with other Christians and different from non-Christians.  Our entire religion is based on the text of a book.  Pastors and speakers are constantly analyzing and re-analyzing paragraphs, sentences, words.  If something is unclear, we look to the original Greek or Hebrew, and suddenly we understand; tiny reinterpretations make all the difference.  Language matters.

Equality also matters.  From the moment Jesus said “What you did for the least of these,” Christians have been rooting for the underdog.  We feed the hungry.  We house the homeless.  We smuggle Bibles into places where Bibles are banned.  Wesleyans in particular have been known to work towards equality on multiple levels, by opposing slavery and ordaining women.  In these areas as well, Christians use certain language.  When we go into missions it is because God called us to do so.  When we encounter a situation we cannot control, we leave it in God’s hands.  We care about the well-being of all, because all are God’s children.

There is nothing wrong with this way of speaking.  Our belief system is different from others, so we talk differently than others.  No matter if some of these phrases have become overused or spoken only out of habit, when they were first said, they were said because they were believed.  However, Christians are not the only group of people who care about equality and justice.  Obviously; just as much activism is carried out by secular organizations as is by Christian organizations.  We’re nothing special, really.  We are all working towards the same end.  But there remains a disconnect between being a Christian who values equality, and being a secular person who values equality.  This is due in large part to language.  We both fight for justice, but we come from two completely different places, and therefore sometimes support opposing sides.  For example, when the world says “It’s my body,” the Christian hears “I don’t care how my actions impact the lives of my child and those around me,” and when the Christian says “All are created in the image of God,” the world hears “God is a narcissist who doesn’t care about the long-term well-being of His children.”  We speak different languages.

Christian language is an important part of our life and faith.  It is also important to connect with others who share our same values and goals.  With more people working together towards improving the world, more can be accomplished.  Perhaps we need to address where our words are helpful to our faith, and where they only add confusion to those we might hope to reach.

 

Categories
Opinions

Goodbye, International Students

Unbeknownst to most of us, the Student Financial Services Office (SFSO) and the Office of Admission have decided to slash financial aid for incoming international students. This decision is appalling, and deserves reconsideration.

            “We are giving more financial aid to international students than to our own,” one administrator crassly put it. Last time I checked, “our own” is the body of Christian believers, not the citizens of a given country. (Not even the US Army War College or West Point is that parochial.)

Inti Martinez-Aleman '07
Inti Martinez-Aleman ’07

This is a matter of equity and justice. Let’s look at a real example, a Honduran prospective student. What used to be a $15-20,000 financial aid package is now meagerly $8,000. That means this Honduran would have to shell out at least $28,000 every year—upfront cash!—which is enough to make a 50% down payment for a comfy house; in a four-year’s worth, one can get a decent 30-year retirement.

US citizens can get federal aid for their education, yet that concept is limited or nonexistent in countries like Honduras. Consider this country’s situation: the exchange rate is 20 Lempiras to 1 US dollar; the minimum wage is $2 per hour; you can buy a small home with $36,000—the Houghton annual price tag.

If we want Houghton to increase enrollment and diversity, cutting aid to foreigners is not the brightest idea. Currently, Houghton students are 96 percent US/Canadian and 94 percent White. This is virtually off the charts amongst American colleges and universities. With the misguided (at best) or jingoistic (at worst) “our own” parlance, these percentages might reach 100. Hooray.

What would our Founder think of this? Some suggest he’d send the Administration and Board of Trustees packing. Frieda Gillette and Kay Lindley put it differently in And You Shall Remember: the Houghton Charter expressed the goal of establishing and maintaining “…a seminary for the purpose of conferring a thorough education without regard to sex or nationality.” (emphasis added)

The Administration’s focus now is to enroll fifteen foreign students who are able to pay at least 80 percent of college tuition and fees; this is labeled as “full paying.” The goal is admirable and achievable, for which I have personally volunteered to try to get more Hondurans of this caliber for Houghton. The reality, however, is that most Christians from the Global South are not affluent.

Higher education institutions that take diversity and inclusion seriously have various endowed scholarships for international students, who collectively get hundreds of thousands of dollars to study in the US, paying close to nothing out of pocket. With the same vehemence and extent Houghton will raise millions for the Kerr-Pegula Athletic Complex and renovating the Paine Science Building, it can also raise money to fund international student education. But it doesn’t.

Thom Kettelkamp and I were briefed on this matter by SFSO and Admission officials. They believe this policy will be temporary; once enrollment increases, it will be gone. Permanent or temporary, this policy runs diametrically opposite to our Mission, Philosophy, Charter, history and every other good thing Houghton is known for.

Say Houghton decided to slash financial aid for non-Wesleyan students, because they are not “our own,” they don’t pay enough, and there’s a limited budget. Wouldn’t we all be irate? Wouldn’t enrollment decrease dramatically? Of course, even if the cuts were temporary. For some reason, however, a similar red flag wasn’t raised when this anti-foreign decision was made.

For me, “our own” are Christian believers, regardless of nationality, denomination, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, bodily ability, socioeconomic class, etc. As a Christian college, we attract students of all denominations, but the fastest growing Christian population in the US or in the rest of the world is not middle-class, rural, Evangelical America. To increase enrollment from domestic and international Christian circles, which are the most numerically promising sources of students, Houghton needs to cater to them. If we are going to pretend to care about diversity and inclusion, let’s do the job right. And cutting aid to foreigners won’t help.

Categories
Opinions

What’s Orthodox to Someone is Heresy to Another

As I come to the end of my undergraduate career at a private faith-based liberal arts college, I think it is appropriate that I reflect on my journey.

I am not sure what sort of Christian I am. I only hope I’m not a heretic. Where amongst the thirty thousand denominations do I fall? I agree with the declaration of the Nicene Creed, so I must be ok.

Courtesy of fotogalerias.universia.c
Courtesy of fotogalerias.universia.c

Throughout my life, I have been dragged through a slew of different denominations. My parents, coming from Gideon and Baptist backgrounds, joined the inter-denominational mission organization Wycliffe Bible Translators. The first four years of my life were spent in a non-denominational Congolese Church. This was quite the Charismatic experience, as I’m sure you can imagine. I recall a story of a woman, supposedly practicing sorcery and possessed by a demon, who barged into the Church hollering in a man’s voice. They say it took seven men to drag her out and beat the demon out of her.

After this, we moved to France, where I was put in a private Catholic school for the following 11 years. I attended Catechism. I was taught that the Saints would intercede for me. I went to confession. I partook in the Holy Communion.

Also in France I attended an Assemblies of God church with my family. Within the first few months I could mimic word for word the “bidi-bidi” sounds that they claimed were Tongues and could also give the interpretations that would always follow.

Around this time, my parents became intrigued by what was happening in Toronto. John Arnott prayed his famous prayer “come Holy Spirit, come;” And thus began the infamous Toronto Blessing. After this, my family joined the Vineyard movement, a neo-charismatic movement stemming out of the Calvary Chapel.

After I moved back to the States, some close friends of the family invited me to attend the International House of Prayer in Kansas City. This is a charismatic non-denominational mission organization that emphasizes post-tribulational premillenialism. Led by a former Kansas City Prophet, Mike Bickle, the movement focuses on the end times.

I am no theologian; however, I’d hazard a guess that I have come across quite a few views that stray in some ways from orthodox Christianity, yet in each of these everyone maintains that their views are most in line with that of the early Church. I find myself distraught. I can’t help but to wonder what heretical views I uphold. Are gays Christian? When does human life begin? Is paedobaptism wrong? Is credobaptism necessary? Do demons exist? Are revivals psychological? Does God carry on personal relationships with everyone? Does God have a plan for my life?

Spiritual people always try to point to scripture. They tell us to base our beliefs on the word of God. Unfortunately, there are verses for and against each one of these questions. I don’t have any answers. I don’t know whether demons exist. I don’t know whether I should be re-baptized, or what happens when I take communion. I don’t know why God has been silent.  I find comfort in Thomas’s doubt. But I recognize that for some people, these questions, when unanswered, put Biblical faith at risk.

Rather than continue preaching these ambiguities—that is, all the doctrines that cause division amongst Christians—for which two thousand years have taught us that there are no conceivable resolutions, let us, as Wolterstorff writes, “endure holding on to God… join with God in keeping alive the protest against early death and unredemptive suffering… own our own suffering… and join with the divine battle against all that goes awry with reference to God’s intent.”

At the last supper, Jesus commanded his disciples to love one another. This was nothing new. He had instructed his followers to do this time and time again. Yet a few hours before his death, he tells his followers that they will be recognized for how they treat others.

Ultimately I am no longer afraid of being a heretic because, as one wise blogger once wrote, “what is orthodox to someone is going to be heresy to another.”

Throughout my time at Houghton I have heard, on at least three different occasions, individuals make reference to being Catholic and “converting” to Christianity. This makes me cringe. Was it their Catholicism that made them unchristian? What if I stated that I used to be Evangelical but then I became a Christian? I used to be Charismatic, but then I got saved. The fact is that Catholics are heretics, and so are the Eastern Orthodox, Baptists, Wesleyans, Mennonites, and the 30 thousand other denominations. We are all heretics to someone else. None of us hold the keys to the mystery of the universe. But we can choose how we are going to treat our fellow heretics: with Love.

Categories
Opinions

Welfare Recipients, American Stereotyping, and the Inactive, Loud Church

Courtesy of www.eirigi.org
Courtesy of www.eirigi.org

Are you living off of welfare? The answer is not as obvious as you might think. Presently, Houghton College and the federal government are two of the greatest welfare distributors in Houghton, N.Y. Welfare according to our friends at Webster’s Dictionary is “aid to people in need: financial aid and other benefits for people who are unemployed, below a specific income level, or otherwise requiring assistance, especially when provided by a government agency or program.” We in Houghton are not like ‘those people’ who are unemployed. We have jobs. Well, we have jobs subsidized through the federally mandated work-study program which is not a natural byproduct of our free-enterprise capitalist society. My income is subsidized every time I work and if you work somewhere other than Subway or China Star then you receive a welfare benefit through the federal work study program too.

        But perhaps you don’t work on campus but instead you receive a weekly or monthly stipend from your parents. I will not argue that you are lazy because you do not work. This benefit is not earned; rather it is inherited because you fit into a special class of people: “mom’s and dad’s child.” Your mother and/or father are very gracious with the welfare they impart on you. Few people would say that it is wrong for parents to impart benefits to their children simply because their children are their children. What about those of us who receive federal grants or federally-backed loans to cover the cost of tuition at Houghton? Aren’t these forms of aid welfare also? Perhaps you are beginning to realize that many if not most of us are here because we depend on the goodness of another person, a government, or an institution. When you start that small business and you receive your ‘subsidy’ that too is welfare. A select group or person receiving a benefit that only that group or person is ‘entitled’ to is a basic qualification for all welfare recipients. Houghton college students are largely living on welfare.

        Unfortunately here at Houghton College when we visualize a stereotypical welfare recipient we see a lazy, black, unmarried mother of 8 not a white college student. Even so we make an exemption because to us the federal government can ‘subsidize’ wealthy fortune 500 businesses, oil companies, coal companies, banks, and colleges but if it gives any money to a woman raising three children on her own then it acts unethically. Would we continue to advocate the destruction of the modern American welfare state even if it meant that people would die? I am not being melodramatic. For some children the only meal they receive each day is given to them through the federally mandated free or reduced lunch program. The food stamp program was established to provide for children who had lost their fathers in warfare. The federal government asserted that children face many disadvantages when growing up without a father. Regardless of the choice their mother made or whether a child’s father left or died should a child suffer for the ‘sins’ of his or her mother or father? Furthermore, it is historical fact that the institution of marriage was forbidden for black slaves in the South. Should we wonder why it is an uncommon institution in the poor inner city communities which grew when southern agricultural industrialization forced former slave-sharecroppers north?

        Don’t get me wrong, the modern American welfare state is a flawed system which does perpetuate some levels of dependency. However, as my grandmother always says, “don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” I would wager that you might be in favor of dismantling the entire welfare state. Perhaps you believe that private institutions would take the place of the welfare state and do a better job as well; our nation’s history shows that just isn’t the case. The failure of Elizabethan Poor Laws in the late 18 and early 19th centuries encouraged the federal government and founding generation to leave the issue of provision for the poor to the state and local communities. For over 150 years local communities handled the issue as best as they could. Then the 1930s came and we realized that our economy is based on more than just a few isolated communities.

If tomorrow the Christian church stepped up to the plate and knocked the issue of poverty out of the park then I would say “Amen!” If tomorrow lines of suburban families stood near abortion clinics and offered to women headed inside to raise the unborn children of those considering aborting them I would say “Amen!” However, presently many communities have more rhetoric than they action. A lukewarm church gets spit out every time. What is your temperature today?

Categories
Opinions

Living Within Our Means

Every day there are many of us that inflict damage upon this world with our highly consumerist lifestyles.

Courtesy of http://btr.michaelkwan.com/
Courtesy of http://btr.michaelkwan.com/

My parents blew their money and their credit scores before I was even born. When they began to think about the consequences of their financial decisions, it was too late. As a result, they resolved to raise frugal, financially responsible children. “Live within your means,” was one of their top five phrases of parental advice, along with “Marry rich the first time around” and “Always check your receipt before you leave the parking lot.” (See a pattern?) “Live below your means” was employed when times were tougher or when my siblings and I perched hopefully on a stationary 25-cent ride outside of K-Mart. Living below their means was their way of remedying the damage that had already been done. However, what if we instead understand “means” as all resources available to us?

By “means,” my parents are talking about income, monetary resources.  I’ve got that down (except maybe for the money going to my private, liberal arts education). I want to know what it would look like if we lived within all of our means. The earth, the waters, air. Electricity, fossil fuels. Paper, plastic, metals. Textiles, animals, food plants. These resources are not unlimited, and when we use more than the earth can provide and more than we need, we exploit the creation within which we live and further marginalize the people who manipulate and produce the resources to cater to our indulgent lives.

So, how does one practice life within the means of the world? Perhaps, considering our current state of environmental, fiscal, and social crises, we should be living below our means for a while. Sometimes I think that the only way to do this is get rid of all I have and run away into the woods like a wild animal. As tempting as that can be, I only know one or two people who might be ready and determined enough to make such a drastic change in their lifestyles. I do not happen to be one of them.

        I agree with the wise Disney character, who once sang, “We are all connected to each other in a circle that never ends.” As long as you live, you cannot escape other life. Our actions, my actions, your actions, have an impact. Our choices make this world what it is. My parents’ decisions not only affected who I turned out to be, but also the economies, communities, and ecosystems of which they were a part. So do yours. Most often, our decisions will affect those who are poor and marginalized around the globe.

Except for the few who will leave civilization completely behind in pursuit of communion with the earth, every person will always be able to do something more to live sustainably. In a way, this idea beautifully clarifies the connectedness of all things by defining the role that humans must play at this point in our history. Our role is to act on our awareness of the state of the world’s resources. Our role is to attempt positive change, taking one step at a time toward harmony. The beauty of this lies in our human capacity to persist in the convictions that proceed from genuine reflection.

In The Long-Legged House, Wendell Berry writes, “We have lived our lives by the assumption that what was good for us would be good for the world. We have been wrong. We must change our lives so that it will be possible to live by the contrary assumption, that what is good for the world will be good for us.” That is a call for radical change. Radical change exists on a continuum that ranges from extreme to reasonable. Change like this can happen one step at a time. Richard Meyer said, “We’ve got to be willing to put in sustained time and energy to create change, and we’ve got to remember that things move at a pace that may feel too slow. If we do nothing, the pace will be nonexistent.” Although he was talking about the educational system, I think this philosophy can be applied to all areas that warrant change. To begin acting on this, the question we must every day be asking ourselves is: How can I live in deeper peace with the world to which I am so closely connected, the world that supports me?

I wish my parents had considered their financial future (me) before it was too late. When I consider the way I live and consume, I will remember those who come after me. But more than that, I want to live in this moment peacefully and in harmony with the world, including the people and resources in it.

Categories
Opinions

Houghton College Encouraging Obesity

As an institution we have lost sight of what holiness is. While we vilify drinking and smoking, we actively encourage gluttony and obesity. As a Wesleyan institution, our roots are buried deep in the Holiness Movement. This movement focused on Wesley’s teachings of Christian Perfection, which holds that the heart of the born again believer could attain a state free of voluntary sin. Out of this teaching, the movement adopted practices that have become quintessentially equated with Wesleyans. Two of the more dominant practices are that of not drinking alcoholic beverages and not using tobacco products in any form. A few reasons for the exclusion of these substances are for the purpose of avoiding sin, maintaining purity and avoiding the appearance of evil.

Courtesy of http://climbforcharity.com/
Courtesy of http://climbforcharity.com/

At this point I am not much interested in delving deeper into these teachings—this is not intended to be a theological exploration—rather, I would like to turn my attention towards healthy living, and use the foundations of the Holiness Movement and Wesley’s teachings as a basis for critiquing the current health practices of the majority of Christians, Houghton students, faculty, and western society as a whole.

As Christians we are taught that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. This is one of the most used arguments by the adversaries of drinking and smoking. We point out the negative effects of smoke on the human lungs. Not only does the tobacco burn the lungs and deposit toxic tar, but it increases risks of heart disease, mouth cancer, and numerous other diseases. Alcohol wreaks havoc on the liver, has ruined countless lives, torn apart families, and destroyed reputations. Numerous children are affected by fetal alcohol syndrome. The fact is that alcohol can be dangerous.

Few are those that would dispute these facts. The proponents of indulging typically appeal to moderation, which is absolutely valid.

Yet as partakers in the holiness movement, I believe we have lost track of what the movement’s original purpose was. We focus on vilifying those that enjoy the substances we’ve qualified as evil; meanwhile, we continue to abuse our bodies by filling them with unhealthy foods. It has been deemed acceptable to attack smokers and drinkers, but it remains taboo to have open discussions about obesity.

Each meal, I wait in line at one of four water dispensers, nestled between 28 soda dispensers waiting to fill my cup with flavored high fructose corn syrup. The healthy food options are hidden amongst an abundance of fried food, sugary food, and sodium-filled food.  In Shenawana Hall there are two vending machines but not one water fountain.  At 5 Bites locations there are a hundred variations of corn based candy and maybe one organic food option. It is as though Houghton is actively encouraging obesity.

If our body is indeed the “temple of the holy spirit” then what should we make of these consumption habits? We condemn drinking and smoking. What about high fructose corn syrup, fried food, and all the other terrible things we ingest? Why do these fall into a different category?

Why is obesity acceptable? We used to hear talk about “freshmen 15,” now it is increasingly becoming “freshmen 30”. Worse than simply accepting obesity as a norm, we are actually encouraging it and making ourselves feel better about it. Obesity costs us approximately 147 billion dollars per year in medical expenditures. Over two thirds of all Americans are Obese.

Why is this form of self-harm any more acceptable than the other previously mentioned forms?

Categories
Opinions

“Through Our Tears We See the Tears of God”

One of my favorite crucifixion artworks is the Isenheim Altarpiece that was painted by Matthias Grunewald in 1516 during the Renaissance in (what is today) Germany. An important fact to bear in mind is that this piece was painted expressly for the Monastery of St. Anthony, which was an order that specialized in hospitalization for the plague and also for St. Anthony’s Fire– a particularly painful skin disease that resulted from the digestion of fungi from various cereals such as rye.

Courtesy of culturedart.blogspot.com
Courtesy of culturedart.blogspot.com

Knowing this, it is hard not to see the marks of these diseases in the artwork. The most gruesome aspect of the piece (indeed it is thought to be one of the most horrifying crucifixions ever painted) is the image of the crucified Christ with his body inflicted with plague-like sores and his skin carrying what is unmistakably the marks of St. Anthony’s Fire. Below the center panel there is also a small panel depicting Christ as if his leg has been amputated, another aspect of the disease that many of the sufferers had to face. But why paint Christ as such when, as we know from the Gospels, he was crucified on a cross and not condemned to a death by disease? Well, because the artist is trying to convey to the patients at the monastery that Christ understood their suffering and, as a man, had even experienced suffering on the cross.

This is the image that has haunted me as I look at the photos of the terror attack in Boston this past week. Images of people with scraps of metal and nails flayed into their skin (not unlike Grunewald’s image of the flayed Christ), images of runners and spectators who lost their limbs in the blast, pain and suffering and streams of blood on an American sidewalk in April. Is God here?

After the past year and a half of there have been extremely violent shootings at seemingly innocuous places from a mall to a movie theater, a Sikh temple to an elementary school, and now a marathon. The innocents that have been slaughtered or wounded in these instances are beyond count. The survivors mourn, we vow ‘never again’, we debate about how to prevent these instances of violence, but, all the same, innocents are still killed at the next instance of human-induced deaths. Why does this happen?

There are no easy answers to these questions — which is why, perhaps, the sufferers at Isenheim found their comfort in a crucifixion scene in which their savior identified with their pain. They could not relate to a triumphant and victorious resurrection scene; their doubts and hurts prevented that. It was the suffering of the incarnate innocent that gave them relief.


Some of you may have had the privilege of attending the campus lecture given by Nicholas Woltersdorff, who has written extensively on the suffering of God, during the semester at Houghton last year. He writes these words: “How is faith to endure, O God, when you allow all this scraping and tearing on us? You have allowed rivers of blood to flow, mountains of suffering to pile up, sobs to become humanity’s song–all without lifting a finger that we could see. You have allowed bonds of love beyond number to be painfully snapped. If you have not abandoned us, explain yourself.”

“We strain to hear,” Woltersdorff continues, “But instead of hearing an answer we catch sight of God himself scraped and torn. Through our tears we see the tears of God.”

Categories
Opinions

Students Shouldering Unnecessary Responsibility

It may seem as if all The Star ever writes about is Senate, but perhaps that is because interesting things do in fact take place there.

xtlxsec7c0vzramwas1mSometimes it is not even the funding requests or committee updates themselves, which are the real issues and discussion-starters for Houghton’s student government, but rather the implications that come with these seemingly basic requests.

Climbing Club approached the Senate with a request for $1,000 to go towards renovations for the climbing wall and shoe closet. Usually the Climbing Club makes a request for $1,000 toward a specific climbing trip’s expenses. In the past, the club has gone to Colorado, Canada, and several other prime climbing locations.

This year, the club chose to forfeit their trip in order to use the funds to repair the climbing wall. As of now, the small holes and other damages to the wall pose a problem to climbers, particularly small children, who come to the wall on Mondays when it is open to community members.

It is not surprising that the club is making the effort to pay for repairs and renovations to the equipment that they use every day. They take pride in what they can offer to students and community members, and they want to see everyone safe and satisfied.

What is surprising is that a student organization on campus has to go to another student organization in order to find the funding to repair part of Houghton College’s facilities. We at the Star are not entirely sure when the maintenance and upkeep, and the necessary finances, of the college’s facilities and grounds ever became the responsibility of students.

And though the SGA has plenty of money to pass around to different clubs and organizations on campus, it is not the SGA’s responsibility to see that renovations are made to a climbing wall that poses safety hazards. According to Tyler Kempney, president of the club, the wall has recently passed inspection, but that does not mean that a small child could not get his or her fingers or hands stuck in small holes and cracks in the wall while climbing. This could easily lead to serious injuries and the damages could also lead to a loss of interest in rock climbing.

We sincerely appreciate the efforts of the Climbing Club to provide a safe environment; what we take issue with is not their actions. But what we can not reconcile is why they have had to even take these actions. The Equestrian Society is not responsible for buying arena footing, though members are arguably the ones doing the most riding. The Gadfly Society does not have to pay for the chairs and desks they use while philosophizing, even if they should break one. Mercy Seat is not responsible for painting Presser Hall or fixing a leak in the roof of the chapel, and so why does Climbing Club find itself having to pay for renovations if they want them done? How do Houghton’s commitments to excellence and community line up with a potentially dangerous facility?

Ultimately, though, the issue is larger than the climbing wall. This is not the first time that SGA has funded events or projects that, as Senator Wynn Horton put it, “It’s not our responsibility to pay for.” Why is it that students seeking to attend an academic conference specific to their major have had to turn to SGA to get there? Is there a disconnect between these academic departments and the funding they need to make the learning experience truly beneficial and better than at other institutions’?

If so, and if SGA has to continue funding trips to conferences and repairs to facilities, Houghton College, as an institution, can not then make the claim that it provides students with wonderful opportunities and outlets. In reality, without students allocating the limited funds they can control, other students could not have the experiences for which they hope in coming to Houghton.

We may indeed be more powerful than we think, but this power should not come at the price of the institution shirking the simple responsibility of safety.