Economy and Humanities

In the last days of April, the leadership of The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, the university at which I serve as a campus minister, decided to discontinue our Philosophy major in an attempt to save money in response to state-wide budget cuts in higher education. Current majors will be allowed to finish their degrees, but no new majors will be accepted into the program and so the number of classes will be reduced each semester.

C. John Sommervile, in his remarkable book, The Decline of the Secular University, laments that Universities, having lost their original purposes precisely owing to their secularization, are becoming little more than "credential factories" - no longer dedicated to seeking knowledge and truth for the good of the human person and community, but rather selling training and credentials for the career advancement of aspiring professionals (here is my more extended discussion of Sommerville's book).

The ULL decision seems to bear this out since Philosophy is seen as a more expendable field than say Business or Accounting: both of which can teach us how to best make and keep money, but not what we ought to use money for in the first place. They do not address the relationship between "the economy" and "The Good." They will not ask the probing questions about what is truly good for human individuals and communities, nor explore how blind allegiance to "the economy" can create a spiritual wasteland of empty consumerism and perpetually dissatisfied people looking for "the next thing". It strikes me as a bitter irony that the modern university, which grew out of the Ancient schools of Philosophy and the Medieval schools of Theology, cuts off its very root in the quest for economic survival. These are precisely the times when good philosophy and theology is so critical to our culture.

But the Humanities have managed to stick around this long and there is good reason to have hope for the future. After all, students will, even in the face of endless distraction by the electronic trivialities of postmodern life, continue to ask the "big questions" about Truth, Beauty, Meaning, and the Good. The impulse to ask is too deeply etched in our souls; as the Book of Ecclesiastes says: "God has put eternity on the hearts of men." In that spirit of hope, enjoy this fictional and satirical report examining the survival of Humanities education from 2009-2020, following the economic downturn.

Young people and Liturgy

Here is an interesting commentary from a worship leader that I hope will get some people thinking in new ways.

Some years ago he noticed that many young people in his contemporary mega-church seemed less engaged with the worship than their Baby Boomer parents. They were more interested in ancient practices and liturgy. Hopefully the desire to reconnect with the ancient practices of the Church and her liturgy among today's youth is beginning to be heard and understood by Church leaders (by and large this does not seem to be the case in my own Annual Conference, but we'll see).

At the same time, he discovered youth who were raised all their lives in liturgical churches often welcome new contemporary songs and music styles. The challenge is to integrate both the ancient and the contemporary.

Christos Anesti!

The Lord is Risen Indeed! Alleluia!

Almighty God,
through Jesus Christ you overcame death
and opened to us the gate of everlasting life.
Grant that we, who celebrate the day of our Lord's Resurrection,
may, by the renewing of your Spirit
arise from the death of sin to the life of righteousness;
through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

United Methodist Hymnal #320

Good Friday

Almighty God,

graciously behold this your family,

for whom our Lord Jesus Christ was willing

to be betrayed into the hands of sinners,

and to suffer death upon the cross;

who now lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,

One God, for ever and ever.

Amen.

United Methodist Hymnal #284; from The Book of Common Prayer (1979) page 221

Holy (Maundy) Thursday

Gracious God,

your Annointed One, on the night before he suffered,

instituted the sacrament of his body and blood.

Mercifully grant that we may recieve it thankfully

in remembrance of Jesus Christ our Lord,

who in these holy mysteries

gives us a pledge of eternal life.

Amen.

United Methodist Hymnal #283; from The Book of Common Prayer 221

De-baptism?

I ran across this about three weeks ago, but obviously haven't had much time for blogging. A number of atheist and secularist Britons are asking the Church of England to "cancel" their baptisms. Like many of their generation they were, as a matter of course, brought to the Church as infants and baptized, but many fell away or rejected the Christian faith as youth or adults and now they want their baptisms to be "revoked" as it were.

The Church of England has refused to make any such accomodations. Baptism is a matter of historical record, they argue, and that it did in fact take place cannot be changed.

The National Secular Society of England, in response to the Church's refusal, has begun issuing its own Certificates of De-baptism (click here for the story and here for the video).

All of this is very interesting to me and raises a number of questions. One mentioned in the article is: If atheists don't believe in any of this "superstitious" Christian stuff, why do they care one way or the other whether they were baptized as infants or not? That is a very interesting question that might connect to the deep spiritual substance of the baptismal event - maybe it is harder to "shake off" than we might suppose? Of course that brings up all sorts of issues about what is it that goes on in infant baptism (and what does not).

Concerning Baptism from a Methodist perspective, John Wesley (himself and Anglican priest of course) is a little hazy on this - in some places suggesting that new birth occurs in infant baptism and in other places he is clearly stating that new birth was a (potentially) seperate event tied rather to faith in the individual. If we (as Methodist theology does) see the sacrament as a covenant oath - an exchange of vows between God and the person baptized (always in connection with the covenant community) - then infant baptism is God speaking his side of the covenant oath and the community speaking its part, while the individual's own covenant commitment must wait until they are old enough to accept (or reject) Christ's salvation. That is to say - they have been claimed by God in baptism, now the question becomes will they actively accept and live into that divine claim on their lives, or will they not. One must be born again by water AND by Spirit, says St. John (John 3:3-5), and they Holy Spirit, while he blows where he wills, is generally held (especially in Galatians 3) to come upon those who believe. Thus, I cannot see how new birth - though perhaps begun in infant baptism - can possibly be said to have already (and completely) occurred until the individual has made a personal commitment of faith to Christ (that is, affirmed the baptismal vows for himself; see The United Methodist Hymnal, page 34).

I suspect some of my Methodist brethren may object to that (admittedly brief) desription of a baptismal theology, and this is I think why we must further clarify our teachings on this. By Water and the Spirit: A United Methodist understanding of Baptism seemed to me to fail to clarify some of the key issues (especially as it relates to New Birth).

Getting back to the issue of de-baptism, another question is about the popularity of the de-baptismal certificates - over 60,000 have been downloaded - by what authority can the National Secular Society revoke a sacramental action performed by the Church and the Holy Spirit? The Church spokesmen quoted in the article says that if someone wants to renounce his baptism, that is an issue between him and God. Maybe the NSS is simply trying to give individuals a way to do so (rather then claiming any authority).

A final observation is that the quotations in the article suggest that the atheists/secularists make certain assumptions about the Church of England that I suspect may be (at least partly) incorrect (but it would require further research for me to be sure). Is the doctrine of Original Sin the justification given for infant baptism in today's CofE (as they de-baptism certificate suggests)? Does the CofE count baptized infants as members as the de-baptism certificate suggests? The article clearly says that it does not. So there seems to be some ignorance among the secularists about the beliefs and practices of the Church that they are rejecting.