Visit to Cornerstone University

[davidb]

I found this letter from Cornerstone University President Dr. Rex M. Rogers on the University's web site:

From the President: Soulforce
Special to The Herald 10.APR.07
Soulforce plans to visit CU Monday, April 23, 2007. While Cornerstone University declined this visit, we will nevertheless greet the Soulforce bus riders graciously. We will provide riders with certain parameters for their visit, and we, like other schools have done, will rightly expect them to abide by these parameters.

We have worked for months, praying and seeking counsel from CU constituents on and off campus, to identify how CU should respond to Soulforce, and we recognize that, regardless of what we determine to do, some will not approve. This is simply the nature of this volatile issue and the fact that the university represents what Chancellor Wilbert Welch calls “the big umbrella.” We are responsible for everyone under that umbrella, and we are working to make decisions in the university’s best interest on what is a complex issue.

It is very important that you understand a key distinction. Remember that Soulforce is an organization whose purpose is to promote sexual immorality in the name of Christianity. In advancing its agenda at other schools, the organization has been deceptive and inaccurate in its communications and interpretation of events. Soulforce is not fair and is not really interested in dialogue. Rather, the organization looks for opportunities to make Bible-believing Christians seem intolerant and to present themselves, via media visuals, as victims of oppression.

Meanwhile, it is also true that the riders are individuals, sincere but confused young people with whom we would like to share the love and hope of Christ. We do not hate nor even dislike these individuals.

So, while the university will draw lines on the level of access it provides the organization, we still wish to treat the individual riders respectfully. This is how CU can speak the truth in love.

I, therefore, want to encourage you to embrace the following recommendations:

• Pray for Soulforce riders.
• Avoid wearing clothing printed with anti-gay slogans, “in-your-face” bigoted or arrogant comments or any other symbols of disrespect and condemnation.
• Avoid carrying message (including Scripture) or protest placards or otherwise staging presentations that media can easily portray as unloving, belligerent or worse.
• Participate in as many of the Human Sexuality Committee’s excellent program series as you can.
• Remember that those who choose to interact with Soulforce riders are not holier than those who do not, and vice versa.
May God make His face shine upon CU April 23, 2007.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Cornerstone University

Remember that Soulforce is an organization whose purpose is to promote sexual immorality in the name of Christianity.

Rather, the organization looks for opportunities to make Bible-believing Christians seem intolerant and to present themselves, via media visuals, as victims of oppression.

The riders are individuals, sincere but confused young people with whom we would like to share the love and hope of Christ. We do not hate nor even dislike these individuals.

OK, this is really too much.

[kara speltz]

Originally Posted by Cornerstone University
Remember that Soulforce is an organization whose purpose is to promote sexual immorality in the name of Christianity.
Rather, the organization looks for opportunities to make Bible-believing Christians seem intolerant and to present themselves, via media visuals, as victims of oppression.
The riders are individuals, sincere but confused young people with whom we would like to share the love and hope of Christ. We do not hate nor even dislike these individuals.

Hmmm, how is it that these good Christians have totally forgotten about, "bearing false witness against your neighbor."

I am always astonished at fundies' capacity to twist the truth.

kara

[antonyh]

First the president claims that Bible-believing Christians are tolerant people

..the organization [Soulforce] looks for opportunities to make Bible-believing Christians seem intolerant...

Then the president pleads with the student body to avoid any displays of intolerance:

I, therefore, want to encourage you to embrace the following recommendations:

• Pray for Soulforce riders.
• Avoid wearing clothing printed with anti-gay slogans, “in-your-face” bigoted or arrogant comments or any other symbols of disrespect and condemnation.
• Avoid carrying message (including Scripture) or protest placards or otherwise staging presentations that media can easily portray as unloving, belligerent or worse.
• Participate in as many of the Human Sexuality Committee’s excellent program series as you can.
• Remember that those who choose to interact with Soulforce riders are not holier than those who do not, and vice versa.

So I am confused. Are they tolerant or intolerant?

We are tolerant, we are tolerant

[u-dog]

So whats with the new picture, Antony? A strawberry? People are gonna think you're some kind of durned fruit or somethin! You're not a fruit are ya Antony? tell me it aint so!

[u-dog]

I'm sorry Antony. didn't mean to offend. One of the ways to take the power out hurtful and oppressive talk is to take control of them and use them of and on yourself -- or so I believe at any rate. But I have deleted my remark from the thread. you may wish to also

[Diane Vera]

Originally Posted by antonyh

First the president claims that Bible-believing Christians are tolerant people

Then the president pleads with the student body to avoid any displays of intolerance:

So I am confused. Are they tolerant or intolerant?

They're trying to "hate the sin but love the sinner," I guess.

[Diane Vera]

Originally Posted by u-dog

But I have deleted my remark from the thread. you may wish to also

You may have tried to delete it, but didn't succeed.

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by Diane Vera

You may have tried to delete it, but didn't succeed.

I believe that you are mistaken

[Diane Vera]

Originally Posted by u-dog

I believe that you are mistaken

I assumed you were referring to this post, which is still there. Perhaps you were referring to a different one?

[antonyh]

It was a different one. We've hugged and made up.

[doom1701]

Originally Posted by antonyh

So I am confused. Are they tolerant or intolerant?

We are tolerant, we are tolerant

Well, I haven't been able to follow the rest of the EQ visits, but you do have to remember that we're dealing with college students here. 25% of them are going to be logical and tolerant, 50% are desparately trying not to make waves, and the remaining 25% tends to be loudmouth idiots that think they are God's gift to the world. The first 25% will show curiosity, the middle 50% will say away, and the top 25% will be the idiots standing in the parking lot with the offensive signs.

As for the letter, forgive me if I'm ignoring things said that might bother other people here, but I see it as a perfect example of Dr. Rogers: he's an expert at saying nothing in a maximum number of words. I do wonder if this letter will also go out to alumni, like the letter that brought me to this site.

[Emproph]

Originally Posted by antonyh

So I am confused. Are they tolerant or intolerant?

"©Rex M. Rogers - All Rights Reserved":

The latest attempt to normalize the gay experience in America is a push to legalize same-sex couple adoptions.

Proponents argue that orphaned children would be better off with a gay couple than they would be bouncing around the foster care system for years.

I feel for these children, and if I could be supportive of same-sex couples adopting children for the good of the children I would. But I cannot. Contrary to some criticisms, this attitude does not make me “intolerant.” It makes me principled.

Not "intolerant," principled.

From the KKK FAQ:

Q. Why do you think you are so superior to everyone else?

A. We don't care who is superior and who isn't. God made us all. We simply believe that the United States of America was founded as a white Christian nation.
[snip]
We think it would be terrible if white Christians ceased to exist and we are working to preserve and promote their interests. We feel the concepts of Christianity benefit all people regardless of color. The fact is we have a right to love our children and our heritage. Even if the white race was but mere cavemen and cavewomen, we still have a right to protect and advance our people.

They're also not racist, they're principled.

[doom1701]

I'm sorry, but a comparison of Rex Rogers (no matter how little respect I have for him) to the KKK is not helping anyone's cause.

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by doom1701

I'm sorry, but a comparison of Rex Rogers (no matter how little respect I have for him) to the KKK is not helping anyone's cause.

I don't think Emproph was comparing Rogers to the KKK so much as he was pointing out that the two use a similar pattern of thought and expression to make and to rationalize their positions. That is, IMHO, very helpful as I evaluate the positions and rationalizations of Rogers.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by u-dog

I don't think Emproph was comparing Rogers to the KKK so much as he was pointing out that the two use a similar pattern of thought and expression to make and to rationalize their positions. That is, IMHO, very helpful as I evaluate the positions and rationalizations of Rogers.

Ideological parallels can be helpful and thought provoking.

[doom1701]

Originally Posted by u-dog

I don't think Emproph was comparing Rogers to the KKK so much as he was pointing out that the two use a similar pattern of thought and expression to make and to rationalize their positions. That is, IMHO, very helpful as I evaluate the positions and rationalizations of Rogers.

But how many people might use that same thought pattern for one thing or another?

Anyway, I have to admit that any conversation involving the word "intolerant" tends to put me on edge--I hate our current focus on "tolerance" and "intolerance". As I mentioned in another thread, to evangelicals (and most conservatives in general), "tolerance" is just another word for "apathy about something that I feel is wrong". To ask someone that firmly believes that something is wrong to accept that activity--and then label them "intolerant" if they instead stick to their beliefs, is little more than name calling.

So, in this respect, I actually agree with Rogers: if I feel there is nothing morally wrong with scrambled eggs, but I storm out of the house if my wife fixes scrambled eggs, I'm intolerant. If I feel that child molestation is wrong, and I refuse to accept the actions of such an individual, I'm not intolerant, I'm principled.

(Yeah, a few of you are now saying "How dare he bring child molestation into this--homosexuals are not child molestors!". That is absolutely correct. I guess I'm just making an ideological parallel.)

I still feel that the need here is not to press people for "tolerance" (or apathy); the need is to address their concerns on a moral level. Scripture is never illogical when you take the time to understand it, and, given time, I do believe that evangelicals will come to realize that their current views on "morality" are not based on scripture--and those views will change.

[davidb]

It is very important that you understand a key distinction. Remember that Soulforce is an organization whose purpose is to promote sexual immorality in the name of Christianity. In advancing its agenda at other schools, the organization has been deceptive and inaccurate in its communications and interpretation of events. Soulforce is not fair and is not really interested in dialogue. Rather, the organization looks for opportunities to make Bible-believing Christians seem intolerant and to present themselves, via media visuals, as victims of oppression.

This is a very irresponsible and inflammatory statement. The fact that it comes from the University President is especially disheartening. I think it borders on hate speech. Of course the Equality Riders weren't welcomed or initiated by the university. Fundamentalist Christian institutions don't want to look at this issue. Of course they don't. I am sensitive to the position that puts the institution in. No one on either side of this issue wants to have their convictions questioned or second-guessed.

But to say that Soulforce's purpose is to "promote sexual immorality in the name of Christianity" and to accuse Soulforce of not being interested in dialogue goes way too far. President Rogers has to be aware of the tone that this language sets for the Soulforce visit.

This kind of demagoguery--besides being completely untrue--is hurtful to any person who is or has been a member of the Cornerstone family who has struggled with their sexuality. And these people exist. Living in Chicago, I have met at least 10 people over the years (including students and former faculty) who fall into this category. To simply dismiss these people as immoral, degenerates, or "less-than," without taking the time to hear their stories is, imho, exactly the opposite of what Jesus would do. And it's no wonder that all of these people felt completely alienated while they were in College, and felt they had absolutely no recourse but to live in misery and silence.

I have no illusions that Cornerstone will ever change their policies. Holding to their particular "literal" interpretation of scripture (isn't interesting what portions of scripture they take literally, and which one's they don't?) is their perogative, but to frame this discussion in such judgemental language is truly a sad statement on their institution.

_________________________________________
What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us.

--Emerson