Posted on 01/07/2006 8:11:15 AM PST by jude24
Wheaton College was delighted to have assistant professor Joshua Hochschild teach students about medieval philosopher Thomas Aquinas, one of Roman Catholicism's foremost thinkers.
But when the popular teacher converted to Catholicism, the prestigious evangelical college reacted differently. It fired him.
Wheaton, like many evangelical colleges, requires full-time faculty members to be Protestants and sign a statement of belief in "biblical doctrine that is consonant with evangelical Christianity." In a letter notifying Mr. Hochschild of the college's decision, Wheaton's president said his "personal desire" to retain "a gifted brother in Christ" was outweighed by his duty to employ "faculty who embody the institution's evangelical Protestant convictions."
[snip]
In a 2004 book titled "Conceiving the Christian College," Mr. Litfin argued that hiring Catholics would start Wheaton down a slippery slope. Wouldn't having Catholic faculty, he asked rhetorically, "lead to a gradual sacrificing of Wheaton's distinctives?"
In an interview, [Wheaton President] Mr. Litfin acknowledges that a ban on Catholic faculty "narrows the pool that you can draw from." But he says that the school's niche is also a key to its success. "If you look at the caliber of our faculty, this is an amazing place. It's thriving."
[snip]
Yet a question nagged Mr. Hochschild: Why am I not a Catholic? As he saw it, evangelical Protestantism was vaguely defined and had a weak scholarly tradition, which sharpened his admiration for Catholicism's self-assurance and intellectual history. "I even had students who asked me why I wasn't Catholic," he says. "I didn't have a decent answer."
His wife, Paige, said her husband's distaste for the "evangelical suspicion of philosophy" at the school might have contributed to his ultimate conversion. The Hochschilds say some evangelicals worry that learning about philosophy undermines students' religious convictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Wheaton should be able to hire/fire anone they want. What's the issue?
That said, Wheaten has got every right to fire the guy. I wish Boston College and Georgetown would fire the anit-Catholics at their schools. (Personally, I would be happy to have Evangelicals at BC and GU, it's the CINOs we need to expunge).
As a protestant who graduated from a (now formerly) men's Catholic college. I consider this a case of 'dumbassness' on the part of the college, but their preogative. However I wonder if it is because they felt threatened by a new converted professor affecting/converting their student body.
What do you all think?
The bigger question, however, is this: can evangelical Christian colleges such as Wheaton (which has the reputation of being the "Evengelical Harvard," a reputation which they want to foster) seriously claim to be teaching philosophy and history, for instance, if they fire admitted believers who simply adhere to another faith-tradition? Especially in the arenas of philosophy and Christian history, there can be no serious scholarship without interacting with Catholic scholarship.
Of course, I support Wheaton's right to terminate the man if his employment contract required him to be a professing Protestant. That's not the question, IMO.
The question is, was it a good idea. Why is a Catholic the wrong person to teach Thomistic philosophy? It's not like he's teaching "Reformation Distinctives 103".
OTOH, most Catholic colleges have Protestant faculty and staff, but I tend to doubt that the serious, orthodox ones would approve of a Protestant in the philosophy department.
(The non-serious, heterodox ones probably wouldn't care for a serious evangelical, either. A Vicki Gene Robinson kind of apostate "Protestant" would be okay. They have every other kind of fruit on the tree already.)
A Protestant in the theology department (as permanent faculty) would be an impossibility at, e.g., Steubenville, because theology professors there have to sign a profession of faith.
* In rejecting protestantism and converting to Catholiciism, isn't he a LDP (Latter Day Protestant)? In becoming Catholic he is fully in line with "biblical doctrine that is consonant with evangelical Christianity" properly understood.
See EVANGELII NUNTIANDI by Pope Paul VI
I think it's odd that they think that they (apparently) can't be "distinctively evangelical Protestant" and have persons anywhere on the faculty (not in theology) who aren't evangelical Protestant.
Baylor thinks they're distinctively Southern Baptist and certainly has many non-Baptists on the faculty.
Wheaton should not have had to fire.
This is a man of no convictions. Had he had any, he would have resigned.
Yet a question nagged Mr. Hochschild: Why am I not a Catholic? As he saw it, evangelical Protestantism was vaguely defined and had a weak scholarly tradition, which sharpened his admiration for Catholicism's self-assurance and intellectual history. "I even had students who asked me why I wasn't Catholic," he says. "I didn't have a decent answer."Another Wheaton professor, Mark Noll, lamented several years ago that "the tragedy of the Evangelical mind is that there is not much of an Evangelical mind." I've had people assume that I am some sort of Catholic wolf-in-sheep's-clothing because I read and quote Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. I have encountered in the Evangelical church a rampant anti-intellectual bias, to the point that some claim that even a theological education is a hinderence to true ministry. In an environment like that, I can understand and sympathize with a philosophy professor who feels the pull of Rome. (Though I have no intention of "swimming the Tiber," since I still have grave reservations regarding certain issues that keep me Evangelical.)His wife, Paige, said her husband's distaste for the "evangelical suspicion of philosophy" at the school might have contributed to his ultimate conversion. The Hochschilds say some evangelicals worry that learning about philosophy undermines students' religious convictions.
As an Evangelical, I think that this is our loss. There was a lot we could have learned from someone with a deep understanding of Thomastic philosophy. I am amazed at just how relevant his natural law theology is today.
The guy went from Episcopaganism to Catholicism. They should consider than an improvement.
A reading of the Wheaton College Mission Statement Here
I personally feel the Aquinas course taught by Joshua Hochschild would be worthwhile as long as it was made clear he was teaching from the "Catholic" perspective.
Then again, Wheaton is not a secular organization and I must admit I am looking at it from a "Unitarian" point of view.
Not necessarily. He may have believed that Catholicism is "consonant with evngelical Christianity." In fact, if he DIDN'T believe that, he shouldn't have become a Catholic.
Their privilege. If they want an all-Protestant faculty, they should have one.
Teaching Aquinas at Wheaton is a bit like teaching Aquinas at Harvard. It is all fun and games until the professor starts to believe what he is teaching is true. We can't have that! Having little evangelical minds actually learning scholastic philosophy as if it were true would be an outrage. Imagine!
The Schaeffers took Wheaton to task in the 80s for refusing to take a moral stance - as an institution or via their offered courses - on the issue of abortion. Nothing that Wheaton does surprises me much.
I see NOTHING WRONG here, particularly as I attended a Catholic university which had Marxists and Queer Theorists on its faculty.
It's funny...there is a stereotype of protestant scholars who concentrate on Medieval studies converting to Catholic.
Think Wheaton was within its rights to determine who they want teaching at their colleges, just like any other faith oriented college ought to.
But don't be surprised when your medievalists swim the Tiber. Occupational hazard.
(First hand experience myself)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.