The following email was sent to Calvin University faculty and staff in an effort to better understand the purpose of the letter sent in response to the current “Human Sexuality Report” that has been submitted to synod. The Agenda can be found here and the letter is found beginning on page 444.
.
Last December many professors and staff signed the letter to President LeRoy of Calvin University. That letter is now contained in the Agenda to Synod (2021). The following is a quote from the letter:
The report insufficiently engages with relevant scholarship from our disciplines, leading to a biased view of the theological, scriptural, and scientific basis for the report.
The letter closes with the following statement:
Believing strongly in Calvin University and its mission, we offer our continued service and scholarly expertise as the discussion of this report progresses.
The tone of the letter indicates that there is a serious concern on the part of those who signed it about the report that will be considered at next year’s synod. Can someone indicate how the report deals insufficiently with relevant scholarship from the University’s disciplines, or point to documents or websites where such is demonstrated?
The letter states that adoption by synod of the report would impair the ability of the faculty and staff to care for LGBTQ+ students in the way that their conscience dictates and the way that scholarship supports. Can someone expound on how their consciences call them to respond and how scholarship supports that? Providing further insight into these things would help a lot in understanding what the faculty and staff are thinking.
This is an unofficial forum looking at this topic in the CRC. It would seem that any opportunity to discuss this matter would be a benefit. It is good that those signing the letter are willing to offer their support in these discussions.
You can either respond with your thoughts to this email or you can comment in the blog here.
Given the fact that this is such a controversial topic, perhaps a group like All One Body could make it available. With or without attribution. Getting materials available to people would help to further the consideration of this matter.
Thank you for your consideration of this.
11 replies on “Letter Signed By Calvin Faculty And Staff”
I’m not able to respond with a theological argument, but simply a human one based on my experience teaching at Calvin for the past 37 years. I’ve had a fair number of my graduates “come out” as gay or lesbian since leaving Calvin. Several told me privately about their sexual orientation while still at our school. Most of these LGBTQ former students are now in same-sex marriages. In fact, the first same-sex marriage performed in West Michigan and highlighted on the local news included a former student of mine whom I was not aware was gay while he was my student. Two of my former students are now transgender, and a third became a transgender person while still my student. Despite my efforts to show that the student’s change of gender did not affect in the least my affection and respect for them, and my encouragement of their classmates to continue to show the same kindness to them they had before, that student felt uncomfortable enough to transfer to a state university outside of Michigan in the following semester. All this is to say that I would have signed that letter to President LeRoy had I known about it, since I feel that the truly Christian response to our LGBTQ students is to show them love, compassion, and support during their time at our university and in all the years to come.
Thank you for your thoughts on this very important topic, Professor Herzberg. I agree wholeheartedly with you that as Christians we need to show love, compassion and support to those who are same-sex attracted. The same way we need to show such graciousness toward heterosexuals who look longingly at someone they are not married to.
In light of I Cor. 6:9-10, “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral . . . nor men who practice homosexuality . . . will inherit the kingdom of God . . .” what is the best way we can show love, compassion and support for those attracted to members of the same-sex? Has the church always misunderstood this passage, or is being in a same-sex marriage enough to eternally separate people from God?
Calvin University (CU) needs to explain to the readers who need and have the right to know how CU has come to reject God’s Word (and the Reformed Confession) that rejects immorality and therefore the entire LGBTQI behavior. CU needs to explain why they dismiss God’s Word that speaks to all generations, including today’s generations! CU needs to explain to us why, and on what grounds, today’s scientists seem to overrule the Maker of all creation, including present generations; that the Holy Spirit has misled the writers of the Bible, OT and NT, when writing that God’s people should abstain from living immoral lifestyles. Are such questions and ideas not at the heart of discussions on immorality? Should we not first discuss the influence of present radical-liberal forces on the Church, and embraced so quickly in North America? Would there be any correlation between those destructive powers and their destructive influence on the Church? Are these not questions that need to be urgently discussed in the entire Chriistian community, the Church, including the CRC? My document, THE RAINBOW LETTERS’, (Pastoral Letters), will be available through the email address stated below. It contains an extensive review on this and other related issues and could serve as a helpful discussion paper.
It would be very helpful, as you point out, Pieter, to have a case made for why it is believed today’s scientists seem to overrule the Maker of all creation. Cases based on genetics have been referred to in the Classis Grand Rapids East Report of 2016 and on the website of All One Body. However, so far I have not been able to find such a case that is worked out. More on this topic can be found on a page on genetics (https://dialogos-studies.com/?page_id=1267) as well.
I think it is accurate to say this letter was signed by many professors and staff employed at Calvin University; that is the group within which it was circulated. It is not accurate, I hope and pray, to cast it as an institutional viewpoint. A similar letter could arise from a number of CRC congregations in Grand Rapids and, so long as there weren’t an opposing letter with a significant number of signatures, it would give the impression of being that congregation’s position, whether or not it is.
Despite this minor complaint, the objections raised in prior comments are fundamental. Herb’s comment (from July 23) adresses the question of “impaired ability to care for LGBTQ+ students” by offering another scenario where one is faced with loving the sinner but hating the sin of embracing an unhealthy sexual desire. But that analogy may be lost on many signers of the letter, and that seems only explained by the belief that it is not an unhealthy sexual desire, or that, if it is unhealthy, satisfying it comes without cosmic implications (sort of like—only sort of, mind you—satisfying your desire for sugar doesn’t jeopardize your soul).
And Pieter is spot on to ask the questions he asks, assuming it is “proofs” that lead to the position, and not a position that arises elsewhere, and then finds whatever proofs seem to best suit. Does scholarship prove that the Bible was translated improperly? Does it prove that Paul (Moses, too?) was not addressing the question he was long thought to be addressing? (Of course, a follow-up question is why God, who actively sustains his Creation, needed 2000 years to correct the error.) Does it prove that Scripture (or at least some of it) expresses human views, not God’s? Or–as would seem the only remaining option–does it prove that God was wrong and needed human science to correct him? A reference to “relevant scholarship” rings like “experts say …”, and too many of us realize the a-political, only-the-facts expert is an endangered species, even rarer nowadays within the Academy. It is time to lay bare for all to see just what mix of proofs is supposed to convince.
Just to be clear…are the Calvin University employees who signed the letter stating they think their personal “relevant scholarship” overrides the teachings of Scripture and the church denomination that employs them? Have any of them laid out the Scriptural case for their opinions?
And a follow-up question that should be answered by the Calvin University employees who signed that letter…
If Calvin is going to use something other than Scripture as the over-arching, fundamental starting point, what is the point of having Calvin University? At that point, there is nothing to make it unique.
On the other hand, a world-class university that remains anchored to Scripture and our Confessions WOULD be unique.
Please read my soon-to-be-released book, “THE RAINBOW LETTERS: IMMORALITY: The Church’s Achille’s Heel in the Twentieth Century” on Amazon. I also can send this book by email when requested and at no cost.
Hi Stephen, thanks for your interest in my book. My actual book (A5) is not available yet. Today I hope to receive the first copy to look at before it will be sent to Amazon in the hope that they will accept it and publicize the book, hopefully, sometime next month. FYI: I work with a self-publication organization in the Netherlands, as I have problems with my Canadian publisher who will not accept materials critical of truthful radical-liberal actions. In the meantime, I can send you the contents of the book by email, also in the A5 format via email. If you can send me your email address I will send it to you. Again, thanks for your interest and God bless you.
Pieter
I must admit my surprise that the manes of the 147 employees of CU were not published with their church affiliation. I assume, possibly in error, that the signers would be considered by many and consider themselves, “liberal”, “progressive”, etc. Such people seldom are “shamed” or “cancelled”. So they should not fear or be ashamed of their positions. Numerous students at CU have signed their names to letters in Synod’s Agenda. I think the CU letter signers should stand up for their beliefs and name themselves as some of their students did.
One of the replies received from CU was that the letter was initially considered a private, internal communication. I can understand the need for such private communications at an institution such as Calvin. However, they also need to understand that they are part of an institution supported by a church and that needs to be kept in perspective, too.
Some churches received a copy of the letter and then published it in their overture to synod. That is how it became public knowledge.