Messages

1

Your Turn / Re: Roe v. Wade overturned?

« on: May 04, 2022, 02:46:24 PM »

It has been years since I read Roe v. Wade, but I don't remember it as guaranteeing a right to abortion. As I remember it, it set a time framework within which state legislators could democratically determine how laws regarding abortion for their state should be written, within the limits of the Constitution. Once again, as I remember it, no laws preventing abortion in the first trimester were to be deemed constitutional; laws to protect the mother could be made for the second trimester; laws in the interest of the mother or of the child were OK in the third trimester. The Court did not legislate. But I don't recall hearing of many attempts by state legislatures to formulate and promulgate laws within the parameters described by Roe v. Wade.

The parameters set were seriously flawed, but the failure of most legislatures to try to pass laws controlling abortion even within those parameters leaves me skeptical that they will suddenly do so when Roe v. Wade is gone.

Peace,
Michael

Having read some of the leaked opinion, it was precisely such formulations that made Roe v Wade legislation rather than constitutional law.  Not only is the right to abortion not in the constitution, neither is this tiered approach based on trimesters.  To create such an approach is appropriate for a legislature, but unless there is something in the constitution to do so (and there is not), not for SCOTUS.

2

Your Turn / Re: LCMS Pastor Distrusts His Local Newspaper Reporting

« on: March 21, 2022, 02:57:15 PM »

From WSJ:

Hunter Biden’s Laptop and America’s Crisis of Accountability
The New York Times now admits the story was real. News and social-media companies will pay no price for suppressing vital information in 2020.

In close elections, a fraction of the total vote distributed in the right places can swing an outcome, and we can never be sure what effect late news stories can have.

If it hadn’t been for a suspiciously well-timed report of a decades-old driving-under-the-influence arrest in the final days of the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush might not have needed 35 days and the judgment of the Supreme Court to deliver him the White House.

Harold Wilson, the British Labour prime minister in 1970, is said to have claimed for years afterward that England’s shock defeat by West Germany in the soccer World Cup quarterfinal that year so depressed the national mood—and turnout—that it produced his surprise ejection from 10 Downing Street in the general election days later.

We’ll never know what effect the “October Surprise” of 2020, the New York Post’s reporting of the discovery of a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden containing all sorts of embarrassing emails, might have had on the election that year if it had received wider circulation. Perhaps in a campaign dominated by Covid and characterized by chaos, it would have been another snowflake in the blizzard of news voters were being hit with.

But the allegations in the reporting—that the son of the man favored to become the next president had been selling his high-level family political connections to foreigners, including suggestions of a possible cut for his father—were worth pursuing. But enough influential people in and out of government—in the foreign-policy-intelligence complex, in the media, and in the big tech firms—were so alarmed that it would affect the outcome that they pulled off one of the greatest disappearing tricks since Harry Houdini made that elephant vanish from a New York stage.

It took its time, but last week the New York Times slipped the acknowledgment of the story’s accuracy deep in a report about Hunter Biden’s mounting legal problems. The Times, along with most other mass-circulation news organizations, had essentially ignored the story in the days when it might have made a difference, but it now says it has “authenticated” the laptop’s contents.

The concession from the paper, which serves as a sort of unofficial licensing authority for reporting by most of the rest of the media, prompted a predictable rush to self-vindication by those who had also trashed the story at the time. The Washington Post insisted its original decision not to touch it was justified because of uncertainty about its provenance.

Normally, when there is doubt about the provenance of an explosive story, news organizations consider it their job to ascertain the truth. Normally, it takes them less than 17 months to do so. But normally they don’t have the cover provided by technology companies that prevented people from reading the original story.

The media and tech companies that colluded in concealing this potentially critical information didn’t need any excuse to do so. But it surely helped that they were given validation for their actions by an august-sounding committee of concerned letter-writers who moved quickly to discredit the story.

In that famous letter, more than 50 former national-security and intelligence officials polished their gleaming credentials and alleged that the New York Post was guilty of peddling a story that had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The principal rationale for this, the letter laid out, was that the story might be helpful to Donald Trump. Russia wanted Mr. Trump to win. The story helped Mr. Trump. Ergo, it was the work of Russia.

That’s quite a syllogism. Using that same logic, you might conclude that Russia was also responsible for any unexpectedly good economic data that helped the incumbent, or that Vladimir Putin was behind the crime wave that had gripped Democrat-run cities.

Now we can guess why so much U.S. intelligence has been so faulty all these years. Either these 50 or so grandmasters of international espionage are completely unable to distinguish Russian disinformation from real information, or they prostituted their credentials in a naked act of political hackery. I don’t have their experience or deductive skills, but I’m ready to go with the latter.

The deeper shame here is the lack of accountability across American institutions. No one who colluded in this conspiracy against truth has even been inconvenienced by it.

Contacted by the Post last week, not one of the letter’s signatories expressed regret or contrition. The reporters and editors at news organizations and the employees and executives of tech companies who participated in the suppression continue to be lionized for their work.

This is what is so corrosive of trust and, in the end, of the system itself. The one way in which real accountability is supposed to work in a democracy is at the ballot box. But how can that even work when the people we want to hold accountable decide what information the voters are allowed to see?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hunter-bidens-laptop-and-americas-crisis-of-accountability-nyt-new-york-post-media-allegations-political-connections-11647872692

3

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 21, 2022, 02:39:44 PM »

I'm waiting to learn of the connection between Concordia and "Wokeism." None revealed so far.

Peace, JOHN

If you don’t see any connection between officers of diversity, equity, and inclusion and wokeism, you might be a tad behind the curve.

Doesn't exist at CUWAA.

Or having a black student union.

We have very few black students at CUWAA -- proportionately more at CUAA than CUW, I'm pretty sure.  We are a historically tribal university (German LCMS Lutheran), and many times this can make black students feel uncomfortable as, frankly, we have a very weird sub-culture.  A Black Student Union can help with this.

Here are its purposes:

Build a sense of belonging among our students. We do this by providing a safety net to ensure a culturally responsive atmosphere.

Strengthen the academic and behavioral success of our students by supporting them and connecting them.

Attract students of color for enrollment and retention.

Help build a pipeline to inform K-12 students about Concordia.


Here's its mission statement and a description of how it's accomplished:

Concordia University Black Student Union (BSU) exists to help all students develop in mind, body, and spirit for service to Christ in the Church and the World. We do this by intentionally setting up a support system allowing students space to learn, teach, vent, give back to the community, be challenged, and get their cultural needs met.

Not sure what's wrong with having such a student group on campus, especially given the historically tribal cultural makeup of the Concordias.

Or seeking transformational, disruptive leadership.

You have already been corrected on the word "disruptive" which cannot be found in any official document that I can find.  It's not there.  I don't know why you keep using it.

I've also spoken earlier about the need to transform what's currently being done in higher education to new models.  I don't know how much you know about how higher ed works and what challenges are facing us, but they are many, and the way we've always done things is unlikely to be sustainable in the future.  For example, we're approaching the so-called "demographic cliff" where the number of traditional college students will drop suddenly and severely.  That alone requires rethinking how we should be positioned.

Again, my experience at CUWAA argues strongly against any significant degree of "wokism" (I'm not even sure how you'd measure such a thing) even as we do try to find ways to appropriately engage our increasingly ethnically diverse student body.

4

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 10, 2022, 03:18:27 PM »

That is a good note. Thanks for sharing that for us. Any idea who put that together?

Jeremy

Nope. But as I've said multiple times, while I'm concerned with the way the Schulz suspension has been handled and, as faculty, would like to know more about the process, the substance of Schulz's accusations regarding what is actually going on at CUWAA is wildly wrong based on my 5 years working here. It's just untethered from daily reality.

5

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 10, 2022, 02:34:15 PM »

A statement from CUWAA that certainly reflects my experience at the university:


Concordia University is a Lutheran higher education community committed to helping students develop in mind, body, and spirit for service to Christ in the Church and the world.

Anyone who sets foot on the Concordia University Wisconsin campus is immediately aware of the school’s commitment to both its mission and the Lutheran faith. Our administration, faculty, staff, and students continue to form a vibrant and faith-filled campus community dedicated to excellence in the higher education space.

At the same time, and in compliance with LCMS theology, Concordia works hard to ensure that all students–whatever their race, ethnicity, religion, or creed–are welcomed and supported as they pursue their educational goals while receiving a distinctly Lutheran Christian education. This is in accordance with God’s Word: “[God] desires ALL people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4).

Our university has a diverse student population, and merely recognizing that fact and taking a position in support of it, is fully in line with Scriptures, as well as Concordia’s long-standing policies, procedures, and mission. Any speculation or insinuation that there are deeper, immoral motives at play is either unfounded or uninformed.

Concordia University is now and has always been an institution committed to the confession of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. The mission of the school is appropriately centered on Christ and the Holy Scriptures. Here, a student’s faith and knowledge will flourish because the Concordia community is one that cares for the whole person—mind, body, and spirit—and we are committed to helping individuals reach their fullest potential.

Under the leadership of our recently retired president, Rev. Patrick T. Ferry, Ph.D., the mission, policies, and procedures followed by Concordia have led to phenomenal success in growing our community. During his tenure, Concordia saw:

59% growth in total enrollment on the CUW campus
75% growth in total undergraduate enrollment on the CUAA campus
5 doctorate, and well over 100 online, on-the-ground, or hybrid undergraduate and graduate programs added
400% growth in the endowment

23 major renovation and building projects—including the addition of a School of Pharmacy and The Robert W. Plaster Free Enterprise Center, upgrades to athletic fields, the construction of three new on-campus residence halls, and the Bluff Renovation Project—all undertaken in the hope of glorifying God through a rich stewardship of his gifts and a commitment to providing a first-class educational environment for students
Such success while following the teachings of Christ and the LCMS’ bylaws and tradition comes at a crucial time, when the very concept of faith and the teachings of Christ are increasingly mocked by the secular world. Our students need us now more than ever. Moreover, society in general needs our graduates and their faithful fulfillment of their vocations beyond our campus walls.

Meanwhile, Concordia University remains committed to academic freedom as it continues to support and pursue a learning environment where all opportunities to discuss relevant topics of the day are encouraged. Events such as our long-running Tuesday Noon Bible Study, the Liberty, Faith and Economics Summit, the Healthcare Economics Summit, the Free Enterprise Speakers Series, and, of course, lessons taught in the classroom are overtly designed to offer civil discourse as part of the academic experience.

Any attempts to divide our campus community will not succeed. At this time, we will not comment directly about specific personnel issues due to our commitment to the dispute resolution process as outlined by the LCMS. This procedure, written in accordance with God’s Word, not only supports confidentiality, it mandates it: “…publicity shall not be given to the issues in the matter by any of the parties involved…” However, those within and outside of our campus community should know that Concordia University continues to pursue the dispute resolution process vigorously and stands unwavering in its commitment to its mission, its students, and the Truth, as we have since our founding in 1881.

As members of the body of Christ, we must continue to offer compassion and support for one another. Let the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus (Philippians 4:7), and let the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in His sight (Psalm 19:14). To Him be the glory and honor for holding the hearts and wisdom of all mankind in His hands. In Him, we have every reason to hope.


https://blog.cuw.edu/lutheran-identity/

6

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 07, 2022, 07:18:02 PM »

I am very heartened to see that the theology department chair is sticking up for Dr. Schulz.

Dr. Menuge is the chair of the philosophy department, and Dr. Schulz is a professor in that department, not theology.

Although, according to the CUW website, 3 of the 4 professors in the philosophy department have been Lutheran pastors -- and the other (Dr. Menuge) is a rostered commissioned minister in the LCMS (I looked him up on the LCMS Locator to see his background as the CUW website only listed his degrees).  So these are not folks without theological background.

You lost me at "Although." I was merely correcting the record.

7

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 07, 2022, 02:46:21 PM »

I am very heartened to see that the theology department chair is sticking up for Dr. Schulz.

Dr. Menuge is the chair of the philosophy department, and Dr. Schulz is a professor in that department, not theology.

8

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 04, 2022, 05:15:53 PM »

Every semester I teach 1 or 2 courses of Christian Ethics to the nursing students.  In every course I have taught so far, the best and most enlightening discussions have been the ones surrounding race.  Our nursing program tends to be one of the most racially diverse on campus, so it's been fun watching how people interact with one another when we come to this discussion.  I have the students research a variety of hot-button topics and then present on those topics in their own words to their classmates in their cohort -- whom they have gotten to know quite well over the course of their training.  It's fun to see how they interact with their friends / acquaintances when forced to publicly discuss race.  The discussion goes in many different ways -- frequently in ways that I did not predict would occur.  Some students are more prone to embrace DIE language while others aren't (I once had a student try to make the other students publicly declare their allegiance to BLM or not, and I shut down that discussion quickly because students should not be put in that position in the classroom).

The best discussions occur when we are able to eschew the narrative behind those (DIE) terms and rather talk about real issues in ways that promote empathy, acknowledging that racism still exists and that people encounter the world differently based upon race, but also pointing out that, in my father's words, "people is people."  We all have hopes, fears, strengths, weaknesses, laudable activities, and sins.  At the end of our discussions, the outcome (usually) is a better understanding of where people are coming from, and, hopefully, an increased ability to recognize that "people is people" and should be understood as such, including a recognition that culture and upbringing matter, and learning to learn from people with a different culture and upbringing is incredibly important to a life well lived.

I think the terms "diversity, inclusion, and equity" are highly problematic given their secular connotations, but they are the dominant terms out there and can't simply be ignored with students.  They have imbibed these terms for years in their education and interaction with the larger culture as genuine goods that should be embraced.  Instead of simply saying that they are wrong, they need to be re-situated in a different narrative that recognizes the good to which they point while avoiding the negative.  Of course, we have plenty of past examples of non-Christian language being "Christianized," and this is no different.

Diversity is not a goal in itself.  It is, rather, a recognition that God has given us all different giftings and different upbringings, and we should appreciate the differences and try to find ways to learn from them.  Using the scriptural description of the body of Christ, it is recognizing that we all have different roles to play in that body.  In a secular context, it can be used to emphasize that multiple viewpoints can help us come to a fuller and better understanding of an issue.

Inclusion is the realization that we are all in it together just as the eye is not a foot nor is a hand a rib, but they are all part of the same body.

Equity is being sure that each part of the body gets what it needs to flourish to the best of its ability with the secular implications being a focus on equality of opportunity as well as a move to make sure that folks in places like schools get what they need to maximize their potential.  Equality of outcome is not a possibility for the simple fact that people are different with different giftings, but ideally people should be empowered to get what they need to flourish in their own unique way.

This is all to say that the terms are not inherently problematic.  They are when they are found in the dominant secular narrative, but they can be helpful when transposed into a Christian narrative.  In any case, they cannot simply be ignored because they are ubiquitous.  The choice becomes to rather ignore or deny them (which is problematic because they point to things that are, in fact, good when divorced from their secular narrative) or to resituate them in a Christian narrative.  I think the latter is more helpful when dealing with college students from many different backgrounds, frequently non-Christian or minimally so.

9

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 01, 2022, 07:49:47 PM »

After listening to Prof. Schulz in the Gottesdienst podcast, I'd say the presidential search is simply the spark of a larger argument that was inevitably going to come to a head anyway. The same battle-- should Concordia survive and thrive by becoming more like other successful universities or by becoming a clear alternative to other universities?

I came to a quite different conclusion.

Rather, that his entire position vis-a-vis CUWAA is predicated on incredibly thin evidence (three words and the move to exclude a panel of candidates who do not have significant administrative experience, a move which other Concordias have done in the past) and that this unsupported premise was taken as a given throughout the interview.

Of course we shouldn't become like every other university out there. It's a horrible idea. CRT only serves to divide and has no upside; neither does other woke ideology. But he is operating on vanishingly little evidence to make incredibly broad conclusions that puts the worst construction on the little evidence that is present.

Said differently, he is posing a question no one is asking. Best I can tell, there is no movement to make CUWAA woke. At all.

That's why I think the fight is/was inevitable. What he and apparently many others regard as utterly problematic is something the other side barely notices. One side thinks the proposition so self-evident it hardly merits demonstrating-- CUWAA has not suddenly become in thrall to wokism with this selection, it has been sliding in that direction foe years. The other side doesn't see that at all; the objection to this presidential search seems to be coming out of nowhere. That makes for an inevitable fight. If it wasn't this presidential search, it would be some proposed curriculum reform, or admission requirement, or scholarship proposal. Something would eventually happen that one side would regard as completely unacceptable and the other as pretty innocent and normal and the whole thing would come to a head.

One thing he points to in the podcast that I certainly think is true the premium people put on the nature of the faith as countercultural. Homeschooling was a big subtopic of the podcast. It is exploding in the LCMS, with our own parochial schools coming to be seen as being acceptable only by necessity in cases where homeschooling is not a feasible option. It has become a part of search committees for congregations with parochial schools. We had someone essentially take his name off our call list do to the requirement that our pastors' children attend our school; he was going to home school, and if that was a dealbreaker, so be it. I think that is getting to be common.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for homeschooling. We would have done it with our first except that my congregation signed on to become part of an association school, where our eldest was the very first student ever enrolled. And we kind of got into that groove. We did homeschool one year when my wife took the kids for a semester to Mexico, where her mother lives. We (meaning she) homeschooled the younger ones for the first semester while the two elder ones attended parochial school, basically practicing the homeschooling and saving tuition money for the second semester of homeschooling all six of them in Mexico. So I'm not in the least bit an anti-homeschooler. But I'm on the older side for the real movement in the LCMS toward bigger families and homeschooling.

It is a big movement now that embraces counterculturalism on theological grounds given our post-Christian context. I think it is a driving force behind this spat at CUWAA. At least, that is a subtext I picked up. CUWAA either becomes the sort of countercultural school (like Hillsdale and the Classical startup in Wyoming) that today's confessional homeschoolers are looking for OR the fact that it chooses not to is prima facie evidence it has gone woke. That division wasn't going to go away is no articles had been written to CN and no professor suspended.     

Kudos to you for creativity. And holy cow have we left what's actually going on toward unsubstantiated speculation as to the facts on the ground. People get lost in their causes, and the above post is an example of that in that it, again, assumes a premise regarding CUWAA that has not been demonstrated. Unless, of course, it is in the vein of more general commentary on our societal problems, but it has no traction (best I can tell) on CUWAA.

FWIW, we homeschooled until we found a good Lutheran, private school to send our kids to. But that we are now discussing homeschooling shows that the thread vis-a-vis proving Wokism at CUWAA has been dropped.

10

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: March 01, 2022, 07:05:58 PM »

After listening to Prof. Schulz in the Gottesdienst podcast, I'd say the presidential search is simply the spark of a larger argument that was inevitably going to come to a head anyway. The same battle-- should Concordia survive and thrive by becoming more like other successful universities or by becoming a clear alternative to other universities?

I came to a quite different conclusion.

Rather, that his entire position vis-a-vis CUWAA is predicated on incredibly thin evidence (three words and the move to exclude a panel of candidates who do not have significant administrative experience, a move which other Concordias have done in the past) and that this unsupported premise was taken as a given throughout the interview.

Of course we shouldn't become like every other university out there. It's a horrible idea. CRT only serves to divide and has no upside; neither does other woke ideology. But he is operating on vanishingly little evidence to make incredibly broad conclusions that puts the worst construction on the little evidence that is present.

Said differently, he is posing a question no one is asking. Best I can tell, there is no movement to make CUWAA woke. At all.

11

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: February 28, 2022, 10:17:57 PM »

I do not have a fish in this pond, but I have long had opinions about Church colleges that are - in some circles, mostly outside the ELCA - unpopular.
   I am a proud graduate of a church college. So is Beloved Spouse. Augsburg University in Minneapolis gave my daughter a fine preparation for her career as a social worker. And it was where she met her future husband, a Roman Catholic who came over to "our side."
   But I have contended for a long time that today if a church college wants to be a church college, that is primarily, for preparing Church workers or for inculcating in all students a strong loyalty to Christianity or the denomination sponsoring the college, it will have a hard row to hoe.
   I think I even proposed once - perhaps in a Lutheran Forum article - that we should consider closing our colleges and using the money to establish strong, well-funded campus ministries Lutheran Service centers at state universities.
   We would sponsor forums and workshops on the faith and the professions, we would provide easy on campus worship and socializing. We would involve Professors at the schools in activities allowing them to express their faith and lead others to it.
   We would be taking faith and life into "the world" where the faith and life of the students (and probably more of them than at our Concordias or Augustanas) will be lived.
   Otherwise, we in the ELCA will have colleges that are essentially secular, and you in the LCMS will face constant - really constant - attack on the Concordias that allow gay rights groups, sponsor "liberal" or "woke" activities, and don't make every classroom or activity conform to the LC-MS handbook. And should you be successful in making a "true" LCMS college, attendance will dwindle until only the children of certain pastors - by that time probably professors at the school - will be there.

Nah.

We do just fine offering desirable degrees that also entail encountering the Gospel. We require of all our graduates that they have a basic knowledge of the Bible and Christian doctrine, and this enables us to both reach out to those who have not encountered the Gospel before as well those who need further encouragement in their faith (contrary to what they would get most elsewhere studying to be, say, a nurse.

Obviously, if the standard is that every student agrees with the goals of the university, well, that just shows how disconnected the individual is. No one can enforce such a view. However, I've had tons of students who are very interested in a high quality nursing degree who are also interested in succeeding in courses having to do with Christian theology, and others who realize the value of Christian teaching.

12

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: February 28, 2022, 10:05:50 PM »

I do in fact remember meeting you and several others in 2009. But my memory of that whole excursion and aftermath is fuzzy enough that I didn’t think it sufficient basis to say I know you personally. I did have occasion amid all the news from Eastern Europe to remember your Ruthinian heritage and firm belief that Ruthinians were not to be messed with. And don’t you do karate with all your kids? I think you’re safe from suspension.

Dude. Don't mess with Ruthenians. We'll ruin your whole day.

13

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: February 28, 2022, 08:57:00 PM »

It is somewhat ironic to see who is on what side of a debate over whether it is just and proper to place people on suspension from teaching at a Concordia without making the specific charges known. Isn't that what people's beef with what happened leading up to Seminex? And taking a defense of one so suspended public, what do they need to do, print up catchy slogan t-shirts to be accepted as acting in good faith?

That having been said, as with past brouhahas, everyone takes the side of the people they trust. In this case, I find myself inclined to trust both sides, so the whole thing just seems unnecessary.

I have never seen CUW do anything particularly woke. I'm no insider, but I do know some people who work/teach there, and I've know Prof. Yakimow as an online presence for many years and he's always seemed trustworthy to me. Plus, as a pastor and someone with lots of college-bound kids, I get gobs of mail from the Concordias. So my own gut inclination is not to believe that CUW (or CUWAA) is somehow captive to woke ideology. It seems like a very counter-intuitive claim to me. I don't know the interim president or the Regents, but I can't say I have any reason to think they're bad faith actors. 

Then again, I've never met Prof. Schulz (to my knowledge), either, and his online resume seems fairly impressive, and some people I know a little bit about seem to think that his getting suspended so abruptly was really unjust and heavy-handed. Why would anyone think those people are bad faith actors? It seems ridiculous for me to say to someone who has been suspended and says it was unjust that somehow I just know he is wrong about that he is getting what he deserves.

It seems to me if President Harrison suspended someone in this manner, the people now calling for trust in the process would be demanding transparency and calling for less tyrannical purging of disagreement, and the people now rallying to Prof. Schulz would likely be calling for trust in the process and leadership. Again, it all comes down to trust.

The whole thing is sad. All we can do is pray that no bridges are permanently burned.

I'm appalled that you don't remember meeting me in 2009 at the ELCA convention at, now here I'm no longer sure, someone's house. Fr. Michael was there as were a number of other ALPB personalities.

As faculty at the same institution, I am (of course) interested in the process for Schulz's suspension. I have no information to add on that score, and I very much want to know that proper procedures were followed. While I disagree heartily with the article (it really is poorly done), I do care quite a bit that proper procedures were followed when suspending Dr. Schulz.

That said, I will continue to speak out against his article (which is entirely of public record). It is insufficiently sourced, poorly argued, and contains obvious inaccuracies, such as the claim that the prospectus does not require the next president to be faithful to Scripture and the Confessions.

In fact, he rails against the BoR and its committees on this point, saying that they are divorced from authoritative texts -- except that they aren't, and they say that they aren't, exactly in the document he is critiquing.

14

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: February 28, 2022, 05:41:53 PM »

.Woke ideology has run rampant at CUWAA for years. This is not debatable. The evidence has been made public and documented in Prof. Schulz's writings, on this page, and by many other persons.

This is news to me. I've worked here for 5 years, and I see no evidence of rampant Wokism, or even of any significant Wokism. If anything, I would say the opposite.

15

Your Turn / Re: Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

« on: February 28, 2022, 05:36:26 PM »

Just as a point of information, we don't have tenure at CUWAA. A full professor (like Schulz or I) instead has a 5 year rolling contract so that you are always in the first year of the contract if all is going well.