Prayer service for Concordia University-Wisconsin

[Steven W Bohler]

This from the brother of a Ft. Wayne Sem professor on the Ides of March:

MAR 15, 2022 —

Three men could put an end to Concordia Wisconsin’s shenanigans.

I understand that a consensus of two of three Church Leaders, Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, Rev. Dr. John Wille, and Dr. Rev. Dean Wenthe can insist that the CUW regents choose from the 11 approved candidates for university president, thus ending the church (I think this is supposed to be "search") for someone who embraces DIE. I urge you to contact them:

“Dear _________: I thank God for your faithful leadership. Please help put an end to the divisions at Concordia University Wisconsin by insisting the regents choose from the list of approved candidates for their next CUW president, and bring an end to their recruitment of someone who would subjugate Christianity to the neoMarxism of diversity, inclusion, and equity.”


This is what I had mentioned awhile back - the precipitating event in this sequence of events was the Board of Regents back in January asking for a new list of candidates that could include the candidates originally forwarded by the Prior Approval Panel.  The strategy now is for the faithful to write the panel and "insist" that this not happen via letter campaign.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are not terms that may be mentioned in our Concordia University system.  Any dialog about those terms is the subjugation of Christianity to Marxism, plain and simple. 

I've known all three of the gentlemen mentioned for lots of decades.  Prayers continue.

Dave Benke

Why do you obsess over this individual's family relationship to a professor at CTS?  He has a name and job of his own, you know.

[Mark Brown]

This from the brother of a Ft. Wayne Sem professor on the Ides of March:

MAR 15, 2022 —

Three men could put an end to Concordia Wisconsin’s shenanigans.

I understand that a consensus of two of three Church Leaders, Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, Rev. Dr. John Wille, and Dr. Rev. Dean Wenthe can insist that the CUW regents choose from the 11 approved candidates for university president, thus ending the church (I think this is supposed to be "search") for someone who embraces DIE. I urge you to contact them:

“Dear _________: I thank God for your faithful leadership. Please help put an end to the divisions at Concordia University Wisconsin by insisting the regents choose from the list of approved candidates for their next CUW president, and bring an end to their recruitment of someone who would subjugate Christianity to the neoMarxism of diversity, inclusion, and equity.”


This is what I had mentioned awhile back - the precipitating event in this sequence of events was the Board of Regents back in January asking for a new list of candidates that could include the candidates originally forwarded by the Prior Approval Panel.  The strategy now is for the faithful to write the panel and "insist" that this not happen via letter campaign.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are not terms that may be mentioned in our Concordia University system.  Any dialog about those terms is the subjugation of Christianity to Marxism, plain and simple. 

I've known all three of the gentlemen mentioned for lots of decades.  Prayers continue.

Dave Benke

1) Part of the problem is the assumption (based on Schulz's accusation) that the only reason they rejected this list is because the BOR wishes to recruit "someone who would subjugate Christianity to the neoMarxism of diversity, inclusion, and equity." Given the background of the BOR, I would like to know who among them wishes to go in this direction.

Isn't it more likely that BOR doubted that any of those approved was capable of handling the complexity of a University of several thousand students, on two campuses, with a budget of over $100 million? (Not to mention in a situation where the traditional student population is declining.)

2) "Diversity, equity, and inclusion" can be good and helpful or bad and destructive. It really depends on how one defines those terms. Does the office overseeing it recommend only books by Robin D'angelo and Ibrim Kendi or does it include Voddie Bacham?

3) As the Concordias rely more and more on non-Lutheran students, it becomes more difficult for the to remain Lutheran/Christian in orientation. America is littered with colleges that were originally established to train missionaries and other church workers but have long since abandoned the Christian faith, both Protestant and Catholic. I've been reading articles about the struggles that places like Biola, Azusa Pacific, and even the Nazarene colleges are having at keeping their Christian identity. In an article about the issues at CUC, one of the students said that the leadership needed to listen to the 95% of the student body that wasn't Lutheran and change their views on some things, i.e. go in a non-Lutheran, non-Christian direction especially in terms of sexuality.

I think this is really the heart of the issue: as the Concordias continue to evolve from church worker prep schools with Lutheran students to serving majority non-Lutheran/Christian populations, how do the Concordias remain Lutheran in identity and not merely, as many universities are, not merely in heritage?

Isn't the short answer that it is not possible?  This is Neuhaus' Law.  Any institution where orthodoxy is not mandated it will soon become outlawed. Former church institutions for centuries have tried various straddles.  The most effective one for a long time was the RCC move of always having a Priest as the head of an organization.  (Something which would argue for picking one of the 11 on the original list.) But the pressures of modernity seem to have overwhelmed even that move.

But being in the middle of Lent, and not long after the testing of Jesus, maybe the situation should force us to ponder the temptations of the world.  Satan certainly can offer us everything in order to forget from whom all blessings flow.  We think of this usually as some type of Faustian world hegemon bargain, but most of us would probably take some version of the American Drean: 1500 sq. ft., good job and kids that aren't embarrassments. How many congregations would be willing to fly the rainbow flag if it meant 50 more people in the pews?  Or 5 less people leaving them?  Likewise, CUW is pretty successful, is it willing to bow to DIE, in order to live for 10 more years? Create a glide path to "in the Lutheran tradition?"  Following behind Valpo by 10 years?

Of course Satan is a bad partner.  He doesn't keep his promises.  And maybe DIE isn't exactly from Satan.  It is just the World.  The way the World works right now.  Maybe you are the one to figure out how to make that straddle with the world.  Write the phrases that will put just enough veneer on DIE to make it Christian enough.

[Dave Benke]

This from the brother of a Ft. Wayne Sem professor on the Ides of March:

MAR 15, 2022 —

Three men could put an end to Concordia Wisconsin’s shenanigans.

I understand that a consensus of two of three Church Leaders, Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, Rev. Dr. John Wille, and Dr. Rev. Dean Wenthe can insist that the CUW regents choose from the 11 approved candidates for university president, thus ending the church (I think this is supposed to be "search") for someone who embraces DIE. I urge you to contact them:

“Dear _________: I thank God for your faithful leadership. Please help put an end to the divisions at Concordia University Wisconsin by insisting the regents choose from the list of approved candidates for their next CUW president, and bring an end to their recruitment of someone who would subjugate Christianity to the neoMarxism of diversity, inclusion, and equity.”


This is what I had mentioned awhile back - the precipitating event in this sequence of events was the Board of Regents back in January asking for a new list of candidates that could include the candidates originally forwarded by the Prior Approval Panel.  The strategy now is for the faithful to write the panel and "insist" that this not happen via letter campaign.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are not terms that may be mentioned in our Concordia University system.  Any dialog about those terms is the subjugation of Christianity to Marxism, plain and simple. 

I've known all three of the gentlemen mentioned for lots of decades.  Prayers continue.

Dave Benke

1) Part of the problem is the assumption (based on Schulz's accusation) that the only reason they rejected this list is because the BOR wishes to recruit "someone who would subjugate Christianity to the neoMarxism of diversity, inclusion, and equity." Given the background of the BOR, I would like to know who among them wishes to go in this direction.

Isn't it more likely that BOR doubted that any of those approved was capable of handling the complexity of a University of several thousand students, on two campuses, with a budget of over $100 million? (Not to mention in a situation where the traditional student population is declining.)

2) "Diversity, equity, and inclusion" can be good and helpful or bad and destructive. It really depends on how one defines those terms. Does the office overseeing it recommend only books by Robin D'angelo and Ibrim Kendi or does it include Voddie Bacham?

3) As the Concordias rely more and more on non-Lutheran students, it becomes more difficult for the to remain Lutheran/Christian in orientation. America is littered with colleges that were originally established to train missionaries and other church workers but have long since abandoned the Christian faith, both Protestant and Catholic. I've been reading articles about the struggles that places like Biola, Azusa Pacific, and even the Nazarene colleges are having at keeping their Christian identity. In an article about the issues at CUC, one of the students said that the leadership needed to listen to the 95% of the student body that wasn't Lutheran and change their views on some things, i.e. go in a non-Lutheran, non-Christian direction especially in terms of sexuality.

I think this is really the heart of the issue: as the Concordias continue to evolve from church worker prep schools with Lutheran students to serving majority non-Lutheran/Christian populations, how do the Concordias remain Lutheran in identity and not merely, as many universities are, not merely in heritage?

This post captures the situation very well, Jim.  All three points are well taken and expressed, and are in my estimation what the Synodical leadership and BOR/Faculty/Staff at CUWAA should be praying about and working through.

Dave Benke

[Dan Fienen]

Another issue that I think should be considered is how we think about what we are and what we want to be. Are we to define ourselves by what we are not, or by what we are or strive to be. I think that we concede too much to current secular culture if we primarily define ourselves as not them. Current secular culture demands obeisance to its Holy Trinity of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity as defined on their terms. We cede to them the high ground if we play their game and allow ourselves to be defined by what we oppose.


But we are not against diversity, inclusion, or equity per se. Those are all good things within reason. We disagree not with diversity, inclusion or equity per se, just the way that secular culture is demanding that we understand and pursue them. There is, I think, strength in not allowing secular culture the power and right to define the terms or us. Rather we should promote a vision of DIE that affirms the essence of those virtues while opposing the vices into which secular culture would turn them.

[Dave Likeness]

The LCMS has universities in California, Texas, Nebraska, Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan.  It might be obvious by now that
 we do not need 7 universities.  Texas is thinking about becoming
independent and Michigan is merely a satellite of Wisconsin.

With the policy that the universities are on their own financially and
the LCMS will control them doctrinally......we could see some changes
in the near future.  Wisconsin is the one who has the biggest enrollment
and spacious campus.  This makes them have the brightest chance
of survival.
 

[Michael Slusser]

Another issue that I think should be considered is how we think about what we are and what we want to be. Are we to define ourselves by what we are not, or by what we are or strive to be. I think that we concede too much to current secular culture if we primarily define ourselves as not them. Current secular culture demands obeisance to its Holy Trinity of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity as defined on their terms. We cede to them the high ground if we play their game and allow ourselves to be defined by what we oppose.

But we are not against diversity, inclusion, or equity per se. Those are all good things within reason. We disagree not with diversity, inclusion or equity per se, just the way that secular culture is demanding that we understand and pursue them. There is, I think, strength in not allowing secular culture the power and right to define the terms or us. Rather we should promote a vision of DIE that affirms the essence of those virtues while opposing the vices into which secular culture would turn them.

Right!

It seems to me that the next step is to say what the institution DOES mean by diversity, by inclusion, and by equity. Say it all positively. Resist the temptation to add BUT WE DON'T mean this, that or the other thing.

Peace,
Michael

[Dan Fienen]

Another issue that I think should be considered is how we think about what we are and what we want to be. Are we to define ourselves by what we are not, or by what we are or strive to be. I think that we concede too much to current secular culture if we primarily define ourselves as not them. Current secular culture demands obeisance to its Holy Trinity of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity as defined on their terms. We cede to them the high ground if we play their game and allow ourselves to be defined by what we oppose.

But we are not against diversity, inclusion, or equity per se. Those are all good things within reason. We disagree not with diversity, inclusion or equity per se, just the way that secular culture is demanding that we understand and pursue them. There is, I think, strength in not allowing secular culture the power and right to define the terms or us. Rather we should promote a vision of DIE that affirms the essence of those virtues while opposing the vices into which secular culture would turn them.

Right!

It seems to me that the next step is to say what the institution DOES mean by diversity, by inclusion, and by equity. Say it all positively. Resist the temptation to add BUT WE DON'T mean this, that or the other thing.

Peace,
Michael

Adding to what we affirm and mean what we do not affirm or mean is not necessarily a bad thing. I am thinking of how the Formula of Concord is structured. For each article there a discussion of the article of the faith, then the affirmative theses listing what is affirmed and to be believed, followed by the antithesis listing those teachings that are rejected.


It's just that we should not make our primary statement how we are not like those others and what we reject. Our primary statement should be what we affirm, accept, and believe. Then we can state what we reject.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

I continue to scratch my head over this conflict. Either someone was not minding things as they should or there is some extreme misunderstanding.

[Harry Edmon]

Dr. Gregory Schulz was on Issues, Etc. today. The show also offered to interview the Interim President of CUW, but the offer was declined.

https://issuesetc.org/2022/03/15/0742-allegations-of-woke-ideology-at-a-lutheran-university-dr-gregory-schulz-3-15-22/

[Dave Benke]

Dr. Gregory Schulz was on Issues, Etc. today. The show also offered to interview the Interim President of CUW, but the offer was declined.

https://issuesetc.org/2022/03/15/0742-allegations-of-woke-ideology-at-a-lutheran-university-dr-gregory-schulz-3-15-22/

A couple of notes -
Professor Schulz opines that his four choices for President are any of four members of the current theology department at CUW who were already on the first list of finalists, after kind of rear-view-mirroring any adjustment as requested by the Board of Regents to the Prior Approval Panel.  So - we'll see what eventuates, if the professor emerges as the de facto selection committee of one.  From the interview, it's unlikely that he will be "stewarding the gifts of intersectionality" any time soon.

Secondly, he mentions that the location of the CUW wokeness is "a certain student union."  That kind of got my attention for personal reasons.  In the 1966 Concordia Blue and White (which I can't lay my hands on at this moment) there's a photo of me in the Brand New Just Dedicated Student Union and Lounge at Concordia Milwaukee.  The reason for having a new student union/lounge was that - oh, no - in 1966 we had coeds.  Not many.  But enough.  And of course you couldn't go to their rooms.  No such intermingling. So - Student Union. 

And I was the VP of the Student Senate, with one duty (as I remember it), which was to look in on the Student Union and make sure things were on the up and up.  Which they were.  In those days we were kempt, never unkempt.   And couth, never uncouth. 

Prior to the New Student Union/Lounge there was a Good Old Student Union, where I worked for awhile, and developed pretty much all the lifetime bad eating habits I have carried with me - burger, fries, coke, chips, double up on that order and add some frozen custard -  all you can eat.  But it was not really suitable for larger numbers and/or coeds.

Anyway, if there's a ruckus coming from a certain student union, it wasn't me.

Dave Benke

[peter_speckhard]

And if a student union were to have publicly specified that it catered especially to people of a certain color, you would have considered that being in thrall to the pre-Civil Rights era culture, no?

[Steven W Bohler]

Dr. Gregory Schulz was on Issues, Etc. today. The show also offered to interview the Interim President of CUW, but the offer was declined.

https://issuesetc.org/2022/03/15/0742-allegations-of-woke-ideology-at-a-lutheran-university-dr-gregory-schulz-3-15-22/

A couple of notes -
Professor Schulz opines that his four choices for President are any of four members of the current theology department at CUW who were already on the first list of finalists, after kind of rear-view-mirroring any adjustment as requested by the Board of Regents to the Prior Approval Panel.  So - we'll see what eventuates, if the professor emerges as the de facto selection committee of one.  From the interview, it's unlikely that he will be "stewarding the gifts of intersectionality" any time soon.

Secondly, he mentions that the location of the CUW wokeness is "a certain student union."  That kind of got my attention for personal reasons.  In the 1966 Concordia Blue and White (which I can't lay my hands on at this moment) there's a photo of me in the Brand New Just Dedicated Student Union and Lounge at Concordia Milwaukee.  The reason for having a new student union/lounge was that - oh, no - in 1966 we had coeds.  Not many.  But enough.  And of course you couldn't go to their rooms.  No such intermingling. So - Student Union. 

And I was the VP of the Student Senate, with one duty (as I remember it), which was to look in on the Student Union and make sure things were on the up and up.  Which they were.  In those days we were kempt, never unkempt.   And couth, never uncouth. 

Prior to the New Student Union/Lounge there was a Good Old Student Union, where I worked for awhile, and developed pretty much all the lifetime bad eating habits I have carried with me - burger, fries, coke, chips, double up on that order and add some frozen custard -  all you can eat.  But it was not really suitable for larger numbers and/or coeds.

Anyway, if there's a ruckus coming from a certain student union, it wasn't me.

Dave Benke

My guess is that Dr. Schulz's concern about the "certain student union" has very little to do with burgers, fries, and frozen custard.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Dr. Gregory Schulz was on Issues, Etc. today. The show also offered to interview the Interim President of CUW, but the offer was declined.

https://issuesetc.org/2022/03/15/0742-allegations-of-woke-ideology-at-a-lutheran-university-dr-gregory-schulz-3-15-22/

I listened to the interview and found myself wondering about the argument for academic freedom. It seems like a two edged sword. On the one hand there is the argument that CUW should be a uniquely Confessional Lutheran university. On the other hand, the faculty are supposed to have academic freedom. Does that mean that a faculty member may be "woke" and free to publish it even if that went against the doctrinal character of the school? I'm not sure what to make of the academic freedom argument. Does the school have a charter that states things that must be taught or restricts what is taught? I'm not sure how that all works. Are there guidelines for faculty about these matters?

[Dave Benke]

And if a student union were to have publicly specified that it catered especially to people of a certain color, you would have considered that being in thrall to the pre-Civil Rights era culture, no?

I think it did cater especially to people of a certain color.  Because the entire student body and staff at that time were Caucasian.  There was no one else to cater to. 

Statistics tell us now that in the Student Union called the Missouri Synod, only nineteen out of twenty people would be Caucasian.  That one person, from my experience, might want to find some space to be in conversation with the four others out of a hundred, so the five of them could share experience. 

In the ancient days, there was a three day event prior to the national youth gathering called the Cross-Cultural gathering.  And the 1000 out of the 30000 attendees at the "big gathering" would get together in advance to share what life in our sphere - usually an urban context, Chicago or NYC or St. Louis or SoCal - was like in the Lutheran church. And then we'd head off to the "big gathering" and interact with the 29000 others.  Both were valuable Lutheran experiences, and from our perspective both were necessary.  I don't think it's wise to outlaw the gatherings of kids or adults from one group or another as long as the overall experience is with the entire group. 

Dave Benke

[peter_speckhard]

And if a student union were to have publicly specified that it catered especially to people of a certain color, you would have considered that being in thrall to the pre-Civil Rights era culture, no?

I think it did cater especially to people of a certain color.  Because the entire student body and staff at that time were Caucasian.  There was no one else to cater to. 

Statistics tell us now that in the Student Union called the Missouri Synod, only nineteen out of twenty people would be Caucasian.  That one person, from my experience, might want to find some space to be in conversation with the four others out of a hundred, so the five of them could share experience. 

In the ancient days, there was a three day event prior to the national youth gathering called the Cross-Cultural gathering.  And the 1000 out of the 30000 attendees at the "big gathering" would get together in advance to share what life in our sphere - usually an urban context, Chicago or NYC or St. Louis or SoCal - was like in the Lutheran church. And then we'd head off to the "big gathering" and interact with the 29000 others.  Both were valuable Lutheran experiences, and from our perspective both were necessary.  I don't think it's wise to outlaw the gatherings of kids or adults from one group or another as long as the overall experience is with the entire group. 

Dave Benke

There is a big difference between a union that serves one race because all the students are of that race and a union that caters to one race when others are present. Obviously. To pretend you don't see the distinction lowers the level of discourse.

That the handful of black students might want to get together is not a problem at all; they can do that in the regular union, at a restaurant, in their room, walking around campus, etc. But if there is an official union for that purpose, it means the school agrees that black people are different and need a separate space. They expect them to want a place separate from white people. It encourages and cements racial division rather than helping it dissipate. It is yet another one of those things that has a perfectly innocent sounding rationale-- why wouldn't they want a place to share an experience with the others who have the same experience?-- that has a much different and deeper actual meaning and purpose.

You have to impute really, really bad motives to anyone who would voice objections to a race-based student union if you think what they're objecting to is black people having a place to share their experiences. Who could object to that? Nobody. And nobody does. They object to the neo-Marxist identity-politics movement and they are fully aware, as are you, that a black student union is a flag declaring it an official, Concordia-approved movement.