Thursday, January 14, 2010
¿Can We Stop Partying?
"We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will not be discredited. Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; in truthful speech and in the power of God; with weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left; 8through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report; genuine, yet regarded as impostors; known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed; sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything."
My friends I go to Martin Luther College and I think that it's a great place. The reasons I like it are because it isn't like a normal college. MLC is a college very intrinsically specialized to produce pastors and teachers. It is a college where we focus on Christ and make him first. I feel at home in the dorms surrounded by my brothers. I enjoy going to chapel twice a day and eating in a cafeteria with a great selection of food. I even enjoy having a place to study and develop the diligence and discipline I'll need to be a pastor. My dorm isn't large, but I sit and think that neither was Martin Luther's. My professors are men I admire and my friends are respectable. This is a good edifying place.
Yet, there are some things that I feel less than enthused about here. There are things that I know need to stop, some things that I shudder to put into my BLOG. Can I write about a few of these? Will critics come back to haunt me? Maybe, but so be it. You see, I don't want MLC to be a regular college. So often this is the main argument for something new here on campus or changing some policy. Yet, since when do we get anywhere good by imitating the world and pagans? This goes beyond just being an abnormal college, it means having an abnormal life (or lives assuming more than one person reads this BLOG; here's to hoping).
"Son of man, speak to your countrymen and say to them: 'When I bring the sword against a land, and the people of the land choose one of their men and make him their watchman, and he sees the sword coming against the land and blows the trumpet to warn the people, then if anyone hears the trumpet but does not take warning and the sword comes and takes his life, his blood will be on his own head. Since he heard the sound of the trumpet but did not take warning, his blood will be on his own head. If he had taken warning, he would have saved himself. But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes the life of one of them, that man will be taken away because of his sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for his blood.'"
There are two events I want to speak about that are mostly dead and gone. This is fine, I'm not advocating change, nor am I vindicating them, but they serve as good examples. As I arrived here for my first semester last year, the first hot issue was that of open dorms. The former policy was that girls and guys were allowed to enter the dorms of the opposite sex on the weekends. The policy was changed in the second semester and now members of the opposite sex were allowed every day of the week within a certain time limit. The plan was that at the end of the semester there would be a survey and then it would be official. The survey came back and the results were about 320 for open dorms and 20 against. I have a friend who at the time told us he knew that every night sex happened on the MLC campus. Granted it was usually the same people, but now there was very little to stop it. 
Doors are easy to close, lights can stay off, roommates go away. I don't like the thought that here, someone in my home someone could be having sex. I don't even like the possibility of it. Yet, the student body voted for it. In light of passages that plead the contrary, they said, "Adiophora," and so here we are now. Open dorms was a decision made so that we could be like every other college. Those propagators of it could no support it Biblically. There argument was that it was simply not talked about in the Bible and so we have freedom to do what we want. My friends, this is not so. "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people." I think that the opportunity for more time within a dorm of the opposite sex means we take away this "not even a hint" principle. It comes down to meaning we cannot in any way let the possibility of sexual be in our lives. (Honestly, this also includes the couples who think they are invisible making out in the lobby three floors below me.) "Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money." Can I leave it at that? I have another example.
This year the first matter of importance came with Homecoming and the so-called "Party in the MLC" video. The video caused an eruption of propaganda and such, and it was completely blown out of proportion, but I think that there is something that needs to be looked at here, that is, the attitude that went along with the video's reaction. Can MLC students have fun? Yes. Can we make fun of ourselves? We probably should. But, here at school we have a specialized subculture and this needs to stay here. I don't think that makers of the video are gay or the like (nor do I think that most of Greg Jackson's assertions are true either), but the situation takes a turn when these men go out to student teach. Their students watch the videos and then the problem takes on a new character. Students should not see that about their teachers. This is a serious problem, I wish it were not so.
My friends, if you are wanting MLC to be like a normal college, please leave. Don't change us. You can point and scream Christian free all you want and I will still respond saying that adiophora is a label not an excuse. I have a quote from Prof. Fredrich saying, "Our Christian freedom is a matter of nobility like the knights of old." This he said when talking about Gal. 5:1, "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." Since we have been freed from both sin and Law why must we put ourselves under them again by being foolish? Friends, in the coming years let us watch our actions far more closely. Let us use the Word wisely. One thing I worry about is that a similar video may occur during Winter Carnival this year, please hold yourselves back. Let this go and make something we can laugh at and enjoy without having to shield our eyes at parts.
Pax Tecum.
9 comments:
Profile
J. W. Heise
- Gender: Male
- Industry: Student
- Occupation: Pastoral Ministry
- Location: Green Bay : WI : United States
About Me
"Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light."
Oh, Justin...where to start? I guess that the best place for me to start is by asking that you not take offense to what I write. I don't mean to discourage you from questioning whether or not we're doing things the right way. I simply see things differently. I'd like to highlight to you where I see things differently than you do, so that perhaps we can both come out of this dialogue stronger (Proverbs 27:17).
I believe that your reasoning for opposing open dorms is a little bit of a non sequitur. Closing doors and having sex are against the rules even in this new policy. Therefore, if people are having sex (which I do not deny, but I believe that the amount suggested by your friend is exaggerated), it's still done outside of the rules. People do not have sex because of a lack of rules. They have sex because of a lack of respect for the rules, whether those rules are man's or God's (oh, and also probably because they want to.) To put it another way, a law never causes people to obey itself. On the contrary, law causes rebellion (Romans 7:7). Rather, it's a desire to follow laws that causes people to obey them. Therefore, instead of imposing another rule onto an already agitated conscience, we should instead seek to provide motivation to follow the rules that do exist.
Out of the theoretical and into the practical...Did people never have sex before last year? People can have sex on the weekends. People can have sex in places not their dorm rooms (as a member of campus security, I realize that it would be nearly impossible for us to find people who are earnestly trying to dodge us...but don't take advantage of that). People can have sex in places off campus. Where do we stop policing the behavior of our fellow Christians through legislation? The Bible doesn't talk about that. What the Bible does talk about is being concerned from your brothers and sisters in the faith and addressing that on a personal level. If you and your friend are so sure that sex is taking place on campus, you're probably aware of the people that are doing it. You should probably talk to them rather than attempt to place one small road block in their way that penalizes the rest of them that use this privilege appropriately.
I have plenty of thoughts about your second section, but I'll save those until I hear some clarification on one point that you didn't provide support for. You say that, "students should not see that (Party in the MLC) about their teachers. This is a serious problem". I'd like to hear what about this is a serious problem. Then, perhaps, I'll share some more thoughts.
There's more to be said about your comments about Christian freedom and the thought of MLC being a "normal" college, but I'll save that for another comment or perhaps my own blog post. There's been plenty said in this comment that should provide some grounds to continue this discussion.
Justin and Tyler, as someone who as you know doesn't go to MLC it is interesting to read all of these remarks. Tyler, I do agree with you in the fact that people will continue to have sex whether or not there is a rule prohibiting it, but Justin brings up a very valid point. Just because they can doesn't mean that we should give the picture that it is easier for them to now. It may be that laws cause rebellion but they can also form lines. I would assume that while the "closed dorm" policy was in place it influence people not to have sex. Whereas, giving a launching point for sin by allowing the opposite sex into the dorm throughout the week, does not seem like something our pastors and teachers should be in support of.
As to the video. Perhaps what Justin is saying is that it was fine to show it in the midst of friends, but to open it to the public where it can cause a negative perspective may have been taking it a little to far. Personally, I thought the video was hilarious, but the entire time in the back of my head I kept thinking, "these are the examples my children are going to have in there churches and schools?" I know that even pastors and teachers are full of their own faults, just as I am full of my own personal ones. However, giving such a negative view of teachers to future students is something as a lay person I will not want my children to be apart of. If it means that I need to not be in support of WELS teachers because they do not provide a proper example well then home schooling is the way I will go. I don't want you to be perfect, just understand and contemplate the image those students put out there for the world to see.
Kath and I have been discussing this for over an hour and a half. We can't seem to come to a conclusion and this is all very confusing. What we are wondering is if there are boundaries set for example, do doors need to stay open during the floor hours? We feel like practice should be had for many MLC students. I feel, not so much kath, however, that for the students too immature to handle these circumstances it seems like a sketchy situation. It certainly is a tough topic and maybe it will only take time to discern whether this decision was God pleasing or not.
In Christian Love
Kath and Stephen
Dear Friends,
If and when you get back to this I hope you find what I'm going to say enlightening. My point with open dorms is that when Paul says we must not have even a hint of sexuality, then we must take that as what it means. Now then, this doesn't signify that there will not be any sex between the student body, but at the least, at the very least, we cannot permit it on the campus. Not that it is better anywhere else, or at all, but that if a Christian life is not supposed to have a speck of sexual immorality then also this college must not have that sort of reputation. Previously, did it happen on the weekends? Certainly, but there are two thoughts that I have about this: first, that the RA's are far more likely to check in upstairs if their rounds come only so often and sitting in the cage downstairs is less of boring routine; second, for the students daring enough to come to these extremes having more opportunities to assimilate to a common environment for sex is now easier. What I mean is that before on weekends it was harder to get comfortable with hiding in someone's room trying to make out when you didn't know schedules of friends or roommates or when an RA would pop in. Now, it's terribly easy to feel the routines and avoid other people. Now, two more things, I'm not ignorant enough to think that this wouldn't just happen elsewhere on campus, but I don't want the feeling that someone on my floor right now could be having sex. I just don't like that. Also, I think there's something to be said about those people who can be trusted here on campus, there are many stalwart (great word or what?) students who would not even do such a thing. Yet, it must also be acknowledged that these dorms are homes for all of us who lives here, and though there are certain freedoms that go along with this, there also needs to be respect. I know that here in Concord this isn't always the case.
As to the video, it should never have been put on YouTube. It should not be on Facebook right now, and I'm appalled at the group that wants it back. Not because I think that we're not allowed to have fun, but because in light of future ministry children will see that video and it will change the image of their teacher. I merely want us all to be above reproach. There is already a comment on the Facebook group by a student that I feel a little sore about. There's something to be said about having fun and the subculture of MLC, but we cannot hope that everyone out there will understand us. To some it's funny, and that's fine, but to a parent who watches the video and sees their child's teacher, it could cause a problem. I'd like that to be prevented. I think this is all, sorry for the late response. Pax.
"Just because they can doesn't mean that we should give the picture that it is easier for them to now." I think this is a valid concern and that we could all agree that if our policies communicate a lax attitude towards sex or that we're making it easier for people to do it, that it'd be a bad policy. However, I do not believe that this is the case with this policy. My support for this relies on the fact that open dorms during the week does not greatly differ than open dorms on the weekend.
First of all, the enforcement of the rules is exactly the same on the weekends as it is during the weeks. This neither communicates a lax attitude nor does it facilitate sexual immorality. You can argue that the enforcement isn't good enough, but that's a matter of enforcement, not policy. To distinguish between times is not founded.
Second, I'm nothing short of perplexed as to how you arrived at the conclusion that sex is easier to plan during the weeks than on the weekends. I find that during the week it can be hard enough to plan a nap because of roommates' study or video game plans. I can't imagine trying to plan a little 7:30-10 delight. However, I know that on weekends that jobs, sports, visits home and evening plans provide ample opportunity for this rampant sex to occur.
Justin opened his comment by saying, "when Paul says we must not have even a hint of sexuality, then we must take that as what it means." I couldn't agree more. However, I believe that I've sufficiently shown that this policy doesn't communicate to anyone that the college encourages promiscuity. The hints of sexual immorality that are present are present on an individual, not institutional level. Again, this should not be a matter of policy, but of individual concern, both on the parts of fellow students and the dorm staff.
Justin, someone on your floor could be having sex. this could happen regardless of what the policies were. We could provide anecdotes supporting this, but it's beside the point. The people living in your dorms are sinful. If you're looking for a place where you know that no sin is happening, you'll have a very disappointing life.
Above reproach is a term that's thrown around a lot, but it usually carries very little meaning. In order to clearly define our terms, we need to once again get out of the theoretical and into the real. This is how it's defined in my mind:
(I expect that if someone still wishes to make the claim that this video causes its stars to lose their above reproach status that you'll either argue with my definition or provide concrete examples of how my fellow Summitites no longer measure up to it)
A person is no longer above reproach if his actions prevent him from effectively ministering to someone struggling with anyone.
For example, if a person regularly drinks in public and ends up drunk, this would cause problems for him in an attempt to minister to someone with a drinking problem. If a person was unfaithful in a relationship, this would cause problems for him in marriage counseling or in confronting someone about breaking his or her marital vow.
So, even if the video was seen by every student or parishioner that will ever be served by the men in that video, what would be the perceivable area in which they could be reproached?
*"...someone struggling with anything."
I apologize for my lack of proofreading. I generally figure that my composition is impeccable, but I often find that my sausage like fingers can't quite keep up with the speed of my mind. Ok, or maybe I just messed up.
Tyler,
I have a couple thoughts that I think will tie the entire matter together, because I think that when we are talking about this video and about open dorms it is the same thing. We are saying there must not be even a hint of sexuality, and why? So that they may be above reproach. I think that while the school doesn't say in its policy it advocates sex, it must take into consideration that sex will and does occur. Thus, maybe there must be some sort of policy enforcing stricter rules or patrolling or such. All so that not only the school, but also, the student may be above reproach. My point about it being easier to have sex during the week is easily shown. When you enter a new environment you must warm up to it. Then, even when you are completely comfortable there, possibly some things you may not do. I think that it is the same thing here, if you become accustomed to being in your room and progressing further and further through this sexual crescendo then eventually nothing in that environment holds you back. If it were only weekends, getting comfortable happens less fast. Also, you argue that there is you cannot perceive the difference between planning sex during the week as in contrast to the weekend. I argue that on the weekends it would be much harder because RA's would feel more inclined to make rounds and you become comfortable there less fast. On the week nights, it is easier to find the time when your roommate is going to be gone or busy and you can have the room to yourself. I mean that you learn more quickly and are able to replicate everything faster having week nights as an option. Once again so that we may be above reproach. All of us. The students in the "Party in the MLC" video also.
I think that first, I must define being above reproach. Paul says in 1 Tim. 3:2, "Now the overseer must be above reproach...." Now, Luther says about this: "that he may not be a fornicator, an adulterer, a greedy man, a foul-mouthed person, a drunkard, a gambler, a slanderer." (I sort of feel like Greg Jackson right now, but I'm coming to a good point.) Two more things I think that are important to keep in my before we clearly lay this down is the word ἀνέγκλητος which is used in Titus 1:6-7 and is translated "Blameless." Lastly, “We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will not be discredited” (1 Corinthians 6:3). Now then I want to work a definition of this ministerial qualification. We can see that a minister must blameless, not before God, but transparent before men. There can be nothing evident in his life that could hinder someone's faith. To be above reproach is more than just not being able to minister to one group. It means we must be conscious of every group and able to always minister to them. Now then, we must find that matter of how they here may have forfeited this (I don't think they really did, but it's close in the public eye). Can we say insensitivity? How about being a poor role model? How about causing offense to those of weak faith? How about the image of MLC? To me, there is something very disgusting to see men acting like that, it wasn't funny to me. Now then, I think that this is what needs to be said about this. The part I despise most about this is that on the FaceBook group there is a student of Krause who has seen this video. They thought it was funny, but how much does it make that student feel like it would be okay to copy him. I think that as students we can do better, as future ministers we can be more, and that all in all our actions need to be more monitored.
(One last thing, I'm not Greg Jackson, I advocate having fun in a good setting, but how are we to have fun when we're imitating sin? We can do better. In light of MLC, the video went over well, I just think that nothing like it should be made again, nor do I think it should be on Facebook. I'm sure the train has left the station on this matter though.)