My Thoughts on “Lee University Doctrinal Integrity and Teaching Fidelity.”

Last month the Executive Council of the Church of God, in partnership with Lee University, completed the document referenced above. You can get the full details of this here. My purpose here is not to rehash the entire process (which started last September) but to comment on its results. The challenges from the culture that both the Church of God and Lee University face are serious ones; it’s best to tackle them now than to wait until it is too late.

My personal interest in this topic is heightened because, as I announced on another site, starting this Fall I am teaching engineering at Lee University. Lee has traditionally been a liberal arts college but it is venturing more towards professional education, first with its nursing school and now with its engineering program. I have contended for a long time that our educational system needs to move more in a hard science direction (and one that will not, in my opinion, deflect it from a faith mission.) This is my chance to make a contribution to that in a Christian school. My entry–and this joint effort–comes with the background of the dispute between one of our prominent ministers and a Lee faculty member about the latter receiving the Holy Communion at his wife’s Episcopal parish. So the urgency of this topic is compounded.

All that said, let us start with this:

Within the context of rapidly shifting societal norms and religious beliefs, and in response to concerns expressed within the Church of God, the International Executive Council determined to review the instructional practices at Lee University. The review process included a series of meetings involving members of the Executive Council and leaders from Lee University.

It’s difficult to overstate the role that Lee has in the Church of God. My years of working in the International Offices (and being married to a Lee graduate) have resulted in my hearing “I went to Lee with him/her” many times. A leftward lurch would be a disaster for not only Lee but the church in general, especially in a church which struggles more than most with resolving differences of opinion and thinking difficult issues through.

From here I’d like to go through the actions which the Lee board approved and sent to the Executive Council:

Lee University will develop a certification course for its faculty including an orientation to the history, culture, doctrines, and practical commitments of the Church of God; and that this certification be required of all faculty engaged in teaching theology, church doctrine, ecclesiology, and/or practical theology at Lee University.

It’s worth noting that our ministers have opposed one or more of their number losing his or her credentials because of lack of fidelity to the Declaration of Faith. How this will play out with the Lee faculty will be interesting. The tricky part of such a certification is whether it identifies people who really have problems with the Declaration of Faith without doing so to those who agree with it but don’t believe and teach “the way we’ve always done it.” I will also remind people that just because you’re a product of the culture doesn’t mean you are faithful to the doctrine.

The Lee University Board of Directors reaffirm its existing policy requiring all faculty members to abide by the existing contractual and policy commitments to the lifestyle and doctrinal commitments of the Church of God as they relate to personal conduct, scholarship, and teaching.

The current application for employment states verbatim that “Faculty members at Lee University agree in their contracts not to propagate religious, teach or publish anything contrary to the Declaration of Faith.” The Faculty Handbook is explicit in the type of conduct which Lee expects its faculty to exhibit, and that includes unacceptable opposite-sex conduct in addition to same-sex conduct.

Lee University will explore the establishment of a required Christian Discipleship class, offered at the 100 level, as an addition to the religion core of Lee University.

Personally I’d look at the whole religion core to make sure that discipleship is integral to it. I’ve discussed this issue before, but face it, Jesus told us to go make disciples.

In collaboration with the Church of God Division of Education, Lee University will explore a means to integrate ministry credentialing in the Church of God within the ministry degree programs of the Lee University School of Theology and Ministry.

It makes sense that the Division of Education, which oversees the education of our ministers, would have input at this stage.

Lee University Board of Directors adopts the following policy changes related to the faculty of the School of Theology and Ministry (STM):

a. Given their central role in training future ministers consistent with the doctrines and teachings of the Church of God, faculty members in the School of Theology and Ministry may not be a member of, regularly attend, or regularly perform ministerial functions at churches or other religious organizations with doctrines, beliefs, positions, or other ministry practices in conflict with the Statement of Beliefs on Human Sexuality.

b. Codify the existing STM practice of hiring only Pentecostal scholars on its faculty and operating policy of the Board of Directors, including hiring preference for Church of God scholars. Exceptions to this policy would require board approval.

c. Require a written response from all faculty candidates reflecting their views on the doctrinal commitments of the Church of God and the Lee University Statement of Beliefs on Human Sexuality and Gender.

d. Require at least one scholarly writing per year from all ranked faculty members on an article of the Church of God Declaration of Faith, Doctrinal Commitments or Practical Commitments.

e. Provide incentives to faculty members who are credentialed ministers with the Church of God.

f. Establish a faculty hiring advisory committee, comprised of three Ordained Bishops of the Church of God (a local pastor, an administrator from the Church of God Division of Education, and a sitting member of the Executive Council), to review the applications and/or interview new faculty members and supply an assessment of the candidates to the University President for consideration by the Board of Directors.

Lee already requires two things from faculty applicants: a) a Personal Faith Narrative, and b) a Personal Faith Statement on the Integration of Faith and Learning. (I’ll be glad to post mine if you’re interested.) My guess is that (c) will be implemented with an additional statement to those. It will be interesting to see how the science and engineering faculty do on (d). I think that (e) needs to be expanded to include lay people, especially in those fields where our ministers are scarce. Concerning (f), Lee may want to have a tiered review process for part-time and full-time faculty.

The Lee University Board of Directors shall establish a subcommittee to review all new faculty hires prior to the University President presenting candidates for consideration for approval by the board.

I think that this needs to be integrated with (f) on the previous point to reduce duplicate effort.

Lee University amends its moonlighting policy to prohibit employees and faculty members from engaging in outside employment or serving in a ministerial staff position, whether or not for compensation, at churches or other religious organizations that have doctrines, beliefs, positions, or other ministry practices in conflict with the Statement of Beliefs on Human Sexuality.

Lee’s moonlighting policy, even for part-time faculty, is more restrictive than what I have been used to at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. OTOH UTC requires an annual Conflict of Interest report out of its faculty, something that Lee might want to consider.

It’s a sign of the times that the issue of human sexuality is the “wedge” issue that our opponents–both inside and outside of the church–have picked. That’s a change from the doctrinal and theological ones that dominated the 1960’s and 1970’s. That’s why this issue is central to this narrative and to the future course of Lee and the Church of God. The unaddressed issue is the role of the federal government in all of this, but perhaps I presaged this in my 2007 piece Waiting for the Cops to Show Up.

Overall I think this is a step in the right direction. The method of implementation is crucial; what we need is a transparent process with a minimum of bureaucratic inefficiency. The stakes are too high for this process and those like it to fail.