The Relationship of the Christian Faith to Institutional Purpose at Lenoir-Rhyne College

It is my belief that the Christian Faith has always been and is still an important part of what Lenoir-Rhyne College is, professes to be, and is perceived to be by the general public. The founders were strong Lutherans, with a clear goal of providing for the education of Lutheran pastors.  Many NC pastors and parishioners have benefited from their vision and continue to do so today.  The College continues to welcome the synod for its annual meeting as well as the Lutheran women’s group and the Lutheran Youth groups every summer.  The visiting pastors program, the Center for Theology and its annual Aquinas-Luther Conference serve as reminders that the College continues to reach out to its founding tradition.

Lenoir-Rhyne not only serves as a resource for the church, but also serves the students of a variety of faith backgrounds within a Christian setting. The symbols to me are very evident: The cross at the entrance to the quad, the dedicated chapel hour every Wednesday, the full time campus minister, the baccalaureate service, the prayers at the opening and closing convos, faculty meetings and many other events.  The Religion 100 and 400 requirements, are unmistakable statements of the importance we place on understanding the Christian faith.

Some would agree with Benne, that church related institutions have all been hurt by secular trends and are in danger of losing their souls. I however, find that Lenoir-Rhyne has remained true to its mission of educating students of a variety of backgrounds to become whole persons within the context of the Christian faith. 

When looking at Benne’s classification of colleges, I find LR to be between the Critical Mass and the Intentionally Pluralistic colleges- leaning in the Critical Mass direction, and this is exactly where I think it has always been and should remain. I feel that if we were to move more in this direction, and especially toward the Orthodox type, that LR would no longer serve the majority of its current students, and would be unaccepted by and unaccepting of many of its alumni.  Current and previous faculty, staff and students have been very supportive of LR’s mission, and have felt free to speak of their religious convictions without feeling that they must conform to ‘one strict interpretation’. Though LR has always been very Lutheran it has been welcoming of other traditions.  Coming from a different denominational background with limited experience with the Lutheran tradition before coming to LR, I can attest that there is no danger of outsiders not knowing that LR is Lutheran. For those brought up in the tradition it is probably less obvious, it seems ‘merely Christian’ but for those outside the Lutheran tradition it is very noticeable.  In fact the Lutheran traditions sometimes even become a stumbling block for the non-Lutheran students, especially those from the more conservative backgrounds.

If there are any secular trends that the college needs to worry about, I find that they are not really the ones that I find Benne addressing. Instead, to me the more disturbing trends include the more subtle ones: The ‘College as a Business’, the need to ‘Market the College’ in order to attract students, the ‘Student as a Consumer’ approach.  While these things may not seem particularly relevant to the relationship of the college to the Christian faith, I find that they are very relevant, because it is in dealing with these trends that we are most likely to forget our mission and our vision. A college must not only ‘speak of its Christian faith’ but must also live its faith.  That means it must be fair, honest and loving in all its dealings, and hold itself to a high moral standard as it tries to attract students, balance its budget and maintain the quality of its employees.  This means that it must live by Christian principles in its dealings with its students, its faculty and staff, and its larger community. One ‘unChristian’ act can say more about the importance of the Christian faith at Lenoir-Rhyne than the absence of many of the ‘marks of a College of the Church’ that Benne finds so compelling.

Benne addresses the necessity of having a critical mass of faculty and staff representing the founding tradition in order to preserve the college’s memory and to keep its vision alive.  I agree that the people of any institution are what make it what it is, and are important for it to succeed in carrying out its mission.  That however doesn’t mean that those from without the founding tradition, who have shown loyalty to, commitment to, and support of the mission, should be marginalized.  As I read Benne’s book I kept feeling that the kind of place he seemed to think ideal would not be the kind of place that I would feel particularly comfortable with, nor one that would appreciate the ‘likes of me’.

The part of the book that I was most bothered by was the part on the ‘integration of faith and learning’ in the classroom. On one level, I definitely support this approach and have benefited from it myself. As an undergraduate at a church related institution I had the opportunity to confront many of the troubling issues at the intersection of religion and scientific learning in a safe, caring and supportive environment. While my counterparts at state institutions were left to struggle with these types of issues alone, we were able to discuss our doubts, misunderstandings and confusion freely and without fear. What bothers me about the way this is presented in the book is an unspoken but nevertheless, I feel, real assumption that the only acceptable way to approach these contradictory or controversial subjects is in a theologically very conservative way.  As a scientist, I have seen the fundamentalists/literalists attack much of what I teach, and have seen it grow into an anti-intellectual fervor.  When we try to restrict our understanding to some preconceived notion of what we must think in order to be good Christians, we do our intelligence and God a disservice.  We often act as if God cannot stand up to the findings of science: If the world is round not flat, if human failings are caused by our genes not sin, if humans are related to all other life, that this somehow lessens God, therefore can’t be true.  To me this reminds me of the book back in the 60’s ‘Is your God too small?’  Who are we to limit God! The answer is not to make sure that in areas of conflict that the theological view always ‘has the last word’, but to make sure that the student be equipped spiritually and intellectually to handle the ambiguity without fear of ridicule or rejection.

So, in closing, what does it mean to teach in the liberal arts curriculum as a Christian and from a Christian point of view?  It means to be true to the discipline, but not to ignore the religious implications or places where a Christian viewpoint might add to the discussion.  It means following the Christian teachings of fairness, support, concern, and duty, to not belittle nor put down those with other beliefs, but to show love and compassion. It does not mean that religion should always be a part of the discussion, nor that the founding tradition should have the last word, but that the values of the Christian faith be evident in the way we live, the way we respect others and the way we approach life.  The message is often clearer when it is demonstrated rather than preached.

Marsha E. Fanning

Professor of Biology