A test of true diversity

Gordon College of Wenham, Mass. (a northeast Boston suburb), has never been known in the evangelical community as a right-wing or super-conservative institution. Pretty solidly biblical, most observers would say. And pretty balanced. Now and then, perhaps, a bit more daring than some of us found comfortable—but not by much.

So it wasn’t exactly as if Gordon College was out looking for trouble early this past summer when its president, Michael Lindsay, joined more than 100 other Christian leaders in signing a modest appeal to President Obama. Word was out that the president was about to issue an executive order (actually signed on July 21) to the effect that any entity doing business with the federal government was required to comply with all rules banning discrimination against homosexuals.

With his colleagues, Lindsay asked for an exception for organizations like Gordon College. Their religious liberty was at stake, stressed those who signed the appeal. At Gordon, the appeal was simply that the college wanted to preserve this statement in its conduct policy: “Those acts which are expressly forbidden in Scripture, including but not limited to blasphemy, profanity, dishonesty, theft, drunkenness, sexual relations outside of marriage, and homosexual practice, will not be tolerated in the lives of Gordon community members, either on or off campus.”

But Lindsay and his college were hardly prepared for the vigor and outrage of the response—from a variety of directions—to his joining what seemed to be a most reasonable appeal. From The Boston Globe, the regional accrediting association, local civic leaders, and other power centers came protests with the combined potential for sinking the college. Intensely watching that whole scenario, with understandable concern and even alarm, were leaders of other educational, charitable, relief, and miscellaneous other organizations. I know, because in the last two weeks I’ve sat in on board meetings of four different Christian enterprises where that concern and alarm were acute. Quite naturally, folks are watching Gordon College.

You and I should join them in that sober vigil and analysis. What’s happening at Gordon College is all but certain to happen sometime soon, in some form, at other institutions we all love and support. Accrediting agreements might be modified, affecting the standing of even first-rate schools. Evangelical colleges could face the disappearance of federal scholarship and loan programs—typically affecting from one-third to half of all students. Generous donors who might step up to help cover those scholarships and loans could easily be denied tax exemption for their gifts. Sales taxes on purchases and property taxes on attractive campuses might be imposed.

As we watch, anticipate, and analyze, it’s critical to keep several thoughts in sharp perspective.

First: Institutional and organizational life is always discriminatory. So what else is new? Ivy League schools discriminate against students with low SAT scores. Biology departments across the country discriminate against professors who don’t believe in Darwinian evolution. NFL football franchises discriminate against linemen who weigh less than 150 pounds. What some people angrily term “discrimination,” others accept as constructive “choice.” It’s the very diversity of such a society that gives it its color and character.

Second: Don’t expect everyone’s response to be the same—even on your side of this disagreement. It’s likely to be messy. It won’t be as simple as “us” against “them.” Already, the Gordon College community has been divided and subdivided. Some folks are quietly thankful the issue dropped right in the college’s lap, forcing a stand to be taken. Others have called on President Lindsay and the board of directors to drop the prohibition against homosexual practice from the college’s policy statement.

My guess is that the scattered response at Gordon is fairly typical of the response we’ll see in the months ahead in the much larger evangelical community. Some will argue simply on the basis of historic traditional values and practice. Some will appeal to “religious freedom.” Some will make a distinction between institutions (like Gordon) that are Christian but independent and those dozens of institutions that are church-related. (For the record, I think that’s a shallow and unwise distinction. Freedom to hire should be as broad and unfettered as possible.)

Most troubling of all, don’t be surprised if large numbers of evangelical students line up on the more permissive side of the issue. The generational divide so visible in our culture at large may show up just as painfully on traditionally Christian campuses and within Christian groups on secular campuses.

Don’t expect this issue to go away soon—and don’t expect it to be a tidy debate.

—See “By whose standard?" in this issue for reporting on Gordon College and accreditation