In the ongoing debate about whether a gay-straight alliance should be recognized by the university, a common argument made against recognition has been this: Pepperdine is a private university, and it can do whatever it wants. In addition, because it is a Christian university and advertises this feature, people who attend or teach here shouldn’t complain about its conservative policy decisions.
Frankly, this argument is irrelevant. By its logic, we also shouldn’t care if Pepperdine starts requiring all students to attend University Church every Sunday and learn all its hymns by heart, too. In this instance, should we say that since it’s a private school, it can do what it likes, and we shouldn’t question it?
Of course Pepperdine is allowed to deny recognition of an official, student-led, not-ideologically-moderated gay-straight alliance on campus. The question is whether it should do such a thing. That “should” is based on values, especially to what degree you think it is good or bad for authorities to regulate the expression and moral action of their constituents. It’s also based on strategic concerns, such as the way that regulation affects various objectives: student learning and happiness, donor funding and especially, maintaining the ideological environment of Pepperdine. Finding a solution that best fits the values and priorities of all its members is both difficult and essential. Thus, we must talk about it.
Beyond the complexity of “should” decisions (what is wise and good for Pepperdine to do, beyond what it is “allowed” to do), the decentralized nature of the Church of Christ is another reason why we ought to be both open and outspoken on how ideology affects administration. Unlike most denominations, the Church of Christ lacks a central government. Thus, it has no grand pool of money to fund schools like Pepperdine, solidifying its sway over the university; nor does the “CoC” have any authoritative body of literature or board of directors telling Pepperdine leaders specifically what to do. So in theory, if our administrators and faculty collectively decide that the truest expression of the Church of Christ faith is to pass out a ripe banana to each student at the beginning of every class, they can call it a religious prerogative. One of the ways this has actually played out is that Pepperdine’s University Church allows women visible roles in its services, while most Churches of Christ in America either do not or are only considering it. University Church made the decision at the will of its local members, including faculty and students.
In the same way, other efforts to change rules can succeed if they fit the community conception of Biblical faith. For example, one can argue that barring recognition of a gay-straight alliance diminishes open discussion of gay identity — discussion that could help the Christian community to better understand, care for and relate to people with homosexual desires. Whatever the church’s theological position on this issue, loving people is — or should be — a priority for Christians.
In fact, there are few instances when expression is best censored or regulated on theological grounds. It usually just causes people to feel repressed or alienated. After all, we are part of a larger society that has decided it’s mostly a bad idea to combine religion with government. At Pepperdine, we have chosen to combine religion with administration. What’s the point?
I believe there is indeed something to be gained in religious education: it’s simply many more “do’s” than “don’ts.” A great example of a “do” is the teaching practice of Professor Jeffrey Jasperse. In his physiology class, he includes the theology of origins (creationism/evolution, etc.) and scientific ethics (stem cell research, abortion, assisted suicide and other controversies). For him, those subjects are natural and necessary parts of teaching at a Christian university.
“You should be getting a different education here than you would at a public school. We should be looking at every major here on campus and asking how Christians think about this,” Jasperse said. In his view, looking deeper at what he calls the “theology of everything” is the point of a religious education. He elaborates, “That doesn’t mean we should only be studying Christian ideals. I don’t think Christians have a corner on truth. We do have a corner on The Truth, Jesus Christ, but as far as artists, scientists, philosophers and poets [go] — they express truth that doesn’t come from their world view. People are made in the image of God, so we can learn something about God just from studying those people.”
A Christian university defined by rules about what harmless things students can’t say or do is likely to produce a jaded and uninspired student body. A Christian university that encourages exploration of the world with a clear link to its Creator is likely to produce students with a deeper understanding of their own beliefs. Whether it’s gay identity, women in worship, stem cell research or any other issue, let’s choose both the truth and The Truth.
