Banner
Anemic Ads for Christian Colleges PDF Print E-mail
Education - Education
Written by Douglas Wilson   
Monday, 07 February 2011 07:53

The Bible requires Christian leaders to not be bellicose (1 Tim. 3:3). And at the same time we are called to put on the full armor of God, and to contend with principalities and powers (Eph. 6:11-12). What gives?

"Then said David to the Philistine, Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied. This day will the LORD deliverl thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel. And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD’S, and he will give you into our hands" (1 Sam. 17:45-47).

Modern scholarship has shown that David had the dickens of a time getting this little speech past the boys in marketing. And then the legal department weighed in as well, and before all was said and done, there was quite a set to in the boardroom of the Davidic Global Outreach Ministries. But in the end, the (sometimes controversial but) always charismatic leader insisted, and then went out and killed the giant. That caused some other problems with the donor base too, but that's another story.

Some of you have seen the "Yo, secularism" ad that NSA recently ran. I am pleased to note that the ad did what an ad really ought to do -- which is get people's attention and make them think about it. Unfortunately, not everyone thinks about these things carefully, and so we have the opportunity for some follow up. Here it is, straight from King Lune of Archenland, the man who gave the final okay on that ad.

 

"'Shame, Corin,' said the King. 'Never taunt a man save when he is stronger than you: then, as you please'"

One of the perennial fears that faithful supporters of Christian ministries have is that once established (or nearly established), the pressure for respectability immediately descends. That is a fact of life, and nothing whatever can be done about it -- except to resist that inevitable pressure when it comes, resisting it the right way. Going back to our original question, this is why every true eductional reform will need to be led by certain kinds of men -- the kind of men who hate petulant quarrels, and who love an honest fight.

I have often told the story of one of the reasons why I got involved in the start up of New St. Andrews College. It was because of the anemic ads from Christian colleges. When our oldest daughter Bekah got to the age that we were thinking about college, we started getting all kinds of mailers from all kinds of Christian colleges. I concluded that the purpose of Christian higher ed had devolved to the point where the central purpose was to allow the kids to make lifelong friends, eat pizza, and ride horses.

Look. Every college in the nation has photogenic females. That is not a philosophy of education. And if that is what you are about, you might as well go to Behemoth State U where the photogenic females would let you do something about it. But the course of study ought to be the liberal arts, not the libidinous arts.

New St. Andrews is a college full of real promise, and is worthy of your support. If you are one of those donor types, and you come to read this post, and your pen has been quivering with indecision above that checkbook, I would not only urge you to write out that check of yours, but also to add a zero to the end of it.

But if you ever see this college going the way of all flesh (and you would probably see it in the ads first), then I would urge you to turn off the support, giving that spigot a quick and decisive twist to the right. Don't send your kids and don't send your money. There are numerous ministries out there which live in two different places -- one place where the compromising action is, and another stalwart place where the autopilot donors think they are.

NSA does not occupy a mysterious place where these pressures have somehow gone away. The point is to resist the pressures, not to pretend that they could never happen "here." One of NSA's mottos is "for the faithful, wars will never cease." In this world, the only way to get the conflict to go away is by surrendering. That is an option, but of course not a faithful one.



Add this page to your favorite Social Networking websites
Digg! Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! MySpace! Yahoo! BlogRolling! Twitter! LinkedIn! TwitThis
 
Comments
Search
Only registered users can write comments!
Jane Dunsworth  Monday, February 07, 2011 8:52 am
I think Christian college marketing is more about the (faulty) assumption that "we know everyone's here to get a good education and grow in godliness, so we don't even need to MENTION that, but here's why it will be more fun here" than about not caring about good education and godliness.

Of course, in the long run, downplaying something has the same effect as denying it. But I wouldn't be too quick to make the association that "pretty ads about pretty girls and Frisbee games" means "good Christian education is neglected." At least not yet.
Kane Augustus  Monday, February 07, 2011 9:10 am
I think the anemia runs deeper than simple advertisements and kitsch-minded slogans, personally. And I think Mark Noll delivers a rather helpful look at the underlying issues that form such wanton piffle in the evangelical circles. Take a look at The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. Also, No Place For Truth, by David Wells.

Both of these books address the underlying issues that speak to the milquetoast attitude in Christian education.

Cheers!
Kane
Melody  Monday, February 07, 2011 10:37 am
I haven't heard the word 'piffle' since my Dad passed away in 1985. :lol:
Kane Augustus  Monday, February 07, 2011 11:37 am
Melody,

Ah, yes, "piffle" is a wonderful word first made memorable to me by the smooth literary croonings of Douglas Wilson's favourite atheist, Christopher Hitchens.

I hope the association of the word with your deceased father is a happy one.

Take care,
Kane
Tim Enloe  Monday, February 07, 2011 11:38 am
Hear, hear! I wouldn't trade my time at NSA - all 7 very difficult years - for anything. All my teachers and all my classes built me up spiritually and intellectually in ways that are incalculable. Thank God for NSA!

I am wondering, is there any sort of NSA forum where matters pertaining to the College can be discussed by all concerned, whether teachers, current students, or alumni?
Caca Fuego  - Monastic model?  Monday, February 07, 2011 12:15 pm
There's a bit in the Chronicle of Higher Ed about getting medieval on college by adopting a monastic model.

A quote:

Quote:
It all begins with a sense of purpose and destiny. A major should not be selected because of a job report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What would it be like if college students felt that they were called to a vocation rather than simply getting their tickets stamped so they can get middle-class jobs, if they are lucky?

Perhaps in the futility of undergraduate careerism lie the seeds of a new vocational outlook in higher education. It is worth remembering that monasteries were the first institutions in the West that allowed people to explore options beyond the circumstances into which they were born.

I often see proposals for such an institution. Why not bring together a core group of serious-minded but underemployed academics—who already have adopted a life of poverty, more or less—to form a college that has none of the superfluities that have made higher education the equivalent of a four-year Carnival cruise? No more millionaire vice presidents and coaches, no more gargantuan stadiums with double-Jumbotrons, no more dorms and dining centers that look like Disney World resorts, no more exploited adjuncts who fear displeasing their student-customers. Instead, this college would have full-time, resident professors, recreational athletics, and basic dormitories that the students maintained themselves. In time, a few administrators could be chosen from among the faculty.

What if, instead of preparing students to leave the institution, we encouraged some of them to stay, joining us in work and reflection for as long as they continued to benefit from the experience? One of the major corrupting elements of higher education—the fear of unemployment—would be reduced, and students could focus, once again, on learning for its own sake.

Another corrupting influence—anxiety over college costs—could be removed entirely by making our institutions self-sustaining through productive labor. Depending on their interests and capabilities, students—let us call them "novices"—could be put to work growing food, tending beehives, crafting furniture, building digital archives, and doing their part in cleaning and maintenance, thereby providing—through a system of communal sharing—the resources, infrastructure, and maintenance needed to sustain the institution in perpetuity, with minimal external support.
Tim Enloe  Monday, February 07, 2011 12:32 pm
Ah, if only such a thing could be done!
Jane Dunsworth  Monday, February 07, 2011 12:55 pm
I'm not saying there's not a problem with Christian colleges generally. I'm saying the automatic association between nice marketing materials and academic/spiritual vacuity may be a bit hasty in particular cases.
Bert Perry  Wednesday, February 09, 2011 6:50 am
"I think Christian college marketing is more about the (faulty) assumption that "we know everyone's here to get a good education and grow in godliness, so we don't even need to MENTION that, but here's why it will be more fun here" than about not caring about good education and godliness."

Two thoughts here; first, in an era when "liberal arts" is defined as "broad based curriculum", it's important to differentiate between imitation liberal arts and the real thing. One is PBR, the other is beer.

Second, there is something to be said for what the countenance of the girl in the picture says--and OK, everything's staged, so it's obscured, but reality is that a real smile with attractive clothing says something entirely different about a person than a pout or forced smile and the fashion du jour.

Which, in turn, says something about how the college operates.
Jane Dunsworth  Thursday, February 10, 2011 9:21 am
Bert, absolutely. But Pastor Wilson isn't specifying a certain kind of girl dressed a certain kind of way in a certain kind of picture. You're absolutely right that the girl can function as a legitimate diagnostic; I'm saying (so to speak) that "a girl in a picture" (without any specifics about the girl or the picture) isn't quite enough to say in order to find a college unacceptable and then go on to make a multitude of assumptions about the precise problems with the focus and quality of the school.

There's no doubt that there's much tarring that needs to be done; I'm just concerned about the width and accuracy of the brush strokes.