Andrea Da Firenze (1343-1377) Descent of the Holy Spirit

Truth, Translation, and Translucence: <Traduttore (no) Traditore!>
(or)
The Flesh/Word Became Word/Flesh and
Pitched His Language Among Us
(Acts 02)

Richard M. Wright
Church of the Nations
Pentecost Sunday (A)
June 12 2011

Everyone speaks French. Not really. But we think my father is funny.

For five years my family lives in England. My family does not travel very much. But during those five years we take many trips each year to different parts of Great Britain and to different countries in Europe. Spain / France / Italy / Germany / Belgium / Luxembourg / Switzerland. Now my dad can speak a very small amount of French. And what we think is very funny is that no matter where we go no matter what language people speak in that country we visit my dad tries to speak French. Because if people do not speak English and we do not speak their language for some crazy reason my father thinks maybe French will work.

One of my favorite stories is when we are in Rome. We are walking from our hotel to the coliseum. We walk by this very ordinary looking church. And there are cars and people everywhere. Something special is happening. So my father walks up to a police officer. Tries to ask him in French what is happening. Does not work. So my dad – the master of all languages – in his best Italian points at the church and says (shrug). The police officer points at his watch and says Il Papa! Il Papa! The Pope! The Pope! The Pope is coming to visit this little church.

Not everyone really speaks French. But my dad tries.

In our Bible story for this morning from the book of Acts chapter two no one speaks French. Not everyone even speaks Hebrew or Aramaic or Greek. Not everyone speaks the same language.

When the day of Pentecost comes, they are all together in one place. ² Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind comes from heaven and fills the whole house where they are sitting. ³ They see what seem to be tongues (Greek gloossai) of fire that separate and come to rest on each of them. ⁴ All of them are filled with the Holy Spirit and begin to speak in other tongues (gloossais) as the Spirit makes them able. ⁵ Now there are staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. ⁶ When they hear this sound, a crowd comes together all confused? amazed? because each one hears them speaking in his own language (Greek dialektos).

Today is my favorite day in the Christian calendar. The Day of Pentecost. The day when the family of God celebrates and perhaps experiences again when God sends the Holy Spirit upon the early Christian church. Last week on Ascension Sunday we hear the story of how Jesus appears to his followers after his resurrection for forty days. He shows them that he is alive. He teaches them about the kingdom of God. He tells them Wait for the gift my Father promised which you have heard me talk about. You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you. And you will tell people about me in Jerusalem (your home city) in Judea (your home province) in Samaria (the country or province next to yours) and to the ends of the earth.

There is a small but very powerful very important detail in this story that almost no one notices or talks about. Think about this for a moment. You have all these people from different provinces different nations different cultures who speak different languages. The story tells us they are all Jewish. Maybe there is one language that they all can use. Maybe they all know Greek or Hebrew although probably not. Maybe the followers of Jesus can speak in Greek or Aramaic and the Holy Spirit can make all these people understand one language.

But the Holy Spirit does not bring all these people together by making them the same. By making them one culture or able to understand one language. The Holy Spirit does something much more interesting. Makes the disciples able to speak in other languages so that each person can hear the good news about Jesus in his or her own language.

As if God respects the different language cultures nations that are there in Jerusalem. God does not say “Okay let’s see we have Africans Asians Europeans – all of you will now be the same. We have people who speak Greek Latin Chinese Korean Swahili Japanese Polish – all of you will now speak French”. No instead God says “Yes I want all people everywhere to know me worship me serve me. Yes I want all of you to experience my love healing forgiveness and salvation through Jesus my son. I want all of you to receive the power of the Holy Spirit. All of you to be part of the family of God. But I do not want you all to be the same. I want you to be a church of different cultures languages and nations”.

So we have this huge gathering of people from different provinces nations and cultures. They proclaim who God is and the wonderful things God has done through his son Jesus – they do this in different languages that reflect their different cultures and traditions. We know from the rest of the book of Acts that these different people go back to their home provinces and countries and form Christian communities that preach teach worship and serve in different languages. They find ways to understand and serve Jesus Christ that are appropriate for their different cultures.

In a way this is the great contradiction(?) of Church of the Nations. Bible study and worship in simple English. English Conversation. But our goal is not in fact to become American or speak only English. Part of our mission is to help everyone learn about and/or grow in the Christian faith. To be a place that helps people understand and live within American culture. But(?) to respect and encourage you as people with your own culture who continue to have your own language of the heart.

Stephen Freeman is a pastor in Tennessee. Two years ago he wrote an article on his website that changed even more how I look at language and culture. He wrote:

“That the Bible can be translated says something about language. It is interesting that the Christian faith has always translated the Bible.

I believe sometimes a translation will reveal things that are true that could not have been seen in the original language. There are relations between words and ideas in a language that are only in that language. I believe we should not ignore such relations and the meanings they create simply because the same relations and meanings do not exist in the original languages. These meanings are not enough for the official teachings of the Christian church. But they can sometimes be part of what the Bible reveals to us”.

It might be possible to translate the Bible or a song of worship or an act of worship or a work of art of a book about the Christian faith into your language or your culture. And not only does that translation or song or art communicate the truth of God. But it can also communicate new ideas and new meaning that is not in the original. Tradutore no sempre traditore – the translator is not always a traitor.

Stephen Freeman writes this is because in the Christian faith a word or an action or even a picture is not just a word or action or picture. There is something more. Words and actions and pictures are windows through which we can experience what they represent. They are transluscent.

Yes we gather to worship God to study the Bible to learn about to grow in the Christian faith in simple English. Mostly. But we do not give up and we do not lose our national or cultural or linguistic background. In fact let us embrace and celebrate and understand better our own language and culture. So that we are better able to let the Holy Spirit proclaim to us and in us and through us the wonderful acts of God and most of all what God has done through Jesus Christ his son.

Originally published in The Window, October 10 2006

Holy Play (or) S-, part I
Richard M. Wright

(The S- is going somewhere. Trust me.)

There is a theme – a theological theme that requires a change in how we live – that has been impressing itself upon my soul/awareness. Play.

Three days in Atlanta for the (apparently well known) Catalyst Conference. The world’s largest pillow fight involving thousands at the Gwinnett Arena on Friday morning. The dodge-ball national championship team – comprised entirely of “youth pastors”, why are we not surprised? – shows up… a dozen from the audience throw official dodge-balls at them which they dodge or catch-and-return-with-force then quickly (d)evolves into thousands throwing their red rubber balls at these masters of a play-ground sport who manage to dodge-or-catch-and-return not a few amidst the red maelstrom.

Yeah the conference was inspiring, informative, challenging and all. But it was also fun.

Which brings me to one of the speakers: Kevil Carroll of Rules of the Red Rubber Ball fame. Worked for years as a “creative catalyst” at Nike.

One of his central points was adults do not play enough. Without play… imagination and creativity shrivel. And perhaps the reverse is also true? That play can be a holy activity. And one that can fuel creativity and imagination and by extension our ability to perform… succeed… innovate… problem-solve… fulfill our mission as individuals and as a church family.

I first learned this lesson from a Baptist campus minister at Cornell University by the name of Armetta Fields. (Interesting first name.) She thought Cornell students were too serious, studious, and stress out. (Oh and arrogant.) So she made us play once or twice a semester.

Crayons and coloring books at Thursday evening “Bible study/prayer” meeting. Taking us to a nearby vocational school at night to spend a couple hours on the playground. Swings and slides and death-by-monkey-bars.

More than therapy but fulfilling (in part) a divine commandment. Care to guess what letter it starts with?

Originally published in The Window (October 23, 2006)

Sa- (or) Holy Play, part II
Richard M. Wright

(The Sa- is going somewhere. Trust me.)

There is a theme – a theological theme that requires a change in how we live – that has been impressing itself upon my soul/awareness. Rest.

Three days in Atlanta for the Catalyst Conference. (Hey this article sounds strangely familiar…) Some of the “Lab” (one day of smaller pre-conference sessions) speakers focused on culture. (Such as Andy Crouch, Cornell class of 1989, my classmate for Attic Greek 101 and 103, and my small group leader in Cornell Christian Fellowship.) On how the Christian church must not only engage (our current “emergent”) culture… but even create culture. But how?

Some of them addressed how. Mark Buchanan on “The Rest of God”. Lauren Winner was going to talk about “Sleep, Kids, and Technology” (my emphasis) but focused on understanding/reading/engaging our culture.

The back of our lab booklet listed the speakers and the many books they have written. Several of the books by the various lab speakers were on the subject of Sa-. Mark Buchanan. Eugene Peterson. Lauren Winner comes from a lapsed-Southern-Baptist/Orthodox-Jewish home and has written extensively on what the Christian movement needs to learn from Judaism. (Did you know Jesus was Jewish?)

Speaking of Cornell and of Orthodox Judaism… one of my best friends was Leah Rosenthal who lived in Young Israel House (a Jewish co-op). About once a month I walked all the way across campus to visit her. Usually on Friday night. Sometimes I watched/listened to Sa- prayers. We hanged out and talked. Then stayed for Sa- dinner.

What struck me was how Friday night there was an oasis of rest dare I say peace (shalom) in the ocean of intense academic stress that was life at Cornell. Sit and talk. Read. Leisurely meal with friends that ended with vast quantities of schnapps (which I skipped) and boisterous singing. Sleep. No phones or television! No work of any kind! Sometimes Leah and I went for a walk. (Once to visit a classmate from Genetics – an international who lived in a single room smaller than some walk-in closets.)

More than a break but fulfilling (in part) a divine commandment.

I apologize to dear readers for the lack of new posts over the last few weeks. Life has been somewhat hectic. Emergency home repairs. Toyota said my Corolla needs a new engine which basically means we have to replace it soon. My wife had some health issues. One of my children was in an outstanding musical production at Chapel on the Campus which meant two weeks of intense rehearsals and performances.

My wife is a teacher and former state worker. Many relatives on my mother’s side of the family are teachers and public/state workers. For some reason almost no one on my father’s side is a teacher or public/state/government worker. And when University Baptist Church two years ago began to offer/provide medical insurance for ministerial staff – read that again – our family declined. Would it save some money each year? Yes. But (1) the insurance my wife is able to provide is much better and (2) if we stay with her insurance then the state of Louisiana will provide medical insurance when we retire. If we go with insurance through the church we save a little now and lose a lot later.

By the way my wife (a) contributes to her retirement and (b) pays part of the cost of our medical insurance. Because she provides nearly all insurance for our family she takes home about 2/3 of her salary. No fooling.

So on the one hand we are a family that is counting on the type of pension and insurance coverage after retirement that is bankrupting states. On the other hand we contribute now to that pension and insurance coverage later.

There is a great deal one can say about the political battles taking place in states such as Wisconsin Ohio Indiana and New Jersey. What frosts my mug is summarized well by James Taranto:

It’s quite striking the way almost every lie the left ever told about the Tea Party has turned out to be true of the government unionists in Wisconsin and their supporters.

The Mainstream Media is doing everything it can to mislead and misinform/underinform the American people. I commend to you “Wisconsin Myths and Facts” by Matthew Shaffer that refutes about 90% of the propaganda we are being asked to believe about the situation in Wisconsin.

Victor Davis Hanson recently wrote an excellent piece comparing teachers to other workers. What I appreciate is he does not run down or denigrate teachers. No nonsense about how teachers have cushy jobs or only work ten months a year and so on. Only that they have it better than they used to. And better than most of the American workers whose taxes pay for teacher salaries and benefits:

So, yes, teaching is a noble profession upon which the future of our youth rests. It is not easy, and it is not as lucrative as the law or medicine. No doubt day-traders and the architects of hedge funds can make more in an hour than a sixth-grade social-studies teacher earns in a year, without either the caring or the commensurate work. Yet in comparison to most workers in the private sector, teachers are, in terms of working conditions and compensation, blessed — which is why we are told of Wisconsin that the problem is not really one of renegotiating wages, benefits, and pensions.

In these lean times, amid the furor and name-calling, we forget that teachers are not the wretched of the earth. They are often noble sorts, and that is reflected by what they make, how long they work, and the conditions under which they toil. If you doubt that, ask the almond farmer, roofer, or welder whose taxes pay their salaries.

Nicely put.

From CBSNews:

Loughner’s parents, silent and holed up in their home since the shooting spree, apologized publicly Tuesday.

“There are no words that can possibly express how we feel,” Randy and Amy Loughner wrote in a statement handed to reporters waiting outside their house. “We wish that there were, so we could make you feel better. We don’t understand why this happened.

“We care very deeply about the victims and their families. We are so very sorry for their loss.”

One cannot imagine what such times are like for the family. Our child did this?!?

How does the community behave toward the parents and other family members? With hate? anger? scorn? Or does the community reach out to them with understanding? compassion?

Several years ago a young man in Baton Rouge was shot and killed after he exchanged gunfire with police. I knew his sister well. She was a strong Christian and often worshiped with my small congregation. She brought her/their mother a few times.

Because of my relationship with the family I drove over and stopped by their apartment. They were not there. They were staying with friends in order to have a few days of peace away from the spotlight. There were several cards and notes along with some flowers in front of the door. I had written out a short note and stuck it between the door and frame.

Several days later the mother called. Could she come by the church to meet and talk with me? Of course.

I will not relate the content of the conversation. But one thing I will share is how she described everything she and her husband did to try to help their son return from the path to destruction on which he was traveling.

Sometimes when a child commits a horrible crime people ask and where were the parents? what did they do? how did they try to stop this from happening?

I can tell you that at least some of the time the parents tried to intervene. And those efforts either worked or did not work or worked but only temporarily. Two years ago I conducted a funeral for a young man who was involved in drug addiction for many years causing his parents all sorts of grief and heartache. Finally he was no longer taking drugs was living in another city and working on a graduate degree. A friend came by his apartment and offered him a hit.

Could parents like these have done more? Could they have done better? Maybe. Maybe not. Who are we to judge? And how are we to judge?

There is a difference between our son was killed after shooting at police or our son died while taking drugs and our son killed more than 30 people and then himself or our son killed 6 people and injured several others but is still alive.

But I wonder what the parents of the young man who committed the shootings in Tucson are going through. And how the community as well as the nation are treating them. Despite what their their son did.

Papyrus Fouad 266 - 2nd oldest Greek Old Testament text from 1st century B.C.E.

Needed to get by this weekend a Bible to present to my fellow minister on the occasion of her ordination this evening. She recently said something about “really need to read the Apocrypha” so found a nice New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha. Just like the hardback edition I used through seminary that at this point is held together by moving tape not to mention lost after a recent Bible study. So got one for myself.

Hold that thought.

Have been listening in the car to two recent podcasts by Father Thomas Hopko dean emeritus of Saint Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary in New York. One on reading the Old Testament and one on reading the Bible.

The reason for bringing these up is they were interesting and surprising. Especially in light of the recent exchange I had with an Orthodox priest concerning the Septuagint and its relationship to the original(?) text(s?) of the Hebrew Bible. I was more interested in the scholarly question of which preserves the original(?) Hebrew text(s?) better – the Septuagint or the Masoretic Text.

Father Hopko made some interesting comments about the extent to which the Greek Bible was the Bible of the apostles. The Greek Bible was a Bible that the biblical writers used. And we must remember it is a translation and that makes a difference in how we understand the way the biblical writers and apostles used the Greek Bible.

Put it this way. I have studied Hebrew and Greek. But in a Bible study I might quote an English translation. Later historians should not on that basis conclude that the English translation is the Bible of the Christian church.

Father Hopko also touched on the issue of which preserves the original(?) Hebrew text(s?) better. And gave examples where he thinks the Masoretic Text makes more sense than the Septuagint. The excellent Doctor Eugenia Constantinou in one of her podcasts mentions that there are examples where the Septuagint clearly is more correct.

My intent is not to argue with Orthodox Christians one way or the other. Only to share that Father Hopko made some interesting points which do suggest the issue is not as simple as some Orthodox Christians seem to say.

He also spent considerable time addressing the relative worth of different English translations. This is not entirely unrelated to the issue of Septuagint versus(?) Masoretic Text because most English translations of the Old Testament are based on the Hebrew Masoretic Text.

His personal favorite English translation is the Revised Standard Version. And he spends quite a long time explaining why he thinks the New Revised Standard Version is simply unacceptable and recommends that Christians not use it for personal devotion or in worship.

This is one day after I spend more than fifty bucks on a nice new copy of the New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha.

I have studied Greek and Hebrew but admittedly have not done an exhaustive comparison between original and translation. Some of the examples of poor translation in the New Revised Standard Version that Father Hopko provides are new to me.

Interesting no? How the Revised Standard Version is his favorite. And the New Revised Standard Version – very popular among mainstream Protestants and is what we used throughout seminary – is unacceptable.

One of my professors in seminary was part of the translation team for the New Revised Standard Version. On one occasion he shared how the editor sometimes ignored and/or changed what the translation teams recommended. The power of the editor!

So now what? I prefer to have a Bible that includes the Apocrypha whether or not one regards them as Holy Scripture. One of the few modern translations that includes the Apocrypha is the New Revised Standard Version.

Sorry about no posts for last couple weeks. Been busy and just got back from much needed holiday with family at Gulf Shores Alabama. Slept a lot. Spent a lot. Relaxed a lot.

Luke 20 is one of the lections for this Sunday the 24th Sunday of Pentecost year C.

Bet you didn’t buy a greeting card for that.

The famous and in fact only exchange between Jesus and the Sadducees in the book of Luke.

I will be preaching on this text again this Sunday. And will emphasize that the Christian faith does not teach what we often call immortality of the soul. It teaches resurrection of the dead.

First a point of self-correction. Although the Sadducees ask a question about the resurrection in the future the response Jesus gives is not primarily a defense of resurrection in the future so much as a demonstration of life with God in the present.

Joseph Kommanchak marvelously compares comments by N T Wright with commentary by Thomas Aquinas.

Aquinas quotes the Orthodox(?) bishop Theophylact with reference to Luke 20:

If the patriarchs had returned to nothing so as not to live with God in the hope of a resurrection, He would not have said, ‘I am,” but “I was,” which is the way we usually speak of things dead and gone, e.g., ‘I was the lord or master of that thing.’ But since he said, “I am,” He shows that He is the God and Lord of the living. This is what follows: ‘But he is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto him.’ For although they have departed from life, yet they live with Him in the hope of a resurrection.”

Compare Wright:

Jesus’ answer to the Sadducees, in fact, does point towards the refocusing of the resurrection hope which was to take place later, not least through the work of Paul. It speaks of a different quality of life, a life which death can no longer touch, and hence a life in which the normal parameters of mortal (i.e. deathbound) life, including procreative marriage, are no longer relevant. It speaks of an intermediate state in which all the righteous dead are held in some kind of ongoing life while waiting for the resurrection which everyone, Pharisees and Sadducee alike, knew perfectly well had not happened yet. It speaks about YHWH’s past word to Moses, in order to indicate a present reality (the patriarchs are still alive), in order thereby to affirm the future hope (they will be raised to a newly embodied life). [emphasis added]

How delightful to see this confluence of Orthodox with Catholic with Anglican commentary!

So when my excellent teacher in seminary Isam Ballenger emphasized “Christianity does not teach immortality of the soul it teaches resurrection” that is mostly but not entirely correct. There is a kind of continuation of the soul beyond death. But without resurrection of the body this continuation is an incomplete form of immortality(?). Komanchak quotes Aquinas on 1 Corinthians 15:

Two answers may be given. First, if the resurrection of the body is denied, it is not easy, in fact it is difficult, to maintain the immortality of the soul. For the soul is naturally united to the body, and for it to be separated from it is against its nature and per accidens; soul stripped of its body is imperfect for as long as it is without its body. Now it is impossible that what is natural and per se be finite and almost nothing, while what is against nature and per accidens is infinite, [which is what would be the case] if the soul were to perdure without its body. That is why Platonists, positing immortality, also posited reincarnation, even though this is heretical. Therefore, if the dead do not rise, it is only in this life that we have hope.

Second, man naturally desires the salvation of himself. But the soul, although it is a part of the human body, is not the whole man, and my soul is not me [anima mea non est ego]. Hence, although the soul attains salvation in another life, I do not, nor does anyone else. Besides, since man naturally desires salvation of his body also, that natural desire would be frustrated [without the resurrection of the body].

This may by the way represent a definitive answer to my earlier post “Those who ‘sleep’ (or) Moebius syllogism?”

Let me confess that on the one hand my conviction that the teaching of the resurrection is one of the essential teachings of the Christian faith but on the other hand is the teaching I find most difficult to believe.

God? Okay. Trinity? You bet. Jesus the God-man? Sure why not?

Resurrection of the dead? Oh man that’s hard. Hard to conceive. Hard to imagine. Hard to believe. So far removed from our normal day to day existence that this is where the scientific(?) rational(?) side of me says are you kidding me?!?

Do not misunderstand. I believe it. Teach it. Proclaim it. Base my life upon it. But where I too cry out “I believe Lord help my unbelief!”

One of funnier moments in Introduction to Christian Mission was when Isam Ballenger then wondered aloud:

How much does God need to resurrect? And what happens if I lose part of my body during life? What if I cut my fingernail or lose an arm? Will I get that nail or arm back? My my my! (very paraphrased from rough memory)

Yeah we had a short laugh at that. But what he said has haunted me since. His questions raise a serious issue. How exactly will we be raised?

Let me put it this way. What if we cut our nails – how long will they be at the resurrection? What if we lose an arm – will we get it back?

Let us raise the stakes. What if we never had an arm – will our resurrected bodies now have arms? What if we have extra digits or limbs – will we have the usual number? What if we are deaf or blind – will our resurrected bodies be able to hear or see? What if we are hermaphroditic – will we be one clear distinct sex? What if we have Down’s Syndrome – will we have a complete set of chromosomes? What if we have dwarfism – will we be normal size? What if we are conjoined twins – will we have separate bodies?

The last group of questions are more difficult because if we say yes then what are we saying about people with these characteristics? I have read of deaf people who are offended by the notion that they will hear after the resurrection because they regard their deafness as difference rather than something that needs to be “fixed” even by God.

Let us continue with some more general questions. How old will we be? Will someone who died at 110 be raised as if they are 30? Will someone who died at birth be raised as if they are 20? And since resurrected life is theologically continuation of this life then what kind of memories and personality will a resurrected infant have?

Hold that thought.

Will we have sex? Probably not.

Will we reproduce? Probably not.

Will we eat and drink? This is a serious question because the reason we eat and drink and breathe is so that we will not die. As one of my teachers Alan McNeil at Cornell University said “the Second Law of Thermodynamics is why we eat lunch”. But if the resurrection signifies the final defeat of death and we will never die then why would we need to eat drink and breathe? For the fun of it? Quite possibly. The Bible frequently refers to the eschatological banquet.

Okay then. Will we go to the bathroom? How will the resurrected body metabolize food and drink?

Oh right. Science-fiction.

The most serious attempt to wrestle with the implications of resurrection is the Riverworld series by Philip Jose Farmer. No matter how old you were you are “resurrected” having a particular age. Although there is a special planet set apart for people younger than 5 – so that they have a chance to learn and grow. Farmer also attempts to explore the exact “technology” that would allow resurrection. Every human being from conception(? trying to recall) has a wathan which is an artificially created “soul” that retains a perfect record of the whole person and his/her life and personality.

Obviously Farmer’s theoretical version of resurrection is not the reality that the Christian faith teaches. But it is the only serious attempt to flesh out *cough* what resurrection of the dead would look like in practice.

I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.

But I have some questions. Which may not matter.

Amen.

H/T The Anchoress by the way.

Best picture I could find - it ain't all about the football!

God has been most merciful because for almost 12 years one of my favorite Christian brothers on the planet is a member of University Baptist and a former Chancellor of Louisiana State University. A few weeks ago he came by the church to copy something for his Sunday Bible study group and we talked for a while. I asked him about the cuts being made at Louisiana State University.

He said such cuts happen periodically. Each time people predict the death of the university. And each time the university somehow survives and grows and thrives. Because every organization needs periodically to trim the fat that has accumulated. Positions and programs that are added when none are removed or ended. Mission creep that leads to a university taking on more projects in the region that might not necessarily be part of its essential purpose.

But this time is different. This is not just trimming fat. This is cutting into the flesh. Perhaps even into bone. This could make Louisiana State University less than what it should be. This could hurt current and future students. This could damage the state of Louisiana as a whole.

From The Reveille today:

All the instructors in the English Department have received termination notices, said assistant professor Daniel Novak.

“Instructors [have gotten] their termination letters extended but still don’t have job security even when they teach the majority of the writing classes for students in this University,” Novak said.

The extension assures the instructors’ employment for an additional six months “but instead of giving them a contract for six months, they were given a letter saying they were going to be fired in six months,” Novak said.

The English Department has approximately 90 faculty members, 36 of whom are instructors who teach the writing portion of the University’s curriculum.

Instructors teach 62 percent of ENGL 1001 sections and 74 percent of 2000 sections of the department’s writing program, according to the Director of the University Writing Program Barbara Heifferon.

The writing instructor who is quoted extensively is also a member of University Baptist. She and her husband are pillars of this church family. They have hosted English Conversation for us several times.

This gets my attention also because if ever I had to leave vocational ministry I would be interested in doing something like teaching English as a Second Language or teaching English writing. During my doctoral studies at Cornell University I took a course on how to teach writing in English and taught or helped teach two Freshman Writing Seminars. It was one of my best experiences in graduate school. I like to think I was pretty good at it. The director of the program borrowed one of my handouts (on crux versus thesis) and asked me to share with the program some of my experiences – like an idiot said no can’t too busy or something – and was the only writing instructor whose students on the last day of class presented him with a cake. On top of which was written something rather mushy.

I hurt for the university. I hurt for the families I know who are affected. I hurt for a program that has a special place in my heart.

But speaking of what has a special place in my heart.

University writing courses are not optional. They are required by university accrediting agencies. This could cause problems for some students who need these classes in order to graduate. So what will the university do?

Faculty and staff in the English Department worry that the University’s recent academic alliance with the Baton Rouge Community College may be the University’s solution to circumvent part of the problem.

“Bears 2 Tigers,” a program allowing students to transfer seamlessly from BRCC to the University to complete a bachelor’s degree, was signed Sept. 28 by Chancellor Michael Martin and BRCC Chancellor Myrtle Dorsey.

The partnership, which originally only included engineering, has been extended to BRCC students with business, science, and humanities and social sciences associate degrees.

Reading through the comments section it appears many think this is a terrible solution. Some make disparaging comments about community colleges.

Dean Ed Warner (right)

I think it is long past time such a partnership was put in place. Community colleges have a special place in the heart of my own family. My grandfather (top of page 5) was dean of Mohawk Valley Community College in Utica New York which is a model of what a community college can be. One of his great achievements was to create such a network that allowed students to “transfer seamlessly” from Mohawk Valley Community College to many of the top universities in the state.

This was 30-40 years ago.

I am deeply sympathetic to faculty and staff at Louisiana State University who are being affected by these cuts. But my sympathy is mitigated by my strong appreciation for the important role that community colleges play in a healthy system of higher education. So what if some students choose to get their basic requirements at Baton Rouge Community College and then transfer seamlessly to Louisiana State University? What is wrong with that?

There is an answer to that question however. Which is what about students who don’t do that? Who begin and remain at Louisiana State? How will they fulfill their writing course requirement? The university cannot outsource the entire program can it?

For the record my wife and I hope and plan for my children to attend Louisiana State. So far they seem pretty happy with the idea. We have a personal interest in the future of Louisiana’s flagship university.

Addendum:

Revolution 21 says it very well indeed in “Louisiana: Stupid Is As Stupid Cuts”. As much as some might rebel against the idea we have too many “university” campuses and greatly need to combine/consolidate.

H/T Opinionated Catholic.