re: more on the dead horse

Jay,

I appreciated your post. I think there is the potential for the current language concerning "learning and biblical truth" to be unpacked in a dichotomous direction, though I do not think a dichotomous reading necessarily follows from the mission statement itself. The key will be how we unpack that phrase in the strategic planning process and any subsequent documents clarifying the mission statement.

I think the following explanatory statement (found under "Our Commitments") following the mission statement proper clarifies that "biblical truth" means "biblical revelation" and that the goal of integration is the formation of "a Christian worldview":

At Erskine the integration of learning and biblical truth is an ongoing process of seeking to discern and develop the integral relationships between reason and revelation. In this process human learning informs the development of a Christian worldview, and biblical revelation informs the content and practice of human learning. Within this framework, faculty and students are free to engage in a genuine pursuit of truth and understanding and to strive to develop the highest and best use of their abilities. (Erskine College Mission Statement, "Our Commitments")

Granted, I know many people find the phrase "Christian worldview" concerning, but if we define a worldview as "the comprehensive framework of one's basic beliefs about things" [1] then there are two key points that need to be noted.

First, everyone has a worldview - the question is what it will be the formative influences on it. Second, the development of a Christian worldview (that is, a worldview shaped by the core confessions of the Christian Faith and by the teaching of Scripture) is simply part of the discipleship process for Christians whereby we fulfill the command of Scripture to "be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God" (Rom. 12:1-2). We seek to have our thinking transformed so that we see everything through the new eyes of God's revelation in Scripture, particularly the story of redemption that centers on Christ. This does not necessitate theological imperialism; but it does mean that as Christians we are called to think theologically -- to think about how the core confessions of the Christian faith shape and ought to shape our thinking about everything.

Again, at a Christian college this ought to be put in the context of encouraging people to think and to act faithfully as Christians (knowing just as well that we often debate how this is to be unpacked, within certain parameters), and to present the opportunity for non-believers to engage with a Christian perspective in an academic context.

Given how much unfortunate confusion there has been concerning these terms, I hope further clarity will come out of the strategic planning process. There's a long tradition of reflection informing this mission statement, and its pivotal that we engage that strive to engage that tradition as an institution and as a community. Having an open conversation and dialogue about these matters will be crucial in moving Erskine past the divisions of the past, and into the future.

[1] Albert Wolters, Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview, 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985). Wolters' book is one of the clearest introductory books on this topic. As Jay noted, the late 20th century emphasis in evangelical and Reformed circles grew (at least at the popular level) out of the work of Francis Schaeffer. To begin exploring Schaeffer's work, I'd recommend the following website, in addition to the website of the L'Abri fellowship.