The Future of Religious Colleges

The Future of Religious Colleges

" The Evangelical Vision From Fundamentalist Isolation to Respected Voice"

R. Judson Carlberg

Wenham, MA

Soon after the University of Chicago opened in 1892, founder John D. Rockefeller inquired about the religious atmosphere on campus. One faculty member responded by praising the University’s active religious life and its tolerant attitude "toward varying religious opinions." He expressed one reservation, however

Little did the professor know how quickly his words would become reality. Although Rockefeller founded the University of Chicago to further some vague notions of religious piety, the University soon joined many other institutions that "emphasized scientific inquiry as separate from the development of character or moral precepts. Chapel services became a diluted form of secular worship which attempted to maintain the trappings of Christianity, but any topic at all was fair game for the lecturer of the day."2

A tortuous relationship between many American colleges and Christianity began soon after the Colonial period. The familiar story of secularization’s impact on colleges and universities founded with Christian missions is well-documented. Observing this phenomenon on selective liberal arts college campuses, Peter Gomes, Minister of the Memorial Church at Harvard University, sees a modeling effect.

Historian Julie Rueben concludes her study of the decline of faith and morality in higher education with this proposal

Some institutions within the framework of evangelical higher education are attempting to do just that. To the extent that these institutions are successful, they will carry on the tradition and mission once embraced by the historic liberal arts colleges. Is this possible or desirable Some academic observers are beginning to think that it is both.

Evangelicals—who are they In the 16th century the term was used to describe groups within the Roman Catholic church who sought to cultivate biblical beliefs and practices, especially as demonstrated by an Italian Renaissance movement which emphasized the personal appropriation of salvation and the spiritual importance of reading Scripture. Later the term "evangelical" was applied to the Reformation, especially as expressed in northern Europe by Martin Luther and his followers.6

Because evangelicalism was formed by many historic streams and finds current expression within so many theological traditions, a simple definition of the term is difficult. In Evangelicalism and the Future of Christianity, Alister McGrath suggests that from a theological perspective there are six controlling convictions important to evangelicalism (1) the supreme authority of Scripture as a source of knowledge of God and a guide to Christian living; (2) Jesus Christ, as both incarnate God and Savior of sinful humanity; (3) the lordship of the Holy Spirit; (4) the need for personal conversion; (5) the priority of evangelism for both individual Christians and the Church; and (6) the importance of the Christian community for spiritual nourishment, fellowship and growth.7

Although many historic influences contributed to evangelical expression in the United States, one movement requires mention since it still impacts evangelicalism and is often confused with it fundamentalism. In America, fundamentalism arose as a religious reaction to secularism, especially from 1920 to 1940.8 At first fundamentalists simply called for a return to biblical orthodoxy. But during the modernist debates of the early 20th century, obscurantism and anti-intellectual themes within the movement dominated, especially during the science versus creation debate. When fundamentalists confronted modernism, a split occurred which has never healed.

In post-World War II America, a group of intellectually astute men was led by Harold J. Ockenga and Carl Henry, both representative of a new breed of intellectual leadership within the fundamentalist movement. They questioned the sharp turn to the right which fundamentalism had taken, especially on social issues, science, and Christianity’s engagement with culture. Both were graduates of evangelical liberal arts colleges—Ockenga from Taylor University in Indiana and Henry from Wheaton College in Illinois. The seeds for their thinking were planted on those campuses and watered by their doctoral studies in research universities. Along with others with similar backgrounds, they launched a "new evangelicalism," an attempt to define a creative approach to further the conversation with the wider culture about values, truth and social responsibility.

While men like Henry and Ockenga worked primarily behind the scenes, a young evangelist and graduate of an evangelical college, Billy Graham, emerged as a public leader of the movement. He was firmly committed to historic, biblical theology as he understood it, but with a more open, moderate stance on social issues. He negated the confrontational style with his irenic spirit and reached out to those he disagreed with on a number of issues. Through the pages of a new magazine, Christianity Today, which Graham and Henry helped launch, a more moderate social agenda for evangelical Christians was set forth.9 Ockenga chose to lead evangelicals from both the pulpit (as pastor of Boston’s Park Street Church) and the President’s Office of higher education institutions (as president of Fuller Seminary in California and later as president of what became known, under his leadership, as Gordon College and later, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Massachusetts).

Without compromising what they understood to be biblical theology, these new evangelicals attempted to redefine themselves over against old fundamentalist notions and attitudes. The young leaders often found themselves under attack from fundamentalists.

Nowhere were "new evangelicals" more warmly received than on the campuses of emerging Christian colleges and universities. These institutions were ready to embrace a higher level of scholarship and engagement with the wider world of academe. A major indicator of the shift in emphasis within evangelical colleges was the expansion of traditional liberal arts courses. But there was a twist faith remained an integral part of campus life, denominational distinctives were made where appropriate, and both were honored and cherished. In addition, rigorous scholarship was consciously valued, though not to the detriment of faith. The two coexisted, each informing the other as important components of the human experience.

Most evangelical institutions started as Bible colleges—funded, supported and guided by a denomination or strong independent Christian leader. Others began as smaller replicas of established liberal arts colleges or secular universities where research, service and teaching were prominent. Whether rooted in the Bible school movement or modeled after the historic liberal arts college, most embraced Christian piety, required chapel attendance, prayer before class, missions outreach, and requirements in Bible and theology studies. By the middle of the last century, the more bold representatives of these institutions undertook the challenge to reintegrate fact and value—a task they perceived to be abandoned by their secular counterparts. Evangelical colleges sought to pick up the Christian banner once held high by those historic institutions.

By the end of the 20th century, evangelical higher education institutions emerged as a small but important force for diversity in the American higher education world. Historian Mark Noll points out, "In the 20th century, evangelical colleges and (since the 1960s, universities) have constituted one of the most important alternatives to the burgeoning of state-sponsored higher education."11

Quietly, almost surreptitiously, Christian liberal arts colleges are growing at a much greater rate than secular institutions. During a recent three-year period when public schools were inching up by only 4 percent and private secular institutions by 5 percent, evangelical Christian colleges expanded 24 percent.12

Most of these institutions are denominationally supported and sponsored. The 20 percent which are independent from any church authority maintain their distinctiveness by carefully adhering to their missions, requiring faculty and trustees to be confessing Christians, and admitting students who are at least sympathetic to Christian values. Some even build Christian faith statements into their official employment documents for faculty.

While this practice is criticized by some, evangelical institutions regard the faith requirement as a way to acknowledge the common assumptions which are foundational to their communities of scholarship. Broad latitude is generally given to faculty to practice their intellectual pursuits without inhibiting academic freedom. Indeed, the boundaries of common faith insure freedom of exploration without the fear of arbitrary interference by outside forces. For the evangelical faith based institution, a natural integrative approach to scholarly endeavors is made more likely.

What do we know about these college communities of faith Evangelical colleges are defined not only by their basic theological commitments but also by the daily routines of campus life through which their convictions are given concrete expression. One source of research information about evangelical college students is the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, a partnership of almost 100 evangelical institutions serving over 160,000 students. These students have some unique characteristics when compared to all university students. Students who pursue a Christian liberal arts education care about both the life of the mind and the life of the spirit. They attend church regularly, often more than once a week. They seek a campus where the Christian atmosphere is important—where searching for truth and building spiritual vitality are valued.

What about the faculty of Christian colleges When students who select CCCU schools encounter their faculty, they find men and women deeply committed to academic rigor and "a personal, meaningful relationship with God" (99.4% of the faculty in the CCCU Collaborative Assessment Project responded in this manner). The same faculty say "their day-to-day life is affected by their relationship with God" (96.6%) and that they "encourage students to consider new insights related to their faith" (98.1%).13

Although evangelicals are often stereotyped as politically and socially conservative, this is often not true on evangelical campuses. While some faculty embrace a politically conservative perspective, others hold to views that are moderate—and occasionally, even socially liberal. These faculty take seriously their responsibility to try to derive their positions from the teachings of Jesus and biblical principles, no matter where they are on the political spectrum. In fact, students in these colleges generally tend toward far more conservative political and social perspectives than their faculty mentors.

Some evangelicals beyond the campus see their charge in warfare terminology. They feel they must attack the surrounding culture on crucial social issues with the goal of winning. This contrasts with evangelicals who demonstrate a true pluralism, which allows for many different views to exist on the field. The battlefield analogy may in some respects reflect the position of evangelicals who are still heavily rooted in a fundamentalist attitude—the old influence lives on.

On the other hand, new evangelicals hold firmly to what they believe are biblical positions on controversial social issues. Yet their mindset and attitude is not one of the battlefield. Instead they practice the biblical injunction to "love one another." They mount strong arguments to support their positions but do so in a loving, caring, compassionate way. While strident voices may be heard in some evangelical colleges and universities, an irenic spirit is usually more prominent.

Contemporary colleges within the evangelical camp tend to define their communities far differently than they did 50 years ago. At that time, what was not allowed, (smoking, drinking alcohol, dancing, playing cards, attending movies or theater) seemed far more important. While selected prohibitions still are honored by some in the tradition, these rules and restrictions are less important as a means of defining evangelicals today.

Many of the colleges have eliminated the compulsory chapel requirement, but this does not mean that worship and community celebration are no longer distinctive features of campus life. Instead, students today seek a variety of ways through which to experience spiritual development and growth. Although some campuses still require worship two or three times a week, alternative means of meeting the requirement are usually available. On campuses with voluntary chapel, many elect to attend. They are attracted by guest speakers or musicians, by the praise bands so prominent in contemporary worship, or by the affirmation which students find in worship with their peers.

But these spiritual expressions do not end with chapel experiences. For example, students in evangelical colleges today frequently create their own informal worship options. Often held late on Sunday evenings, these spontaneous experiences are student-led, planned and supported. In fact, faculty and staff are often not encouraged to attend.

Another distinctive of evangelicalism found on many campuses is the heightened practice of voluntary service. Students serve in local communities, in nearby urban areas, and in developing countries during summer and term breaks. It is not unusual for over half the student body to be involved in soup kitchens, outreach to the elderly in nursing homes, tutoring urban youth, or visiting prisoners in jails. In keeping with their tradition, they also engage in direct evangelism through creative use of drama, music or one-on-one conversations in bars, rock concerts or inner-city streets.

Most evangelical colleges recognize the importance of not only taking faith seriously but also making a significant contribution to the broader world of scholarship. Faith is applied to social concerns. Graduates understand that education should prepare them to enter culture to positively influence it—not to stand against it. Of course there are significant exceptions, most especially in those colleges which try to maintain a dualism between the secular world and their own Christian perspective.

Perhaps the most compelling distinctive practiced on many evangelical campuses is a commitment to develop a Christian worldview through the integration of faith with serious scholarship. This is certainly what attracts many faculty members to devote their lives to the high calling of education. Evangelical faculty take their faith seriously while upholding the highest standards of scholarship. They lead students through the process of understanding their chosen disciplines while asking, "How does one’s faith—or lack of faith—change the basic assumptions and presuppositions of one’s discipline"

While evangelical colleges and universities may have a bright future filled with hope and promise, an honest appraisal will quickly identify tensions and challenges—some uniquely related to evangelical traditions and values.

The distinct emphasis on faith and learning integration makes little sense to the secular mind. Critics ask, "Of what relevance is faithlearning integration Can a quality institution be both intellectually rigorous and faith affirming By wedding intellect and faith, do graduates take away a viable and unique education on commencement day" These questions pose a major challenge for evangelical faculty.

In academic debate, it is generally off-limits to attempt to embrace truth that is based in history, in science, or especially in God’s revelation. But in evangelical institutions graduates are encouraged to have respect for truth, whether it is revealed in God’s Word or through the natural world of creation. For example, the interface between science and the Bible is not necessarily incompatible for evangelical scholars. They are willing to allow truth to emerge from scientific inquiry and biblical study. They do not necessarily see a contradiction between the Hebraic literary expressions used in Genesis 1 to portray the Creation of the world and the overwhelming scientific evidence for a theory of Creation that might incorporate elements of God-mandated evolution. They affirm the biblical notion that God created the heavens and earth. They also accept scientific discoveries and theories which suggest that He used processes to create the heavens and the earth—processes that are still being understood and do not require adherence to young-earth Creation theories. The evangelical claims, "God did it, but He didn’t tell us how or when."

The ancient Hebrews teach that all study is a hallowed act of worship. Evangelical faculty are confident that, as the Author of all truth, God will eventually lead toward His truth. In this age of relativism, they seek to comprehend the ancient truths which undergird their communities and their common assumptions. But they undertake their task with humility, ever mindful of the trap of triumphalism.

Few challenges are creating more consternation for evangelicals than attempts to enforce a range of views under the general theme of diversity. Evangelical Christians of all groups should know the importance of diversity, especially given their distinctive commitment to sharing the "good news" with all. The University of Virginia’s distinguished economist, Kenneth G. Elzinga, wrestles with diversity issues daily. He comments

Elzinga observes that diversity, as used on secular campuses, is indeed hostile to the Christian faith. It applauds religious expressions of various sorts—all except biblical Christianity. On the other hand, secular advocates of diversity claim that Christianity is exclusive, and, therefore, not tolerant.15 Much work needs to be done to resolve this tension on both sides.

In social relationships, evangelical faculty begin with the basic assumption that all women and men are created in the image of God. While not always affirming lifestyle choices others make, evangelical faculty instill in their students the principle that all Christians are called to serve, no matter who the population is. For example, in education or social work—which are strong majors in many Christian colleges and universities—faculty challenge future professionals to cultivate the attitude of servanthood, whether dealing with the drug addict, the child of wealthy parents, the AIDS patient or the recent immigrant from Honduras. Students are taught to show the compassion of Christ to populations who are privileged or economically, socially and perhaps spiritually marginalized.

Evangelical colleges attempt to understand varying views of the world and how they interact with biblical teaching. Students are encouraged to ask questions, to probe alternative biblical interpretations and to study various expressions of Christianity, all within a framework of fidelity to God’s revelation. At times this liberality causes difficulty for some. However, others celebrate the diversity, the varying viewpoints, the openness to exploration and the creativity which is fostered in such an environment.

One of the most difficult tensions faced by scholars on evangelical campuses comes from the philosophical world, where rationalistic assumptions are under scrutiny. The postmodern movement shapes the worldview of students who will be in tomorrow’s classrooms. They see it in the media, they hear it in their schools, and their peer groups have already embraced it. How will evangelical faculty respond to these students Are there valuable insights in this movement, or are the threats overwhelming, undercutting the very foundations for a Christian worldview The prospects mire some in despair. They cry out,

The methodology of modernism has influenced evangelical Christianity. Logic, reason and the scientific method were tools that evangelicals adapted to their own ways of seeking truth, although they did not assume these methods of inquiry would lead to ultimate truth. They were used, nonetheless, as tools to confirm truth. But the postmodernist asks whether this is appropriate and helpful, given the power structures which shape perceptions of knowledge.

Postmodernism challenges the traditionalist assumptions by identifying and exposing the hidden hierarchies, whether real or perceived, which underlie them. "Each of these hierarchies, postmodernists argue, is nothing more than a social construction which marginalizes and excludes people and their ideas."17

Some think that postmodernism poses a threat to evangelical Christian higher education because it excludes the possibility of comprehending truth. They express this fear in stark and somewhat simplistic terms, "The postmodernist views all notions of absolute goodness, truth and justice as anachronistic, particularly if these are understood as deriving from an internal and unchanging God."18 To the postmodernist, reality is a relative concept shaped by individual experiences. The postmodern critic of evangelicalism says, "No one has the right to claim any standard of what is real, what is true, what is good, what is just, what is valuable." The evangelical responds, "Although we believe in the possibility of apprehending truth, we have not captured it."

The evangelical college works toward understanding truth and goodness, creating an opportunity to know reality in more lucid terms. Evangelical thinkers suggest that the drive to know reality is deep within us, a dynamic process which is heading somewhere. They only ask for the opportunity to be involved in the exploration.

Reflective evangelicals are also asking whether the postmodern critique might have some valuable insights that ought to be considered. The notion that perception shapes reality could provide a caution to those who simplistically reach premature conclusions on a range of difficult issues. Or it urges some skepticism about the hourly bombardment of news whose content is decided by a range of observers, each shaped by their own experiences and the editorial slant of their news source or employer.

Could postmodernism also allow for a climate in which a healthy Christian perspective can grow again Postmodernism, with its emphasis on mystery, may help academia consider "the possibility of human beings having religious or spiritual needs that cannot be satisfied through the objective scientific approach to life."19

And then there is the matter of fairness. If postmodernism is applied consistently, should not the voices of Christian, Jewish or Islamic scholars who embrace a monotheistic approach to teaching and learning be accorded a place at the table Postmodernism allows the voices of the oppressed, excluded and marginalized to be heard. The evangelical claims that religious voices should not be marginalized. If no one has a unique claim to truth, then all truth claims ought to be allowed—even Christian faith claims. And "Christian educators in particular should be advocates of inclusion in light of the message of the Christian gospel; they should not be afraid to offer scholarly critique of the abuses of power and establishmentarianism."20

A most optimistic and hopeful proposal for the future of education was offered not long ago by a senior evangelical scholar, Carl Henry—a man who for years has championed the notion of a first-rate evangelical graduate university. He suggests that the very climate created by postmodern thinking might become the seedbed for a rebirth of Christian influence in higher education.

From a sociological perspective, evangelicalism is somewhat ill defined. It is beyond any denominational constraints. No longer are behavioral indicators significant measures of its way of life. At best, its adherents accept a general theological set of assumptions. Because it lacks precise definition, the movement encourages entrepreneurialism. This comports well with contemporary American society where "thinking outside of the box" is highly valued.

Nor has this tendency been eradicated within churches and the parachurch movement, especially where pragmatic, results-oriented measures are used to indicate success. When it spills into colleges and universities, historic liberal arts values can be eroded in favor of applied majors and utilitarian education. Instincts for pragmatism run deep in this tradition. For decades evangelicalism has achieved significant success by staying current with technology, communication and sophisticated marketing. As historian Mark Noll points out

When pragmatism and an emphasis on numerical results confront the renewed vigor in evangelical academic life, the seeds for tension are planted. Those teaching within the evangelical framework constantly struggle with the pressure for utilitarian education. Whereas a hundred years ago evangelical institutions were created to prepare men and women for evangelism and missions, contemporary pragmatic impulses press for more graduates to prepare for professional careers in business, communication, nursing, computers and, most recently, the dot.com economy. On many campuses undergraduate majors in these fields are the fastest-growing majors, contributing to the enrollment upswing. But because many evangelical colleges still focus on traditional liberal arts study, graduates also enter medical school, law school and other professional graduate programs in education, science, social science and the humanities.

These pragmatic tendencies will continue to be a challenge for evangelical institutions. The differences will no doubt be exacerbated between those who choose to dwell on enrollment expansion as indicators of success and those who tout various academic excellence standards as the better measure. Only those colleges that are able to maintain the highest academic standards of selectivity while capping their enrollment growth will survive as the evangelical elite. That will be especially true where a strong endowment base already generates economic resources which fund their educational dreams.

Given the current climate in our culture, the faster route to economic stability and future viability for most evangelical schools will be through enrollment expansion. Numerical growth will be possible for those campuses where entrance requirements remain lower and where a plethora of applied majors, including graduate studies in professional fields, are created. Sophisticated marketing strategies already are and will continue to be an important ingredient for success at all institutions, especially those that seek to grow their enrollments.

Perhaps the alternative is not to choose between utilitarian training and liberal arts education. Given the history of the evangelical movement, the most viable success route for the evangelical institution of the future may be to draw from the best of both when charting their planning strategies. A case can be made that evangelical colleges that have remained sensitive to the Christian marketplace have generally thrived, especially when a creative spirit has been combined with a strong commitment to classical liberal arts and traditional values. While this might seem to be inherently contradictory to some, experience supports the notion that entrepreneurial institutions without a firm grounding in traditional classical liberal arts run a great risk; they evaporate like fast-growing plants that wilt under the noonday sun because they lack rootedness. On the other hand, evangelical institutions which have remained isolated or secluded within their denominational framework, or constrained by a 19th-century vision of education, have struggled to survive.

The historic liberal arts colleges founded before 1850 are by and large able to continue to offer an elite classical education tempered by adaptations to the marketplace. There are a number of reasons for that. These colleges are perceived as preparing leaders for society—cultivating men and women who are able to think creatively and critically, are well-versed in the traditions of Western culture and agile enough to flex in the fast-changing world driven by marketing and technology. But these institutions also thrive because of relatively large endowments which have been amassed over many decades, providing steady sources of income to supplement the relatively high tuition they charge. Given their elite status and reputation coupled with their significant endowments, they are somewhat immune from the press of the marketplace.

On the other hand, evangelical colleges generally lack large endowments. And they have a limited student market from which to draw because these colleges encourage self-selectivity; prospects who do not embrace Christian values or personal Christian commitments will rarely elect to apply to evangelical institutions. Consequently, to attract more evangelical students, the leadership in these institutions must exude that entrepreneurial spirit which is so highly prized in the evangelical subculture at the beginning of the 21st century. When the combination of creativity and the entrepreneurial spirit is linked to a firm grounding in the traditional liberal arts, the result may lead to vitality for evangelical colleges and universities.

Parents of entering students have high expectations that their sons and daughters will be prepared to move into the marketplace after completing a Christian college education. While this is an understandable expectation, it can lead to an over-emphasis on utilitarian skills without the underlying philosophical and theological foundations of the liberal arts tradition.

A related tension is caused by the expectation for services which many parents and, by extension, students bring with them to campus. While they profess evangelicalism with its pious platitudes, they increasingly have been shaped by a materialistic worldview which raises expectations ever higher. Before accepting admission offers, most parents and students check out the amenities of campus life. They also are very clear about the personal attention they expect to receive from faculty and staff, including the president!

Christian colleges and universities have come a long way from the spartan existence they provided students who attended Bible colleges in the early part of the 20th century. Today’s student populations are much more affluent, sophisticated and worldly wise. They not only want good food served in spacious dining areas with a multitude of choices, but they expect computer terminals in public areas and hookups for their own private laptops to insure instantaneous connection to the Web. Their wants are not unique to Christian students, but as the level of the evangelical subculture has risen economically, their expectations have kept pace, if not shot forward.

Even though leaders within the movement took advantage of the developing 20th-century technology to share their evangelistic message with the world, they took a critical stance against the content of much in the entertainment and popular cultures. But as the lines between culture and Christianity blurred, critical attitudes began to soften. On many campuses evangelicals have also become more tolerant of the prevailing culture. Students today are encouraged to enter the entertainment and media fields to become "salt and light" in professions which are still perceived to be hostile to Christianity in general and to evangelicals in particular. Entertainment—including television, movies and the Internet—has a great influence on evangelical students, just as it does on their secular counterparts.

Nowhere is this phenomenon seen more starkly than in debates over appropriate worship styles in chapel services on Christian campuses. The entertainment factor in contemporary Christian music is shaping how the subculture views God, the worship experience and the building of community. At best, colleges and universities in the evangelical tradition struggle not to lose sight of the importance of the great musical traditions and historic worship liturgies. At worst, these institutions jettison their musical and liturgical traditions and replace them with entertainment leaders, complete with applause, professional quality bands and actors on stage.

Not all contemporary worship is determined by the entertainment industry, but its influence is pervasive enough to cause alarm in many traditional music departments and faculty lounges around the country. Many deans of chapel are attempting to blend traditional music and worship with contemporary expressions. If this effort is successful, students may at least have some appreciation of their Christian roots. They are also more likely to embrace the growing commitment within evangelicalism toward intellectual vigor and the historic foundations on which the best of contemporary expressions are built. But the tension will remain as the larger society is driven toward informality, an emphasis on emotion, and the diminution of intellectual content or traditional social structures.

Ideally the Christian college will be a place where creativity thrives not only in the intellect and the abstract world of ideas, but also in the arts, where ideas meet concrete expression. Evangelical Christians have been prone to vacillate between being critics or copiers. Neither is free to strike out with new expressions of joyous creativity. Those given gifts in music, drama, dance or the visual arts must be given freedom to express them.

But Christian college campuses also struggle to accommodate the artist. What is the most effective means to balance freedom with responsibility In our culture, artistic expression and the freedom of the artist to express almost anything is upheld as a high virtue. In most evangelical communities, art, which denigrates others, which advocates racist views or glorifies sexual pornography, is clearly not condoned.

On questions of artistic expression, the professional judgments of faculty artists and authors are crucial. This places a significant responsibility on those who are trusted to help the community define artistic standards. But the tension will always be present, as it has been in the historic Christian church. Artistic expression depicting God’s creation, especially if it involves the use of the undraped human figure, has always made some squeamish—from popes to peasants. The evangelical campus is not immune.

As in the rest of culture, evangelical institutions are impacted by the technological revolution. Though the classroom was once the bastion of professors who shared their knowledge through time-honored traditional lectures, today the classroom is filled with students who insist on active engagement in the learning process, often through the use of computers and other technologies. Students have already used such technologies for a long time before arriving on the college campus. Not only must faculty wrestle with the issue of how to engage students who have little appreciation for the finely honed lecture; they must also search for ways to stimulate the learning process beyond the classroom through the use of the Internet with all its diversions and distractions.

Students expect to continue this form of learning on the evangelical campus, just as they would at any other college or university. The use of technology must be accommodated on evangelical campuses that have long prided themselves on individual contact between professors and students. Student personal interaction with faculty does not need to suffer simply because technology is welcomed on campus. But how to strengthen one while embracing the other is one of the challenges facing the faculty.

Properly developed and effectively marketed, education which uses the Internet has the potential to influence vastly more students than just those found in evangelical campus classrooms, important as classrooms might be. Christian liberal arts colleges will remain committed to the core mission of preparing men and women through residential learning experiences within the confines of evangelical Christian thought and worldview. But the effective use of technology will also give evangelical institutions the opportunity to exert a worldwide educational impact that was not possible before the Internet.

In the broadest sense, proclaiming the evangel—the good news—and offering education of the highest quality are both part of the worldwide evangelical task. No longer are Christian colleges and universities limited by time and space in carrying out this grand vision. The technology already exists to launch this ambitious project for the benefit of those in remote areas or other nations who cannot take advantage of this uniquely American form of education.

Many scholars, including evangelical faculty, have lagged behind in the development of course content for use through this medium. Whether it is a simple lack of time and resources, or a more complex resistance because of philosophical and pedagogical objections, future evangelical scholars may find that their supporting constituencies no longer patiently wait for them to get on with the task. The potential explosion in evangelical, worldwide educational opportunity is being realized by many potential donors with significant financial resources. Not only are they making resources available, but also funders are securing those respected scholars who are willing to share their knowledge through Internet courses. The world is waiting, especially in church communities in less-developed countries. In such locales leadership development is hampered by the lack of educated men and women who could help bring the influences of historical Christianity to bear on the astounding problems of the 21st century.

Because the Internet is growing throughout the entire world, learners in other countries who cannot afford to come to a campus in the United States will still be able to study with Christian faculty and interact with other Christian students. This will become a lively source of education as people from a variety of cultures and geographical areas interact around a common body of knowledge. Diversity will become commonplace, taking on far different connotations than is now attributed to the concept.

Technology will also have a greater impact than currently anticipated closer to home. Using technology to deliver education which takes one’s faith and one’s scholarship seriously may benefit more students than we ever imagined. For example, prospective students who are high school graduates but not ready for a residential college experience could take courses via the Internet. Adults who, by virtue of family or professional responsibilities, are unable to return to the campus may also receive education provided through distributed learning options. Seniors in our culture who feel uncomfortable even thinking about returning to a college campus classroom will become an entirely new potential student cohort. And home-schooled students who resist the prospect of attending a major university may find an Internet option just what they need to get started in higher education.

Are evangelical colleges prepared to enter this world of technology-assisted learning, or will they resist because they cannot reconcile the new learning paradigms with traditional concepts Evangelical colleges and universities will have to deal with this challenge whether they want to or not.

The tensions are many within evangelical higher education today. It is a testament to the vitality and ability of these colleges and universities that they persevere in a healthy and vital relationship with the world of higher education as well as with the churches and other evangelical constituencies they also serve.

Prospects for 21st Century Evangelical Higher Education

While there are those who claim the Christian residential college is a thing of the past, there are some indicators that Christian residential college campuses are needed more now than ever. The dehumanizing effect of technology on our culture, the materialism which permeates every family, church and campus, and the need for relationships with significant adult role models who can serve as mentors—these are all dilemmas that can be addressed best in the context of the residential college.

Even though some scholars assess the evangelical movement as vital and thriving, an honest appraisal must include the prospect that some evangelical higher education institutions simply will not persist through the next decade. Their futures are not guaranteed. Some uncertainties pertain to any institutions of higher education today, but others are peculiar to Christian colleges, especially those within the evangelical movement.

The obstacles they face are formidable. Lawsuits have already challenged their right to remain distinctively Christian through the hiring of committed Christian faculty or only admitting professing Christian students. Outside influences, whether within government or denominations, increase pressure for accountability on a range of issues which were once internal campus matters. From the cultural forces advocating applied education come demands for education which is relevant, vocationally based and geared to the needs of the marketplace.

Social issues can be especially divisive when addressed within the evangelical campus context. Traditional interpretations of biblical teaching on such things as abortion, gay lifestyles or the Christian's response to systemic poverty may not create a hospitable environment in which those who hold contrary points of view may thrive. How can scholars and other campus leaders examine their understanding of Christian teaching on these issues without encouraging a judgmental backlash On the other hand, how can an open atmosphere be created which gives a fair hearing to those who hold closed positions on controversial "hot button" issues

On these issues there is not an evangelical consensus. Some have uneasy social consciences, especially when confronted by the harsh stance taken by others in the conservative camp toward those who are different. This divergence of perspective could portend trouble ahead for evangelical institutions, particularly if supporting constituencies continue to embrace narrowly conservative political and social positions. Since most institutions in the evangelical camp must rely heavily on tuition for their income, supplemented by donations from loyal supporters, any erosion within the group from which students come or donations emanate could starve these institutions financially. Most do not have endowments large enough to make them immune from the ebb and flow of political opinion which swirls through their supporting constituencies. On almost any controversial issue which becomes a public campus debate, an evangelical president today will get a range of critical letters from across the spectrum.

The evangelical label often hampers colleges in this tradition. Unfortunately some have turned the word "evangelical" into a political designation without theological meaning to the average person. Christian higher education may have to breathe new life and vitality into the word or search for a better descriptor.

While the evangelical higher education enterprise is still fragile, it is stronger now than ever. But it will need more than respect to survive. The foundation is in place. Perhaps evangelicals can begin to fulfill the possibilities Wolfe sees for intellectual leadership in American life. Challenges lie ahead. Not only are financial resources limited, but history suggests that a spiritual vision can quickly erode without an ongoing commitment and compelling mission. As illustrated at the University of Chicago a century ago, a few uncommitted faculty, campus leaders or trustees can undo the vision of a pious, wealthy and dedicated Christian founder in one generation.24 Is the future of evangelical higher education bright It can be. It’s up to those who serve, lead, teach and guide these unique places.

Footnotes

1Reuben, Julie A. The Making of a Modern University, Intellectual Transformation and the Marginalization of Morality. Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1996, pp. 12, 13.

2Reuben, p. 126.

3Gomes, Peter J. "Affirmation and Adaptation Values and the Elite Residential College." Distinctively American The Residential Liberal Arts Colleges. Steven Koblik and Stephen R. Graubard, eds. New Brunswick, Canada Transaction Publishers, 2000, p. 103.

4Reuben, p. 267.

5Wolfe, Alan. "The Opening of the Evangelical Mind." Atlantic Monthly. Boston, October, 2000, p. 61.

6McGrath, Alister. Evangelicalism and the Future of Christianity. Downers Grove, IL InterVarsity Press, 1995, p. 19–21.

7McGrath, pp. 55, 56.

8McGrath, p. 28.

9Smith, Christian. American Evangelicalism Embattled and Thriving. Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1998, p. 12.

10Smith, p. 14.

11Noll, Mark. "The Evangelical Mind in America." Should God Get Tenure David W. Gill, ed. Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1997, pp. 195, 196.

12 "Enrollments Surge at Christian Colleges." Chronicle of Higher Education, Washington, D.C. March 5, 1999, p. A42.

13Longman, Karen. "Envisioning the Future of the Christian University." The Future of Christian Higher Education. Dockery and Gushee, Broadman and Holman, eds. Nashville 1999, pages 40, 41.

14Elzinga, Kenneth G. "I Saw Gooley Fly." The Future of Christian Higher Education. p. 64.

15Elzinga, pp. 64, 65.

16Slimbach, Richard, "Re -Imagining a Distinctively Christian Liberal Arts Education" The Liberal Arts and Higher Education. Diana Glyer and David L. Weeks, eds. New York University Press of America, 1998, p. 80.

17Sheridan, Dennis A. "Modern and Postmodern Challenges to Liberal Education."The Liberal Arts and Higher Education. p. 42.

18Sheridan, p. 44.

19Sheridan, p. 44.

20Sheridan, p. 45.

21Henry, Carl F. H. "The Christian Pursuit of Higher Education." Faculty Dialogue. Portland, OR Institute for Christian Leadership No. 24, Spring 1995.

22Noll, p. 208.