A College of Which Church?

The article we read in class the other day, "A College of Which Church?" by Mike Townsley and Professor Bouzard was really interesting and controversial. I've heard a few of my friends talk about this article before I read it and they all thought that Mike Townsley was really rude and completely wrong. So, when I read it, I was ready for him to be completely off-base and ridiculous. However, I did not find him to be as horrible as they made him sound. Yes, I think he made a lot of claims that were not very well supported, but some of what he said would have bothered me too. For instance, it would have been a little frustrating to me to go to Chapel and hear someone say they decided to believe in a "savior" that's better than Jesus. I strongly believe that Jesus is the only way to Heaven, and to denounce this in a church service would quite upset me.

I know I am very conservative on the  matter, but I in no means dislike other religions or other people of other religions because of this. And neither does Townsley. He said that it would be fine to interact and learn about other religions outside of the church service setting. I believe this to be completely true. However, Professor Bouzard's counter to this accusation was really good. Quoting the ELCA constitution and therefore proving that Townsley was only partially informed was a great pull to his argument. He also said that truth can be found in every person, no matter what religion they are. Although I believe that every religion has a nice aspect to it that can be learned about, I think Christians should be very careful in how much they filter into their own beliefs, for they could easily be swayed into thinking that the other religion is Heaven-leading too. For this reason, I believe that we shouldn't have those people speaking in a Christian service. Sorry if this sounds completely prejudiced. I really am not trying to be, but when it comes to my beliefs I get fairly defensive. Again, I have no problem talking and learning from them outside the church, and do not by any means think they shouldn't go to Chapel in general. I just don't think that they should speak at a service, making it look like the church advocates their religion.

The things about Townsley that made his argument flawed were mostly twisting information to fit his own argument. Not only did he only quote part of the ELCA contract, but he also said a "verse and prayer from another religion" was quoted during Holy Communion, omitting the fact that it was during a memorial service of a 9-11 attack. In this circumstance, I personally wouldn't have a problem with this quotation as long as it was during something like this. This twisting of information reminds me of State of Fear and how each side of the debate took information to meet their own needs. Also, as Professor Bouzard pointed out, Townsley did not speak to any of the pastors or religion faculty--a serious blow to his credibility and argument. In addition, making the claim that Wartburg is not a Lutheran-based college at all was extreme. I believe Wartburg has great ministry opportunities to give here, and to say that it is not meeting those expectations is quite ridiculous.

Townsley had many problems with his argument, and I believe that he could have done a better job of supporting his claims and with more thorough research. However, the point that he made about someone speaking at a Chapel service about how Jesus was not the only way to Heaven was something that I found to be fairly valid. In the other cases I believe the Professor Bouzard was correct in what he was saying. Also, Professor Bouzard just had a better argument in general that was much more credible than Townsley's.

Sarah