During the whole Tyndale and Bush fiasco, and after reading Dan’s post on Love, and pondering the attacks of many commenters accusing us of being unloving toward Gary Nelson I have to keep asking myself the question if it is possible to actually love a public figure.  I don’t mean if you become famous no one can love you.  Rather, I wonder if you can love someone that you don’t know but only know through media, stories or rumours?  There is different scenarios that come to mind that makes me question the love that people say they have for someone.  Think back to the death of Princess Diana and the onslaught of tears by people all over the world, most of those who have never met her.  Think back just a little while ago the death of Jack Layton, and the emotional response that it drew from Canadians all over the country.  Finally, think about Jesus Christ that who we read about in the bible and the connection that people have with him from all over the world, many still moved by his death and entire religions built on this one man, who none of us physically know.

When you don’t know someone, it’s not very easy to be patient, kind, non-envious, non-boastful, humble, honourable, selfless and not easily angered towards them.  I would suggest rather that when you don’t know someone that all you can do is love or hate the way that person makes you feel.  If the person makes you feel safe, then when that person is attacked, you feel attacked.  If the person makes you feel important, then when that person is ridiculed, you feel a little bit smaller and insignificant.  How does one really love someone if they don’t know them?  How can one really defend someone they don’t know?

As we move forward with political elections, I’ll never cease to be amazed at the personal attacks and love letters that I read from both sides of the spectrum of people sure that there leader is amazing, perfect and without flaws and all the others are immoral, wretched people out to intentionally ruin our country.  Everyone thinks they love their leader.  Everyone hates the opposition.  May I suggest that it’s probably the way your leader makes you feel that you love, or the fact that your leader tows the political line you lean towards.  You don’t love them.

As we move forward in understanding our relationship to our faith.  It’s probably good to also realize that many of us love Jesus because of the way he makes us feel, or what he does for us.  Or maybe we think that Jesus just agrees with whatever we think.  No wonder we love him.  Most people don’t love Jesus, they love the way Jesus makes them feel.

Let’s not just assume that the feelings of comradery that we have with people, especially those we don’t know, are those of love or hate.  They are probably just selfish longings that we don’t want to admit that we project on these people that we don’t know.  Just a few random thoughts.

Dr. Gary Nelson responded to our requests and decided to meet with us today. I am glad, not only did it help me better grasp the situation as a whole, but I hope it will also allow me to better explain to everyone else that is on this site what happened or is happening. Dr. Gary Nelson and Dr. Barry Smith were gracious to have met with us, and for that we are thankful. I was really hoping a Larry would be in attendance just so it all rhymed.

My biggest disappointment through all this has been Tyndale’s lack of communication to the public. I recognize that they have spend a lot of time with their current students/faculty trying to work through these issues. However a decision like they made and the accusations and assumptions that were floating around on the Internet, especially international media, in my opinion made it mandatory that Tyndale have public statements to clarify, put falsities in their place and stand firm on decisions that they have made.

I’ll take it as my duty to post now what I was told from them as to shed some light on the conversation for everyone.

So here is some definitive statements that Dr. Nelson made just to clear the air and since I’m not sure if they will ever make these statements themselves.

1. Tyndale never made a penny from the event directly with Bush, in fact they probably lost some.
2. It was not just wealthy people that were invited to the event.
3. It was a combination of things that caused the cancellation of the event, it was not them “caving in” to a petition or protest.
4. He admits they were caught off guard and didn’t know how to communicate well in a social media/viral world.
5. Arthur Boers was not censored. He was not asked to remove the paragraph from his article. He was asked to clarify it or leave a disclaimer that gave more information about what actually happened but Boers decided just to remove it instead.
6. Dr. Nelson did not call Boers a liar or a slanderer, in fact he was clear in his meeting that Boers was not a slanderer. He was not angry either. He did say though that because of Boers article it is causing slander to happen.
7. In no way was he intentionally manipulating students. It was all very bad timing and chose to be silent after rather than engage the criticisms or make more statements.
8. In hindsight, having the event as a public forum with a controversial figure such as Bush would have been a wiser move rather than a private invite-only event that was seemingly secretive (but not intentionally).

I have no reason not to believe him on any of this. I have no clue why in the world they wouldn’t make these statements publicly, but here they are for everyone to read. I think the way this unfolded is unfortunate but I think it was inevitable considering what was at stake and the poor system that was in place to deal with this kind of controversy.  Though if it wasn’t for this site and being a way to discourse, there may have been bigger protests that happened.

I think what I have realized through this process is that Tyndale is on a steady path towards becoming a full fledged university. Not just a small time Bible College, but they want to grow into something a lot bigger. This means that they care an awfully lot about reputation, donors, cash flow and appeasing as many people as possible. Whether we like it or not, or we think this is the Christian path or not, this is the direction that Tyndale wants to go. Unfortunately for them, they still have the Christian label attached to what they are doing and with that label comes all sorts of convictions of exactly what that means. For some it means that there is no possible way that George W Bush should be even remotely associated with what the school is doing. For others it means that he is the perfect candidate to speak to us about higher Christian Education. If the system is not in place to deal with that kind of controversy than my assumption is that there is no place for Tyndale in that realm of business. The fact that I can start a website while sitting in my underwear and “expose” anything at all tells me there is something wrong with the level of transparency and communication that Tyndale has with its people. Or at the very least there is no system setup to allow for opposition, or dialogue that people feel safe to express themselves.

A lot of accusations were thrown around on this site. A lot of them true and a lot of them not true. Tyndale’s inability to deal with the issue only made it worse. The commenter’s onslaught of insults and immaturity didn’t help much either. We posted everything that was said, or was sent to us and Tyndale could have set the record straight numerous times but it seemed like they were too paralyzed to say anything. In the end, besides Bush speaking, I think this was the real failure. The fact that I have to write this post clearing the air of all eight of my points, proves that.

The second thing that bothers me about this still is that everything became personal very quick. Whether that was because Dan Oudshoorn’s article about manipulation or the fact that Dr. Nelson cried when dealing with this issue I don’t know where it started. All I know is that this was never personal for me and I know it wasn’t for Dan either, as his article on what love is on this site suggests. I come across as strong towards institutions and systems because I think that’s the only way to expose them. Dr. Nelson in this case was nothing more than a representation of a system that we discerned as being dishonest and possibly oppressive. In being the kind of school that Tyndale wants to be, their president has to grow thicker skin and be able to lead his institution through rough waters without taking offense when someone opposes him. This I don’t think was ever fully understood by the students defending him and and he reassured us he was a good person and wanted the same things that we wanted. This was never about him as a person.  The fact that we met with him and tried to meet him from the beginning should tell you that.  We do want the same things. Accusations, whether true or false, bring out a lot in a person. If the accusations were false then so be it. Impressions are everything with a spokesperson and the impression that some got was negative. This is the life in the public eye and is a choice of the person there. He did take responsibility for this. I also take responsibility for running a site that hurtful things were said on, and accusations were made on both sides of the debate. We both think what we did was necessary and so we will both leave it at that.

All that said, I don’t think this “fiasco” needs to end with failure. I think there was a lot of lessons to be learned for everyone. For starters, we all know that media distorts and pulls out stories where there are none. They don’t care about context, they just care about getting people excited and then they leave. The hits that this site generated proved that. If I was to do this again, I probably wouldn’t have spoken to any media at all. They didn’t represent any of the moderation, grace or love that I had thought I expressed and only focused on the controversy. Dr. Nelson had a similar experience. There was other lessons we learned. Like how quick people blame the messenger. Or that the messenger could have opinions that are just wrong and offend people by their accusations. Or how fast people degrade to insults and refuse to engage the arguments. Or how quickly people take something personal and internalize it. Or how little people actually want free speech if it goes against their own convictions. All of these realities from this past ten days shows us that we all have a lot to do to grow in character and as a body of believers, inside and outside of the school. I’m grateful that I had the opportunity to do my part in this and I’m even more grateful at the grace that was shown to me by Dr. Nelson and Tyndale while I moved forward in what I thought was the right thing to do.

A few days ago we found an article written by Arthur Paul Boers, endowed chair of Leadership at Tyndale Seminary, on the Tyndale/Bush controversy. It was a beautifully written article about his feelings towards George W Bush, his use of faith and his upcoming event with Tyndale University. The article states that “If Bush was going to be associated with my school, conscience compelled me to speak.” We all read it and were relieved to know that it wasn’t just us leftist, marxist, socialist, non-christian, pacifist, shit disturbing types (just to name a few of the great labels that have been attributed to a few of us that post on Tyndale.co) that had similar feelings towards George W Bush.

Today that article was taken down. Why? We aren’t sure. We of course in our computer savvy ways were able to recover the original article from our browser cache. So for anyone that wants it we have now published it on this site for anyone to read. ChristianWeek.org after a few hours re-posted the article, but with a revision. Like we learned in Old Testament class at Tyndale, when you see something repeated, always look for what is missing in the repetition. More than likely the missing information reveals what is going on beneath everything else. So below is the text that was was ommitted from the revision when it was reposted.

Third, steeped in Mennonite convictions, I believe Christians can differ and disagree, even vigorously, and at the same time grow in love for one another.

The day after the faculty was informed of the impending presidential breakfast, a colleague and I proposed a forum for interested faculty and students. The event would consider Christian interpretation of the legacy of George W. Bush, inviting four diverse viewpoints that spanned the political and theological spectrum. We would structure a civil conversation and give room for other faculty and students to respond and interact.

Our proposal was in the spirit of dialogue, academic freedom, and freedom of speech. A key administrator explained that our offer was not accepted because of – quoting here – “concern that we not make too much of this.” (In spite of our administration’s caution, a maelstrom of controversy ensued once the press exposed Tyndale’s plans.)

I’ve really done my best to not judge through this whole process.  This is making it almost too easy.  Why was this taken down?  Your guess is as good as mine.   But I’ll guess anyway.   My guess is that Tyndale didn’t like this whole paragraph all that much.  It revealed too much.  It showed that they screwed up and made bad decisions.  It shows that not only did this event have absolutely nothing to do with free speech (like Dr. Craig Carter, Dr. Gary Nelson and Dr. Scott Masson publicly stated and pointed fingers at us for).   But it reveals that even attempts to exercise this freedom that folks at Tyndale seem to prize so much, were shut down because a key administrator (I wonder who that would be) said that they didn’t want to “make too much of this.”  So Tyndale probably strongly suggested that Arthur take down his post or change it.  So he changed it.  Of course, that is all speculation.  It’s unfortunate that anything had to be changed, especially since he was just exercising his right in free speech.  But I’d wager a bet that is pretty close to what happened.  I can’t imagine Arthur re-reading his post a few days later and thinking “ah, you know what, that’s not necessary, why don’t we take that out.”

Tyndale is really trying to cover it’s tracks here.  Their public statements are empty of meaning.  Dr. Gary Nelson admits that they need clearer guidelines and policies so that views can be respected in a hospitable place.  Let me make a suggestion Tyndale.  Trying to undo something on the Internet won’t work.  Trying to censor professors that are speaking respectfully and making the school a hospitable place won’t work.  Silence from the very people that shouldn’t be silent from the higher ranks of Tyndale won’t work.   Your options are dwindling and you seem to be making a lot of bad decisions before you land on some right ones.   You need to be honest.  Stop worrying about your reputation.  Stop trying to cover your tracks.  Make decisions and defend your decisions with grace and humility to those that disagree with you.  Most importantly, please start communicating (honestly), you are leaving us all to wonder and guess and assume.

So again, like I stated before, we are still waiting for an official statement about this mess.  Now I’d like to request a statement about why it seems as if you are censoring some professors from speaking and allowing others to blabber on.

This is a post I made on Tyndale.co that is coupled with the end of new posts until Tyndale responds.

A decision was made at 8:46am on Wednesday the 13th to “stop it from happening;” in reference to the event planned between George W Bush and Tyndale. The last few days have turned into something I was not prepared for.   As stated before in my letter, I think any kind of professional relationship with George W Bush and all he represents is a complete lack of Christian character. It promotes hate and oppression to all those who have been affected by him both in North America and on an international scale.  To attempt to pass his presence as merely promoting free speech is a cop-out.  The thought of using such a man for the stated sake of “raising the school’s profile” at an invite only, elitist breakfast made me sick.  I would have no problem having Bush speak or engaging in constructive dialogue about a variety of issues, but this isn’t about free speech.  The issue here is having him publicly associate himself with a school that should be primarily associated with kingdom values. It’s with bringing in a high profile speaker to in turn raise the profile of Tyndale and ultimately gain financially from this association.  If Bush wants to address Christian higher education, this website, or other public policy matters I’d encourage everyone to hear what he says and discern how they see fit.

Before acting, I sought counsel from friends whom I respect and who Gary Nelson respects before I moved forward in anything.  I did not take this lightly.  I wasn’t trying to stroke my ego.  I was simply trying to prevent my school from associating itself with this event and hopefully create a level of transparency which, from my experience, has never really existed at Tyndale.  I sought counsel from a number of people, especially people that I assumed would have told me to back off and remain silent if it was needed.  From many sides I was told this was a good plan.  I was advised (again, from people both sides would respect), that protest is good.  I was advised that  “Gary Nelson would welcome a storm of protest …especially if it was from former students, which then reflects well on the seminary…”  Another person responded to me, a university faculty member in the Toronto area who is well-respected in the Christian community, and told me that there “needs to be a significant response to this.”  So these responses, coupled with the encouragement from others, set the move in motion to expose the mess.  There was never intention to harm or create distrust or to disturb peace, but it was meant to disrupt the conscience of Tyndale as a body, and especially of those at the top of the chain who have the power to make the decisions.

I love Tyndale.  I loved a lot about my experience there.  I loved my professors and some of my closest friends are still heavily involved with the daily ongoings there.  I would not have worked so hard at this if I didn’t have some kind of investment in the result and in the school.  In a lot of ways Tyndale still represents me as a person and what I do in ministry contexts.

So I did what I do best, I started a website. I started it as a way to document the process, gain support and speak loudly against what I saw as a non-kingdom like decision.  The website/petition snowballed so fast that by the next day there was obviously enough of an uproar to cause the apparent cancellation of the entire event.  This was the best news I could have heard.  This meant that I wasn’t just spouting off stupid ideas and annoying everyone but there was actually enough resistance to cause a cancellation.  It wasn’t until it was cancelled, however, that the media really started getting involved.  We started getting e-mails from across the country congratulating us on our victory and people trying to replicate the same kind of results in other places in the world.  International media picked up the story and now the world saw that a group of Christians stood up for kingdom values even if it did tarnish their “high profile.” I saw this not only as a great accomplishment on our part but also on the part of the Tyndale administration who acted bravely in listening to their students and alumni and cancelling the event.  Myself and others saw the cancellation as having something positive attached to Tyndale as students rallied together to oppose what they thought was a bad move.

Of course, with anything good comes opposition (which is what was said about the Bush event in the first place).  I have been in this place before of exposing shady deals or calling out harmful practices in the public sphere and I should have been prepared for what was to come next.  Everyone came under the gun.  Accusations started flying in every direction.  To the people who started the site (me), to Gary Nelson, to Dan Oudshoorn and the list went on.  The goal of the site was to be honest and post everything in regards to this fiasco in hopes of getting a sufficient response that would eventually create no need for this site.  I approved every letter and every comment that came my way, even if they were straight up insulting me.  I thought this was the fair thing to do.  I knew there would be controversy, but I did, and I still do, uphold that this kind of dialogue is the kind of thing that an institution, especially a Christian one, should accept with open arms.  I weighed my words carefully and I believe that I upheld integrity in my responses in both what I wrote or said to the media or on the site.  I submitted to correction numerous times and did my best to do this in a way that was honourable.  Really though, this isn’t about me.  This is about Tyndale.  Tyndale, through all of this, has had glimpses of hope, but for the most part has completely let its student body/alumni down.  Besides actually cancelling the event, which still is questionable as to how/why/what happened, they have been completely silent and difficult to work with or understand.

This is why the website is still up and is still running.  I believe that people who are affected by the decisions Tyndale makes, need a place to challenge Tyndale in the public eye.  I also think that there needs to be a place to defend Tyndale.  Because of their silence over an obviously controversial event, it showed me that there was a hole in the transparency of the Tyndale administration and its leadership.  When people feel as if something is being held from them, which they most certainly do now, they need a place to express that and to be heard.  Or when people feel that wrong is being committed and they aren’t given the appropriate outlet to express this, they need a place where they can gather support and challenge decisions.  I know that even this view is controversial.  Why should private institutions be publicly accountable to the masses, international media and loud mouthed alumni?  The people of God are constantly on display, and it is our duty to be honest about who we are, the mistakes we make and the things we believe.

A site like this is only ever criticized by two kinds of people.  The first are those that have something to hide or are afraid of confrontation. Because this site forcefully confronts both those people, it doesn’t make a lot of friends. The second group of people who don’t like this site is really why I wrote this post.  These are the advocates of peace and love.  They are good people who are beautifully empathetic with any hurt that they see has been caused.  They want a world of peace (and God knows so do I ) where all sides can love one another. Reconciliation is at the forefront of their minds; not just confronting that which is evil, but striving after that which is good (even if it means ignoring that which is evil).  These are the people whom I want my conscience as a Christ follower to be formed by.  Those that place compassion ahead of confrontation.  I am not built that way, but I long to be formed into that kind of person.  The amount of hurt that has been expressed through this ordeal is too much for one person to take, I can only imagine how Gary Nelson feels.  I am constantly thrown back and forth as to what my response should be.  Should I take down the site completely?  Should I continue to stand up for what I think is right and confront what I think is wrong even if it’s causing strife?  What is the appropriate balance between justice, love and peace?  What is my role in any of them?  The questions haunt me.  I realize that my actions carry a lot of weight, especially since I can flick a switch and end the site right now.

I’m not even sure what peace is anymore.  Is peace just everyone getting along, oblivious to the fact that there is something to be up in arms about?  Is peace ignorance?  Is peace just a weapon to use to stop people from opposing evil?  These are what I feel are some people’s suggestions, that they just want to go on with their life, forget anything happened and ignore the reality of what took place and what could easily happen again.  I don’t think this is a peace that we are to seek as Christians.  Rather, the kind of peace that Christians should seek is one that embodies an honest portrayal of who we are, both the good and the ugly, and leads us to be formed into a kind of people that can face into reality (not our ideological hopes for peace) humbly and with Christ at the core.  Unfortunately, I don’t think this process comes across as very peaceful.  It carries with it the baggage of hurt egos, true and false accusations, confessions and blatant opposition.

I never intended this website to turn into a ‘bash Tyndale’ or ‘bash Gary Nelson’ site.  Every time someone calls for Nelson’s resignation, my heart aches.  In no way do I think a resignation solves anything or answers anything.  I don’t want Gary Nelson to resign.  I would start a website to oppose that suggestion as well.  I recognize that this site has caused insurmountable grief, especially amongst some of the current staff and students at Tyndale, and for that I’m truly saddened.  My hope is that this site has proven to be an honest take from a range of people about Tyndale’s transparency, the Bush event and the appropriate response.  So, from this point on I’m not going to post anything new.  I’m only going to approve comments that add something new to the conversation and if their full name is stated, but for the most part this site is going to be frozen/paused.  I’m also going to take down the petition for people to sign.  120 people signed it, 85 confirmed their signature and 10 people or so have asked to be taken off of it.  The petition served its purpose to prevent the event from happening.  No one needs to feel associated to the opinions on this site just because they signed to cancel the Bush event.  The petition did it’s job and now it is simply a reminder that it helped bring the end to a harmful relationship.

I am planning on coming up to Tyndale on Monday and Tuesday to try and mend anything that I can that has been broken.  I would love to meet with anyone who is interested, especially Gary Nelson.  E-mail me if you are interested.  I’m open to whatever kind of reconciliation steps are necessary and I hope that whatever people feel has been broken can be fixed.  I’m willing to take responsibility for what I have done, and I hope Tyndale is willing as well.

My hope still is that Tyndale responds.  I can’t imagine them not responding at this point.  If they do respond, we will post it on the site as well.  This site can serve as a historical database of our successful opposition to Bush representing Tyndale and hopefully the successful reconciliation of all the divisiveness that has occurred.  I’d even be willing to hand over the domain to Tyndale if they would agree to having this information posted elsewhere on their site, or if I could post it elsewhere as a reminder of what happened.

So I hope this explanation is sufficient and that it is obvious that my intentions are not to harm or to cause strife:  they are for peace, they are for reconciliation.

Peace, love and grace

To the Board and President of Tyndale University

I write this letter as a former student of Tyndale University College and Seminary, one who completed two full years at your institution, started the the student magazine on campus and has been sponsored by Tyndale multiple times to run events and bring in keynote speakers from around the world.  I had heard a rumour a week or so ago that Tyndale was bringing George W. Bush in to promote Tyndale and I thought it was a joke.  However, the rumour was proven true today by a few Toronto Star articles and a letter from Gary Nelson.  Not only was it proven true, it was announced only a week before the proposed date of the actual event that is happening on Sept 20, 2011.  I can’t help but view this as intentionally secretive as nothing was mentioned anywhere by Tyndale until we started bombarding Facebook walls with questions and links to what we were finding out.

I’ve been running events now for a number of years and if there is one temptation that keeps coming back over and over again it is to invite speakers based on ticket sales and revenue rather than content or character.  It’s a tough balancing act.  Unfortunately for Tyndale, they have failed at bringing any balance to this through the decision to bring in one of the most controversial so-called evangelical leaders of the century.  As David Fitch puts it in The End of Evagelicalism, “I suspect that many American Christians under the age of thirty-five refuse to be called evangelical because of the presidency of George W. Bush.”  Gary Nelson seems to think that “Tyndale represents a more thinking kind of evangelicalism.”  Gary Nelson obviously has no clue what Tyndale represents or he is set out to completely destroy the reputation that Tyndale has now.  Gary Nelson has also cemented the fact that he does not represent the growing amount of those under the age of thirty five who want nothing to do with the “Christian” rhetoric of a man like George Bush.

I’ve now been deleted four different times across two different Facebook pages with the post of “anybody talking about george bush coming to promote Tyndale at a breakfast on sept 20? is there a reason why it’s been so silent among the students? if anyone is interested in speaking more about this and possibly working with us to voice our disgust with such a publicity stunt/money grab, shoot me an e-mail. (nathancolquhoun@gmail.com).”  Gary Nelson states that they “are a university that tries to present all sides and be open to different opinions,” and “as a university, it’s {Bush} someone we need to listen to just like other points of view.”  Meanwhile his staff are deleting opposing comments from Tyndale’s Facebook walls and rather posting announcement letters that are written by him.  I’ve also been contacted by others who have had their comments deleted because of their questioning or opposing stance against Bush while leaving immature comments for everyone to see like this one by a man named Brian that says “Hey don’t go then, you immature know it alls!! You are so wise you would have voted for Obama!”  Since when was being open to all sides picking and choosing what Facebook comments you feel like the rest of the world needs to read?

This is a shameful money grab and publicity stunt for Tyndale.  Whether or not they came up with the idea or funded it themselves they are most certainly excited about “elevating the school’s profile” and benefiting from the event as much as possible.  There is no reason to give George W Bush any sort of voice when it comes to Christian Higher Education.  If this was really about addressing Christian Higher Education, James KA Smith just wrote an excellent book that addresses Christian Higher Education beautifully, ask him to speak.  But we all know it’s not about that.  This is about two things.  1.  Raising Money.  2. Raising the School’s Profile (whatever that means).  Using Bush (or anyone else for that matter) to do either is wrong.  A Christian school that cares more about “elevating their profile” than about forming Christians is a school I can do without, as that flies completely in the face of the Christian values that I have come to understand should characterize the church.

I don’t need to dig too deep to expose the kind of policies the Bush is affiliated with.  He’s been accused of  plenty of war crimes, he has been threatened to be arrested if he shows up into certain countries, he thought that God told him to invade Iraq and he approved and gave orders for torture.  He doesn’t have a great track record.  Bush seems to represent and promote systemic dysfunction at its finest.  This is not the kind of man that should be promoting a school that is supposed to be identified with peace, love, grace, forgiveness, suffering for good and loving the poor.

As a response to our disappointment and disgust with Tyndale’s decision to partner with such a man to help Tyndale become more successful in our world, we have started a website to oppose this event.

WWW.TYNDALE.CO

On the website you will find my letter along with others like mine, articles posted, and a petition full of names of those who oppose this decision. You will also find announcements about the protests that we plan on staging along with updates on where to meet and what we will be doing.   We hope that you will change your mind and pull back on this event entirely and refuse to allow Tyndale to stoop to a level of marketing (because that is all that this is) that is abhorring.  We hope for an apology from Gary Nelson and an admission that he and the Board made a mistake by moving the school in this direction.

The quote below from Stanley Hauerwas will help explain exactly what I think is going on here.  Tyndale is doing nothing more than trying to be seen as a high profile learning centre for Christian studies and they don’t care what they have to give up in the process.

“It is clear that those who support Christian universities would be quite upset if the qualifier came to mean that the education students received might put them at a disadvantage for being a success in America.”
- Stanley Hauerwas

I write this letter from the position of not caring if Tyndale has a raised profile, creates successful students who get jobs or can attract a leader of international popularity.  None of this matters.  The kind of education that Tyndale should be providing for their students is one that would form students who are disciplined in the ways of Christ and his church, and refuse to allow fame and wealth to seep into their decisions.

There is still time Tyndale.  Please cancel the event.  Walk away.  You don’t have to do this.  It’s really not worth it.

A letter I wrote in the local paper about the unnecessary rudeness of the Sarnia police force in dealing with traffic crimes.

Sir: Recently a friend was pulled over by the police because he didn’t have a bell on his bike. Fair enough. He should have had a bell on his bike. However this is yet another example that I’ve heard of or seen myself over the last number of years of police being unnecessarily rude.

I get that the police and border guards are trained to be intimidating and authoritative, but is this really necessary in every single interaction that they have? Why can’t police officers just be graceful and kind instead of instantly putting on the “I’m in a place of power over you” hat. They are not making any friends and they are not keeping peace. They aren’t making people feel safe and they are perpetuating a system of distrust towards our officers that is already flimsy.

If they are pulling me over for a speeding ticket, or God forbid not having a bell on my bike, even if you have to give me a ticket, they need to take a deep breath and remember that we are both human and that they don’t have to go on such a power trip just to make sure I know who’s in charge and that I did something wrong. Everyone is aware that the guys in the police cars and wearing uniforms are the police, they don’t have to be rude and condescending just to make a point and fish for a reaction.