Victimized for Christ
By: A.J. Pawlikowski
Issue date: 2/5/10 Section: Opinions
Tenell Felder's Jan 22 column, "Hated for Christ," describes a Furman University that "hates" religion, a place acting to "subject Christianity to persecution and abject revulsion because of it", an institution that works to "silence and threaten" believers.
This is particularly strong language considering that the Princeton Review recently ranked Furman University as number nine in their top ten most socially conservative colleges. In the two decades since its formal split from the South Carolina Baptist Convention, Furman has steadily risen to the reputation as one of the top liberal arts schools in the nation. Had Furman maintained such extensive ties to the church, there can be no doubt that it would today occupy a position more similar to a certain other university just down the road.
In his essay on "Toleration", Benjamin Franklin suggested, "If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution." Felder's espoused victimization neatly fits into this proposal. The trouble is that the persecution of any dominant group is self-contradictory; by designation, the dominant group (i.e. Christians in Greenville, S.C.) is the only one with the ability to victimize another. Besides, if Felder is as secure in her beliefs as she advocates -"As far as I am concerned, there is nothing left to debate" - why the need to go as far as to emphasize that "our faith is not weak or incoherent" and such common notions of a Christian god whose "word is infallible and [whose] son is Jesus Christ?"
In order to more easily contextualize Felder's argument, let us take a quick historical aside. The Reverend Richard Furman's "Exposition of the Views of the Baptists Relative to the Coloured Population of the United States" (1822) outlines a religious argument affirming that the "right of holding slaves is clearly established by the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." In case you didn't already know, let's set things straight - the man from whom our university takes its name is widely regarded by scholars as the originator of the biblical defense of slavery. Furman's views were clearly hateful, but not devoid of support. Ephesians, the tenth book of the New Testament traditionally attributed to Paul, states, "Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ." Had we "respected" such Christian beliefs as Felder asks us to do, her example of "God's [working] through the church during the Civil Rights Movement" would apparently never have occurred.
In search of some kind of concrete evidence as to the oppression of Christians at Furman, Felder writes in a separate October 9 column that, "The teaching of evolution in public schools - and a complete rejection of intelligent design - is a prime example that secularists indeed have the 'privileged position' in society." The "spiritual laws" which Felder uses to justify her rejection of the field of evolutionary biology bear a shameful resemblance to the "divine government" Reverend Furman cited in his rejection of governmental authority to outlaw slavery. The underlying pattern should be clear by now: the popular denial of church doctrine will continue to perpetuate the victimhood of those who believe in the supernatural.
I will simply conclude with one of Felder's own quotes, "Truth offends, and yet it is eagerly offered to every single human being on this planet."
Well, thank God for that.
This is particularly strong language considering that the Princeton Review recently ranked Furman University as number nine in their top ten most socially conservative colleges. In the two decades since its formal split from the South Carolina Baptist Convention, Furman has steadily risen to the reputation as one of the top liberal arts schools in the nation. Had Furman maintained such extensive ties to the church, there can be no doubt that it would today occupy a position more similar to a certain other university just down the road.
In his essay on "Toleration", Benjamin Franklin suggested, "If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution." Felder's espoused victimization neatly fits into this proposal. The trouble is that the persecution of any dominant group is self-contradictory; by designation, the dominant group (i.e. Christians in Greenville, S.C.) is the only one with the ability to victimize another. Besides, if Felder is as secure in her beliefs as she advocates -"As far as I am concerned, there is nothing left to debate" - why the need to go as far as to emphasize that "our faith is not weak or incoherent" and such common notions of a Christian god whose "word is infallible and [whose] son is Jesus Christ?"
In order to more easily contextualize Felder's argument, let us take a quick historical aside. The Reverend Richard Furman's "Exposition of the Views of the Baptists Relative to the Coloured Population of the United States" (1822) outlines a religious argument affirming that the "right of holding slaves is clearly established by the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." In case you didn't already know, let's set things straight - the man from whom our university takes its name is widely regarded by scholars as the originator of the biblical defense of slavery. Furman's views were clearly hateful, but not devoid of support. Ephesians, the tenth book of the New Testament traditionally attributed to Paul, states, "Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ." Had we "respected" such Christian beliefs as Felder asks us to do, her example of "God's [working] through the church during the Civil Rights Movement" would apparently never have occurred.
In search of some kind of concrete evidence as to the oppression of Christians at Furman, Felder writes in a separate October 9 column that, "The teaching of evolution in public schools - and a complete rejection of intelligent design - is a prime example that secularists indeed have the 'privileged position' in society." The "spiritual laws" which Felder uses to justify her rejection of the field of evolutionary biology bear a shameful resemblance to the "divine government" Reverend Furman cited in his rejection of governmental authority to outlaw slavery. The underlying pattern should be clear by now: the popular denial of church doctrine will continue to perpetuate the victimhood of those who believe in the supernatural.
I will simply conclude with one of Felder's own quotes, "Truth offends, and yet it is eagerly offered to every single human being on this planet."
Well, thank God for that.