The following are notes by Clark concerning his resignation from Wheaton. One can read the original scans here.
I have not transcribed several letters that have already been published in Clark and His Correspondents (link), which can be bought as a searchable ebook. My goal in transcribing any of Clark's thought has been to make searchable what is not already [easily] searchable. One exception to this is the two paragraphs below which begin with "Or else?" and "Now for ordination." These paragraphs were clearly meant to be cut in the letter Clark sent to Bob, but as they are in the public domain and not included in Clark and His Correspondents, I have transcribed them, as they give a fuller understanding of what was going through Clark's mind during this time he describes as a "theology of crisis" he thought would (and, in fact, did) affect "the rest of [his] life" (see below).
Each distinctive note is separated by "------." As with my last transcription, if I take a more or less educated guess as to what I think Clark meant, I put "[?]" after the word. Clark misspells some words; I've left those misspellings unedited. He has also had certain points in his writing during which he either struck out a thought or drawn lines or made asterisks to update his flow of thought or writing. I have tried to make these points intelligible below, but if anyone is confused by this, he or she can read the original scans to compare with my attempt.
1942. Wheaton Resignation Notes.
On the evening of June 30 1942 a committee of the trustees of
Wheaton College, composed of Doctors Edman, McCarrell, Fuller, Ironside, and
Mr. Fischer, met with me. They had heard complaints from certain members of the
faculty, from students, and from the parents of students respecting my
theological views.
The session lasted from 7:30 P.M. to 10:30 P.M., and most of
the time was taken up by their attempt to learn my views and my attempt to
explain them. I was handicapped by what appeared to be the almost complete
ignorance of the historic position of the reformed churches. For example, Dr.
Fuller was abruptly taken aback when told him that the Westminster Confession
taught the doctinre of reprobation.
Although argued that position carefully set down by learned
men and accepted by a score of denominations for three hundred years could not
legitimately be called extreme, I am confident that they all regard reprobation
and the foreordination of sinful acts of men as incredibly extreme.
Some time was given to the consideration of the statements
of students who had learned of Calvinism. I gather that they think I am responsible
not only for every absurd statement one of my students makes, but that I am also
responsible for great many absurdities committed by students with whom have
never talked.
When I raised the matter of the secret method of dropping
the philosophy major and the false statements circulated about me and certain
of my friends who are outside the college, Mr. Fischer informed me that the
committee had not come to discuss personal discourtesy.
The committee took no action, nor did it make any
suggestions. Mr. Fischer personally suggested more cautious expression of
views.
I do not know whether the committee plans to meet again or not. One of the members, I think it was Mr. Fischer, intimated that if the situation did not improve, the trustees would be forced to do something or other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------Dec. 15 1942 Dr. Edman for[?] the first[?] reported that the
Board had not acted on the Committees report at their meeting in October.
Dr. E. told me on Dec. 31. Report accepted and services
terminated, at meeting a few days before
Jan 21, Fischer said he would ask trustees to rescind motion[?]
and let me resign.
Track team ran on Sunday Nov 23 1942
----------------------------------------------------------------------------Mrs. Anderson also wrote to Schoon[?] on Sept 27 1941. Schoon[?] answered on Dec. 18 1941, and signed himself assistant[?] to the Dean of Men. Yet the Dean’s office kept Wm. [?] A. in our house the year of 41 and 42 and would have let him return for 42 and 43, had we not discovered Mrs. Anderson’s protest and insisted that he live elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------To take effect at the close of the present semester I hereby
present my resignation as Asso Prof of Phil. at Wheaton College in protest
against two phases of current policy.
First: the philosophy major was dropped from the catalog
without departmental recommendation, without committee action, without
or faculty approval. One cannot submit to such an underhanded procedure and
retain self respect. I am also at variance with the policy of lowering such[?]
graduation and entrance requirements, and the general lack of
encouragement, to original productive work by the not to mention the
positive handicaps, with reference to scholarly productivity by the faculty.
Second: while the college has the undisputed right to
require a sincere adherence to the doctrinal position stated in the catalog, I
have been denied the right to acquaint the students [an attempt is being
made to deny students the right to be acquainted], either in class or in a
student club, with the historic position of the several Presbyterian Churches
denominations, the several Reformed Churches, the Congregational bodies, a large
number of Baptist churches – in general the position of the greatest Reformers
men of the Protestant reformation.* Cooperation [with the Trustees] is [being]
defined as compliance with the theology of one or a few individuals, a theology
never adopted by any denomination, nor by Wheaton College. The unauthorized imposition
of new standards, contrary to the historic creeds of Protestantism, is on a par
with the unauthorized dropping of the philosophy major, and its cause.
I am entirely out of sympathy with this situation and, to maintain my self respect and to permit Wheaton College to function ad the Trustees (?) desire, I must resign my position as _________
*Keeping the students thus in ignorance is neither intellectually worthy of a college nor morally worthy of a Christian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------Or else? Find a church. That requires ordination. I am the world’s worst diplomat, but maybe I could keep a church going. I even think that without too much bad luck I could convince an independent group to enter the OPC. Of course the group would have to be found first. It might have to be founded, and that would be a harder job. Whether I would be more useful in a church or in teaching is another consideration.
For any light you have on the situation I shall thank you. I feel job now like the theology of crisis. That is, my present decision (if it is I and not the Trustees who decide) will probably stand for, quite lkely, the rest of my life. If a change is to be made, now is the time, and I want all the wisdom I can gather.
...Now for ordination. As I think I said in my last letter,
Marsden raised the question about two years ago. I said No, rather positively,
because I thought I was fixed for life, and as a professor I did not need it.
But the idea remained, and I broached it to Woolley about a year ago. Then I
postponed it because I wanted to serve on the Committee of Nine. The only
deterring consideration now is the particular mess in which I find myself. That
the situation has a bearing on my desire for ordination, I do not deny;
certainly it has accelerated the progress of thought. And now that it is time
to settle some problems, other problems also might as well be settled also.
Will you therefore kindly join with Woolley (if he will) and present the enclosed paper to the Philadelphia Presbytery?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------May 9 1942
Dear Paul,
In view of our friendship for the past ten years, and to
conclude a matter that has been revolving in my mind for a little while, would
you be so kind as to join with Bob Strong in presenting the enclosed
(self-explanatory) paper to the Philadelphia Presbytery?
I should be greatly obliged if you can consent to do this
for me.
It the Presbytery cares to consider that matter, perhaps a
meeting in the summer could be arranged. It would be most convenient, if
perchance the Committee of Nine is continued and if I am still on it, to have
these two meetings on successive days. But such details will take care of
themselves.
Cordially yours,
Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------------May 19 1942
Mr. Allan C. Emery
King Oak Hill
Weymouth Heights, Mass.
My dear Mr. Emery,
Your son, whom we enjoyed having with us during his year at
Wheaton, told me to be free to write to him or to you, if occasion should arise.
There is an occasion now.
But since I have not heard from Allan for some time, I fear
that he might be in the armed forces. Therefore I have written to him but am
enclosing the letter with this to you. If he is home, I judge that both of you
will read it.
Very truly yours,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------May 19 1942
Mr. Allan C. Emery
King Oak Hill
Weymouth Heights, Mass.
Dear Allan,
On one or two occasions you told me that if I had any matter
concerning the college which I desired to present to your father as trustee, I should feel free to write to you or to him. In the present situation I think it to proper to write; it is the first time, and it may be the last.
First an account of the situation must be made. Owing to the
war and to the budget it seems that some, retrenchments in the college must be made.
This possibly affects the offering of some "majors” in the curriculum.
When the material for the present catalog was being prepared, Dr. Thiessen told
me that Dr. Edman wanted to see me about the philosophy major. I met Dr. Edman in
the hall and he asked me to write a letter giving my views as to keeping or
dropping it. With one of the young faculty men called into the army, I was asked
to teach four hours of Greek. In my letter I showed how a philosophy major could be
retained even while taught some Greek.
The next thing I knew the catalog was published with the philosophy
major missing. There had been no departmental recommendation, no committee
meeting, no faculty action. It seems to me that all matters pertaining to the
curriculum should pass through the faculty. Therefore I asked in the faculty
meeting if this were not the case, and how it was that the philosophy major was
dropped without regular action. The faculty seemed to approve of my views and
instructed the administration committee (composed largely of the heads of the
departments) to discuss the matter and bring back a recommendation.
In this committee meeting it became clear that the war and
the budget had virtually nothing to do with the matter, for I had some eighteen
or twenty major students while other majors had less than five.
The real reason came to light in several accusations made
against me. First, I was a Calvinist, and Wheaton ought not to be known as a
Calvinistic school. Second, my students asked Dr. Thiessen embarrassing
questions. Third, I gave my moral support to the Creed Club, a “disruptive"
group of students that meet to study the Bible as interpreted by the reformed
creeds.
I tried to reply to these accusations. First, I am a Calvinist.
It is the doctrine of a dozen or more of the finest evangelical denominations.
Wheaton is ostensibly an interdenominational school, and if Calvinism is
persistently attacked (as it is), it ought to have also sympathetic
presentation. Since do not have much time to discuss it in class (for the
subject matter overlaps only at intervals), I am happy that the students meet in
the Creed Club to study the matter. I cannot attend very often, but I certainly
lend them my moral support.
The second charge was that my students ask Dr. Thiessen
embarrassing questions. If this means that I suggest that they go and ask him
questions, the charge is false. His students also come to me and ask questions.
When they do so, I am neither embarrassed, nor do I think he has sent them to
me. As a matter of fact, the students who know me best and sense the situation
ask Dr. Thiessen very few questions. Most of the questions come from students
who are simply seeking information, and yet the students tell me that Dr. Thiessen
takes nearly every question as personal affront. In one case, if the students
report correctly, a girl whom I do not know, who never has taken any work from
me, asked a question, and Dr. Thiessen scolded her till she cried in class.
The third charge is of course along the same general line.
The Creed Club asked to use a room in the New Dorm this year. They were granted
permission. They conduct sober, dignified church service, with hymns, prayer,
and what is practically a sermon. The Dean, however, charged that Calvinism was
sect and tried to put them out. They asked to have the opportunity to speak
before the Committee on Student Affairs. I think that they were not granted
permission, but no furhter attempt was made to put them out. Far from being
disruptive influence, they stand good deal of petty persecution. Calvinism is
misrepresented, I can say even slandered in classes, and often students take
the cue and openly snear at the members of the Creed Club.
Finally, in the meeting of the committee on administration,
in which these charges had been made against me, Dr. Thiessen demanded that
there be no mention of a theological position different from his made in the
classes. And in particular, since I am in his department, I must never disagree
with him. Of course I am free to believe as I please, but the students must
never know it.
This demand is, I take it, a demand for my resignation. It
comes at a very awkward time of the year, when it is difficult to find another
position; and I am unwilling to resign without acquainting some of the trustees
with the reasons. If the trustees wish to enforce the views of Dr. Thiessen and
some of the others, that will settle the matter. But I must remind them that
Calvinism has been a noble and dominant part of Protestantism, whereas Dr. Thiessen’s
theology has never been adopted by any denomination and is only his personal production.
These are the facts as I see them, and I am writing this
letter simply for your information.
Very sincerely yours,
No comments:
Post a Comment