Emerging Scholars Blog

InterVarsity's Emerging Scholars Network

The University

Faithful Presence: University Structures and Faculty Service (Part Two)

photo of man sitting in front of people
Photo by fauxels on Pexels.com

Engagement

In the previous post, I identified the frustration faculty have with university structures even as they serve within such structures, how the InterVarsity Statement of Faith calls its campus ministers to engage with university structures, and the sundry collection of structures easily observed with in the Bible. I concluded by observing that “some structures we already participate within but we have yet to discover how God would incorporate our faithful presence and work in the academy into the new creation.” In other words, serving in the university can hardly promise guaranteed outcomes. The question of what kinds of outcomes should we aim toward is a question of mission, even as we live by faith and not because we can specify in advance what the outcomes will become. Christians found among university faculty have an abundance of biblical and theological resources with which to participate in fulfilling their service responsibilities. What might describe a faithful response by Christian faculty to university structures? Such faithfulness will engage with our identity in ways that received commendation by Scripture.

Trust in God Is More Than Proclamation

In conversations with Christian faculty, they describe their efforts in evangelization, especially with peers and among graduate students. Their message is orthodox. I celebrate these efforts and commend such declarations as practices that other professors can take up. These descriptions, however, gesture toward a Christian identity that only evangelizes. Surely receiving the grace of God is more than verbal proclamation. Of course, we want others to experience the joy and comfort from God through the forgiveness of sin through Jesus, along with the presence of the Holy Spirit.

What we read in the New Testament regarding identity involves both the announcement of the Gospel and agency that meets the social world to alleviate suffering, confront injustice, as well as engagement that aims to develop creation according to the good and just intent of God, i.e., the mission of God. Too much is at stake here if the only service of faculty is evangelizing their peers and students.

I would draw attention to an observation Lesslie Newbigin made regarding faithfulness in the Pauline letters, and I develop his thought below:

What really needs to be said is that where the Church is faithful to its Lord, there the powers of the kingdom are present and people begin to ask the question to which the gospel is the answer. And that, I suppose, is why the letters of St. Paul contain so many exhortations to faithfulness but no exhortations to be active in mission [i.e., cross-cultural witness and service]. 1

So, while evangelization remains a crucial element to the formation of any and all Christian faculty, such practices hardly bound the kind of engagement faculty have with university structures.

Servanthood

Responding to the call of Jesus to the Gospel of the Kingdom of God produces many changes of identity. One of those changes involves servanthood. What I would call out, for the sake of our topic, is that few Christian faculty act out of their identity as servants within their service component of their contract in ways that go beyond their shared responsibility with their unbelieving colleagues. “Going beyond” involves serving in the university that welcomes spiritual refreshment coming from salvation in Christ. “Going beyond” looks and listens for opportunities within the respective university structures to affirm, refresh, and create policies and programs that promote justice and human flourishing. In other words: “Going beyond” perceives one’s lifestyle as one who serves in the name of Jesus — in the context of the university as a faculty member — who participates in the mission of God.

While a longer discussion of the mission of God remains to be developed elsewhere, I would assert here that God aims to hear and renew all of the created order through the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ: this assertion, obviously, needs to develop how the agency of Christians serves in such a mission. For faculty, the call from Jesus to servanthood as a way of life extends directly into all aspects of being and becoming a faculty member: a researcher, a teacher, and in service to the university.

Let’s pause for a moment here. In this discussion of servanthood, we need to receive the Holy Spirit. (Jn. 20:22) One might expect that, apart from the Spirit of love and power, servanthood would hardly differ from an activism severed from a vital connection with Jesus. Servants become developed from a connection with the Holy Spirit and a praxis of care for those on the margins of their social location. (Acts 1:8; 2:4; Lk. 10) Such development contributes to exercising our faith in God and to deepening our life in God but does not guarantee specific outcomes.

Suffering

One professor informed me of deciding to decline an invitation to an elite committee involved in campus restructuring. This invitation was made with an announced conviction of trust that the persons in the committee would create new policies. The work of the committee would satisfy external regulatory boards and other credentialing associations which needed the presence of such an administrative group. Such a group, however, had existed before: And the administration managed to circumvent and ignore policies for collaboration with faculty. For this faculty member, the whole invitation reeked of the hard work of policy development that the administration had no intention of engaging and practicing. Having observed this behavior before, the faculty member perceived such labors to have zero influence and maximal discomfort.

This characterization is the hardest part of engagement. Far too many faculty reading this post know of a quiet, passive resistance to change that would produce justice and freedom within higher education. One can hardly decry decisions to avoid working with people perceived as bad actors: And, if called out, would those with power act on behalf of faculty or to preserve their powers? The kind of inflicted pain and disillusionment, even in milder forms, has contributed to faculty disengaging with university structures.

Examples of Engagement

The fiction of risk-free faith

An assistant professor on the cusp of submitting his tenure dossier explained why he wasn’t involved with any Christian students or Christian fellowship on campus. He was told by well-intentioned Christians he should just lay low with going public about his faith until he received tenure; announcing he was a Christian in the life sciences would harm his promotion. “After I receive tenure, I can start witnessing and serving.”

It may be the case that more is hidden in that declaration than disclosed. He might be the sole breadwinner of his household and may need to have health insurance or provide for childcare. He may have graduate students relying upon his funding sources and mentoring. And, yet, this tenure-track professor was convinced he needed to keep his faith under wraps. This stands in contrast to the practices of the early church:

Christians are indistinguishable from other men either by nationality, language or customs… And yet there is something extraordinary about their lives. They live in their own countries as though they were only passing through. They play their full role as citizens, but labor under all the disabilities of aliens… They live in the flesh, but they are not governed by the desires of the flesh. They pass their days upon earth, but they are citizens of heaven. Obedient to the laws, they yet live on a level that transcends the law. Christians love all men, but all men persecute them. Condemned because they are not understood, they are put to death, but raised to life again. They live in poverty, but enrich many; they are totally destitute, but possess an abundance of everything. They suffer dishonor, but that is their glory. They are defamed, but vindicated. A blessing is their answer to abuse, deference their response to insult. For the good they do they receive the punishment of malefactors, but even then they, rejoice, as though receiving the gift of life… As the soul benefits from the deprivation of food and drink, so Christians flourish under persecution. Such is the Christian’s lofty and divinely appointed function, from which he is not permitted to excuse himself.” (Letter to Diognetus, ca.130)

It should be declared now: There’s no risk-free faith. This faculty member failed to observe that he was already giving witness to the Gospel: a gospel that was full of fear. In contrast, Jesus appeared to his disciples (John 20:19–23), showing his healed wounds and breathing his Spirit into them: They were sent into the world, into God’s mission, aware that suffering would accompany them, unable to control the outcomes of their lifestyle, their service, and their proclamation. God’s power would accompany the announcement of the Good News.

Good examples

I have some examples of faculty who have created and engaged the structures of the university, and while these professors are modest, I can promote their agency here. One senior faculty member approached the department chair — asking for money! — to create an annual event at the end of the spring term. Senior students would give a public presentation of their research. Once approved, the whole department was invited. It’s a huge event with food and drink every spring. Having hosted this event for several years, invariably a colleague approaches the senior professor and says, “I love this event. It reminds me of why I got into our discipline in the first place.” This kind of celebration of knowledge production among undergraduates created a salutary and refreshing influence throughout the department.

Another faculty member served as the chair of a search committee for an African American literature professor. He needed to do homework on his colleague who had just retired. He learned how the policies and practices of the department had both helped and hindered the former colleague. He learned all the good, the bad, and the ugly of the retired professor, and how incredibly hard life and work was in the same department that they were in for years together. So, serving on the search committee became more than delegating dossiers and other tasks within the committee. He found himself having hard conversations with the department chair and the dean, collaborating to clear administrative barriers for the new hire. That initiative, outside of the search description for the chair, led to a fruitful hire and produced changed policies.

Lest I write this only citing how senior faculty have exercised influence inside their university structures, I need to reference a small tenure-track cohort of more than ten years ago at a Midwest university. None of these professors were in the same department, but the campus was small enough that they could find each other. After about a year, one of the assistant professors declared that he could not keep his faith down as he awaited his promotion for tenure when there may be a perceived safety risk. He needed to publish how he understood the Christian faith engaged his discipline as well as the campus itself: now. He asked how his cohort was feeling about this, and one of the women present expressed a desire to think it over and to pray and to talk about his proposal again. A few weeks later, she announced to the group that she, too, would be making her faith known to her students and colleagues, inviting their prayers. She realized that, for her, awaiting her tenure promotion was tantamount to placing her faith in the university instead of the risen Lord. Soon, all of the small cohort was taking on similar public projects. Unsurprisingly, they all received tenure in the time to be expected at their university. They were all known for their generous participation within their departments and understood as respectful listeners to others of different faith traditions, even as they published their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

“Saving the University?” Or Life as One Saved Inside the University?

Anyone reading this might ask the question: “Are you proposing that we serve to save the university structures’?” Given what I’ve written so far, it’s not an outlandish nor a distracting question. Furthermore, I’m aware that some reading this post might conclude I’m hosting a mild case of the Dunning-Kruger effect. (I might still.) I harbor no Pollyanna ambitions. Nor do I presuppose that such a career-long involvement would become generative of reproducing a specific sense of morality or a return to halcyon days of university life. I refuse any notion of what outcomes should materialize, save that the overall goal might produce human flourishing: an important element of God’s mission. 2 With those qualifications in mind, let me take up a few possible objections here to clarify my intention about Christian faculty serving within university structures.

First, this post is about mission, not soteriology. Put another way: Yes, God sent his one and only Son into the world to save the world. (Jn. 3:17) And, if we’re reading “save” as “getting people into heaven after they die,” we might misunderstand the Fourth Gospel or the rest of the New Testament. In saving women and men across history through the crucified and risen Jesus, God’s great reign aimed to work through them in love and with power to heal and renew creation.

Such ways of living as saved people understands God’s call to eternal life to act in the present as God’s agents of mission. These agents of God’s mission anticipate a future of God that joins the new heaven and new earth in celebration and in work to promote flourishing for all. Given the global importance of the university, Christian faculty have a credible, long-term occasion to participate in mission with Christ in a limited and selective manner. This occasion will require both spiritual disciplines and attentive labor regarding how (and to what end) university structures operate in the institution.3

I realize that no one generates and develops their intellectual powers and labor and, having obtained tenure, wakes up one day and says, “I should become an administrator of a university structure.”4 But finding the kinds of service that contribute to God’s shalom, justice, and human flourishing is surely a matter of prayer and of risk-taking, and long term commitment. Clarity in how the tenure policies/processes work? Developing sustainable practices that contribute to the flourishing of contingent faculty? There are so many possibilities for credible, fruitful service by faculty.

Second, Christian faculty serving in an intentional manner for university reform and renewal is one of many possible biblically-sourced responses. As suggested in one of my examples above, one can land on a variety of readings from the Bible and conclude: “Just make the faith about verbal proclamation. It’s a solid description of our beliefs.” It’s worth observing that none of us within the university should delegate the responsibility of proclamation to our colleagues in the religious studies department or presume that surrounding congregations and campus ministries have evangelism covered. Social and cultural diversity can work against a credible comprehensive dissemination of the Gospel.

This is why people “go,” and the faithful who are “there” both have the graceful occasion by which to faithfully live in ways that announce the Good News. It is important to recall that all structures are populated with persons who also need to hear the Good News. While a dedicated ministry of evangelism is needed, so are committed faculty who serve as agents of God’s mission throughout one’s career to heal and renew university structures. Such agency aims to serve God, the campus, and the world.

Finally, my proposal joins our spiritual disciplines with our ever-developing person within the academy: this is a long-term engagement with the academy, not a one-off event. The kind of person that God dwells within will go about knowing they are beloved by God and know themselves as a child of God (1 Jn. 3:1–3). Consequently, there is an important need to cultivate our lives centered upon Jesus. As Trevor Hudson observed, it’s far too easy for our lives to “get bogged down in dull familiarity, empty routines, and tired clichés.”5 Seeking God is not only welcomed by God, but an enduring invitation. (Jer. 29:13–14; Mt. 6:33) Experiences of seeking not only contribute to our identity as servants within the university, but empower us for bold, compassionate declaration of the Gospel.

Such is the life of faith developed and centered on Jesus: You and I may never know how our presence and labors within our respective campuses may produce the kinds of shalom, justice, and gospel that the Lord desires and takes pleasure in. But we can trust that the same power and love that was exerted in raising Jesus from the dead will be at work in us, conforming us into Christ-like women and men.

So, we pray “Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as in heaven” for our departments, colleges, and universities. We live into those prayers confident that the risen Jesus accompanies us in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. We have this great and fearful occasion and opportunity to serve our campus through the university structures. We serve, then, aiming that the fruit of our prayers and labors will produce a more just campus structure, one that contributes to the flourishing of the university, the world, and to God’s mission. We may suffer. There are no promised outcomes that ensure our safety or that our name and effort will receive citation. We are promised that Jesus will be with us always, even to the end of the age.

Endnotes:

  1. Newbigin, Lesslie. 1989. The Gospel in a Pluralist Society. Grand Rapids, Mich.; Geneva [SZ]: W.B. Eerdmans ; WCC Publications: 119.
  2. The question on the mission of God (missio Dei) deserves better discussion and engagement with higher education. See the following for a lucid explanation of the missio Dei:  Flett, John G. 2014. “A Theology of Missio Dei.” Theology in Scotland 21 (1): 69–78.
  3. “One lesson of the past would seem to be that Christian and other religiously based higher education is better off when it recognizes, as is easy to do in our postsecular age, that it is a minority enterprise in a richly diverse society. As such, it will not be able to impose its will on others, but, rather, its challenge will be to make itself so attractive in its practices and outlooks that, despite its inevitable imperfection, others will admire it and want to emulate some of its qualities.” Marsden, George M. 2021. The Soul of the American University Revisited: From Protestant to Postsecular. Oxford, UNITED STATES: Oxford University Press, Incorporated: 389. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/fuller/detail.action?docID=6551633.
  4. Dettmar, Kevin. 2022. “Advice | Administration Can Be a Calling.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. September 30, 2022. https://www.chronicle.com/article/administration-can-be-a-calling.
  5. Hudson, Trevor. 2022. Seeking God: Finding Another Kind of Life with St.Ignatius and Dallas Willard. S.l.: NavPress Pub Group: .

Faithful Presence: University Structures and Faculty Service

fauxels at Pexels

The Ubiquity of Faculty Service to the University…and Frustration

Service within the university is rarely celebrated or joyfully anticipated. Every faculty member has some service responsibilities: From an R1 to a community college, faculty members have some assignment of service. And, while such is a contractual expectation, no one has received tenure (or been promoted) for completing their service responsibilities.

Many faculty disclose utter frustration when discussing their histories of serving within the university. Agendas where decisions focus on fulfilling quotas. Meetings that isolated junior faculty from participating in the decision-making of the committee. Administering programs that required reporting to several administrative offices on campus or never having any funding to hire administrative labor for communication and administrative work: sometimes, both. Committee structures that secured power for senior faculty. Meetings hosted with no clear agenda, random speeches given (by mostly senior faculty), and no clear actionable responsibilities. When I first heard these descriptions, I assumed these were outliers. Not so. Over and over faculty readily identified participating in structures that were broken and messy. Such experiences contribute to perceptions by the faculty as to the fractured nature of higher education. Frustration easily grows among the most optimistic of faculty. Including Christian professors:

The fragmentation [of higher education] is so pervasive that no one is likely to be able to do much to change the direction of the whole. Too many competing powerful interests, ideological and economic, are involved. Yet we as Christians may still ask what opportunities there are for us to contribute positively within sometimes challenging university settings.
George Marsden1

Marsden has reproduced here what so many professors know in their bones: A genuine sense of frustration and resignation in response to ideological and economic demands. This description of the brokenness by Marsden is not an exaggeration. So, Marsden decides to foreclose engagement with the university at the structural level. These kinds of decisions among faithful women and men in the academy are common; while lying out in the open, many Christian faculty do not signal their distancing from (and their sense of resignation with) university structures.

What follows from Marsden is worth trusting. He proposes a kind of disposition of better scholarship leading to a credible and faithful engagement in the academy. Note how Marsden suggests what the direction should produce:

If Christians can demonstrate by the way they treat those with whom they differ that they are good community members in a pluralistic setting, then they should be in positions to emphasize that varieties of religious viewpoint ought to be honored within university communities. Administrators and others who can influence academic policies should then be trying to promote something like “principled pluralism”…

Of course, Marsden aims toward an engagement that John Inazu developed.2 I want to join Marsden, and say, “Amen!” Our speech and conduct — our very presence — should lead to an assessment as “good community members.” We — and the world — benefit from the fruits of our knowledge production that participate in a pluralistic institution. Refreshed considerations of one’s discipline through personal faith and Christian theology can articulate a new vista for justice and human flourishing that serve the campus and the world. Our personal relations and knowledge production can lead to becoming known as collegial and a contributor. Marsden’s proposal, though, offers a clear decision to withdraw from structural rehabilitation (or renewal) in the university in favor of attractive ideational proposals.

But I would draw our attention to my emphasis on Marsden’s suggestion: To “be in position” is to participate in a university structure. To simply declare one’s ideational preferences hardly engages with the power of that university structure: Whether those administrators and others would exercise their power stands independent of what ideas are proposed to initiate and undergird changes existing in the university.

And, yet: Marsden is correct: It is to “be in position” where university structures are sustained, corrected, and improved. That is not to say that such proposed reproductions and changes will represent God or Christ, or manifest as informed by the Bible. I am only affirming that one has to “be in position” in order to have any possibility for participating in the university structures.

Surprised by the InterVarsity Statement of Faith

Possibly some reading this post might ask, “Why would InterVarsity staff care about university structures? How is this concern part of their ministry?” Tucked beneath the “Beliefs” of the Statement of Faith of InterVarsity is the following:

Our beliefs lead us to these core values [in the] Context [of] Colleges and Universities:
We are called to be a redeeming influence
among their people, ideas, and structures.

For the sake of this post, I am treating “structures” as those ideas, institutions, policies, and procedures that contribute to the operation and growth of the university, which includes “differential access to the approved opportunities for legitimate, prestige-bearing pursuit of the culture goals.”3 More often than not, faculty populate many of those structures; they often know how to obtain and who possesses “differential access” that lead to fulfilling the goals of the structure. And they often know who is excluded from “differential access.”

Some of the more obvious structures are well known: Admissions. Tenure Promotion. Academic advising. Curriculum committees. Faculty daily engage with a myriad of structures. Sometimes the engagement is fruitful, possibly pleasurable. But that’s rare. Thus, in serving the university, InterVarsity staff announce the Good News on campus. But such announcements hardly set limits on God’s reign. The Gospel is for all of creation, and therefore, it will address how university structures, obvious and inconspicuous, might participate in the Kingdom of God.

Biblical Selections on Structures

Since I’ve mentioned the Bible, it would be good to ask what, if any, concerns can be found within the Bible regarding structures. What follows represents a partial selection of structures found in the Bible. Besides lifting these to the surface, I trust this fragmentary collection demonstrates the variety of structures created, engaged, and a range of outcomes.

Genesis 47:13–26

Joseph creates and develops economic policies in response to a regional famine. The enduring problem of famine creates opportunity for a new policy measure of servitude. While servitude to cancel one’s debts could be found throughout the ancient Near East, this structure appeared without a clear termination date. Perhaps the silence within the text about the immorality of this structure suggests both a critique and a portent of what follows. 4

Deuteronomy 19:1–10

The Torah provides a safe haven for anyone committing unintentional manslaughter and elaborates on specific lethal events either known in recent history or deadly accidents that could plausibly occur, all of which precedes entry into the city. The structure also creates the possibilities for preventing civic leadership from enacting hasty judgment upon the person whose actions lead to death. The safe haven proposes a geo-institutional structure that receives theological support from a covenantal history with YHWH.5

Mark 11:15–17

The practice of Temple offerings gave important liturgical continuity with the Torah (e.g., Lev. 1–7). Depending upon one’s socio-economic class, the various offerings and sacrifices may have needed a monetary transaction or exchange to fulfill the law. The narrative suggests the presence of nearby workers who were accountants, treasury officials, and security. Such persons were needed to fulfill the transactions but the sheer volume of businesses—along with exorbitant prices for the transactions—inhibited YHWH’s call to prayer for all nations (Isa.56:7). The failure of the temple comes into sharp relief by Jesus in addressing the resources of faith, prayer, and mutual forgiveness in accessing God’s favor.6 Even if the retail exchange structures could be endorsed from the Torah, the excessive charges and corruption placed the practices of the money changers and “dove sales” representatives in opposition to the worship of God.

Revelation 21

The book of Revelation has a criticism of imperial Rome, as well as a severe critique of Roman allies and those who betray the people of God. “The whole point of John’s writing is that it is in this world, in this human history, that the power of the Lord will be seen.”7 In reading Ch 21, we observe the intention of God to establish a new city, one brightened with a different source of guidance and power for its social arrangements. Relationships are now characterized by reconciliation. The present and the future for creation proposes both the illuminating presence of God and a diversity of peoples worshipping and working in the new heavens and the new earth; such work confers dignity to the person and their labor, while contributing to the flourishing of all creation.

A summary of the above biblical texts offers both an affirmation of the tendency of humans to create structures and for those structures to produce mixed outcomes. Even with the Bible observing, affirming, and critiquing structures, we don’t necessarily find some straight-line guidance on structures. We receive narratives and poetry that aim to cultivate ways of life under the reign of God. Often, those biblical texts aim to cultivate God’s shalom and justice.

This selection of texts are examples but are not prescriptive in our efforts to understand and engage structures. I aim here to reaffirm that the Bible has already observed the presence of structures. Furthermore, some of the outcomes run counter to the worship of God and the mission of God. Some structures need revision and renewal but not abandonment. Some structures we already participate within but we have yet to discover how God would incorporate our faithful presence and work in the academy into the new creation.

In the next post, I will elaborate on engagement with university structures that cohere with the mission of God, along with a few good stories of faculty engagement with structures that aim to develop our faith in Jesus with our careers in the university.

Bibliography

  1. Marsden, George. 2022. “Higher Education in a ‘Post-Secular’ Age.” Substack newsletter. The Raised Hand (blog). September 15, 2022. https://theraisedhand.substack.com/p/higher-education-in-a-post-secular.
  2. Inazu, John D. 2018. Confident Pluralism: Surviving and Thriving through Deep Difference. University of Chicago Press.
  3. Merton, Robert K. 1938. “Social Structure and Anomie.” American Sociological Review 3 (5): 679. https://doi.org/10.2307/2084686.
  4. Walton, John H, Victor H Matthews, and Mark W Chavalas. 2012. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. InterVarsity Press: 79.
  5. Brueggemann, Walter. 1982. “The Bible and Mission: Some Interdisciplinary Implications for Teaching.” Missiology 10 (4): 401-403. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLA0000797138&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
  6. DeSilva, David A. 2018. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods & Ministry Formation. InterVarsity Press: 221.
  7. Boesak, Allan. 1987. Comfort and Protest: Reflections on the Apocalypse of John of Patmos. Westminster Press: 129.

Practicing Faithful Presence as an Astronomer

Lucas Pezeta at Pexels

Early in my academic career, I spent several months intensively studying Scripture to determine how I would view my vocation as professional scientist.  The conclusions I drew from this process have stayed with me and have helped shaped my career for decades.  I recommend this process for anyone regardless of their particular vocation.  The earlier in their career they undertake this exercise, the better—but it is never too late.

As a result of my reflections on Scripture, I have settled on four primary ways of being a faithful presence in my chosen field:

First, as a scientist, I engage nearly every day in the process of “thinking God’s thoughts after Him” (to quote Johannes Kepler).  As an astronomer, studying the cosmos that God has created provides endless opportunities for worship (cf. Psalm 19).  In my experience, astronomy provides one of the more direct ways of gaining insight into the awe-inspiring grandeur, mystery, and power of our Creator, but I have no doubt that the pursuit of myriad different professions—from paleontology to poetry to pottery—could provide similar insights.

Second, every vocation consists in working productively toward something bigger than oneself, though my career has largely been within the narrow confines of academia.  But regardless of how big or small the field of my labor is, the resources I obtain as a result of my work (especially the financial resources) allow me to support myself and my family.  And the contributions I make to my academic institution allow it to continue its research- and education-focused mission as well.  In essence, I see productive work that mirrors God’s creative work as one of the best ways to “Be fruitful… fill the Earth, and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28).

Third, my vocation provides very specific ways for broader social impact.  As far as academic research goes, astronomy is not as directly impactful as, say, attempting to cure cancer.  But fundamental research of any sort is part of the overall process of stewarding the Earth and its resources for our benefit, and astronomy provides inspiration for countless potential scientists to pursue STEM careers (for more in-depth thoughts along these lines, see NASA scientist Dr Stuhlinger’s letter written in 1970 to Sister Mary Jucunda, now titled “Why Explore Space”).  Of even broader impact, popular-level astronomy is an excellent tool for improving the scientific literacy of the general populace – especially when critical thinking skills are so sorely needed to address issues of public policy, illustrated in the recent contentious public discussions of expert claims (and counter-claims) in the field of epidemiology.  Furthermore, even though my direct sphere of influence is relatively small (my institution employs less than 200 people), I can use that influence to address some injustices present in our broader society (e.g., the misogyny that potentially leads to underrepresentation of women in STEM).  For example, I recently played a role in the hiring of a female colleague into a senior position, and our regular interactions often give me the chance to support her in this new role.  I have also had the privilege to serve the broader scientific community by, for example, being a member of the American Physical Society’s Committee on the International Freedom of Scientists.

Finally, my vocation allows for opportunity to develop deeper relationships with colleagues and students in my own institution and across the world.  Interpersonal skills were definitely not a focus of my university or grad school training as a scientist, but I use them even more now as the leader of a large and diverse group of scientists and engineers.  As I manage this group’s tasks, contribute to the long-term strategy of my organization, and support my staff in their chosen vocations, I see myself as a shepherd, albeit in a secular setting rather than in a church.  While this is not precisely fulfilling Paul’s admonition in Ephesians to “Prepare God’s people for works of service”, I do have analogous responsibilities for the organization’s (and its employees’) flourishing.  For example, at the start of the pandemic, I had the opportunity to develop and enact policies that kept our people employed and productive.  We ceased some of our research and educational activities for a time, but our leadership nevertheless decided we’d keep *everyone* employed (if they wished to stay).  An organization that makes its people (rather than financial profit) a priority has values that are consonant with my own moral views, and therefore I hope to continue to support such an institution for as long as I am able.

In conclusion, my study of God’s word has shown me several ways to be a faithful Christian while pursuing a career as a scientist, from learning about God’s creation that directly inspires worship of Him, to faithfully providing for the people and institutions closest to me, to uplifting my colleagues (directly) and broader society (indirectly).  Whether I am consciously thinking of these larger, more “spiritual” goals in any given instance, they nevertheless have motivated me to be a faithful presence over many years within my chosen vocation.

Faithful Presence Without Fear

Vlad Bagacian at Pexels (cropped)

“…I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God…for God gave us a spirit not of fear,

but of power, love and self-control.”

II Timothy 1:6-7 (ESV)

Many of us are returning to campus for the first time after two tumultuous years of worry due to Covid-19.  Yet even apart from the pandemic, our academic environment can generate anxiety.  Some may be anxious about working in a department where colleagues are hostile to the Christian faith. Others may be feeling the pressure of completing their dissertations or succeeding in the job market.  Some may be just starting as new professors and feeling pressure to prove themselves.  As I begin a new semester, I think of these words that the apostle Paul wrote to his young assistant in ministry, Timothy.  Paul was a kind mentor.  Knowing that Timothy was launching out on his own, Paul acknowledged the reality of fear.  But then he countered this with a challenge and a promise.  The challenge is to “fan into flame” the faith that God had given Timothy.  The promise is that God has given him the tools to do this—a spirit of power, love and self-control. 

How do we fan into flame the faith that God has given us, in our work in the university?  Clearly, working with integrity, humility and excellence in our fields is fundamental.  But how can that flame transform the way we meet the challenging requirements of our jobs, and bring light to our academic communities? 

Meeting the Challenge

Perhaps the first step is to recognize that God is working already.  My second day as an assistant professor, a student walked into my office, said he’d heard I was a Christian, and that the campus fellowship group needed a faculty advisor.  Would I do it?  I was still wondering how anyone knew I was a Christian, but I said yes.  That one “yes” expanded my vision of what it means to be a professor.  I saw that God had gone ahead of me.  He had already opened up a way for me to encourage students in their faith, alongside my academic responsibilities.  It was not easy.  The campus was not always a friendly place to faith.  But God was working through it all.  Throughout my career I have prayed for opportunities in each place I’ve been privileged to work, and God has answered those prayers.  Sometimes, other professors have become curious about my involvement with student groups and started to ask questions.

The second step might be to remember that we are “…created in Christ Jesus to do good works which God has prepared in advance for us to do” (Eph. 2:10, NIV). That includes not only our teaching, but also our research.  Early on in my career, the Association of Christian Economists challenged me to write an article about how my faith affects my research.  I had never asked that question explicitly.  I didn’t know if I had an answer.  But I said yes.  As I probed into this further, God gave me opportunities to discuss what it means to think Christianly about my work, not only with other believers, but with a number of colleagues from different faith backgrounds.  And He keeps bringing fruit out of that work.  Fast forward to March 2020, just before the lockdown.  The graduate Christian fellowship at my university asked me to come talk about how my “profession (faith) affects my profession (work in economics).” A  student from a different faith background heard about the talk.  He asked if he and I could talk about this, since he was trying to determine his own beliefs about God. 

A third step is to pray for wisdom to approach our work with a different attitude—one that does not conform to this world, but is instead “transformed by the renewing of [our minds]” (Rom. 12:2 NIV).  For me this realization was most vivid as I was about to discuss a paper at a conference. The paper was written by two stars in my field, who were sitting in the front row.  Despite having been a professor for a good while, I was feeling very small in comparison, and inadequate to the task.  My anxiety was growing, when I suddenly realized that this fear was not honoring to God.  If God had given me this opportunity, I should approach it with a good spirit—not worrying about what others would think of me.  Could I let go of the fear?  I said yes.  I sat down on the desk up front and took a friendly approach–praising the strengths of the work and offering a few comments that might be useful to the authors.  That was a pivotal moment for me.  My future was in God’s hands. Trusting him, I did not need to give way to fear.    

Equipped for the Task

God has given us a new spirit that enables us to be that bright flame on our campuses.  He replaces our fear with power—inner strength to engage our work in a transformative way.  We may not feel powerful, but God has promised that His grace is sufficient for us, for His “power is made perfect in weakness” (II Cor:12:9, ESV).  Anxiety often disables us.  But God’s power enables us, for the “joy of the Lord is our strength” (Neh: 8:10, NIV).  We are also not alone in this endeavor.  For me, active involvement with colleagues in Christian academic societies has given me wisdom,  encouragement, and a deeper ability to think Christianly about my field.        

To this power, God adds love.  Love fans our flame of faith in a radical way in the university.  Perhaps it is manifest in the way you acknowledge the contributions of others when you present your own research.  Or maybe it is seen in the time you take to write a careful referee report, knowing that it affects the author’s chances for promotion.  That love might be seen in the time, integrity, and kindness you demonstrate in your teaching and grading.  In an environment where success often seems to depend upon self-promotion, such humble actions stand out.  Love also prompts us to pray for opportunities to serve our students and our colleagues, and gives us the courage to say yes.    

Finally, to power and love, God adds self-control.  We acknowledge that these tasks are too big for us, and we cannot do them on our own.  As Spurgeon says, “a sense of our own poverty drives us to Christ, and that is where we need to be, for in Him is our fruit found.”[i] This self-control helps us wait patiently and prayerfully for God, rather than run ahead of him.  In my second university position I was excited to continue serving students but had no clear direction for an entire semester.  Then two students found me and asked for help to begin a fellowship group.  I was glad I waited.  This gift of self-control also helps us in dealing with conflict or difficult problems.  Spurgeon notes that when we worry about our circumstances, we are trying to do God’s job.  “Be wise and attend to the obeying, and let Christ manage the providing.”[ii] Self-control allows us to approach our work calmly and diligently—confident that God will enable us to accomplish all that is needed. 

Transforming our Scholarship

Fear of the global economy is palpable these days.  I study global trade and economic development, with a special focus on China and India.  Even before the pandemic, the news was full of claims that trade had decimated US industries, and that other countries had gotten all the benefits and stolen our jobs.  In the US we saw an unprecedented rise in protectionism.  With the pandemic came interruptions in global supply chains, and a new wave of fear emerged.  Global trade was too risky.  Firms should re-shore their production processes. 

Can my flame make a difference?  Yes.  With self-control (or a “sound mind,” as some translations put it) I can both respect those who are fearful, but calmly try to bring information that will help dispel that fear.  Economists know that trade is not a zero-sum game but is instead mutually beneficial.  In fact, we have overwhelming evidence that global trade has contributed to growth and prosperity in the US, and in countries all over the world.  During the pandemic, trade was crucial to maintain access to medical and personal protective equipment.[iii] Evidence suggests that global supply chain trade not only strengthens US industries but can mitigate economic losses and reduce risk.[iv]

The tremendous reduction in extreme poverty since the 1990s–especially in some of the poorest countries–has been caused, in part, by more open trade, and by participation in those global supply chains.[v]  In my own work, I’ve found evidence that global supply chain trade has also had beneficial effects on the environment in developing countries.[vi]  If we love our neighbors as ourselves, there is no room for treating others as adversaries and inflicting policies that we think favor “us” while harming “them.”  Ironically, those same policies typically harm ourselves.  At the same time, economists do recognize that while most people within a country benefit from trade, a smaller number will face losses.  Some countries have programs to address these losses, but they often aren’t very successful.   Loving our neighbor also requires acknowledging this and working to address these needs so that all may flourish.

Saying yes to the opportunities God brings us is not easy.  Sometimes we are tempted to just keep our heads down—especially in the face of hostility toward our faith.  I imagine Timothy felt the same way.  But when we are willing to fan the flame of faith, we see God work in marvelous ways.

[i] Charles Spurgeon, Morning and Evening, Wheaton:  Crossway, 2003.  August 28 evening devotion.

[ii] Ibid., December 19 morning devotion.

[iii] World Bank and World Trade Organization, Trade Therapy: Deepening Cooperation to Strengthen Pandemic Defenses.  Washington, DC: World Bank, 2022.

[iv] Handley, K., et al., “Rising Import Tariffs, Falling Export Growth: When Modern Supply Chains Meet Old-Style Protectionism, NBER Working Paper 26611, 2020 ;  C. Ariola, et al., “Localising value chains in the post-COVID world would add to the economic losses and make domestic economies more vulnerable,” VoxEU Nov.15, 2020.

[v] World Bank, World Development Report 2020 Trading for Development in the Age of Global Value Chains. Washington, DC:  World Bank, 2019; World Bank, The Role of Trade in Ending Poverty.  Washington, DC:  World Bank, 2015; J. Dean, “Trade with Developing Countries in a Global Value Chain World,” Faith and Economics, 72:51-59, 2018.

[vi] J. Dean and M. Lovely, “Trade Growth, Production Fragmentation, and China’s Environment,” in R. Feenstra and S. Wei, eds., China’s Growing Role in World Trade. Chicago: U. of Chicago Press, 2010; J. Dean and M. Lovely, “GVCs, FDI, and Industrial Pollution Intensity in China,” manuscript 2022.

Faithful Presence: A Medical Student’s Perspective

Gustavo Fring at Pexels

What does faithful presence mean for Christians in the context of medical education? This question arises from the main theme of James Davison Hunter’s book To Change the World. He articulates an approach to culture that reflects Christ’s incarnation, an approach characterized by faithfulness in contrast to accommodation and witness to the culture in contrast to domination. How is this approach applied in different cultural and professional contexts?  As a medical student who is early on in his path to becoming a physician, this question is important to me. I came to medical school after many years of being in vibrant Catholic communities. I quickly became aware that, in contrast to my previous communities, my beliefs were not the dominant worldview or moral compass. This difference of belief has rarely resulted in hostility toward my faith, yet the recognition of difference always magnifies the role of belief in one’s life and calls for justification of that belief to others and to oneself.

How do I effectively and faithfully communicate the Gospel to those who may be interested in the ways that my faith informs my approach to medicine? How do I communicate the Gospel in situations when my religious convictions put me in opposition to the dominant beliefs of my peers and institution? These outward facing challenges and opportunities both arise from and create a challenge of justification internally: What do I believe? I have always encountered a tension between the virtues of fortitude and prudence. All physicians need these virtues, but Christians embedded in medical institutions require them on another level: how do we courageously and gracefully embody the Gospel while prudently navigating institutional structures and relationships? Ultimately, these challenges and opportunities manifest themselves in two ways: our inward-facing efforts to build a community of like-minded believers, and our outward-facing efforts to engage with our peers who do not share our faith.  Three passages from Scripture come to mind as guides: Acts 28:22, Matthew 18:20, and 1 Peter 3:15.

“For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.” -Matthew 18:20

As Christians, we are called to love everyone we encounter. My non-Christian friends enrich my life in innumerable ways. However, it is important to have a community of believers to challenge and support us in faith. This involves a cycle of giving and receiving. I have been blessed with faculty mentors who serve as important witnesses to the Christian mission, and in turn, I have been privileged to co-lead our group of Christian medical students, Pritzker Christian Fellowship. The encouragement that I have received has given me the strength to encourage my peers. It has been enlightening and comforting to hear the struggles of my peers and to share my struggles; the shared pursuit of growth builds community and deep friendships. Sometimes, this community is small. I am a firm believer that great things often begin as small endeavors. Consistency is key. We have a Bible study that is sparsely attended, but its benefit does not derive from the number of people it reaches. Rather, it is worthwhile because it fulfills Christ’s statement above. Although poor attendance can be a discouragement, the study remains a source of spiritual renewal for the few that attend and will attract others if it is genuine. Even so, it is not sufficient to have a community of believers around us if we do not cultivate our own relationship with Christ. Christ reveals us to ourselves. Many of my peers share my experience of having a poor prayer life during medical school. If we seek community, we must first prioritize the community of the Trinity. It is from there that all love and communion flows, so even amid our busy-ness, our relationship with Christ must be paramount.

“But we would like to hear what you think, for with regard to this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against.” -Acts 28:22

The verse above comes from the Jews in Rome as they addressed the Apostle Paul. Their statement identifies Christians as a “sign of contradiction.” I do not believe that this is the primary way in which Christians should seek to be viewed in the world. However, in following Paul’s example of lovingly preaching the truth, we will sometimes be a “sign of contradiction.” For medical students and physicians, this often occurs in the context of advocating an unpopular ethical stance. It could also come from adhering to beliefs that are perceived as “unscientific.” In my own experience, I have found that these battles must be chosen prudently, but that we must be willing to take chances. I met the predictable opposition when I have taken these chances. Even so, they have led to unexpected conversations that have provided fertile ground for dialogue and even friendship. They are also opportunities to learn. Dialogue and conflict inevitably lead back to internal conflict and force us to examine the consistency of our lives. I am continually inspired by my classmates’ pursuit of justice and their reflection of the Christian mission, whether intended or not. God gives us opportunities to witness, and He teaches us through them. Sometimes this involves initiative on our part, and sometimes it involves accepting the challenges that come our way. We can take comfort in the fact that Truth is a person (John 14:6) and that we can always depend on Him.

 â€œAlways be ready to make your defence to anyone who demands from you an account of the hope that is in you” -1 Peter 3:15

While we sometimes are “signs of contradiction”, a defensive posture is not ideal. If we are right in what we claim about the Christian life, it should be joyful and attractive. The verse above mentions “giving a defense,” but notice that it is a defense of hope. Our lives should generate genuine interest, and we should be ready to give an explanation. Medical institutions are academic environments filled with questioners. Young medical students in particular encounter existential questions in the face of death and illness. It is in this common endeavor towards truth that the Christian life and witness can shine. I was fortunate to start a religious diversity initiative in which students were given the opportunity to discuss “big questions” about life. These discussions were not evangelical in nature; they were an opportunity for students of all beliefs (or none) to question together. However, the answers that Christian students gave flowed from the Gospel. In situations like this, Christians have the opportunity to articulate a reason for our belief. As in so many things, relationship is foundational. I believe that we can engage everyone we encounter in some way, but that the setting of friendship is often the most fruitful. We seek friends for the sake of friendship itself, yet friendship is also the best way to share our lives with others, including our life in Christ.

As a young medical student, I am still relatively untouched by burnout. However, I do believe that as Christians we ought to feel at home in medicine. Our faith teaches us in a special way that the human body reflects God’s goodness. A central tenet of our faith is the Incarnation, God taking on human flesh in Christ. I have been privileged to engage in medical outreach to those experiencing homelessness through a group at my institution. The outings we make to encampments have been some of the most fulfilling experiences during my time in medical school. I hope that this serves as an example of Christian witness, but I do not do it primarily for that reason. We are called to serve, but we also receive. Our faith elevates these experiences to a new level: I see Christ in those I serve on the streets, and I do my best, whether explicitly or implicitly, to be a Christian witness to them.

Medical students have the opportunity to see Christ and the beauty of His hand in creation, whether in the intricacies of the human body during dissection or in the patients that we serve. In this way, our patients and our work are “sacraments” to us. In the same way, we are called to be sacraments to our patients, peers, and institutions. Gaudium et Spes, the Catholic Church’s document on the approach of the Church to the modern world, encourages all believers to do just this: “To promote [the communication of the Gospel to the diverse cultures of people and situations in the modern world], especially in our days, the Church requires the special help of those who live in the world, are versed with different institutions and specialties, and grasp their innermost significance in the eyes of both believers and unbelievers.” As physicians and physicians in training, we are part of this call. We must use our special skills and circumstances to embody the Gospel and to bring it into our unique circumstances.

Works Cited

Hunter, James Davison. To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity Today. New York, Oxford University Press, 2010.

The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition. Oxford University Press, 1999.

Paul VI. Gaudium et Spes. December 7, 1965. Papal Archive. The Holy See. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html