Sattler College Turmoil

[Judas Maccabeus]

If FOTW were to plant a church in my city, I think there would be healthy ways to go about it and unhealthy ways. I don't think it would be hypocrisy for me or my church to make a determination about that.

You call a church/college that is totally dependent on one guys money healthy? Same guy potentially as your landlord, “pastor “ and employer/college chancellor healthy? This is about the most unhealthy situation I can think of.
Planting a church totally dependent on one guys finances is a recipe for unhealthy , full stop. Gives far too much control to one individual, formally or informally . Calling anything else unhealthy is hypocritical to say the least.

I have not said these things.

A “Stone-Campbell “ church has no business telling Mennonites what they should or should not do. If the local Baptist church stated that about us, I would feel free to ignore them.

That may be, but the local Baptist church may have an accurate perspective on the health of how a Mennonite church was started in their area. If it is accurate, it should be considered regardless of who said. An accurate perspective from an unbeliever should also be considered.

I would consider anything they say hopelessly colored by their bad theology.

[mike]

I think the issue is that there are some key dogmatic differences that would result in any Anabaptist church not having a "healthy" foundation

I suspect the FOTW concern Ernie heard about "a healthy foundation" has more to do with the circumstances around the proposed church plant - who is planting it and why - than matters of dogma and differences in theology between FOTW and Anabaptism.

That is correct.

This is typical when there is a "split," where a group of folks leave a church and start a new one in the same area. The original church feels threatened and almost always believes the new church lacks a "healthy foundation." This of course may or may not be true, but it is very seldom that the original church believes the new church is a positive development.

[joshuabgood]

I had stated earlier when we were talking about how many FotW congregations there were that I heard the Minneapolis group was no longer with FotW, which is what I heard. That however was confirmed incorrect. So want to correct that for the record.it would be 8 total...

[Ken]

To recap this thread. First Joshuabgood writes that numerous top people at Sattler are resigning including the president, provost, several faculty members and the entire board over a dispute about whether or not Sattler has diverged from its original stated mission Those sorts of actions do not generally come lightly. And usually only after people have determined that their concerns are unlikely to be addressed through other less-drastic means.

In short, reportedly, President Dean Taylor is leaving the college leadership (though he may have limited involvement for time), Mike Miller, Provost and architect of their initial accreditation, is also leaving (though he also may have limited involvement for a time), numerous other faculty members will likely be leaving in the next year or so.

Reportedly the entire board (David Bercot, Charles Pike, Eva Adams, ...), minus Finny Kuruvilla, is resigning due to their discernment that Sattler has left its original mission of being a more inclusive school of "pan-Anabaptists" and became more of a denominational school fundamentally guided by FOTW tenets. This culminated in the majority of the board, reportedly, blessing the idea Dean Taylor brought of an Anabaptist church being started for Anabaptist students at Sattler, in Boston. The word is Finny Kuruvilla strongly opposed this move. The board believes Sattler can't exist without Eventide contributions (through proximity with Finny) and therefore is resigning with the encouragement that a board be set up that is exclusively, and explicit, about the school being an FOTW denominational school.

and then Ernie reports the anonymous comments of someone who is reading this thread but is unwilling to comment in public:

Someone with knowledge of the matters being discussed in thread has contacted me to say that there are inaccuracies in this thread and that there is context and complexities that are too personal and too numerous to be straightened out in a thread like this.
So I want to go on record as saying that some of my comments are one sided and that they should be viewed as such. Personal perspectives that I have shared about Sattler and FOTW are simply my perspective and may not reflect reality.

In particular, it would be good for me to clarify that the concerns at FOTW about starting an Anabaptist church in Boston have to do with the foundation upon which such a church is begun. If the foundation for an Anabaptist church in Boston was deemed healthy by FOTW, many at FOTW could likely feel quite positive about the initiative.

Except that from what Joshua writes, the actual reason why so many people are resigning is that they believe Sattler has diverged from its more original ecumenical or "pan-Anabaptist" mission and that the apparent opposition to the church founding is more of a symptom of the problem and not the root cause. The actual root cause of the dispute is the effort to convert Sattler into an explicitly FOTW denominational school.

In any event, it is rather absurd to claim that a subject is too complex and the issues are too numerous to be addressed in an internet forum. This is not a broadcast or print medium where either time or space are constricted and editorial compromises must be made. People can post a 1,000 page dissertation here if they wish. It sounds more like they just don't want their dirty laundry discussed in public and want to control the discourse without actually having the courage to come do it in a space where people are able to ask questions and push back.

Jumping ship is a VERY PUBLIC way of expressing one's disapproval or disagreement with the course that an institution is taking. One has to expect such actions to be discussed in public.

[joshuabgood]

Except that from what Joshua writes, the actual reason why so many people are resigning is that they believe Sattler has diverged from its more original ecumenical or "pan-Anabaptist" mission and that the apparent opposition to the church founding is more of a symptom of the problem and not the root cause. The actual root cause of the dispute is the effort to convert Sattler into an explicitly FOTW denominational school.

To be clear a better term is pan kingdom Christian like Dan mentioned. Regarding original vision, I had heard in the letter the board sent to faculty it states that they believed the school should either return to the original vision or more clearly identify as FotW. Whether or not FotW is a denomination is probably a matter of perspective. And whether or not the college deviated from the original goals is also probably a matter of perspective. But I am under the impression it is the boards perspective...that it did.

Also I noted that the president and provost were going to continue at least for a time with some involvement with the school, though I don't think they will be present in Boston.

I do think these pieces are significant and worthy of analysis and evaluation. The vision it would seem needs clarity and unity.

[Ken]

Except that from what Joshua writes, the actual reason why so many people are resigning is that they believe Sattler has diverged from its more original ecumenical or "pan-Anabaptist" mission and that the apparent opposition to the church founding is more of a symptom of the problem and not the root cause. The actual root cause of the dispute is the effort to convert Sattler into an explicitly FOTW denominational school.

To be clear a better term is pan kingdom Christian like Dan mentioned. Regarding original vision, I had heard in the letter the board sent to faculty it states that they believed the school should either return to the original vision or more clearly identify as FotW. Whether or not FotW is a denomination is probably a matter of perspective. And whether or not the college deviated from the original goals is also probably a matter of perspective. But I am under the impression it is the boards perspective...that it did.

Also I noted that the president and provost were going to continue at least for a time with some involvement with the school, though I don't think they will be present in Boston.

I do think these pieces are significant and worthy of analysis and evaluation. The vision it would seem needs clarity and unity.

So this is really more about the future direction of the school and not about a church founding in Boston.

[Ernie]

You call a church/college that is totally dependent on one guys money healthy? Same guy potentially as your landlord, “pastor “ and employer/college chancellor healthy? This is about the most unhealthy situation I can think of.

I have not said these things.

You have not, but that is what FOTW is. Are you saying my statement is incorrect ?

I was asked a couple questions and I responded that I was not saying this.

Among many things, I think the things you mentioned would need to be addressed in a discussion with the household of faith, in order for a healthy FOTW church plant to take place in my city.

[ohio jones]

People can post a 1,000 page dissertation here if they wish.

I'd recommend posting a link, rather than the whole thing.

[appleman2006]

People can post a 1,000 page dissertation here if they wish.

I'd recommend posting a link, rather than the whole thing.

986 to go.

[Soloist]

I see pros and cons of Sattler/FOTW. I do really appreciate their outreach to foreigners in the area, as well as the accountability groups that I think both the college and church provide. There might be a bit of a superiority thing some get into regarding college educated Christians and those who are not, but I would think that may depend on individuals and not always be intentional. I'd feel uncomfortable sending my children here, but I think some students probably benefit from it.
The only advice I would have for a prospective student/parent is to make the effort to visit, and interview students/staff to make sure you are comfortable with the culture/educational/theological practices you see. It's worth any extra expense to do so. Don't assume that just because they come from a Kingdom Christian theology, you and them have the same beliefs on everything being taught, whether theological, scientific, or otherwise. I think parents and students need to invest the time to look into this stuff before they find out after moving and starting school, on the off chance that there is something being taught/practiced that they may consider a show stopper. I do not have any family who are faculty or students, so I would recommend you ask those who are, because this is a large investment, both financially and eternally.