Kingdom Christian and Charity Movements

[Josh]

I would seriously reconsider, the education appears subpar, faculty turnover off the chart and no facilities except a bunch of classrooms. Majors that really do not line up with what employers expect (Except for the IT major

I don't think employers would be impressed with the IT major either, nor am I impressed with the fact they currently have no CS professors in their faculty (although they do have an open position they're trying to hire for).

, maybe human biology might form the basis for med school admission, but considering Finney's attitude towards clinical medicine as a career, I would not count on them being interested in that after he is done with them, it is all in black and white) and no public statement as to what they ACTUALLY believe, I would discourage that as a place to get a further education. About the only thing they seem to do well is language.

I have heard offhanded comments by a number of them, especially Milloni, that barely conceal their contempt for the Mennonite moment. I was actually more than a bit put off.

J.M.

Of note is that Milioni informed me I'm unsaved due to my lack of valid immersion, although he walked back this statement when I saw him again a year later.

[joshuabgood]

And it would collapse like a house of cards without his money. Both school and church. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

The college, as a startup, is of course dependent on donations, as really are most Christian colleges. Though to be sure, if one counts the federal/state aid donations secular schools receive their economic models don't hold real well either. I guess I am sounding like an FOTW apologist here, but I don't think money is the reason FOTW is a "success." I think the vision is a compelling one (even though I don't quite embrace the entirety of it).

I would seriously reconsider, the education appears subpar, faculty turnover off the chart and no facilities except a bunch of classrooms. Majors that really do not line up with what employers expect (Except for the IT major, maybe human biology might form the basis for med school admission, but considering Finney's attitude towards clinical medicine as a career, I would not count on them being interested in that after he is done with them, it is all in black and white) and no public statement as to what they ACTUALLY believe, I would discourage that as a place to get a further education. About the only thing they seem to do well is language.

I haven't seen evidence that would make me think the education is subpar. I have a number of former students at the school and these were kids who scored off the charts on the SAT's, AP exams, etc. They are being worked hard at Sattler. Further I have visited the school and sat in on classes. I have personally had the privilege of attending and graduating as a student from 3 differing colleges, two secular and one Christian, and the rigor and pedagogy seems quite comparable.

My feeling is if you want a decent liberal arts degree, they are a fine place to go. If you wanted a nursing degree, a fine arts degree, or a technical degree of some sort (possibly Comp Sci aside) it wouldn't make sense to go there. My son, being a liberal arts guy, it makes sense academically (by that time they should be accredited - which is important to me), and I also appreciate and trust the mentoring and coaching he would receive there.

I have heard offhanded comments by a number of them, especially Milloni, that barely conceal their contempt for the Mennonite moment. I was actually more than a bit put off.

Milioni is critical of aspects of CA society. This doesn't bother me. For the most part, the portions he is critical of, I think are valid critiques. So I don't find that too threatening. Incidentally, Milioni isn't connected to Sattler. And Milioni, articulates his own views, which while ably presented, perhaps a bit acerbically at times for the CA hearer, are actually different in significant ways from Kuruvilla's or Taylors. So it doesn't feel fair to me to use your feelings about Milioni to cast aspersions on Sattler.

[Ken]

Milioni is critical of aspects of CA society. This doesn't bother me. For the most part, the portions he is critical of, I think are valid critiques. So I don't find that too threatening. Incidentally, Milioni isn't connected to Sattler. And Milioni, articulates his own views, which while ably presented, perhaps a bit acerbically at times for the CA hearer, are actually different in significant ways from Kuruvilla's or Taylors. So it doesn't feel fair to me to use your feelings about Milioni to cast aspersions on Sattler.

Maybe he's not employed by Sattler, but he writes on their blog: https://www.sattlercollege.org/blogs/20 ... on-to-rest

[joshuabgood]

Milioni is critical of aspects of CA society. This doesn't bother me. For the most part, the portions he is critical of, I think are valid critiques. So I don't find that too threatening. Incidentally, Milioni isn't connected to Sattler. And Milioni, articulates his own views, which while ably presented, perhaps a bit acerbically at times for the CA hearer, are actually different in significant ways from Kuruvilla's or Taylors. So it doesn't feel fair to me to use your feelings about Milioni to cast aspersions on Sattler.

Maybe he's not employed by Sattler, but he writes on their blog: https://www.sattlercollege.org/blogs/20 ... on-to-rest

He wrote as a father of a student though...not as anyone with any formal influence. This particular article, which I read when it came out, was a bit too effusive of its praise for homeschooling in my opinion. And a bit too critical of the education sector. Perhaps I feel this way simply because I am a lifer in education, both public (for 14 years) and private Christian (6 years), and know schools actually to be great places. And perhaps it is because, as an "intake officer" of numerous, 50ish probably, over the space of the last few years, home-schooled students, I see plenty of data that Milioni doesn't seem familiar with, but needless to say it doesn't always cohere with the "typical overachieving" and "brilliant" homeschool student language used in this missive. Homeschool students are rather like school students. Some excel...some need additional support.

But considering he was writing about his own daughter, the "over the top praise" is understandable as paternal pride, though my guess is for some readers, a bit much.

Interestingly his daughter no longer attends Sattler...

[RZehr]

Eldest got married. Second daughter?
That was the first Chloe I knew, and many years later I ended up with a daughter named Chloe.

[Josh]

Eldest got married. Second daughter?
That was the first Chloe I knew, and many years later I ended up with a daughter named Chloe.

Perhaps Sattler has a good MRS. degree programme?

[Judas Maccabeus]

And it would collapse like a house of cards without his money. Both school and church. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

The college, as a startup, is of course dependent on donations, as really are most Christian colleges. Though to be sure, if one counts the federal/state aid donations secular schools receive their economic models don't hold real well either. I guess I am sounding like an FOTW apologist here, but I don't think money is the reason FOTW is a "success." I think the vision is a compelling one (even though I don't quite embrace the entirety of it).

I would seriously reconsider, the education appears subpar, faculty turnover off the chart and no facilities except a bunch of classrooms. Majors that really do not line up with what employers expect (Except for the IT major, maybe human biology might form the basis for med school admission, but considering Finney's attitude towards clinical medicine as a career, I would not count on them being interested in that after he is done with them, it is all in black and white) and no public statement as to what they ACTUALLY believe, I would discourage that as a place to get a further education. About the only thing they seem to do well is language.

I haven't seen evidence that would make me think the education is subpar. I have a number of former students at the school and these were kids who scored off the charts on the SAT's, AP exams, etc. They are being worked hard at Sattler. Further I have visited the school and sat in on classes. I have personally had the privilege of attending and graduating as a student from 3 differing colleges, two secular and one Christian, and the rigor and pedagogy seems quite comparable.

My feeling is if you want a decent liberal arts degree, they are a fine place to go. If you wanted a nursing degree, a fine arts degree, or a technical degree of some sort (possibly Comp Sci aside) it wouldn't make sense to go there. My son, being a liberal arts guy, it makes sense academically (by that time they should be accredited - which is important to me), and I also appreciate and trust the mentoring and coaching he would receive there.

I have heard offhanded comments by a number of them, especially Milloni, that barely conceal their contempt for the Mennonite moment. I was actually more than a bit put off.

Milioni is critical of aspects of CA society. This doesn't bother me. For the most part, the portions he is critical of, I think are valid critiques. So I don't find that too threatening. Incidentally, Milioni isn't connected to Sattler. And Milioni, articulates his own views, which while ably presented, perhaps a bit acerbically at times for the CA hearer, are actually different in significant ways from Kuruvilla's or Taylors. So it doesn't feel fair to me to use your feelings about Milioni to cast aspersions on Sattler.

Maybe I am more facility focused than many of you. But one of the differences between an "online" degree and one at your local university is the ability to teach laboratory science. You cannot correctly teach even basic science with no lab component. The hands-on aspect is key to understanding how what the prof. is talking about in lectures and the real world is done in the lab. For even a freshman, introductory biology is nearly useless if taught in an all lecture format. Most students change their major sometime in their first year. Without that exposure, there is no opportunity to really know what the hard sciences are about. The world in general, and our community in particular need more of these. The fact that they have ignored or outsourced these would prevent me from ever recommending this school.

I see little difference between getting a degree from University of Phoenix and going to Sattler in an academic sense. In the spiritual sense, yes. The fact that they filled their first class with smart students is more a testimony to the free tuition rather than any qualities the school has. No mennonite can pass up free.

As to the stuff that is being taught up there, separating that group into neat little boxes does not cut it. All of those students will almost certainly be discipled through their church, and come under the authority of their leadership. Hence, the position of all of the leadership is important. I will tell you again, except for Dean Taylor, the attitude is palpable, and you admit that you have heard it too. I would LOVE to know what went on at that EPMC church, but I would defiantly not send my children to a place where the leadership takes shots at my home church. If you add 2+2 together, I wonder if they want to recruit our best and brightest to be foot soldiers in the establishment of their movement, since they are planting a string of churches. I have seen this done before.

Lastly, I have attended 3 places, one preprofessional, one professional, got my degree from there. Did 30 credits of grad school, no degree by design. Was involved in clinical training of undergrads back in the day, no faculty appointment. I have been around the block as well.

Are they really calling their leadership "Apostles?" If so RUN. FAST.

I have seen that train wreck before.

J.M.

[Ernie]

I hear you JM, and you are right in that, were it not for CA scholars, Sattler would pretty much lose 90% of their student body. They simply haven't managed yet to appeal broadly. Simultaneously there is obviously much they like about "our" the CA, product.

Interestingly, their original vision was to try to "market" conservative Anabaptism to evangelical background people. So far they've managed to have 2 non-CA people enroll (as of the last conversation I had, during AIC 2019).

Yes, originally during the design stage, Kuruvilla said he wasn't planning on recruiting CA students. He was going to recruit among the fans of Francis Chan, etc. Folks who were disappointed that their parents were rooting for Trump and were looking for a third way.
Once it was time to get students, there was heavy recruiting among Anabaptists. Then Kuruvilla explained that it was actually good to start with a CA student body, as it helped establish the kind of two-kingdom culture that he wanted to see at Sattler. At this point, I'm not sure what base they plan to target in the future.

Instead, Sattler seems to be on a mission to evangelise and "convert" students to FOTW's way of thinking, and then send them back to their home communities as change agents.

Yes, either that or keep them and use them in FOTW endeavors.

[joshuabgood]

At this point, I'm not sure what base they plan to target in the future.

I've had direct conversations with their chief recruiter, and based on those conversations with her, I think I can safely say they plan to continue to strategically recruit from CA circles.

I have been thinking about why my perspective is a bit different than JM's and here I think is the essence of it. I think we need/ed a shot in the arm around a coherent compelling vision that goes beyond Protestantism light and Republican politics and a church vision that goes beyond defensive cultural protectionism (often thought of as guarding against "drift"). I think the FOTW vision, or Kingdom vision as articulated by Kuruvilla and Taylor is compelling. I don't think as a whole, that the CA world has a clear vision, despite the great work of FBEP and AIC. That is at least in part why droves of CA youth wind up in neo-reformed circles, Bethel types of circles, High church traditions, or secularism. As Chester Weaver ably notes, we have lost track of our own story in the 20th century.

And I think an outside perspective can help illuminate that which it is very difficult for insiders to see, if we embrace humility and vulnerability. I have a lot of personal confidence in the integrity and spiritual maturity of Taylor and Kuruvilla.

That said, I am not on board fully with the FOTW folks and probably (almost certainly) would never quite fit in in their model, though I think most of their criticisms of the CA circles are on point. Where am I different? Like JM, I am not as sold on the "five-fold ministry" model, though that may be due to places I've observed it going amiss. I am also not in the same place with regard to practice (clothing particularly for women - who dress quite plainly, some might say "frumpily", others might say stylishly Bohemian) while at least some of the men appear to be pretty influenced by urban hipster style. I also am not in the same place around the "regulatory principle," absolute silence of women "in the assembly," closed communion, their views on divorce and remarriage, real presence, regenerative baptism, etc - to name a few. (And of course as a musician, I can't get behind their approach to music.)

However, I am behind their Christocentrism, Kingdom centric, small church brotherhood model.

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd create a Kingdom centric vision somewhere between Cavey/Boyd and Kuruvilla/Taylor.

[mike]

(And of course as a musician, I can't get behind their approach to music.)

What is their approach to music?