Union University celebrates 200 years of faithfulness to Christ
By / Sep 22

We’re celebrating our bicentennial at Union. For 200 years, Union University has stood as a model of excellence in Christian higher education. A place where learning is integrated with our faith in Christ, where it is infused with the hope of Christ, and where it is transformed by the love of Christ.

Remembering the past 

From a small-town academy to one of the nation’s premier Christian universities —the story of Union University is one of faith, Christian commitment, and dedication to excellence. And, it is the story of how faithful people in faithful churches help sustain God’s ongoing work of educating our young people.

Union stands as a testimony to God’s faithfulness, and we remain committed to our mission of providing Christ-centered education that promotes excellence and character development in service to Church and society. That’s what Union University has been about for 200 years. Many schools have come and gone. Other schools have lost their biblical bearings and drifted to the siren’s song of the wisdom of the age.

But Union remains as resolute and committed to its biblical foundation as ever. At Union, we believe God has spoken to us through the Scriptures. We believe the Bible is trustworthy, reliable, and true. We believe Jesus Christ is our only hope for salvation. And we believe that pursuing him and loving him with our hearts, souls, minds, and strength is what God has called us to do. 

Union traces its origins to Jackson Male Academy, the forerunner of West Tennessee College, which opened on Feb. 3, 1823. Madison County had been chartered by the Tennessee General Assembly in 1821, and its county seat, Jackson, was created in 1822. As with other frontier communities, its people immediately began to establish the types of institutions that they had left. The good people of Jackson wanted the best education possible for their children. To obtain that objective, they established “a College of high standing and extensive usefulness,” relying on the “cooperation and patronage of the citizens of West Tennessee.”

The story of Union is the story of how two institutions—West Tennessee College and Union University at Murfreesboro—merged into one college, Southwestern Baptist University, and then Southwestern Baptist University changed its name to Union University and incorporated a third college, Hall-Moody Junior College of Martin, Tennessee.

God has proven himself faithful to Union University, time and time again. Through war and peace. Through fire and storm. Through prosperity and want. Through blessing and trial.

Looking forward to the future

As we celebrate our bicentennial this academic year, Union University stands on the brink of its third century. At the same time, we find ourselves in an increasingly secular, post-Christian society that disdains many of the beliefs and convictions Union holds dear. The higher education environment has never been more competitive, and institutions like Union must be equipped with the resources necessary to successfully navigate the cultural waters in which we sail.

Despite the challenges before us, we are confident that God has great things in store for Union. As we look to the future, we see the ways God has used the university over the past 200 years, and we dream of what he will do in the days ahead.

We dream of a campus that continues to attract students from all over the world—students who come to be taught and mentored by world-class professors who are skilled at instructing their students in how to think about their subject matter through a biblical lens. We dream of providing students with state-of-the-art facilities that will equip them to be excellent in their fields. We dream of being a campus, based in West Tennessee, that is a beacon to the world and that showcases the glory and the beauty of Christ.

We dream of Union alumni who will be the hands and feet of Jesus in every context imaginable: pastors, nurses, teachers, business owners, doctors, social workers, scientists, parents, community leaders, missionaries, musicians, engineers, coaches, accountants, artists, church members, and on and on the list goes. They will join the Union alumni around the world—now 21,000 strong—who are serving the Church and society and making a difference for the kingdom of God.

Ultimately, we dream of how God will use Union University to send out an army of alumni to be salt and light to a lost and dying world—alumni who will take the gospel with them to every tongue, tribe, people, and nation.

Let us never say that we failed to dream big about what God can do through Union. Let us never say that we doubted the urgency or the importance of our mission. From now until Christ’s return, the mission of Union University will be vital and necessary in making disciples, in equipping students to serve, in supporting churches, and in reflecting and proclaiming the glory of the Lord to the world around us.

As we celebrate, we look back to what God has done in Union’s past, and we look forward with anticipation to what he will do in Union’s future.

Psalm 16:6 says, “The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance.” Union University does indeed have a beautiful inheritance. The Lord in his kindness has richly poured out blessing after blessing upon Union over the last two centuries. As we reflect upon God’s goodness to us, and as we dream about what God can and will do through Union in the days ahead, we pray that he will move the hearts of people during this pivotal moment in Union’s history to pray for us, to partner with us, and to help us sustain the mission of Union in the days to come.

In December 1874, a committee of Tennessee Baptists reported, “Thus far the School has more than realized our highest expectations and the future is hopeful.” Almost 150 years after that report and 200 years since our founding, we can say the same.

The minutes from that meeting go on to say something important to emphasize today, “but let us not forget that in building up the University we are laboring not for our own selves alone but for the whole Baptist denomination . . . and let us hope that we are laying the foundation of an institution which we hope by the blessings of God to continue for the ages to come.”

May we never forget how important it is to continue to build up this institution for the glory of God and the good of mankind.

What school option will you choose for your child?
By / Aug 3

The countdown to a new school year has begun. Summer has flown by, as it usually does, and families everywhere are preparing to get back to the routine that the start of classes brings. But not everyone will go to the same kind of school. Many of us in our country are blessed with choices regarding how we will educate our children. And many school choices have turned upside down after COVID-19. According to the Census Bureau, during the pandemic, nearly 93% of families with school-aged children reported some level of “distance-learning” from home. This, in conjunction with a more progressive push in public education, has led Christian parents, in particular, to weigh the best options for their family. But what measure will help us determine the best school option for our children?

A rubric for families

In education, teachers use rubrics as scoring tools to measure student performance based on established criteria. Students are expected to meet certain goals in order to achieve mastery of a particular skill or standard. A score is given based on how the student met or failed to meet the expectations of the assignment. What if there was a rubric for families to use to gauge school options for their children? What standards would they use to measure those options? To design such a rubric, there are some essential questions parents should ask in order to guide their thinking.

What is the cultural climate of our school district? No two school districts are the same. Some schools are in districts that lean more progressive, while other schools are in districts that lean more conservative. This is important to understand, because many of the decisions that are made about school policy, curriculum, and instructional practice arise from the political and cultural climate of school districts. Administrators in each individual school also have choices regarding what is emphasized each year. Families must ask, “What is the climate of our school district, and can we navigate its waters as we send our children to its schools?” 

What are our current family dynamics? Family dynamics place a large role in education choice. Some parents may have the time and resources to educate their children at home. Other families see benefits from sending their kids to the local public school. Or, a family may prefer the environment and curriculum that a private education offers. The family’s schedule, taken as a whole from its various members, should also be considered. Whether it’s marital status, budget, health, or some other factor, what is feasible and preferred varies from one family to another. 

Families require flexibility as children grow and needs change. And along with that, every family is unique with various strengths and challenges. Parents will have to decide what educational option fits them best for right now considering their current family structure, demands, and resources. 

How involved are we in our local church? There is no substitute for the local church. School, travel ball, scouts, homeschool co-ops, and other subgroups should not replace the fellowship families have with other believers in their home church. Before families seek out the best schooling option for their children, they must first seek out a local church that is gospel-centered, proclaims the Word soundly and emphasizes obedience to its commands and ideally has a strong discipleship focus that applies to various ages. Find a church. Get involved by committing to weekly attendance, service, and fellowship. There is no school option that can or should replace the local church.

A simple rubric like this can assist parents as they are trying to decide what school option is best for their kids. Essentially, families should ask, “What are non-negotiables for us? What are the non-essentials? What are our goals for our children? Will this help us disciple them in that direction?” 

3 action steps

As parents evaluate the above questions, it can still be intimidating to make a choice. Here are a few action steps to help you along the way: 

Pray for wisdom. Seek the Lord’s will as parents who desire to please him with the kids he has entrusted to you. Our children belong to Jesus first and foremost. Trust him, and let him guide you as you prayerfully consider how he is guiding you. Pray for your kids before they enter school age, while they are in school, and after graduation. We are all in formation throughout our lives and need the Lord’s grace to shape and sustain us.

Get equipped. Whatever choice you make for your children’s education, continue to be involved in their learning. If you choose to homeschool, you will have a front row seat in your children’s school as both a teacher and as a parent. Look for other homeschool families to come alongside you on the journey, and find resources to support your role as a homeschool parent. If you choose to send your child to public school, ask about opportunities to volunteer,  join the school’s parent organization, or attend your school district’s committee meetings. Invite their school friends to your home and get to know their families, as well.

Get equipped in knowing your kids in whatever school context they face. Check their homework, ask about their lessons, and look for natural opportunities to extend their learning with a biblical worldview. Lastly, read or watch the news in small measures. Get informed and seek to understand the culture in which we live and in which our kids live on campus every day. Strive to eat most of your meals together around the dinner table weekly and engage your kids in thoughtful discussions asking about their day, their interests, their friends, etc. Look for ways to have conversations about current events and issues and how God’s Word addresses them. 

Keep an open-hands mentality.  I used to homeschool my oldest two kids, but now all of my kids go to the school where I teach. Even though my methods have changed as a parent, my convictions have not. My husband and I still have the same goals and aspirations now as we did when our children were younger. For now, the Lord has led our family in a different direction, and he may lead us elsewhere in the months and years to come. Be open to how the Lord may lead your family in educating your children year by year.

The fact of the matter is there is no perfect school option. Every system is broken, and until Jesus returns, no matter what educational choice we make, we will be disappointed along the way. We can have confidence that God, in his grace, will use various people and methods to accomplish his purpose for us (Acts 17:26, CSB). In wisdom, choose the option that fits you and your family best, as the Lord leads. Turn off social media and all the voices clamoring for our attention and allegiance. There is one choice to be made, really. Choose to follow and serve Christ in whatever place you find yourself. Let Deuteronomy 6:4-7 be your family decree: 

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.”

Keep the conversation going and the relationship with your children strong as you continually point them to Jesus. If you are homeschoolers, private schoolers, public schoolers, or somewhere in between, the most important education we can give our children is teaching them who our God is and living a life following him as our King. In the kitchen, at the ball field, during homework, in the car, or in the yard, we will teach our children to love the LORD with all that they are. There is no better choice than this.

What I would tell new homeschooling families
By / Jan 11

I remember our oldest child’s first day of public school. My husband and I had decided to go the public-school route so that we could be involved in a positive way in our local community. Our daughter had on a new outfit, and I braided her hair special. We waited for the bus to come pick her up for kindergarten. Living in a rural environment, she would end up spending two hours on the bus every day. 

In the following months, we noticed some changes in our daughter that troubled us. Discipling her became more difficult because our time with her was so limited. The school bent over backward to accommodate and encourage her. But, in the end, we decided to take her out of school for a year. Then, one year turned into two. 

When it was time to put our next child into school, we realized he had some learning disabilities and was hyperactive. He would need extra accommodations, and we saw the simplicity of just helping him at home. So, we decided to homeschool them both. At that point, it just became a part of our family culture and is what we’ve done with all six of our kids for the past 12 years.

There are a lot of logistical advantages to homeschooling. It’s hard to downplay the advantage of extra time with our kids. My husband’s job has hours that vary widely in different seasons, so it’s been a huge benefit to the kids’ relationship with their dad to work their school schedule around his work schedule. Our kids can also pursue their interests more deeply. Homeschooling makes travel, field trips, and apprenticeship opportunities easier. Furthermore, the kids have more play time because it takes only a fraction of the time for a handful of students to complete the work it might take a much larger classroom to complete.

Advice for new homeschooling families

Every new homeschooling family is full of nerves. I have seen a lot of my friends pull their kids from public school, each having their reasons for keeping their kids at home. It’s often an exciting and terrifying endeavor. The weight of educating your children creates in us a longing to do everything perfectly. We really don’t want to mess it up, so the pressure we put on ourselves is usually severe. As new homeschooling parents describe this to me, I always stop them when the discussion turns to talking about homeschooling as if it’s an insurance policy.

Our family chose homeschooling because it made the most sense for where we lived and with the kids we have. It fit our situation. However, the biggest temptation — and possibly the greatest way to infuse stress into your homeschooling life — is to treat what you are doing as a sure-fire way to ensure that your kids grow up to be Christians. Once our oldest was able to drive, she wanted to go to a local private school, and that ended up being a great option for her, though it was a sacrifice for our family in multiple ways. Ultimately, we felt free to let her do that because our hope isn’t in homeschooling.

Homeschooling makes a poor god. I’ve now seen many kids in my circles graduate from homeschooling — and some walk away from the faith, not wanting anything to do with God. I’ve seen the heartbreak of mothers who made many sacrifices. They thought they did everything right to the best of their ability, and now it feels like it was all for nothing. For these mothers, it’s devastating.

The truth is that homeschooling is no savior at all. If we look to it as if it will do the work that only God can do, we’ve made it into an idol. And like all idols, it looks good — even religious — and it will fail you. The law, whether we’re talking about God’s good law or our own made-up formulas for success, is insufficient to save. God’s law is good and wise when used rightly. Our children need to know it, and they need rules. But none of it will save them. Eventually every child will have to face the sin that they can’t seem to will or discipline away. They need the one and only Savior. And homeschooling families don’t need Christ any less than our public or private-schooling friends.

Loving our kids as whole people 

If your home has people with a sin nature (which it does), you will not escape struggle in the midst of homeschooling. While it has been a great tool in God’s hands for our family, we could stop homeschooling tomorrow, and God would still hold us. None of that depends on the type of schooling we choose or on doing everything “right.” His promises are not so shaky or fragile that we must teach our kids to live a perfect life so that they may obtain them.

As we teach our children, we must remember, as Susan Schaeffer Macaulay points out in For the Children’s Sake, her book on education at L’Abri, that they are whole persons. They struggle with a real sinful nature, they are made in the image of God, and they have real needs. And as real persons, they need a real Savior. 

Therefore, love your kids as whole people, not projects. Give them a big view of God. Pray for them when their hearts are hard. Don’t be scared when they wrestle with God (sometimes wrestling with God is where we find his embrace). Our day involves a lot of forgiveness. I’ve learned to apologize a lot and to teach my children to apologize. And we talk a lot about the power of the gospel.

These homeschool years have been a gift, and I am thankful. But I am reminded often: I am a servant of the Lord, but I’m not God. I can’t make them into my image. I can’t change their hearts. I teach my kids about God and his Word, but their little souls are in his hands, not mine. The older they get, the more I’m thankful for that. When we realize that it is not our homeschooling that is saving our kids, we can unload that burden onto the sufficient shoulders of Christ, and educate our children from a place of rest.

For more perspectives on schooling, visit this article about public school and this article about private school. 

3 ways Christian education shaped me
By / Aug 9

I did not always fit in at the Christian schools I attended growing up. I was one of only a handful of students who did not have both parents at home, which meant I was the only one in my class with a different last name than the rest of my family because my divorced mom had remarried. This required complicated explanations to my classmates and sometimes even teachers; most of them lived in a world where most moms and dads were married, so their children shared their last names. It meant I had to ask permission from the front office to wait with my little brother after school, long after everyone else had gone home, until our single mom could get off work to pick us up. And it meant that I did not have my father there to walk with me in homecoming court senior year. Often, neither of my parents were present during special school ceremonies because my father lived in another town, and my mother could not always leave work.

As a shy child, I didn’t like feeling different from my classmates. I secretly resented them for their seemingly perfect family lives and wondered what it would be like to see both my parents’ smiling faces in the audience during a school play or to be able to share a last name with my mom and half-siblings. But I knew enough to be grateful for the sacrifices my mother was making to keep me in private school — even if I didn’t always feel like I belonged there. 

When I grew up, got married, and had kids of my own, I knew I wanted a Christian education for my own kids. I eventually convinced my reluctant husband that our two-income family could afford the private school tuition if we budgeted carefully. To make it work, we’ve had to sacrifice things like a bigger house in a fancy neighborhood and newer cars, but we have never once regretted these sacrifices.

An investment in my future 

Christian education began influencing my life from about the age of two, when my newly divorced mother enrolled me in one of the area’s most popular Christian preschool programs. It was an expensive choice for a single mother, and one she continuously had to defend to family members who questioned why she would pay private school tuition when she could barely make ends meet.  

Because we moved around a lot, I ended up attending five different Christian schools over the years, ranging from a tiny Pentecostal-run academy to the large Southern Baptist school from which I eventually graduated. Nonetheless, Christian schooling became one of the few constants in my life when the shape of my family never stayed the same. Even after another divorce, various job changes, and relationship challenges, my mom always found a way to keep me (and for a time, my younger siblings) in Christian school. 

It turned out to be one of the best investments she would make in my future. For me, Christian schooling served as a lifeline out of a world plagued by father hunger, family disfunction, and economic instability. Not only did I receive a private school education, but I also gained the direction and support I needed to stay on a path toward the stable family life I enjoy today. 

A report about private education 

My experience with Christian education is backed up by a report from the Institute for Family Studies and the American Enterprise Institute. The Protestant Family Ethic, written by Albert Cheng, Patrick Wolf, Wendy Wang, and W. Bradford Wilcox, is the first of its kind to analyze the effects of private versus public schooling on three family outcomes for adults. The report found that students educated in private schools, especially Protestant schools, are more likely to be in intact marriages and to avoid out-of-wedlock births as adults. 

One of the report’s most striking findings involves the powerful effects of religious schooling on students from lower-income backgrounds. As the authors explain, “religious schools, both Catholic and Protestant, have comparatively more positive influences on family stability for students who grew up in financially difficult circumstances.” 

According to the report:

“About 40% of public-school attendees who grew up in financially unstable households eventually marry and never divorce. The rate is higher for Catholic-school attendees who grew up in the same unstable financial situation (53%). Meanwhile, Protestant-school attendees who grew up in financial hardship are the most likely to marry and never divorce; 72% are still in their first marriage.”

In addition to the differences between religious and public school students, the figure above also reveals that students from financially unstable backgrounds reap more positive family outcomes from religious schooling than students from financially stable backgrounds. Among Protestant school students in particular, those who grew up in financially difficult circumstances are significantly less likely to have a nonmarital birth and to have divorced than those from financially stable backgrounds.

3 ways religious schooling shaped me

As someone who was raised in a financially turbulent, single-parent household, I have a few theories about why this might be the case. Religious schooling shaped my future family life for the better by providing me with three things I needed the most: 

1. Examples of healthy marriages and decent fathers and husbands. 

Growing up in a broken home where men were either absent, unreliable, or dangerous, the messages I absorbed about fathers, marriage, and family life were overwhelmingly negative. But in Christian school, I found peace and hope in the midst of family turmoil. It was there that I was introduced to the concept of God as my Father who looked upon me as his child, which mattered a great deal to a little girl who desperately missed her biological father. And it was there I experienced Christ’s unconditional and unfailing love through the lives of my teachers and the pastors who led the school. 

At the same time, I was exposed to healthy married families with faithful dads and husbands — men who did not harm or abandon their families but who loved God, their wives, and their children. None of these men were perfect, but they were clearly striving to be the fathers and husbands their families deserved. Many of these examples came from married teachers whose spouses also worked at the school — like my favorite bus driver/ janitor, Mr. Robb, a gentle giant whose wife taught kindergarten, or my high school Algebra teacher and senior adviser, Mr. Ammons. Something I noticed about their families is the role faith played in their lives. The parents prayed together and took their children to church often, and they were committed to something, or Someone, bigger than just each other (and research confirms that couples who pray together and attend church regularly enjoy more stable marriages). 

2. A biblical worldview that pointed me to a path for a successful future. 

In the IFS/AEI report, the authors reflect on why Protestant schools appear to have a stronger influence on the future family lives of students compared to the other schools, noting that: 

“Protestant schools are more likely to stress the importance of marriage as a good in and of itself—and of having and raising children in marriage. The different messages they send may play some role in providing a normative context for their graduates’ future family lives.” 

This was certainly true in the schools I attended. The contrast between my unstable family life at home — where divorce and father absence seemed to spread like a disease — and what I experienced in the Christian school classroom gave me a taste of the healthy family life I desired but did not know how to obtain. I was taught a biblical worldview that said every life has value and purpose, that marriage was designed by God for the good of children and society, that divorce was to be avoided if at all possible, and sex and parenthood should be reserved for marriage. 

Importantly, I saw these ethics lived out in the lives of my teachers and in most of the families of my peers. I learned that boundaries matter, not to fence me in but to protect me from harm. Instead of lessons on condoms, I was encouraged to delay sex until I was married because of God’s good design, to work hard in school so I could go to college, and to eventually get married and start a family — a sequence of steps that research shows is linked to lower chances of poverty and a greater chance of achieving family stability and economic success. These values, and the support I received to sustain them, helped me to avoid some of the common risk factors for kids from broken families.

3. Supportive and like-minded peers.

As I said earlier, I was an outsider at my Christian school because of my family life at home. Most of the students lived with their married parents in stable, middle- or upper-class neighborhoods, while only a handful, like me, came from broken homes, often relying on scholarships or financial aid to be there. But the friends and classmates I found there helped keep me away from choices that would have most certainly derailed my future. Most of the students attended church regularly and avoided alcohol, drugs, and early sex. While there were definitely some kids who were having sex and partying on the weekends, most of the students were striving to avoid these behaviors. 

Again, my experience echoes the findings in the IFS/AEI report, which identified “stark differences in the peer environment of various school communities.” Compared to students who attended secular private and public schools, Millennials who attended religious schools were significantly more likely to report that “almost all” their peers attended church regularly, did not use drugs, had never had sex, and planned to go to college. 

I’ll be the first to acknowledge that religious private schools are far from perfect education models. Many of these schools lack the economic and racial diversity that could benefit their student body and the surrounding community. And emerging from the Christian school “bubble” into the real world can leave some students with a bit of culture shock. Even so, I would not trade the Christian education I received, flaws and all, for any other form of schooling — and I believe that without it, I would not be where I am today.As theProtestant Family Ethic concludes, “private schools serve the public good more by fostering stronger and more stable marriages among American men and women compared to public schools.” Religious schools have a vital and unique role to play in promoting this common good, especially among lower-income kids from unstable families who are hungry for the faith, values, and role models these schools offer. Just as it did for me, Christian schooling can provide at-risk students with a lifeline out of the cycle of family instability and point them toward a path for a brighter family future. 

Explainer: The significance of The Scopes Monkey Trial
By / Jul 21

July 21 marks the anniversary of the verdict in one of the most important court cases in American religious history: The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, or as it is commonly known, “The Scopes Monkey Trial.” This trial—which brought attention to the small town of Dayton, Tennessee—was an open and shut case of guilt. So what attracted so much attention? The trial was a visible clash of the fight raging within Christian denominations at the time between modernist and fundamentalists centered around the teaching of evolution. 

On one side was the fundamentalist, former secretary of state, and three-time presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who argued that teaching evolution was contrary to Scriptures. On the other side was self-proclaimed agnostic Clarence Darrow and the American Civil Liberties Union, who saw this case as a chance to roll back the influence of religion in education. The court case, especially when Bryan took the stand in defense of the fundamentalists, was an encapsulation of the ongoing struggle within American Christianity over how literally to interpret Genesis and just how to integrate Christian doctrine with new scientific information. The modernists saw no problem between the two or were willing to change Christian doctrine to fit the new information. The fundamentalists saw this as an attack on true Christianity. 

It was in the courtroom of a small town in Tennessee that these sides squared off for their most visible confrontation, and neither side walked away truly victorious. 

Background

The conflict between fundamentalists and modernists had raged since the late 19th century. At the core of the debate was how to integrate the supernatural claims of the Bible with new criticism coming out of scientific inquiry. New scholarship raised doubts about the authorship of biblical texts, the timeline of their writing, and the details provided. Many of these revisions were attempts to maintain Christianity’s relevance and also find agreement between science and the Bible. Thus, rather than completely abandon the Bible, they choose to reinterpret it, often by disregarding the supernatural elements such as miracles or a virgin birth or a physical resurrection. 

Another point of controversy was in the creation account of Genesis 1-2. Higher criticism raised questions about Mosaic authorship, arguing that there were in fact different accounts of creation that had been woven together by different authors and a final editor. Further, when compared with modern scientific findings as made famous by Charles Darwin and others, it was impossible to square the age of the earth with a literal seven-day creation account. Though there were some Christians at the time—such as Benjamin Warfield and Charles Hodge of Princeton Seminary—who saw no problem in accepting a theistic evolution account, many fundamentalists saw this as an attack on the special place of humanity in the cosmos. These critics often asked how humanity was unique in God’s design if men and women were descended from apes. 

At the state level, this reached a crescendo when the Butler Act was passed in 1925 in Tennessee outlawing the teaching of evolution in schools. The ACLU offered to defend anyone who broke the law in an attempt to get it overturned. There has been considerable research which has shown that locals in Dayton, hoping that the trial would attract attention and business to the town, encouraged a local teacher known to teach evolution to challenge the law. He was subsequently fired and tried for breaking the law.

Important figures

John Thomas Scopes: Scopes was the defendant in the court case and a high school biology teacher and football coach. As a young, unmarried man who was not a local in the area, he had little to lose in being the ACLU’s test case. Also, there was never a question of his guilt. Scopes would go on to lose the trial and eventually receive a fine of $100 for the misdemeanor of teaching evolution. The fine was later overturned on appeal. 

William Jennings Bryan: Bryan was a staunch fundamentalist Presbyterian and progressive candidate (a not uncommon combination at the time). As a staunch Prohibitionist and anti-evolution crusader, Bryan often found himself seeking to save the conscience of the nation. He was a three-time unsuccessful candidate for president who served as secretary of state under Woodrow Wilson before returning to his social and legal advocacy. As a lawyer for the prosecution in the trial, he is best known for taking the stand and being questioned by Darrow as to the scientific accuracy of the Bible. 

Clarence Darrow: Darrow was the lawyer for the defense and vocal critic of religion. As the child of an atheist and a self-proclaimed agnostic, Darrow saw this is as a chance to attack the fundamentalist movement and the way he felt it was overstepping the role of religion in the public square. Darrow was famous before the trial for his role as defense attorney in the Leopold-Loeb murder trial. By the end of the trial, his questioning of Bryan on the witness stand had helped to humiliate the fundamentalist movement before the wider culture as he pointed out supposed contradictions in the biblical text.

H.L. Mencken: Mencken, journalist for the Baltimore Sun, is perhaps the person best known for describing the trial to the outside world. His columns portrayed the Bryan and the fundamentalists, not to mention Southerners in general, as backwoods yokels. His writing and depiction of Southern fundamentalists was what helped the modernists win the larger culture war, even as they lost the specific court case.

Events of the trial

At the heart of the trial was not a question of guilt. Scopes did not hide that he had taught evolution. He was guilty under the Butler Act. However, the ACLU argued that the law itself was unconstitutional because it violated Scopes’ free-speech. Bryan, arguing for the prosecution, asserted that the people of Tennessee who paid for the school and Scopes’ salary had a right to dictate what was taught, especially when it was something like evolution, which he claimed undermined the Christian faith. However, both sides, especially Darrow and Bryan, came to see the court case as unconcerned with free speech and a death match between science and religion. 

Thus, the most memorable moment of the trial came when Bryan took the stand in defense of the Bible as an expert witness. After asking a series of questions meant to illustrate the use of figurative language in the Bible (i.e., Jesus describing his followers as the salt of the earth in Matthew 5), Darrow attempted to get Bryan to agree that the earth was only 6,000 years old (a theory popularized by Anglican archbishop James Ussher). As historian Baryr Hankins recounts, Darrow interrogated Bryan about world religions, modern science, and even biblical criticism, showing that he was not an expert in any of these fields. Further, Bryan was not even a literal creationist: Bryan believed that the six days in Genesis weren’t, by necessity, 24-hour days, but rather time periods.  

Bryan was shown to be woefully ill-informed and was summarily humiliated. At the same time, Darrow’s attacks, though in agreement in the conclusion by the broader culture, were not all well-received, even by liberal theologians who saw them as attacks against any faith, not just fundamentalism. By the end of the day, both men found themselves ill-composed, shouting at one another and threatening violence against one another. The judge adjourned for the day, and when the case resumed the following day, both sides agreed that the jury should be brought in and deliver their verdict, which they did in a matter of minutes with a verdict of guilty.

Lasting influence

Scopes lost the trial, but fundamentalists lost the broader culture war. Because there was no doubt that Scopes had taught evolution, this was never about his guilt. The jury quickly determined that Scopes was guilty of breaking the law and was subsequently fined $100. This fine was later overturned on appeal. However, for the fundamentalist movement, this trial served to humiliate them on the national stage, largely due to the writing of journalist H.L Mencken. After being cast as uneducated rubes, many chose to retreat and create their own institutions and subculture rather than interact with broader society. 

Although historians such as Daniel Williams and Darren Dochuk have complicated this narrative by showing that though they did not enjoy the larger cultural influence they possessed previously, they did not entirely disappear. Rather, they laid a foundation for what would emerge in the middle of the 20th century as the evangelical movement, encapsulated in figures such as Carl F.H. Henry, Billy Graham, and eventually the Religious Right of the 70s and 80s.

However, the trial in Dayton, Tennessee (which is reenacted every July), set the stage for the larger culture wars between fundamentalists/evangelicals and their theologically liberal counterparts over issues such as abortion, the feminist movement, and eventually the LGBTQ movement that would shape the 20th century.

Further reading

Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America’s Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion by Edward J. Larson: Larson’s Pulitzer winning book is one of the most thorough and readable accounts of the trial and its enduring impact on the role that science and religion play in the public square, as well as evangelicalism’s relationship to science and education. 

Jesus and Gin: Evangelicalism, the Roaring Twenties and Today’s Culture Wars by Barry Hankins: Hankins’ book looks at the entire decade of the roaring 20s, and he devotes an entire chapter to the court case which represented the high point of the fundamentalist-modernist controversy.

Fundamentalism and American Culture by George Marsden: Marsden is the preeminent historian of fundamentalism, and his classic work places the movement in the broader sweep of American religious history. 

Clarence Darrow Papers & Court Transcript: The Court Transcript of Bryan’s testimony and Darrow’s line of questions beginning on day six of the trial can be found in Darrow’s papers contained in the University of Minnesota School of Law.

Educating Children for a Complex World
By / Nov 3

Andrew Walker moderates a panel discussion on Educating Children for a Complex World at the 2018 ERLC National Conference with Nathan Lino, Dan Peterson, Timothy Paul Jones, and Jani Ortlund. 

4 ways to display the gospel as a public school teacher
By / Oct 23

Editor's note: An anonymous public school teacher has written this article. This teacher's job could be jeopardized if his/her name was published on this topic due to the specific community the school is in.

It’s no secret that American public schools can be unfriendly environments toward the gospel. Teachers are under tremendous pressures and expectations from their principals, parents, and society. But for the Christian teacher, all of these things are second to displaying the gospel as she steps foot into that public school every single day.

As a teacher since the early 2000’s, my career has been in a variety of communities. Through my experiences, God has shown me many ways that I can display the gospel, no matter the setting.

Be humble. I know many teachers who have been in situations where they were treated unfairly. Some said they were being targeted because of their faith. Even so, we can’t see what is in another person’s heart. Whoever this may come from—a co-worker, student, or parent—the best way we can demonstrate Christ’s grace is by loving them.

David asks the Lord in Psalm 7 to save him from his enemies, but he also asks God to let his enemies overtake him if he did any wrong. Like David, we should ask God to reveal our sin so we may apologize and seek forgiveness when appropriate. Be gracious with those that might seek harm, pray for them, and ask God to use you in those situations to model the gospel.

Be in awe. If you’re like me, I would assume you enjoy the subject you teach. Whatever the content, God’s glory is displayed in immense ways through each discipline—whether it’s being in awe of God through his creation, the order in which he has created all things, the diversity and complexity of languages, how he has displayed His glory through history, or the beauty in the diversity of all peoples. As teachers, we have the amazing privilege of being in awe of his magnificence every day.

We have the ability to demonstrate the gospel when we treat every one of our students with dignity and respect.

Don’t be alone. We should find other believers in our schools that we can pray with and encourage. Our biggest ministry might be to those fellow believing co-workers. They may need to be pointed to the cross and reminded of God’s faithfulness. Or, they may need to be reminded of their true purpose as a teacher: to display the glory of God through serving the students and families in your community.

Build relationships. Relationships are one of the best things about being a teacher. The impact we as teachers can have with our students can literally change their lives. You never know how loving and caring for your students (even the least of these or those that resist you) could impact them. We have the ability to demonstrate the gospel when we treat every one of our students with dignity and respect.

Maybe you’re reading this and you’re not a teacher or you have little to no interaction with your local public school. Regardless, pray for teachers. As you drive by a school, pray for the believers there. No matter the type of community you live in, there are Christ-followers in the public school. We need your prayers and encouragement every day, especially in this confusing culture. We can’t do any of these things on our own. It’s only by God’s grace and power that we can know and live for him.

The reality is that the spiritual condition of our public schools will continue to grow in opposition to the gospel. But we don’t have to shrink back in fear. By God’s grace, we can display the gospel and bear witness to Christ in an incredibly tough environment. May God use our influence for his glory.  

Have Christian Colleges Lost Their Way?
By / Jun 9

When Notre Dame and Boston College conferred honors upon heads of state who work to secure abortion rights—respectively, President Obama and the Prime Minister of Ireland, Enda Kenny—thousands of alumni, students, and parents signed petitions, wrote open letters and editorials, and protested publicly. Bishops and prominent Catholic intellectuals refused to attend the events. Harvard Law professor Mary Ann Glendon declined an honor from Notre Dame, which she was to have received alongside President Obama. The controversies prompted reflection, much of it thoughtful, about what it means for a college or university to call itself a Catholic college or university. At least in Notre Dame’s case, that reflection has borne fruit.

Protestant Christians have not had that conversation about our own colleges and universities. It is time to discuss the matter.

What makes evangelical and other Protestant Christian (Reformed, Churches of Christ, Baptist…) colleges and universities distinctive is supposed to be what makes them effective at informing and disciplining young minds. Two commitments stand out. First, an emphasis on the primacy of scriptural authority is thought to give students access to, knowledge of, and hearts inclined toward God’s special revelation.

Second, the Christian insistence that faith and reason are allies is understood to enable and embolden students to pursue and witness about what is good, right, and true. The alliance of faith and reason is not merely an intellectual but also a moral matter, a source of inclination toward truth. It is supposed to be why Christian college graduates go off to do good things in the world.

When Christian colleges are willing to compromise those commitments, their students suffer. But the colleges also place themselves in peril. Parents, students, and donors might reasonably wonder: Do Christian colleges have a unique reason for being, or are they merely attractive campuses where students encounter the liberal arts, among hundreds of such places?

Authority of the Bible

A couple of years ago, the Bible department of a Christian university advertised a public event on the question whether to support a law defining marriage as marriage, i.e. the union of a man and a woman. The advertisement promised that four clergy would speak to the issue, two in favor of the marriage law, two against it. Professors in the same university wrote an editorial which encouraged students to vote against the law. In other words, the discussion proceeded on the premise that there are more than one Christian definitions of marriage, as if marriage were a changeful, malleable, institution which can be redefined by law and other human institutions.

Some Christian educators assert that this way of framing the discussion is necessary for academic dialogue. That’s just not true. This is not to deny that Christian educators do well to engage winsomely with non-Christians in public discourse about moral issues. I have participated in public debates and discussions about abortion, assisted suicide, and the meaning of marriage with non-Christians. Of all the thank you notes I have received, one of my favorites was from the LGBT(AQ…) society at a secular law school, thanking me for “being willing” to participate in a forum they hosted about marriage laws and to “share [my] view.” That view was simply the case for real (biblical) marriage, made in non-biblical terms—with appeal to the coherence of law, the rights of children, the duties of adults, etc. The students and faculty in attendance had never heard it before, and were fascinated. After the event, several students stayed to continue the conversation, which dove into more fundamental questions, such as the relationship between law and morality, the role of reasons and religion in legal discourse, and the meaning of empathy.

Discourse with non-Christians has enormous pedagogical, as well as moral, value. And Christian institutions should be commended for hosting and encouraging dialogue with non-Christians on all matters of civic importance. But when Christian college faculty cast doubt upon the biblical conception of marriage they risk causing intellectual and moral harm to their students and the community. And they cast doubt upon the commitments of their institutions.

If we are committed to the authority of the Bible, there is one answer to the question what marriage is. The Bible does not endorse marriage as anything other than the one-flesh union of a man and woman, and never even speaks of marriage as a genderless institution. And if marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, then what is it? For anyone who thinks that the Bible equivocates on marriage, it is not enough to observe that there are both central cases and borderline cases of marriage in the Bible. No one doubts that there were better and worse marriages in ancient times, just as there are today. Christian teaching on marriage has not changed in twenty centuries in part because the Bible has not changed. Equivocation on the meaning of marriage indicates a willingness to make the meaning and authority of the Bible negotiable.

That law establishes a civil, rather than religious, institution of marriage does not create space for good-faith disagreement among Christians. Some conception of marriage is going to be enshrined in law, either a true conception or a false one. And American Christians cannot avoid responsibility for what the law teaches; we live in a democratic republic. A vote to abolish from marriage law the distinction between men and women is a vote to eradicate the legal offices for fathers and mothers, to eliminate the legal right of children to be raised by the people who gave them life, and to force an unbiblical conception of human sexuality on our own institutions (including our colleges and universities) as well as others. Civil marriage is a public institution, and marriage law applies to everyone. Support for redefining marriage in law just is support for destroying marriage as a public institution. That Christian educators should lend support to that effort is troubling.

Note well: I am not advocating for a particular policy. I am not arguing that faculty who advocate marriage revisionism be sacked, or that only non-Christians must be invited to present non-Christian or anti-Christian views. But it is important to point out the costs of promoting confusion about Christian teaching on marriage, and to acknowledge that less confusing means of addressing these controversies are available. To adapt terminology from law, a Christian college should have a compelling reason to present non-Christian views as ostensibly Christian, and it should adopt the least morally-costly means of achieving that goal.

Moral Witness

Also a couple years ago, a Christian college invited then-Senator John Kerry, now the Secretary of State, to deliver a talk titled, “On Faith.” The lecture was advertised as the inaugural event in a series of lectures which would keep “a thoughtful Christian perspective at the forefront of contemporary cultural issues.” This move puzzled and even shocked many of the college’s alumni and supporters. Secretary Kerry has on many occasions contributed to the deliberate killing of unborn human beings. He is a vocal and tireless advocate for abortion rights and for public funding for organizations that provide abortions, such as Planned Parenthood. He has worked to secure public funding for research that entails the destruction of human beings in their embryonic stage of development, when they are most vulnerable.

In short, John Kerry’s public words and actions have been the very contradiction of a Christian perspective on the most fundamental moral issues of our day. What possible conception of a “Christian perspective” could have justified the Kerry event? The science is clear that human life begins at conception. And one of the clearest of Christian principles is the prohibition against murder. So the only question is whether we have the will to extend protection from murder to all human beings.

Public subsidies for abortion and embryo destruction are not merely policy or political issues, like immigration enforcement or the lawfulness of carbon emissions. To hold Senator Kerry out as a model of Christian witness is to risk forfeiting one’s own witness to the faith of many Christians who have courageously fought for the most vulnerable of God’s beloved creatures.

This is because to be pro-choice on abortion is to repeat the error of those who were pro-choice on slavery a century ago. It is either to accept or to claim that some human beings are less worthy of legal protection than others. Articulating, defending, and acting on the truth that all human lives are intrinsically valuable and equally deserving of legal protection is an indispensable aspect of Christian witness. American and British Christians in the nineteenth century defended this truth, and therefore stood against legalized slavery. For the same reason, Christians must oppose legal support for abortion.

Moral Muddle

The confusion about abortion and marriage is particularly striking in light of the stands that Christian college leaders have taken. A few years ago, several administrators of Christian colleges joined other evangelical leaders in signing a document called the Evangelical Climate Initiative (ECI). The ECI affirmed the importance of “moral witness,” but then proceeded to obscure that witness. The ECI declaimed that “Christian Moral Convictions Demand” certain responses to the issue of global warming, including “national legislation requiring sufficient economy-wide reductions in carbon dioxide emissions through cost-effective, market based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade program.”

What Christian principle resolves the question how much carbon dioxide Americans should be permitted to emit? What is the Christian answer to that question? The answer must be more than zero. To state that obvious fact is to demonstrate that this problem is not a moral or theological problem at all. It is instead a pragmatic problem, to be resolved by technical expertise and prudential deliberation. Indeed, one must answer many additional, complex questions, implicating expertise in science, engineering, economics, law and other disciplines, before one can in confidence conclude that a cap-and-trade program would do more good than harm.

Of course Christians ought to be good stewards of God’s creation. Any disagreement is about the complex and numerous means of fulfilling that obligation. To suggest that Christians have a moral obligation to support a particular, national policy governing carbon emissions is to reveal a profound confusion about reason, morality, and obligation.

Clarity: The Path to Institutional Flourishing

Nevertheless, there are hopeful signs. Faculty, staff, and administrators from Christian colleges are among the hundreds of thousands of people who have signed the Manhattan Declaration, pledging to affirm the intrinsic value of life and marriage, and the importance of religious liberty. Some Christian colleges have ventured their resources and reputations in defense of life by filing lawsuits to challenge the Department of Health and Human Services contraceptive mandate, which requires religious employers to subsidize their employees’ use of abortifacient drugs. Several Christian colleges have publicly reaffirmed their commitment to marriage and sexual virtue in response to recent cultural pressures to abandon marriage.

The job of a Christian college is to promote clarity, not confusion, in the minds of its students. Many Christian educators seem to understand this. Those educators are serving their students well. And they are demonstrating a will to preserve their institutions for future students. Will all Christian colleges commit themselves to the same purpose?