By Robert A. J. Gagnon, First Things.
Fuller Seminary
decided not to offer tenure to a New Testament professor, J. R. Daniel Kirk, whose view of marriage does not comport with Jesus’s view.
Although a decision such as this is never made happily or easily, I am grateful for the courage of senior faculty at Fuller Seminary in asserting the importance of a stance on sexual ethics that Jesus clearly regarded as foundational: a male-female requirement for sexual relations (Mark 10:2-12; Matt 19:3-9). Had Fuller set a precedent of embracing faculty whose position toward sexual ethics was so at odds with Jesus’s own, it would soon have ceased to be an evangelical institution.
For an account of what happened, we have to rely on Kirk’s June 29 blogpost, “Fuller and Me.” Fuller Seminary issued a statement saying, “Fuller is not legally permitted to participate in public conversation regarding any individual’s employment by the Seminary.” According to Kirk:
[For] a couple of my senior Bible colleagues . . . one had to like the idea that we define Christianity by what we believe. . . . So when I say, “The Synoptic Gospels show Jesus as an idealized human figure,” I have not said enough. If I cannot say, ‘And it also shows the divine Jesus, as we learn in the creeds,’ I have articulated a theology that ‘is on a trajectory’ away from our shared statement of faith. . . .You can imagine my disappointment, then, when I left that panel on how to respond to SCOTUS and walked across campus to a meeting with a couple of senior colleagues who indicated that my writing on homosexuality was going to be a profound hindrance to their ability to support me should I apply for tenure. . . .
Fuller has this phrase, ‘Fuller fit,’ that we use to evaluate potential colleagues. It’s an amorphous way of saying that we know ‘us’ when we see it. My senior colleagues have decided that I do not qualify under this rubric. I will therefore be leaving at the end of the 2015-16 academic year.
Apparently, then, in a meeting with two senior faculty, Kirk was informed that they (and perhaps other senior colleagues) would not be able to support him for tenure should he so apply, given his stance on homosexual practice and, perhaps secondarily, on low Christology in the Synoptic Gospels.
5 Comments. Leave new
SOLA SCRIPTURA says it all, and that’s “God breathed”. End of discussion. Thank you Fuller.
A set back for the Gays, but fear not, the Gays will find a way for Fuller to accept same sex so called marriage which I call same sex sin. The Gays will stop at nothing because they know the straights want to be accepted, and will partner to allow Fuller one day to accept same sex sin.
What is chilling about this decision to deny tenure, is the academic failure. Tenure is granted on the basis of ability in scholarship, publishing record, teaching ability (probably in that order of importance).
What Dr. Gagnon is implying is that tenure was and should be granted on the basis of adherence to a particular religious point of view. How sad. Believe my way or go away. The value of academic and scholarly integrity is compromised.
Fuller–a pale academic institution.
Mostly agree.
Gagnon’s first sentence is incorrect, of course, in that Fuller did not make a tenure decision about Kirk, but rather some senior faculty made it clear that they would do whatever they could to thwart a tenure application.
Kirk’s views highlighted here are, as you say, not appropriate for denying tenure. Fuller as a whole and the opposing senior faculty were well aware of Kirk’s approach to interpreting scripture when he was hired. His recent statements are a perfectly consistent result when applying those views. A basis for interpreting scripture that seems pretty mainstream to most Presbyterians, I would say. If Fuller believed that they are not in line with the seminary’s mission, the time of hiring was the appropriate point at which to make that decision. Tenure is a time to judge the quality of a scholar’s teaching and research, not a time to reject viewpoints that were well known when the person came to campus or to exercise other personal grievances. Kirk’s CV shows extensive work published in prestigious journals (definitely not the self-published diatribes that one might occasionally see) and by all accounts he was an effective teacher and was providing good service to the institution.
Keep the Faith
God Bless you Fuller