Freedom at last?

After debate and revision, Eastern Mennonite University now has its own Academic Freedom Policy. Approved by the University faculty, cabinet, and board of trustees, it is an attempt to clarify how "free" faculty actually are to explore or claim contrary ideas their own.

Unfortunately, the document, prepared by Lester Zook, professor of physical education, makes some significant statements regarding the relation of faith and reason which inevitably raise questions in the reader's mind.

Beginning on a positive note, the document states in the second paragraph that "to cut off discussion is to assume infallibility." Faculty's exploration or advocacy of differing opinions is acknowledged as beneficial to the institution for bringing "self examination and even eventual change." But an underlying assumption of the document quickly arises after the first page.

Creating an unnecessary spectrum with faith on one end and reason on the other, the document goes on to state, "Here is the one tension in the area of academic freedom at EMU: we want to practice both scholarly inquiry and faithful communal participation. We seek a balance between these two legitimate pursuits."

Quickly clarifying the proper way to balance this dichotomy, Hebrews 11:3, "By faith we understand," is hastily used to justify placing faith ahead of knowledge in the correct "sequence of epistemological order."

This underlying assumption raises some significant questions. Is it really necessary for faith and reason to be at odds? Does accepting natural science explanations of our world necessarily negate God? Are we simply afraid that as science explains more and more, that eventually God will be left with nothing to explain in our lives?

Behind the Academic Freedom Policy is an understanding that isn't beneficial to our Christian institution of higher education. Perhaps, instead of using a dualistic model of faith and reason, we should come to an understanding that faith and reason can actually work hand in hand. That they do not necessarily need to be at odds with each other. That it is indeed possible for natural discoveries to inform our faith, and to even change it-and in turn for our faith to inform our natural discoveries.