The Moderates Dive for Cover, Part 2

So, we had a meeting the other day. It was for the duly-appointed church members (otherwise known as the "constituency" of the university) who gather on occasion to hear reports and vote policy matters concerning the institution. [I know this sounds boring, but stay with me.] The meeting was informational, preparing this same group of people to vote changes to the bylaws in May. The university had posted the proposed changes to the bylaws on the web. And the activity on the blogs and discussion boards had accordingly ratcheted up as the date of the meeting drew near.

The critics of the university had been analyzing every word and phrase of the proposed changes, conjecturing that there was once again nefarious activity afoot on our campus, and that the changes were meant to sneak the institution out from under control of the church. (Having read through the changes and heard the internal discussions, I can tell you that the wording changes tie us closer to the church. None of us who work here wants the institution to become one of those "formerly church-related colleges.") The chatter had risen to a screech and the "sky-is-falling" viral e-mails were flying. An open letter to the world church leadership had been posted at the website that's devoted to exposing the perceived evils of the university.

On the other hand, the folk who style themselves as the "progressives" in the church (the other side would call them the Liberals) were gloating that the proposed changes would supposedly put the conservatives in their place and wrest power over the institution from the church leadership, making the institution more independent. Let me say this: Gloating and smugness are just as offensive as screeching and finger-pointing.

So there we sat in the meeting. The chair of the bylaws committee was explaining the proposed edits to the bylaws, every line of which was numbered, legal-style. The air picked up tension as an older pastor from Hawaii and a younger pastor from California voiced expressions of distrust and dismay, repeating the accusations that were flying around the internet. A church official from the regional office proposed significant changes to the wording, the effect of which would put us at odds with our accrediting organization.

The chair of the bylaws committee remained calm, and then at one point made this observation: "You can't believe everything you see in print online. I've seen both sides saying things loudly in the blogs that are not true. And in the meantime, the moderates dive for cover."

That last comment hit me like a brick: "The moderates dive for cover." It kept playing itself in my head over and over as the meeting progressed.  "The moderates dive for cover."

It was a comment that extends much further than to the case study we had in front of us.

[To be continued]