The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

To exclude or not to exclude?

Recently, at Central College in Iowa, Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship forced one of its members, Brad Clark, to step down from his leadership position due to his newly publicized homosexuality. In wake of this decision, the college's Student Senate debated whether, given this discrimination, they should continue to recognize Inter-Varsity Fellowship's affiliation with the College, and -- after a heated debate -- eventually decided to continue its recognition of the organization.

In this situation, no party is particularly in the right. Those students -- including Clark -- who advocated the severing of Student Senate ties with Inter-Varsity were unjustified, but the students who made the decision to force Clark from his leadership role were also in the wrong.

Inter-Varsity Fellowship, on college campuses, takes the form of the U.Va. equivalent of a Contracted Independent Organization, or as they are more commonly known, CIO's. At the University, the main prerequisite to gaining CIO status through Student Council relates directly to the problems encountered at Central College: each organization has to prove itself non-discriminatory. However, the non-discrimination clause is not so cut and dry as it may seem. If an individual is unable to successfully fulfill the duties required of a member in any given group, he or she can rightfully be excluded. For example, no reasonable person would object should the Virginia Belles fail to accept a male applicant into their group. Since the Belles is in and of itself an exclusively female organization, having a male join would be not only strange, but also disruptive and detrimental to the purpose of group as a whole. Adding a male voice to the Belles would disrupt their sound, and so they would not be expected to include man in their group for the sake of being "politically correct."

This is how the Inter-Varsity leadership most likely viewed the situation that they encountered with Clark. Inter-Varsity merely asked him to step down from leadership, not to leave IV on the whole. By looking to this detail we can see that -- though many would doubtlessly jump to paint it in this way -- their forcing him to leave was not an act of hatred against homosexuals. In the opinion of these individuals, in practicing homosexualty, Clark had a direct conflict of interest with the message and mission of Inter-Varsity Fellowship. Since the Reformed Church Of America, with whom they are affiliated, does not support homosexuality, they doubtlessly felt that it was inappropriate to showcase a leader who was openly homosexual. This was not an act of discrimination; this was an act of conscience. This is why, when the Central College Student Senate voted to continue its recognition of Inter-Varsity, it made the right call.

The question of whether or not the decision of the Inter-Varsity Leaders was a good one, or a truly Christian one, however, is another matter. Although their logic is understandable from the standpoint of Christian doctrine, it seems to conflict with the overarching principles and message of Christianity.

The fact that Clark was in a leadership position complicates matters. Should he have been but a member of Inter-Varsity, it is doubtful that there would have been any trouble, as evidenced by the fact that he was asked to stay on as a regular member after his removal from power. As a leader however, Clark is supposed to set an example to be followed, and since his homosexuality is arguably in conflict with the beliefs of the Reformed Church of America, he was theoretically unable to fill his role as leader. The question of whether Clark's homosexuality really does conflict with the church could be debated forever and it is likely that a conclusion would never be reached. Luckily however, there is a logic that transcends squabbles over correct translations and interpretations of biblical verses.

What Inter-Varsity should be striving to represent above all else is the teachings of Jesus. One will be careful to take note that in the Gospels -- which Christians hold to be the words of Christ Himself -- there is no talk against homosexuals, there is no talk of exclusion, there is no talk of hostility or of judgment. What there is a lot of talk about however, is forgiveness, understanding and love for one's neighbor.

The leaders of Inter-Varsity at Central College really missed a great chance to show grace to one of their friends. He was partaking in a practice that the Bible warns against. However, like Clark, Jesus' close friend Mary Magdalene partook in a practice (prostitution) the Bible warns against, but Jesus did not cast her out. Likewise, Inter-Varsity should not have cast out Clark. If the leaders of Inter-Varsity thought his behavior to be wrong, the best thing they could have done from the Christian perspective would have been to love him in spite of it, and to let him stay on in his leadership role. This action would have produced a far greater testament to Christ's love than the route they chose.

The plight of Brad Clark is not in vain, however; we at the University can learn from his story. Few, whether they be religious individuals or not, will argue that judgment is superior to love and forgiveness. We need to recognize the wise and foolish decisions made in past weeks at Central College, and keep them in mind as we approach our own organizations, our relationships and our daily lives.

(Laura Parcells is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at lparcells@cavalierdaily.com.)

Comments

Latest Podcast

Today, we sit down with both the president and treasurer of the Virginia women's club basketball team to discuss everything from making free throws to recent increased viewership in women's basketball.