Issue 10

VOLUME 10

WWW.THEVENTRILOQUIST.US

A Farewell to Cedarville Closing remarks from your friendly neighborhood conspiracy theorist. • Joshua Steele

As what was once a vision for the future has become an agenda for returning to the past, the list of people who no longer fit the Cedarville mold is growing. I contacted former vice president of Student Life, Dr. Carl Ruby; former professor Dr. Michael Pahl; current professors Dr. TC Ham, Dr. Shawn Graves, and Dr. David Mills; and former trustees Dr. William Rudd and Rev. Chris Williamson to see where things stand as this academic year comes to a close.

Although Dr. Ruby does not know what the long term future holds, he is pouring himself into immigration reform. When asked about his plans, he replied: "I'm motivated by an experience that I had on the Civil Rights bus tour in Birmingham, Alabama.

As I read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail, I determined that I didn't want to be on the wrong side of history, or more important, on the wrong side of the gospel on these kinds of issues. I leave Cedarville with lots of good memories and a clear conscience. I hope I invested my time and energy in the things that mattered most ... loving God and loving people."

And speaking of immigrants, Dr. Pahl moved his family nearly 2,000 miles as the crow flies from Alberta, Canada to Cedarville, Ohio in 2011.

However, after just two semesters, the "promising scholar" and "dedicated teacher" was fired for his inability "to concur fully with each and every position of Cedarville University’s doctrinal statement." The Pahls have spent the year trying to move on – looking for work, and working on renovations to sell the old parsonage which they bought less than three months before receiving notice of Dr. Pahl’s "review."

It would be one thing if the Pahls were victims of a broken immigration system. It seems, however, that they are victims of a broken institution which claims the name of Christ.

Although Dr. Ruby and Dr. Pahl had little say

My Struggle

regarding their terminations, others are voluntarily choosing to disassociate from the University.

Prompted by the changing Cedarville climate, Dr. Ham will be making the move to Canton, OH this summer to teach at Malone University. “I should note that I am not being forced to resign. I am leaving voluntarily,” Dr. Ham clarified. “However, I would not have been seeking other ministry opportunities had the past two years been different. For me, it was the events surrounding the termination of my good friend Michael Pahl that prompted me to look elsewhere. Other recent events—mostly known to the student body, but some unknown to them—have served to solidify my decision. While I am very excited about my future ministry, it is with profound sadness that I leave the wonderful men and women I’ve known as colleagues here.”

After the elimination of the philosophy major, Dr. Graves was offered a terminal contract. However, he has instead accepted a tenure track position at the University of Findlay, where he will begin teaching this fall. His wife, Marlena Graves, will conclude her role as the Resident Director of Murphy Hall at the end of this semester.

Dr. Mills, if he is at Cedarville next year, will have to carry the course load for the remaining philosophy minor in Dr. Graves’ absence. Dr. Mills declined the option to drastically expand the Honors Program during the 2013-14 school year before handing it over to an unknown successor, and was therefore removed from his involvement in the program, effective at the end of this semester.

The voluntary disassociations are not limited to faculty and staff, but also include trustees. Recent changes in the Board have included the resignations of Dr. Rudd and Rev. Williamson, two proponents of

From a fellow Cedarville student struggling with homosexuality Anonymous

Guys. Imagine your daily morning routine, showering in your dorm bathroom. Except, instead of men, all the stalls around you are occupied with girls showering. Imagine the level of temptation you would face, the spiritual battle that would writhe inside of you.

This is how I feel every morning.

I tried my hardest to focus my mind on school, work, God--anything but the naked girls just inches away from me.

But the thought of all those pretty girls around me just wouldn't escape my imagination.

I finally gave up and just tried to finish quickly. Getting out to dry myself off, I couldn't help but want to sneak a peek through the spaces between the curtains of the showers across from mine. I fought hard to try to control my mind. I gave one final weak plea to God for strength. Then, I heard a clink as the girl across from me uncaringly pulled open her curtain to reveal her naked self. She grabbed her towel and proceeded to dry herself off. Already weakened by my initial thoughts, my eyes finally gained power over me, and I started sneaking glances at her.

I felt a tingling feeling below, so I quickly dried off and wrapped a towel around my body. I walked to the sinks and started brushing my teeth, trying hard to focus on reaching every crevice

Continued on Page 2 >

Continued on Page 2 >

The Tyranny of Freedom The Right’s exploitation of religious expression Grant Miller, CU Alumnus

In 1779, Thomas Jefferson penned the following words: "[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."

Twelve years later, a more simplified sentiment found its way into the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment states, among other things, that citizens of this country are protected from the passage of laws that respect an "establishment of religion."

Having grown up with a conservative family, I am well aware of the rebuttals and arguments. "Someone has to decide what the laws are!" "How will we have moral laws if not directed by Moral Law (re: the Bible)?" “This country was founded on Judeo-Christian

The Ventriloquist

APRIL 2013

principles!” However, one has only to look at the 1796 treaty with Tripoli, crafted under Washington's presidency and signed into law by Adams to see the status of our country’s founding. The treaty clearly states, "...the government of the United States is not in any sense (emphasis added) founded on the Christian religion..."

Yet today, one has only to turn on any cable news channel to hear incendiary rhetoric, cloaked in distorted religious piety, being spewed at the American masses.

Last May, a "pastor" in North Carolina declared, "I figured a way to get rid of all the lesbians and queers, but couldn't get it past the Congress... [put them in a fence] and have that fence electrified so they can't get out. Feed 'em... In a few years they'll die out [because] they can't reproduce... It makes me puking sick...

Can you imagine kissing some man?" A similar sentiment is winding its way rapidly through the Kansas legislature, although this chilling effort is much more far-reaching in its implications: elements within the Kansas legislature want anyone who has been diagnosed with HIV or AIDS to "have their movements restricted," in effect, quarantining entire swaths of the population.

In the same breath that espouses the heritage of our nation and its history of freedom, politicians such as Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, and Rick Perry, will infer religious liberty--while claiming that their version of religious liberty must dictate law and that it must come explicitly from their understanding of

Continued on Page 3 >

www.theventriloquist.us

Page 1

The Problem of the One (Within) and the Many

Farewell (con’t) the same concerns held by student advocates such as myself.

Dr. Rudd, who served as a Cedarville trustee for over 20 years, including multiple terms as Board Chairman, had the following to say regarding his resignation:

“I’m very thankful for CU and the privilege of being very closely associated with it for so many years. I have many dear friends there who are amazing servants of God. It saddens me deeply that I could no longer support actions and direction of the current leadership and that I was no longer able to exert influence for what I believe to be truthfulness, integrity, and Biblical consistency. God has graciously blessed Cedarville and there are many, many wonderful people still associated with it. I pray that the leadership will be restored to Biblical integrity.”

In Rev. Williamson’s words: “The board of trustees repeatedly mishandled God's servants while virtually ignoring the cries of students and alumni alike. Any hint of due process was abandoned, and the ability to have respectful dialogues on key issues was non-existent. I resigned because I could no longer be associated with a group that was constantly untruthful and unjust.”

And so the Cedarville diaspora grows. If this university is going to inspire true greatness, it should avoid driving away godly individuals like Ruby, Pahl, Ham, Graves, Mills, Williamson, and Rudd in the future.

Some may accuse me of biting the hand that feeds. But it is not the same hand.

I have been fed by Carl Ruby’s Cedarville, not the new Cedarville of twenty years ago. As the University hearkens back to the glory days before creeping “liberalism” reached the bubble’s border, the leadership has responded to repeated requests for clarity and honesty with poignant silences and disappointing distortions of the truth.

God is not surprised. I wonder if he is angered, though, by having his knowledge and sovereignty used to justify injustice.

Cedarville, fulfill your call and be true to our God – not by claiming institutional prerogatives to drive away our Christlike best – but by doing justice, promoting honesty, and walking humbly with Him whose name we claim. ♦

My Struggle (con’t) in my mouth, and nothing else.

Suddenly, the bathroom door swung open and a girl in just her underwear stumbled in. I tried not to stare, but I was too weak and just gave in.

I left the bathroom, mentally and emotionally exhausted from trying to ward off all those temptations. I walked into my room, thinking that the hardest part of my daily battle was finally over.

A few minutes later, my roommate, who was also a girl, returned from showering. She dropped her towel and started nonchalantly perusing her closet, trying to find the perfect outfit. I wondered how long she was just going to stand there, flaunting her nudity. With no more will power to fight temptation, I just stared at her enticing body until she finally got dressed.

With a few minutes until class, I got dressed myself and threw my books into my bag and left. As I walked to class, I wondered when my struggles would end. I thought about I Corinthians 10:13. Did God really know my limits? I cried out to God, ashamed, guilty, frustrated, that I had only been awake for an hour and had already failed miserably. ♦ Editor’s Note: Cedarville students who are questioning their sexuality can find support in numerous places. One such place is Cedarville Out, online at www.cedarvilleout.org.

About The Ventriloquist The Ventriloquist is an independently-run, independently-funded student publication at Cedarville University. We accept well-written articles from anybody in the Cedarville community and publish them in hope that the reader will give each piece fair consideration. Article ideas, questions and comments can be submitted to ventriloquistpaper@gmail.com.

Campus Progress The Ventriloquist is proudly published with support from Campus Progress, a division of the Center for American Progress. Campus Progress is online at CampusProgress.org.

The Ventriloquist

Reflections on courage, authenticity, and pluralism Matthew Nelson, CU Alumnus

Ever so vivid in my memory, I recall Dr. Mills’ theatrical antics in front of the classroom in the Dixon Ministry Center in Introduction to Philosophy.

In one of the earlier lessons in the class, Mills effortlessly expounded on a perennial and foundational philosophical issue taken up in the Presocratic period: ‘The Problem of the One and the Many.” The ancients were plagued by the tension between unity and diversity in nature; namely, how one fundamental element might be the source of a variety of manifestations, objects, events, and the like. Corresponding to this was the discernable reality of simultaneous constancy and change. Heraclitus (540-480 BCE), Dr. Mills instructed, preferred to accentuate diversity and dynamism over unity and stasis, by using the act of stepping into a rushing river as an analogy to explain his ontological insight: “You cannot step twice into the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you. It scatters and it gathers; it advances and retires.” So as not to be awash in the chaotic flux of reality, Heraclitus asserted that there was a unifying principle – the “logos” – that coheres all things – providing substance and structure – so that we could perceive a river as a river. Conversely, Parmenides (510 BCE) advanced a perspective that we commonly associate with the Eastern philosophical tradition that the world of multiplicity and change is an illusion and “the One” as eternal, undifferentiated, immutable, and unmoving is really all that exists.

I then went on to learn in my graduate studies that some posited that there was just one fundamental element,1 others saw an animating force/ rationale like Heraclitus,2 while others championed the perspective of Parmenides through the lens of paradox,3 relativism,4 or pluralism.5 Years later, I find myself returning to the world of the Presocrates and their “Problem of the One and the Many” to elucidate the struggles of the present.

Though I’d like to believe that Cedarville University has advanced beyond the dogmatism, authoritarianism, and insular political and other thinking that characterized my time there from 1999-2003 (with notable exceptions), recent developments indicate not (i.e. the issuing of creedal “white papers,” the dismissal of Dr. Ruby and President Brown, and the liquidation of the Philosophy major). In fact, I have, due to these abrupt and brash actions, reason to believe that a return to its fundamentalist, legalistic past may not be too far in the offing. Should Cedarville be “girding its loins” for a protracted campaign against more progressive ways of thinking, they had better “count the cost.” The future belongs not to the current administrators and donors, but to the young Christians in their charge. And these students, as Emergent Church leaders have been quick to point out, are not marching in lock step with the established ecclesial leadership. Given this inter-generational theological/social drift that seems well under way in America, I have hope that Cedarville’s religious Machiavellianism is not long for this world. In the twenty-first century, Christian students just won’t allow their minds to be in bondage as spiritual serfs to a theological vassal.

No, the moral buoyancy that the Millennial generation exhibits, according to pollsters and demographers, with regard to climate change, marriage equality, and poverty, and its resistance of the consumerist and materialistic tendencies of its Baby boomer forebears, revitalizes my hope.

To you Cedarville students who spurn an occupation of your minds and spirits, I want to offer you some edifying thoughts. As Jesus says, “For those who have ears to hear,” I’d like to cast the ancients’ “Problem of the One and the Many” as an instructive metaphor for how we might help Cedarville University cognitively, spiritually, and morally evolve by sharing some reflections on the following topics: courage, authenticity, and pluralism.

Every Evangelical pretense of certainty to the contrary, existence with all of its multilayered, multifaceted complexity is murky. Reminiscent of Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave,” Saint Paul admits in 1 Corinthians 13:12: “At the present time we see indistinctly by mirrors offering enigmatic reflections.” Such is reality as it is; a reality that the Presocrates understood all too well in their wrangling over the “Problem of the One and the Many.”

Deeper study into their world reveals wildly disparate interpretations of reality, even verging on the absurd (Parmenides thought ”The One” was an actual rounded object). Nevertheless, a diversity of perspectives lead to even

Continued on Page 3 > 1:

E.g. Thales: water; Anaximenes: air E.g. Pythagoras’ mathematical relations 3: E.g. Zeno 4: E.g. Xenophanes and Protagoras, a Sophist 5: E.g. Empedocles 2:

Faces of The Ventriloquist Zach Schneider, editor/webmaster ♦ Jordan Ryner, asst. editor Tommy Graves, staff writer ♦ Josiah Sleppy, staff writer

www.theventriloquist.us

Page 2

Freedom (con’t) morality and the universe. This misleading mentality is seen throughout the leadership structure and frames of the religious right's arguments: "We believe in religious freedom and liberty, but it must be our interpretation as such that rules this land." In fact, this sentiment is so strong in North Carolina that lawmakers are pushing for the establishment of a state religion while at the same time, the Attorney General of Virginia (who is currently running for governor) is pursuing the reinstatement of sodomy laws for the state.

This is the great danger of the religious right's politics: speaking the language of freedom, these individuals seek to impose their belief system on hundreds of millions of people (or as Jefferson feared, "enlarging their civil capacities"). Exclusionary right to religious freedom is granted to "JudeoChristian" values in the eyes of these individuals. To make matters worse, a faulty interpretation and understanding of the Bible places many of these individuals in dangerous territory when it comes to science, environmentalism, international policy, and social policy.

In 2007, Pew Research conducted a survey of Republican voters and found 37% of all Republican voters are white evangelicals, but make up 55% of Republican voters on social issues. To more fully understand the implications of these numbers, it is important to note the fact that 89% of the Republican base is ethnically Caucasian. Combined with an overwhelmingly white base--over a third of it evangelical--a structure for the imposition of views is highly skewed towards a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant mentality.

With cries of persecution and marginalization rising from this demographic, I find it nearly impossible to take these claims seriously. True religious freedom allows diverse expressions to be celebrated--not shunned or ridiculed. Exercising religious freedom allows us schools that are free from intervention and indoctrination, public spaces that welcome all, and an atmosphere of tolerance and acceptance that would otherwise be squelched in the neo-fascistic endeavors of some on the religious right.

The cultural diversity of the United States is rapidly expanding and will continue to do so, bringing with it fresh expressions of art, religion, and civic practice. These things should not be squelched in an agenda aimed at moral domination and subjugation, but at developing a deeper sense of community and a greater understanding of the phrase, E Pluribus Unum--"Out of many, One." As civic discourse continues in our public squares, it will be crucial to develop our understanding and enactment of tolerance and acceptance. Even so, we walk a fine line; we must ask ourselves, "At what cost will we tolerate intolerance?"

Conservatives are quick to crow, "You claim tolerance but where is your tolerance for those who are [opposed to your position]?" Let me clearly state that intolerance based on religious preference has no place in the liberal state. "Freedom of speech" allows everyone to say their piece, yes.

However, in the space of civic discourse, ignorance masked as piety and bigotry cloaked as purity and faithfulness are repugnant. One does not have to look very far into the past to see this dualistic mentality of the "persecuted crusader": slavery, interracial marriage, the Equal Rights Amendment, the AIDS epidemic, marriage equality... our history is replete with such shameful episodes.

We are a thriving, beautiful, and diverse population. Seeking to impose one's own understanding of the universe on millions of others is not only hubristic, it is damaging. The worst part about what is being attempted by the religious right, joined with the political right, is the fact that it is a thinly veiled exercise in white privilege. As such, when it is challenged, cries of discrimination and a call to arms to "Take America Back!" are issued. No. Those days are gone. In the place of white fear may we build a society that cherishes our differences & creates space for expression and freedom without fear of recrimination--a place, as Jefferson wrote, where "all [people] are free." ♦

Follow The Ventriloquist •Visit our website, www.theventriloquist.us. All of our articles are available to read online. You can comment on articles, interact with other readers, and contact us to tell us how we’re doing.

•Like us on Facebook for updates and occasional posts about important current events. www.facebook.com/CUVentriloquist •Follow us on Twitter to stay up-to-date on all of the happenings at The Ventriloquist. @CUVentriloquist

Designer Wanted The Ventriloquist is currently seeking a graphic designer to take over layout and illustration duties for our print issues. If you’re interested, shoot us an email at ventriloquistpaper@gmail.com with a sample or two of your work.

The Ventriloquist

One and Many (con’t) more insightful and generative understandings of the nature of it all.6 Yet, at Cedarville and elsewhere we hear such ironclad declarations of the nature of the Divine – that which is, ultimately speaking, ineffable, transcendent, and mysterious. Søren Kierkegaard speaks of this in articulating a Christian existentialism, that the world is fundamentally paradoxical, and no more so than in the unifying work of God and humanity in Jesus Christ. It is the Paschal Mystery after all, now isn’t it? The height of theological hubris is to demand others believe as exclusively and certainly authoritative one particular theory of the nature of God or of Jesus’ work on the cross! Who will have the existentialist courage to shoot back that forcing assent to doctrinal statements is antithetical to the Spirit of God working in our lives?

Not that we can’t posit knowledge of God in creeds and Systematic Theology, but we forget God is still the “I am that I am”7 to Moses in the Burning Bush, the “still, small voice”8 to Elijah, and the “Unknown God”9 to Saint Paul. God’s very existence problematizes and deconstructs every human conception of reality as given. Even a Trinitarian theology proper (the very epitome of the paradox of “The One and the Many”) bespeaks of imperceptibility.10 In the postmodern turn, we realize that the truth of reality has always been queerer than our limited minds could ever process.

Theologians long before Kierkegaard were mindful of this too. For instance, the via negativa or the negative theological tradition – resisting conceptualization of God, by speaking in terms of what cannot be said of God – cautions us against theological delusion when even our most sophisticated theologies ultimately fall victim to the finitude of human language, reason, and perception. Apophatic theology, as it is properly known, is actually the earliest Christian theology; existing well before the quasi-scientific systematizing of belief that is copied off of Powerpoint slides in Theology classrooms at Cedarville. From Tertullian, Gregory of Nyssa, John Crysostom, and Dionysius the Areopagite11 to Mother Teresa, C. S. Lewis, and Greek Orthodox theologians today, Christians have used this negating approach in a dialectical understanding of God and reality.

Ironically, it is through this negating method that The Cloud of Unknowing12 is pierced and something of the infinite is glimpsed.

This brute realism, that we can’t colonize “truth,” is a fiercely courageous stand – one that leaves room for faith and fosters the virtues of honesty and humility, and leads to knowledge of God through prayer and contemplation, mysticism, and other spiritual experiences. So if the intersection of God and reality is not certainly knowable, then why is Theology at Cedarville being taught in a sometimes strident and polemical fashion, as it was for me and I suspect it is for you? How can we hope to “know the face of God” if our wonderment, imagination, and exploration of God is tamped down by “orthodoxy” and other tyrannies of the mind? No, we need the courage of our convictions that we are free to have our own convictions about God.

Where shall we discover this courage? It resides in the ancient Greek quest, encapsulated in the aphorism: “Know thyself.” Authenticity is not, in the rugged individualism of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” “To thine own self be true.” It is the self-determining freedom of Jean Jacques Rousseau and Johann Herder that each one has a unique state of being that should be cultivated and expressed.13 Made in the image of God, each person must live life in accordance with the dictates of personal conscience, and with freewill be about the business of self-making. But this must be balanced, of course, by other checks: community, tradition, law, and scientific and other modalities of knowing, not just personal experience. Here we arrive at the profound “Problem of the One and the Many.” To what extent should my identity (The One) be made in the presence of the Others (The Many)? I would suggest that it is a non-starter to continue down a path of theological despotism – a top-down imposition of someone else’s “conscientious perspective.”14 Similarly, one cannot submit oneself wholesale to another and claim to be one’s own or the Savior’s. Through dialog and experience, we can question, doubt, worship, reject; but what we mustn’t do is allow

Continued on Page 4 > 6:

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle would produce some of the world’s keenest insights into the nature of reality and the Divine.

7: Exodus 3:14 8: 1 Kings 19:11-13 9: Acts 17:23 10: To use the language of Romans 11:33 with reference to divinity, “unsearchable and inscrutable.”

11: His oft-quoted explanation of God deserves to be noted here: “The inscrutable One is out of the reach of every rational process, nor can any words come up to the inexpressible Good, this One, this Source of all unity, this supra-existent Being. Mind beyond mind, word beyond speech, it is gathered up by no discourse, by no intuition, by no name,” PseudoDionysius: The Complete Works: Paulist Press, 1987.

12: The Cloud of Unknowing is an anonymous Christian text dating from the 14th century urging the faithful to have the courage to abandon their souls to “unknowingness” in order to know God. 13: On this point I am indebted to the thinking of the eminent Roman Catholic philosopher, Charles Taylor, in his book The Ethics of Authenticity: Harvard University Press, 1991.

14: This is a concept coined by Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed.

www.theventriloquist.us

Page 3

One and Many (con’t) ourselves to be ruled by a totalitarianism of mind that prevents us from knowing and living our authentic selves. “The One” within must be preserved from those who, like Cedarville, would conscript it for a political or religious agenda – denying you your God-given freedom. The tension of “The One and the Many” – who you are within and as a part of the whole – must be worked out dialogically in community, and informed by as many perspectives as possible, which leads to our final topic: pluralism.

We have nothing to fear from diversity, “The Many.” Yet it is fear that drives us to our baser human impulses of tribalism, nativism, xenophobia, conformity and passivity, or reactionism. We defend some semblance of theological homogeneity – The One – out of fear that “The Truth” won’t be able to hold up under the scrutiny of “The Many.” Once we set our foot in Heraclitus’ rushing river of multiculturalism and diversity, we might be tempted to think our identity, beliefs, and traditions will get washed away.

This insecurity, which I detected while at Cedarville and hear about from afar today, is mutually exclusive from faith as described in Hebrews 11:1: “Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.“ Faith doesn’t shy away from difference; it courts it. Perhaps it is the lack of faith that drives us to make everyone else believe, think, act and feel exactly as we do? Whatsoever the reason, it is untenable that this variety of ideological rigidity can hold fast in this modern age. Catalyzed by globalization, our nation is increasingly religiously and culturally plural. We might hope that the “Cedarville Bubble” carries us like Noah’s ark through the wicked world, but the “Cedarville Bubble” is an academic gas chamber with the noxious fumes of our own voices echoing back to us. This can hardly be a suitable learning environment committed to free and open inquiry – just the opposite. Pluralism (note: not relativism like the Sophists) is our hope for finding some way out of the Presocrates’ riddle. A faith hero of mine, Eboo Patel, founder of the Interfaith Youth Core, encourages us to embrace religious and other pluralism. In his book, Acts of Faith, Patel

believes that the 21st century will be challenged by the “Faith Line” – given increased diversity in close proximity, either we will capitulate to hostilities brought about by all stripes of religious totalitarianism, or will we learn to engage “the other” with respect for all differences for “common action for the common good.”15 Pluralism ideally directs us to a more robust knowing and living of one’s own tradition; as my former professor Diana Eck has said: “Pluralism is not relativism, but the engagement of commitments.”

This steers us, then, to a much more fertile discussion of reality, or “The Truth,” because different people are coming together from different backgrounds with different perspectives thinking and discussing in a constructive fashion. As we grow in a knowledge of “The One (within)” in a plurality of perspectives and influences, we come to know “The One” throughout, and vice-versa. Only abandoning a “Cedarville Bubble” or its ecclesiastical proxy will allow you and your faith to grow.

Like you, I am a Christian and I have always had a strong desire to know reality as it really is. Though we might be duped by the Siren song of certainty – either in a Scripture passage, or a favored theologian or a religious denomination – we know in the depths of our soul that this is merely an illusion, wrapped in wish fulfillment, hidden in a box of insecurity. That is why Christ called us to have faith, for we cannot have any other – no matter how determined we will it to be so. What I have discerned in the decade that I have been out of Cedarville is that we will always live in the “Problem of the One and the Many.” However, that shouldn’t lead us to existential despair. Rather, we are anchored in a hope that in courageous dialog first with “The One (within)” and second in the company of “The Many,” with our faith in the person and work of our Lord and Savior the Christ, we will know better our Creator God – THE ONE – who gave life to “The Many.” ♦ 15:

Eboo Patel, Acts of Faith: The Story of an American Muslim, in the Struggle for the Soul of a Generation: Beacon Press: 2010.

Crossword

Solution online: www.theventriloquist.us/puzzles/april_2013

The Ventriloquist

www.theventriloquist.us

Page 4