X-Envelope-to: EDPOLYAN%ASUACAD@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"<@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU:EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD>"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:39:00 EST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         Jack Letarte <JCLETARTE@TAYLORU.BITNET>
Subject:      Moral and Spiritual Values

        It has taken me awhile, but I've just re-read the week's postings
on the above topic.  Perhaps it will help if I give an example of what I
believe Frank Doherty has been talking about.  I'm familiar with a case in
a nearby state in which a secondary school offered and "activity" or
"interest" period - not wihtin the class room obligations of students.
For a peiod of time as student-led Bible study group was permitted to
use bulletin boards and PA system to publicize its activities, just like
all other activities.  Then, the administraiton of the school decided
that the Christian group should not be allowed to use those means, be-
cause, they said, it was necessary to separate church and state.  The
students appealed to the school board, which decided that *no* group
would be allowed that privilege.  Guess who the student body directed
its wrath toward?  The board? The principal? No, the Christian group, of
course.  I think it is possible, in our politically correct world, that
all groups *except* orthodox Christian groups find that their rights are
protected.
        Some other comments:  Frank's original posting spoke of
"evangelicals", not "evangelists".  Stan, there is a difference.  Look it
up in your dictionary.
        I don't think that Frank advocated a theocracy; in fact, he spec-
ifically stated that he did not.
        Anne, asked for statistics ot prove an association between our
problems in the schools and a lack of moral and spiritual values. I think
that some people have done that, but I don't believe the association of two
indicators will prove causality.  Certainly it has not in the familiar
statement and re-statement of the association between smoking and lung
cancer.  Anne also equates "authoritarian dictatorship" with "religion",
and I don't believe it is necessary to do that in order to react to
Frank's thesis.
        Frank did speak of a change being needed in "the heart", and
that
seems to have caused consternation to some on the list.  I would
translate that simple as an inward change, and in so doing I would not
deny that there are many people who hold the right beliefs but still
engage in the wrong actions.  On the other hand, to Dr. Covaleskie's
comment that Germany in the 1930's and Russia during the Czarist
period were "Christian" but look at the evil which existed in those
countries, I say yes, I agree, but - How many Christians gave their lives
because of their beliefs and their opposition to that evil during that
same time?
        I sense that many who have posted to the list have been bothered
by a sense of any "absolutes."  The word "meaning" has been used
several times.  Within my understanding, words, concepts, ideas, all
have "meanings".  If put together by a careful author, they have a
meaning, and that meaning does not differ depending upon who is doing
the reading.  A comment was made that "knowledge of God is socially
bound".  If our knowledge of God comes from Scripture, and if that was
God's chosen way to reveal himself, there is only one meaning.
        I liked Dr. Covaleskie's comments regarding the teaching of
morals, and the reminder that we do this one way or another, whether
we intend to or not.  Thus far, most teachers would agree that lying,
stealing, and killing should be discouraged, as Kevin Kurtz has
pointed out.  What happens when we reach the point at which that consensus
no longer exists?  Someone commented that morals are derived from the
political process.  I thought the reverse was true.  Are not our
political processes only as good as the people thye are created to
serve?
        Lastly, I really was astonished by Stan's posting on history.
I've just come back from the library, and sure enough, I'm *not* a
modern Rip Van Winkle.  The history books are still there, by reput-
able authors and publishers, and the more modern among those which
relate to Jewish history refer to the latest archeological findings.
I place the assertion that we don't have evidence of the existence
of David and Solomon right alongside the new teaching that the
holocaust did not take place.  Of course, there are some who are
bothered by the fact that early Jewish history has a number of
supernatural elements in it.  I believe, though, that we can never
account for all the facets of the history of any era or people.  There
are always things we don't understand, but we shouldn't discard or
ignore history for that reason
        Sorry for the length of this.

                Jack Letarte    Taylor University, Upland, IN 46989
                BITNET: jcletarte@tayloru