Bruce Waltke Leaves RTS

A student just notified me that Bruce Waltke, a noted Old Testament scholar, has not had his contract renewed at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, FL. You can read about the story here.

I think it is sad that a scholar of Waltke’s stature was put in this position. I would hope that a solidly evangelical institution like RTS would be able to see that Waltke affirms the inerrancy of Scripture and that he is seeking truth, not compromising on it. I would also hope that they would allow for someone to hold a view that differs from theirs as long as the person can demonstrate how it can be compatible with ideas of the inerrancy of Scripture. That is, I wish they could have allowed Waltke to be “wrong” in their view, rather than dismissed.

On the other hand, it is important to note that if you look carefully at the story, two important facts emerge. First, Waltke admitted that he wasn’t clear in his BioLogos presentation, and that he wished it had been clearer. Second, Waltke did not accuse RTS of “getting rid” of him, and RTS did not actually accuse him of error. Rather, they said that his views were incompatible with those of the institution.

Though I wish it had been handled differently, it seems to me that there is a place for holding to certain confessional stances at a sectarian institution. For example, the seminary I serve, Bethel, is a Baptist seminary. All of us on the faculty agree that believer’s baptism is the preferred mode of baptism. If, after careful study of Scripture, I were to conclude that infant baptism was the preferred mode of baptism, I would no longer be a good “fit” for Bethel, even though no one would claim that my view was heretical or in error. (After all, everyone on the faculty knows evangelical Presbyterians, Methodists, etc., who baptize infants.) I have been on search committees in which we passed over candidates who might be great in many ways, but who don’t fit Bethel on that and other theological points, though they were undoubtedly evangelical. We could debate whether that is a wise position to adopt. Some might feel that that is less important than having faculty who are evangelical in theology, whatever their views on baptism. But, for good or ill, that is the position Bethel has taken. It was clear when I was hired that this was the stance taken (both in terms of the issue of baptism itself and the idea that a faculty member must be a fit with Bethel on this issue), so were I to change my views on this, integrity would require me to seek employment elsewhere. That is true even if everyone recognizes that the stance itself is not in error.

There is a tension between the kind of academic freedom necessary for robust academic inquiry, and the theological commitments of a sectarian institution preparing students for ministry. Every confessional institution has to find that balance. Sometimes cases come up that test those boundaries or upset the balance. Waltke’s case is clearly one. There have been and will be others. But, to me at least, it seems that striving to find that balance is important for the ministry of preparing students to lead churches within a certain theological framework. For example, students at a secular university have often shared the difficulty of being an evangelical Christian in that environment, forced to defend their views with regularity and perhaps ostracized for their views. Drawing certain lines to achieve a balance between academic freedom and theological commitments helps foster an environment in which students are able to process and develop their theology and attend to their spiritual formation without constantly feeling threatened or under attack. (At least that is the ideal!) Drawing some lines and establishing some boundaries, with respect and charity for views that are different but not heretical, helps foster that environment. I might draw those lines differently, but, in principle, at least, I’m not opposed to drawing some lines.