Cal Thomas is a man with integrity and has a well-established reputation for defending conservative principles, in addition to proclaiming elemental truths within the teachings of Christianity. His columns are enlightening, informative, and thought-provoking to read. This being said, I cannot disagree more with his most recent column in The Washington Times, “The lesson behind Jerry Falwell Jr.’s fall.”
Thomas correctly expressed the dangers of “politicians who often use people of faith to hide or excuse an earthly agenda and cloak their own moral shortcomings.” While President Donald Trump has undeniably experienced some moral shortcomings in his previous life, these shortcomings have not been ‘cloaked.’ In all actuality, they have been displayed on a national stage predating the 1990’s. He has not “used people of faith to hide or excuse an earthly agenda,” as Thomas alludes.
President Trump has remained dedicated to protecting religious liberty, and has challenged prejudicial policies that target people of faith. By far, this is not an earthly agenda. It’s quite the opposite, because it allows the church to evangelize freely, permitting religious individuals to practice their faith outside of their religious facilities. He has taken great steps to preserve the protections granted in the First Amendment, ranging from deploying his legal counsel on religious liberty cases to signing religious protections into law. Many other congressmen and senators have joined the President in fighting for these policies and protections.
He continues, “This is not unique to the current president or to contemporary evangelical Christians.”
Consequently, we understand that his column is directed at the relationship between Trump-like politicians and Liberty University.
Thomas states, “The problem is too many go about seeking change through the very political and government structures they have previously criticized as unable to achieve noble ends.”
At this point, evangelicals are beginning to understand the objectives that need to be accomplished in order to regain the culture. Evangelicals are no longer supporting those who seek to implement governmental policies that dictate cultural standards, as these can be easily corrupted. Rather, evangelicals want a president who will remove the government from dictating certain consensual cultural norms, allowing the church to freely evangelize a worldly culture. To clarify, it’s much easier to establish biblical morality when you do not have a government dictating their immoral version of “morality.”
Thomas then cites Psalm 146: 3-7, “Do not put your trust in princes, in human beings, who cannot save. When their spirit departs, they return to the ground; on that very day their plans come to nothing. Blessed are those whose help is in the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord their God.”
Did Samuel not consult with the Lord, who selected David to be anointed as the future king of Israel (1 Samuel 16)? Did David not consult with God on filling this governmental appointment (2 Samuel 2:1)? Therefore, we can easily conclude that God has historically been involved in governmental affairs and we should seek His involvement in governmental affairs.
After all, reformed theologian John Calvin stated, “When God wants to judge a nation, He gives them wicked rulers.”
Calvin held the view that God has a role in government. While he favored the government and church existing as separate institutions, he believed they could work together in a spirit of cooperation.
I certainly agree with Thomas on the criteria to select a new President, “[Liberty University] needs to bring in someone who has not only impeccable academic credentials, but also consistently practices his or her faith.”
However, he continues, expressing that Liberty University should sever its relationship with politicians.
“It should also stop inviting politicians to speak at commencement and convocation.”
When the President of the United States speaks at your graduation ceremony, it is an esteemed honor. Nationally, it exalts Liberty University as a highly recognized institution, further advancing its credibility. If U.S. presidents were to stop speaking at Liberty University, it would further damage its reputation, as it would be perceived as a ‘once successful’ institution destroyed by scandal. It would be viewed as a university where presidents once spoke, but now avoid like the bubonic plague.
Presumably, Thomas would respond that Liberty University‘s credibility should be determined by their academic credentials and their biblical doctrine. While those are exponentially important, these two factors alone cannot rescue them from their public relations nightmare.
Thomas even acknowledged that Liberty University is a “very good university.” As a student enrolled at Liberty, I couldn’t agree more. Prior to transferring to LU in 2018, I attended a Wesleyan institution. It was secular at its core, where several lecturers often presented their opinions as facts. Morality among staff and within certain classrooms was overtly poor, where one of my required general education classes played an x-rated film, asking students to compose a summary. For me, Liberty was a breath of fresh air. Their studies are exceptional. Their political science program is highly detailed, greatly examining various political philosophies, international relations, and areas of public policy. Their theological courses are also doctrinally sound, ensuring that their students are educated on the core doctrines of scripture.
Liberty University is an exceptionally great university. It is a sanctuary to students desiring higher education in the heathenistic hades of academia. Liberty University should not change its values, mission, and institutional operation to “become successful.” These factors are what made Liberty University successful. It was these values presumably not being followed by the President of the university that resulted in this predicament. Liberty University‘s launch of an independent investigation into the prior administration was a correct step in re-establishing credibility.
Liberty University should return to the values, mission, and institutional operations that have created it as an institution of national prominence, but (in the words of Thomas) select a new president “who has not only impeccable academic credentials, but also consistently practices his or her faith.”
If Liberty University applies these methods, it will regain its prominence and academic reputation. Liberty University does not need to be restructured; it needs to be restored.
