Ministry versus Integration

After reading Culbertson's article "A New Rallying Cry" I would have to disagree with some of his points. In any field, even education, marketing is very important. I can't help to think Culbertson's "call" is more of a marketing strategy. I believe if integration to faith and learning has failed, it is due to professors AND students. For many students, myself included, they need to be ENGAGED in the classroom by the professor and KNOW how to integrate faith and learning. When I came to Montreat College, the idea of integrating faith and learning was new to me. I will admit I probably wouldn't call myself a Christian scholar as Culbertson points out, but I feel like I am on my way in understanding this concept better.

Culbertson is a professor of missions at Southern Nazarene, which is "why" he probably puts the emphasis on "ministry" in his new slogan idea. He sees that the integration of faith and learning doesn't go far enough. Missions and hands-on experience needs to be a part of the integration. You can read more about Culbertson's mission work at http://home.snu.edu/~hculbert/.

My second point, is that it seems that Culbertson's call for Ministry Across Curriculum related more with professors than students. In all of his points, he emphasizes the role of the professors instead of the student. Where does the student's role in this "new cry" fit? I like the idea of integrating faith and learning because it puts the responsibility on the professor and the student.

I do like the author's point about not treating faith and learning as equal parts. Sometimes I think if viewed my learning as important as my faith I would do better in the classroom! Many people to put faith as their center, which don't get me wrong is good. But, can you imagine if students valued their education as much as their faith what impact that would have on their engagement in class, academic faithfulness, and their GPA!

I do like the word "ministry" and what it could mean for students. I think we should see our education as part of a ministry. One of Culbertson's questions is "What would it look like?" I don't know how students would "live" out the curriculum part. Using the word curriculum almost seems tied to the classroom, while integrating faith and learning could be applied to the classroom, the community, athletics, and other extracurricular activities. Using the word curriculum almost seems smaller in perspective. Even though I like the word ministry, it may need to be described more in detail for those students who are not deep in their faith.

I like what Robert Harris said in his article related to integration of faith and learning. "Christians must be intentional about making the connections between their faith and the knowledge claims they encounter and careful to keep the Biblical framework in the foreground as the structuring principle of truth. Finally, why even make this change? I don't think changing the "slogan" is going to change anything. To make any slogan or idea work you have to have the people behind it believe in it. Why would professors do anything different with this new slogan? Yeah, Culbertson makes some good points, but the bottom line is there has to be a change in professors and students' hearts and minds about making this ministry and integration a priority. If you don't do that, no fancy slogan will make a difference.