Crossroads Podcast: Turning Point USA Vs. Christian Colleges

The following are two fictional scenarios, each based on decades of conversations I have had with students at Christian colleges and universities.

Conflicts like these are not — repeat, NOT— normal or common, but they can happen. I moved them into present tense for reasons that will become obvious, as I connect them to news coverage we discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast, focusing on tensions between a few Christian schools and Turning Point USA.

(1) In an undergraduate history class, a Christian college professor makes an assignment in which students write papers about specific human rights issues. Many students propose papers about immigration, racism, gender and other topics, but one offers a proposal about free speech and social media, focusing on Vice President J.D. Vance’s blistering Munich Security Conference speech accusing European elites of fearing the voices of their own people. The professor rolls his eyes and, after making cold comments about Vance, rejects the proposal. The student writes about the clash in social media.

(2) In a political science class, a Christian college professor veers into commentary about abortion rights (again). A student uses her phone to record part of the lecture, including the professor saying that if pregnant females at the school need private rides to Planned Parenthood, he would be willing to help. The student writes about the remarks online and ignites a firestorm.

In the next act of these dramas, school administrators remind the students that, in the student covenants they signed at the school, they pledged — when faced with conflicts on campus— to remember chapter 18 in the Gospel of Matthew:

If your brother or sister sins,[go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

In other words, the social-media posts violated the covenant. Students ask if the professors violated school covenants in any way, but the teachers are not disciplined in any public way. The young students face tense interviews with deans and administrators in which they are told that they have misunderstood the actions of their professors and the teachings of the college.

Conflicts such as these may center on a wide variety of other hot-button topics, from the Book of Genesis to LGBTQ+ rights, from the ordination of women to the existence of Hell.

Let me stress that these conflicts at private Christian institutions are not about free speech, as opposed to conflicts between Turning Point USA, InterVarsity and others at taxpayer-funded state universities. At private, doctrinally defined schools (even on the left) the issue is whether administrators are serious about applying doctrinal and lifestyle covenants to students, faculty and staff.

Now, let’s see if we can see any possible connections between my two hypothetical case studies and the following stories in the news. First, there is this Fox News headline:

California university students’ third attempt to form TPUSA chapter denied

Point Loma Nazarene University cites concerns over Professor Watchlist and faith policies

Note that reference to a “Professor Watchlist.” Here is the key material:

A third attempt by students at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego to establish a school-supported Turning Point USA (TPUSA) chapter was denied by the university’s Associated Student Body (ASB) Board of Directors.

The decision was announced in an email sent to students by university President Kerry Fulcher Nov. 5.

“I felt silenced when I got that email,” said Luke Cole, the elected secretary of the chapter and a third-year student at the university. “I felt like I couldn’t speak anymore.”

The email, obtained by Fox News Digital, said the motion was brought to a vote by the ASB Board of Directors and failed to pass after a review process. The email expressed concerns over the organization’s Professor Watchlist. According to TPUSA’s website, the Professor Watchlist aims to “expose and document” professors who discriminate against conservative students.

Yes, note the “watchlist” social-media website reference. That leads to these remarks from the school’s president (especially the words I put in italics):

“While the applicants indicated they would not participate in the watchlist, their application included phrasing that mirrors language used on TPUSA’s website in connection with it,” Fulcher wrote in the email. “That practice is not aligned with ASB’s purpose of fostering constructive communication and interaction between students, faculty, and administration.”

Does that sound like a reference to a Mathew 18 policy, with school administrators being in charge of the grievance policy described in covenant documents?

Reporters would need to look into that? Alas, in decades of watching mainstream-news coverage of conflicts of this kind I do not believe I have seen more than one or two cases in which reporters read and quoted the relevant language in the school’s doctrinal or lifestyle covenants.

Why is that? Simply stated, the assumptions are that these fights are about partisan politics, when many of them are rooted in conflicts over doctrine. Politics is real, you see. Doctrine? Not so much.

Also note that the Point Loma leadership cited the threat to open a TPUSA Faith chapter on campus — with its goal to “eliminate wokeism” in modern churches. That would almost certainly clash with Point Loma’s approach to campus ministry.

Now, here is another real-world case study. Once again, this is a Fox headline: “Concordia student secures Turning Point USA chapter approval after viral post.”

In this case, Concordia-Wisconsin student Jacob Turner wrote about the conflict on the X platform, where it was retweet by (#triggerwarning) Elon Musk. Millions of readers clicked into this conflict.

Turner alleged Concordia pushed back on his application over the group’s “Professor Watchlist,” which labels faculty accused of discriminating against conservative students.

No Concordia professors are on it.

What they’re saying: “They were putting so many different layers on, like, ‘You have to abide by this, this, this, this and that,’ to the point where the organization would have been just an organization in name only,” said Hilario DeLeon, chairman of the Republican Party of Milwaukee County, who knows Turner and his family. “Have those conversations and say, it’s okay if we disagree, but it’s not okay if we can’t have those conversations in the first place.”

Once again, the watchlist was the key — with students passing judgement on the words and deeds of faculty in a forum that might be seen by students, parents, clergy, donors and even trustees.

Once again, the Fox coverage assumed that this was about Donald Trump-era politics, placing the issue in a free-speech framework.

But this is a private school. That means, once again, that it’s crucial to know the language found in school covenants signed by students and faculty. Is there a Matthew 18 clause of some kind?

Meanwhile, are students complaining about political issues, alone, or are many of the clashes with faculty linked to doctrines and moral issues that might be covered in campus covenants or in Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod teachings?

Let me stress that these stories are very, very complicated and school leaders frequently are trying to avoid — at any cost — public discussions of doctrinal divisions in their campus communities (especially involving faculty).

Also, are the student complaints accurate or valid? In my experience, many are not, but some of them are valid. It is very common for college and university faculty members to be to the cultural and theological left of the church folks and parents who are writing checks to pay their salaries.

I will end with a related case, one covered in a Rational Sheep post that has drawn the second highest click rate in this project’s short history: “Exploring the ongoing Wheaton College wars.”

This concerned a Wheaton alum, Russell Vought, who was appointed to a high post in the Trump administration. Wheaton leaders made the mistake of posting a note congratulating him and seeking prayers on his behalf.

There were screams of protest from progressive students, alumni and faculty. At that point, conservative Wheaton alumni responded with their own letter. In my post, I noted:

The key to the “For Wheaton” letter from conservative alumni was its focus on moral and cultural trends that have existed for several decades. This led to the document’s most aggressive demand — asking trustees to examine whether many faculty members and staffers had, in effect, signed the college’s doctrinal and moral covenants with their fingers crossed.

Once again, note the reference to the covenants that define life at Wheaton.

A political fight? Yes.

But are there doctrinal issues looming over the decades of conflicts at Wheaton and many other Christian schools? Yes, without a doubt. Read some of the details in my earlier Wheaton post.

Reporters have to be willing to dig into the doctrinal covenants (they are often buried deep in a school website) that establish the faith-based worldviews defended at these schools. The reporters need to pause and consider that there may be more to these conflicts than mere politics. Also, there is a chance that the complaints by students may be valid.

Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others.