Taking down the Wren Cross at the College of William and Mary
CorporateWhore
Posts: 1,890
This issue has recently become national news, putting my small college on the map, so to speak.
Our newly appointed college president recently decided to remove a 2 foot brass cross that adorned a table in the historical Wren Chapel. The wren building, with the adjoining chapel, was supposedly designed by Christopher Wren, one of England's most famous architects. W&M was chartered in 1693 and is the second oldest college in the U.S. The Wren was built in 1723.
The cross had been there for 67 years. No previous president had ever found fault with the presence of the cross, but President Nichol changed all of that.
Apparently, a jewish individual was offended by the presence of the cross.
Newt Gingrich said my views best:
"Unfortunately, the “endorsement test” has proven itself a decidedly unhelpful legal criterion. It is indeterminate, bordering on arbitrary, because it focuses primarily on subjective perceptions; its first consideration is not how the law actually treats people, but rather how people feel they are treated by the law. Taken to its logical conclusion, the endorsement test leads to the rule of the perpetually aggrieved, a tyranny of the easily offended."
Our newly appointed college president recently decided to remove a 2 foot brass cross that adorned a table in the historical Wren Chapel. The wren building, with the adjoining chapel, was supposedly designed by Christopher Wren, one of England's most famous architects. W&M was chartered in 1693 and is the second oldest college in the U.S. The Wren was built in 1723.
The cross had been there for 67 years. No previous president had ever found fault with the presence of the cross, but President Nichol changed all of that.
Apparently, a jewish individual was offended by the presence of the cross.
Newt Gingrich said my views best:
"Unfortunately, the “endorsement test” has proven itself a decidedly unhelpful legal criterion. It is indeterminate, bordering on arbitrary, because it focuses primarily on subjective perceptions; its first consideration is not how the law actually treats people, but rather how people feel they are treated by the law. Taken to its logical conclusion, the endorsement test leads to the rule of the perpetually aggrieved, a tyranny of the easily offended."
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
-Enoch Powell
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Right?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
I'm not offended by the cross. They should learn some respect for our traditions.
-Enoch Powell
Well I'm sorry, but you're going to have to find another country to do that in.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
What ever happened to telling people to "just get over it."
I drive by churches and synagogs(sp) every day. Nothing says...be offended other people believe differently than you.
William and Mary is a private school, right? In my opinion they can put up whatever they want.
That being said, it's the appointed president of the university that decided to do it, not the state or whomever forcing him to do it. I'm sure if the university didn't agree with the move, the board of trustees (or whoever appointed the president) could over-rule him.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
that's too bad, sorry for your loss...
Will your studies be affected...?
Will anyone's studies be improved?
Not a very good barometer for deciding if this is ok to do.
Like someone else said, it's the school president deciding it. Certainly if you disagree you should fight it, but at least it's an inside job.
prob not as much as that poor kid who felt offended. I bet he could barely function knowing there was a cross on a chapel.
perhaps the offended jewish student's studies will improve...:)
I wonder, five years from now, heck, five weeks from now, will it really matter...
If Newt says it then I agree. What about Buchanan's view on this? I mean you seem to choreograph your life based on his views.
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
god help me i kind of agree with newt. our current test has become pretty abstract and arbitrary. it's become problematic becos it's so unpredictable that nobody knows whether a proposed plan is legal or not.
I wonder how well it would have went over if the reverse was called upon? How quick that person would have been labeled a hater of a race. Ridiculous, sad and pathetic all wrapped into one nice story. Not like we haven't been seeing this type of story from all over with all kinds of people making noise about nothing at all.
Clearly, no one at William & Mary has enough work to do, particularly the student who initially complained.
This is a chapel, right? Shouldn't people who are bothered by crosses stay out of chapels?
W&M is a public college. The Wren chapel was built before it was public and the cross was placed there while the college was public. It had been there for 67 years without any questions of church/state problems - after all - the chapel is a clearly christian place.
-Enoch Powell
That is true.
-Enoch Powell
Wait, wait, wait - there is a cross in a chapel??? I'm really confused. What possible reason could there be for being offended by this? IT'S A CHAPEL!!!
What are we becoming?:(
The problem lies in whether a state-sponsored school can put up a cross in an historical chapel. Before 67 years ago, no cross existed in the chapel because they were seen as idolatrous. Nonetheless, the Anglican church did accept crosses after that.
The place is a publicly funded Anglican-style chapel and is also used by other groups for religious purposes.
-Enoch Powell
Thanks for clearing that up.
But like I said, (from what you originally posted) this was a decision by the school to do this.
I do think removing it is a stupid move, but if that is what the school wants to do, then it's up to them. The only thing that people who oppose it can do is complain to the school or take their tuition money elsewhere.
I just can't understand how someone can walk into a chapel and be offended by a cross.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
if that policy is already in place; that makes this story even more rediculous.
Sorry for not presenting enough information about the situation. There's a website called
http://www.savethewrencross.org
President Nichol took the cross down without consulting anyone. No vote from the student body was done either.
-Enoch Powell
The main problem I have with the people who agree with me is that they are not inclined by religious motives, but political ones.
For what it's worth, president Nichol has said that he regretted unilaterally taking the cross down and wishes he had consulted faculty and students first.
My main thought is this: the society that wants to take down the cross is degraded whether or not they actually take the cross down. This issue is reflective of the death of Christianity in our society - not just a cross being taken down. It proves that a president would be willing to take down a cross because that symbol no longer holds any positive thoughts for our college.
-Enoch Powell
Stretching it a bit there, I think. It is unfortunate, though. Hopefully they can get it back up.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
It's a chapel. The damn place was founded by Anglicans. We were all a little religous back then. Even if the cross was only added 67 years ago, a chapel ia an appropriate place for a cross!
I'm a bleeding heart liberal and this pisses me off. When will common sense return?