At another college, professor Kent Gramm’s divorce from his wife of 30 years might be a private matter known only to friends and close colleagues.
But at Wheaton College, the end of the popular English professor’s marriage has cost him his job””and sparked a debate about whether a divorce should disqualify a faculty member from teaching there.
Though the college has sometimes hired or retained staff employees whose marriages have ended, officials say those employees must talk with a staff member to determine whether the divorce meets Biblical standards. Gramm told administrators about his divorce but declined to discuss the details.
“I think it’s wrong to have to discuss your personal life with your employer,” he said, “and I also don’t want to be in a position of accusing my spouse, so I declined to appeal or discuss the matter in any way with my employer.”
It is pathetic that we don’t hold our bishops to the same standard that Wheaton holds their English professors to.
I’m a Wheaton grad myself, but there’s not a whole lot more I can add to this article. It’s true that Dr. Kent Gramm is a popular and highly regarded teacher. My daughter, who graduated from Wheaton in 2004, was an English major and loved him as a teacher. He had tenure. He’d taught at Wheaton for about 20 years.
However, I strongly suspect that there is more to this story than appears in this account. I’m glad that there appears to be no rancor on either side. I do know that Prof. Gramm actually commuted to Wheaton from over an hour away (he lives in the Lake Geneva, WI area), and he wasn’t as closely connected to his colleagues on the faculty as most professors are.
I’ll just add two comments. First, that the Provost quoted here, Dr. Stanton Jones, is an Anglican, and attends the flourishing AMiA church in Wheaton called Church of the Resurrection (ASA over 700).
Second. I have very mixed feelings over this case. On the one hand, I’m proud of Wheaton for being as strict as it is on some matters of Christian discipleship, including divorce. It certainly is curious that Wheaton has much more rigorous standards on this and other matters than it takes to be a bishop in TEC (witness poor old Bp. Beisner of Northern CA, now on his third marriage after TWO divorces!). In general I’m all in favor of moral strictness.
What distrubs me is the inconsistency with which this principle is applied, with some sins being treated as much more serious and job threatening than others. Unfortunately, divorce is still treated in much of the conservative evangelical community as more scandalous than other sins. Wheaton has loosened up in recent years in various ways, such as allowing dancing now on campus (to the delight of my two children who attended the school and LOVE to dance). But in this area, it still tends to smack more of Law than of Grace. Still, this article makes Wheaon sound more rigid than it really is.
David Handy+,
B.A. from Wheaton, class of 1977
I have posted about this at the [url=http://www.firstthings.com/blog/2008/05/02/the-bonds-of-community/]First Things blog[/url]. The Tribune article has several errors, though not as many as a number of other stories I have seen.
Also, to David Handy — Jessica’s father? If so, you should be very proud — President Litfin points out, in a press release I link to from the FT blog, that “the College employs dozens of people who have experienced divorce, both before or during their employment.” I don’t know about every case, but I can only think of one person (prior to Kent) who has been asked to leave after a divorce. Given that proportion, I think it would be far more plausible to accuse Wheaton of laxness than of legalism. But in fact I think the college administration has exercised proper grace and compassion in these matters.
“Colleges” were originally communities of prayer and learning. Interesting that it’s now an “employer”.
Dr. Jacobs (#4),
Actually, I’m Kara Handy’s father. But yes, I’m proud of her. And my son Joel too (class of 2001). My wife is also a Wheaton grad, so 100% of us are Wheatonites, and proud of it.
I’m glad you chimed in here and provided the link. I’m well aware that you write regularly for First Things (my favorite journal). Keep up the good work.
David Handy+
This all seems very strange. The issue, as far as I have ever heard, was possible adultary which would only occur if a re-marriage occured. For example, in the Roman Church (which is usually where this issue comes up due to taking communion) being divorced is not the big deal, it is only when re-marriage happens without an annulment. I guess that the college could say that this man (who I know nothing about) was deserting his family (a sin) but I don’t otherwise see a problem. Of course, Episcopalians would have problems with other parts of their rules. It would probably be hard to be a good whisky-palian if they still ban drinking. (Remember, whereever there are four episcopalians-or Anglicans-there is always a fifth. I have NEVER met an Anglican/Episcopalian tee-totler-GRIN).
P.S., Now that I’ve read Dr. Alan Jacobs’ online blog comments about this incident, and Wheaton President Duane Litfin’s Q&A;comments about it, I’d like to add that I agree wholeheartedly with Dr. Jacobs. I think both Dr. Gramm and the college have acted with integrity and commendable honesty in this difficult situation.
The truly sad thing is that, even though Wheaton College isn’t a church, it is acting far more like a church should than TEC does as a whole, or the vast majority of TEC parishes do. Lord, have mercy.
David Handy+
I want to add my thanks to Dr. Jacobs for posting the link to his blog on this issue. Thank God for Wheaton College and its witness. I have almost gotten to where I ignore anything in the secular press that concerns church matters.
This line, “I think it’s wrong to have to discuss your personal life with your employer,” he said, “and I also don’t want to be in a position of accusing my spouse, so I declined to appeal or discuss the matter in any way with my employer” really bothers me…
Doesn’t the divorce do the very thing that he wishes to prevent?
If I were to be the one judging his competancy in a leadership position it would be his attitude rather than his divorce which would give me the greatest concern. No matter how good an English teacher he is/was, the teaching he was living is far more important than what he was teaching in class. And isn’t that the very point of an English class; turning reality into words?
Don