Rev. Dr. Hans G. Spalteholz+

It is with deep sadness, tempered by faith and hope in the risen Christ, that I announce the death of my dear friend, mentor, and colleague, Professor Hans G. Spalteholz. After a brief illness, he died very peacefully last night in his living room. He was 92 years old. 

I am grateful that I was able to speak with him last weekend before he had to be more heavily sedated during this past week. I am also grateful that his suffering has now ended and that he has entered that perfect peace prepared and granted by the risen and glorified Christ. 

I will say more about him at his memorial service, but these are a few thoughts that come to mind this morning: Professor Spalteholz taught me to love the Holy Scriptures, to wrestle with them for the sake of faithful interpretation, and to apply them to the world’s deep needs and hurts. He taught me the distinction between law and gospel by unpacking the theology of the Lutheran Confessions. His love of books and of learning and of the German language rubbed off on me. He pointed me the way to the University of Chicago, and he later carefully proofread my doctoral dissertation. He modeled a truly ecumenical approach to the question of theological truth. He and Professor Richard Reinisch made room for me to join the faculty of Concordia University, Portland. In so many ways, the death of Hans marks the end of an era. He and others in his generation were among the best and brightest that the Missouri Synod educational system ever produced.

Since the fall of 1980, down through these many decades, Hans became a second father to me. At various times of crisis he was a spiritual counselor (serving multiple times as a "paraclete" when I was facing one charge or another in the LCMS). More importantly, he became the most influential and significant theological conversation partner in my life. For more than two decades we worked very closely together on several book projects, including the first two volumes of our translation of the writings of the German Lutheran theologian Edmund Schlink.

Since Hans and his wife Christa had no biological children of their own, I became one of their "adopted children." On many occasions, he let me know that he considered me his son. My son Jacob calls him "Opa Hans." So his death is hitting us hard, even though we knew this day was coming. We are experiencing what Hans' and my teacher and friend Martin Marty has called "the cry of absence."

The memorial service for Hans will be held at St. Michael Lutheran Church, Portland, Oregon, on Saturday, May 13. Dr. Robert Schmidt, our former colleague in the theology department of Concordia, will be preaching. 

Please keep Christa and her extended family in your prayers.

Precious in the eyes of the LORD is the death of his saints, who from their labors rest, and who sing their songs in endless light. Shalom, shalom, dear Hans!

P.S. Linda Borecki interviewed Hans two years ago and uploaded her three-part interview to Youtube. Below are the links to that interview. Thank you, Linda, for doing that! This interview is so meaningful to me. It really captures Hans' personality as well as his spiritual and intellectual depth. What an amazing  person he was!

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

A New Republic Article on the Controversy at Valparaiso University

David Masciotra, a Valpo alumnus who writes for The New Republic, has published an article in the current issue of that national magazine: "A Georgia O’Keeffe Painting and the Battle for the Soul of a Liberal Arts College."  

The article is given prominence at the top left corner of the homepage of the online version of the magazine: https://newrepublic.com/

In my judgment, Mr. Masciotra frames the issues in precisely the right way. 

"What is the purpose of studying at a university beyond job training? How can schools like Valparaiso, which emphasize learning outside of vocational courses, survive when a corporate-consumer model has overtaken higher education and exerted a powerful influence on administrators and students alike?"

Masciotra writes: "Valparaiso University’s student body is shrinking and its dormitories are aging. But is selling the campus museum’s most famous artwork the right solution to the problem?"

As you can tell from the quotations by yours truly that he included in his article, I think Valpo can take a different, better path here. 

(The university recently constructed a huge, expensive residence hall, Beacon Hall, which is only partially full--and partially paid for. Valpo has also recently built a couple of rows of sorority houses down the hill from our athletics building, and Valpo has recently made renovations to at least one of its freshmen dormitories. These expensive on-campus housing projects have largely gone unmentioned in the reporting. Valpo has been making capital improvements to its campus housing in recent years.)

A larger issue, at least in my view, is the expensive and oversized role that athletics plays on our campus.  We are moving toward becoming an athletics institution that offers some college-level classes on the side. Toward that end, the university's administration wants to build a huge, new, very expensive athletics complex. In my judgment, that will be a mistake. We will be digging ourselves into an even deeper hole of debt--and then forced to make even more cuts to our academic programs (further weakening the liberal arts).

Meanwhile, in light of the reporting by Mr. Masciotra, one wonders, "From where will the funding come?" Part of the administration's answer to that question, at least so far, has been: "We'll sell off what we consider to be our non-essential assets to raise the money."

And that is how a church-related academic institution eventually loses its soul.

To read the entire article, go here.

P.S. I also encourage you to read another piece on the Valpo situation that came out today. John Fea is a former Lilly Fellow at the university. To read his article, "What Is Going on at Valparaiso University?," go here.

P.P.S. Inside Higher Education also ran a piece today on the Valpo matter. To read it, go here.

A New York Times Article on the Valpo Controversy

The New York Times published an article today on the decision of Valparaiso University's board of directors to deaccession three paintings from the university's Brauer Museum. The article contains a link to the letter I wrote, opposing this decision. This letter was signed by more than 90 current and former Valparaiso University faculty members (75 current ones; 17 former ones; and two staff members who work at the Brauer).

I'm grateful for the service and leadership of John Ruff and Dick Brauer, who are dear friends and valued colleagues! Stop the sale!

To read the NYT article, go here.

Stop the Sale!

On February 8, 2023, in a campus-wide email, Valparaiso University’s president, Jose Padilla, announced that he and Valpo’s board of directors would be selling three masterpieces of art from the university’s Brauer Museum to provide funding for the renovation of two on-campus residential buildings. Here is a link to his statement.

In a subsequent statement, President Padilla said, “Our actions will be based on the best interests of our students, mission, and entire campus. Not just one small piece of it, especially when that piece is not part of our strategic plan and our core mission of educating students and giving them the best campus residential experience.” 

Both the decision and the justification for it deeply disturb me. As someone who regularly takes students to the Brauer Museum as a part of my teaching, and who frequently visits the Brauer for my own edification and enlightenment, and who works closely with people who support the mission of the Brauer, I consider that museum to be near the core of Valpo’s mission and a key feature of its unique identity. The artwork there relates directly to my vocation as a university professor of theology and the humanities. I have a particular interest in Christian theological interpretations of art, about which I have written in my book on fundamental theology. I am especially pleased that we have three central works  that demonstrate excellence in the visual arts, precisely the three pieces that the university board wants to sell. These three pieces comprise the anchor for the whole collection.

I should add that I had met privately with President Padilla in his office exactly one week before he made his announcement. It was my first face-to-face meeting with him. I presented him with my recently published edition of Schlink’s Ecumenical Dogmatics, I explained a little about it and my scholarly work in ecumenical theology, and I discussed matters of shared interest (e.g., politics). We had a very pleasant meeting. I wanted him to know that he could count on me to help him as a resource, especially with respect to Lutheran theology and the American church scene. 

My meeting and conversation with him that day would have been very different had I known about this  secret board decision. 

So on February 9, I began to write a letter to our faculty senate, to criticize this presidential/board decision. That letter, whose rough edges were polished with the help of a few others, was sent to the faculty. After only two days, 75 current faculty had signed it, as had 17 emeriti or retired faculty. To read the letter, go here. (At last week’s faculty senate meeting, President Padilla referred to the letter as “the Matthew Becker letter,” but it is not my letter. I may have written the first four drafts, but it was ultimately submitted as a letter from the faculty who signed it.)

For more details on this controversy, go here. 

The New York Times has assigned a reporter to the story. I learned today that her article will be coming out perhaps already next week.

Yesterday, at a special meeting of Valpo’s faculty senate, a few of us presented a memo, which we hope will become the basis for a senate resolution that would call upon the president and board to rescind their decision. Here is the content of that memo: 

1. The sale constitutes a gross violation of professional museum ethics. VU will be censured by professional organizations, lose credibility with those associations, and the museum will be unable to lend, borrow, or collaborate with other museums in the world. The president claims he has his own “ethic” to uphold—a confusion of ethics and expediency? Will that “ethic” trump ethical standards across all disciplines, professional schools, and university organizations? 

2. The sale violates the trust of artists, the public, donors, and faculty. The Brauer Museum is at the core of Valpo’s liberal arts identity. The three masterpieces anchor the collection and its international reputation. Artists want their work to be displayed in notable public collections. Donors expect their gifts to contribute to the strength of the museum in perpetuity. Faculty count on these works as crucial pedagogical resources. This action tramples on the generosity and trust of current and past donors. It conflicts with the strong support for the arts and humanities in the Lutheran intellectual tradition. What is the presidential and board rationale for breaking these basic and long-term trusts for the sake of short-term, perishable goods? 

3. The sale may be illegal. The sale clearly violates the terms of the trust agreement signed by the VU board president when the core collection was acquired in 1953. The Church painting was part of that gift; the other two paintings in question were purchased with funds from the restricted Sloan endowment fund. The president claims that will not be a legal problem. That remains to be seen. And, does it not matter that violating the trust is clearly unethical? 

4. This sale is a poor management of assets. To sell an asset of appreciating value and use it to buy something of depreciating value (dorms) is problematic. Furthermore, by selling these pieces through a private auction, Sotheby’s will be entitled to at least a 25% commission. Add in PR and legal fees, and that is a very poor return on the value of these assets. Selling university assets in a reckless and/or unethical manner has already resulted in the loss of major donors and negative press. More will come. This could also have a negative effect on our bond rating. Is this short-term sale really worth the net outcome, especially in view of Valpo’s long-term future? 

5. This sale seems very rushed. Do we understand why a dorm renovation suddenly rose to the top of the university’s priority list? What is the urgent necessity for this project? The administration could provide no concrete evidence. 

6. The process of making the decision to sell these masterpieces lacked transparency. The plan to select and sell the works has been conducted with deliberate secrecy. The paintings were selected purely for cash value, without any investigation into or concern for their importance to the museum and the community it serves. No one with any knowledge of the collection was consulted, as if the details of the works themselves were irrelevant to the process. This is a shocking way to approach the sale of university assets, and not a path to a sustainable future. 

7. The administration’s withholding of knowledge of the impending sale resulted in an unethical hiring process. Last summer, while in the process of finding and hiring Jonathan Canning, representatives of Christie’s Auction house were on campus. This information was withheld from the search committee, and more importantly from Canning when he accepted the job. Any association with this sale will be devastating to his career. The university asked Canning to participate in a sale that would violate his professional ethics. 

8. This impending sale represents a further attack on the arts and humanities at VU. Student response has been spontaneous, strong, and often emotional. They immediately connected this action to the administration’s ongoing dismantling of the arts on campus. Notably, among the nearly 400 signatories on the student petition, approximately half are STEM majors. The board/presidential decision is contrary to Valpo’s stated mission. 

I don’t know what will happen here. We want to stop the sale of the paintings.  Thankfully, for now at least, the masterpieces remain on the walls of the Brauer. But as I indicated at yesterday's senate meeting, my confidence about the leadership of the president and the board has been deeply shaken by the decision and by subsequent presidential behavior that I will not write about here. Indeed, I wasn’t able to control my emotions very well yesterday as I tried to thank the students who publicly spoke so eloquently, passionately, and persuasively about their reasons for opposing this decision. Those students give me hope. My heart is not the only one around this place that is broken right now.

If you want to sign a petition to stop this sale, please go here.

Rev. Dr. John Scheck+

On Sunday night I learned that Dr. John Scheck died on Christmas Eve. Some of us had him as our beloved professor at Concordia University, Portland, Ore. He was my academic adviser, and I think I took every course he offered during those four undergraduate years (1980-1984), e.g., freshman humanities, several courses in American history, one on American thought and culture, and his introduction to philosophy. In addition to being a great teacher, he was an excellent preacher and musician. He wrote the lyrics for the school song. (A few decades later, he also composed a hymn for my son's baptism.)

John was among the shining stars that Dr. Thomas Coates, president of Concordia, Portland, brought to the school during his tenure (1946-1957). People called those faculty members "Tommy's boys." In addition to John, that illustrious group included Art Wahlers ("Mr. Concordia"), Don Lorenz, Dick Reinisch, Karl Keller, George Weller, Al Roth, and Hans Spalteholz.

When I started teaching at my alma mater, John helped to mentor me. (It took me a while to become comfortable using the first names of people who had been my esteemed professors just a few years earlier. They kept insisting that I was now their colleague, not merely their former student, and that I should thus call them by their Christian names, but every now and then I still referred to them as "Dr." or "Prof.") John graciously gave me many of his course notes and teaching aids, and he kindly took time to offer advice on how to deal with various higher-ed situations. 

(When Martin Marty received an honorary degree from Concordia, John served as the M.C. at one of the accompanying events--Marty had been John's resident assistant [is the right term "dorm buck"?] at Concordia College, Milwaukee, Wis. Needless to say, that evening we learned some new things about Marty and about John that we hadn't known before. Indeed, I need to underscore that John is the one who introduced me to Marty's writings when I was an undergraduate. In one of John's classes, we used a Marty book on American religions as one of our texts. I don't think I would have gone to the U. of Chicago had it not been for that introduction to Marty and for the encouragement that John Scheck and Hans Spalteholz gave me to go to there.)

I got to know John's first wife because she was a librarian at Concordia. I have known John's second wife, Nan, my whole life. She, her first husband, and their family spent a lot of time with our family when I was growing up in Salem, Ore. (Nan, whose father was Rev. Amos Schmidt [who served at St. Michael's, Portland, and was at one time the LCMS' campus pastor at U.C.L.A., and who was also a close friend of my grandfather Emil], is the baptismal sponsor for my sister.) Nan and John were joyfully married for more than thirty years.

In so many ways, John represented the best that the Missouri Synod produced among its clergy in the twentieth century. Today, more than one of my former classmates has commented that Dr. Scheck helped them to know what the gospel is and how to preach it effectively. Many of us are remembering sermons he preached in Concordia's Chapel of the Upper Room and at St. Michael's. His wry humor always helped to bring a little spice to the message he shared.

John was a gentleman and a scholar. He was a kind man--and a forgiving grader of freshmen term papers (!). Always prepared to offer a quick and witty reply to an offhand comment by one of his conversation partners, John modeled the kind of Christian humanism he hoped his students would embrace, one that would resist the inroads of Protestant fundamentalism in the church body that he served, but also one that would maintain the essential, mandatory content of the classic Christian faith. Needless to say, his relationship to the Missouri Synod was always tenuous, especially after 1969, and he wasn't too surprised when some of his former students were eventually pushed out of the LCMS. (His funeral will be taking place at the main ELCA church in Salem.)

I will always be grateful for all that Dr. Scheck taught me, and for how he did that teaching and preaching. I am so grateful for the mentoring he later provided. I wouldn't be where I am today were it not for him and his example.

Here is a link to his obituary:

https://www.dignitymemorial.com/obituaries/salem-or/john-scheck-11078414

Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of his saints. May John rest in the peace of the Lord, and may the Lord's light shine perpetually upon him.