PonyFans.com

Also, if this were to take place, what would the new name of SMU be since it would be wrong to keep Methodist in their title as a then atheistic university?

They should not but they're not going to listen to us in the first place. They would rather be on the government dole like most all schools anyway so it's not surprising these days. So sad because there is an after life we will all be held accountable.

But as for donations & because SMU has been going in that politically leftward-socialistic direction, I'm like many alums (I'm sure) whose income has far exceeded their best expectations in life & give to Christian organizations & 'the' very few schools that truly deserve it.

Yes. We haven’t been a church school for generations. It’s silly for the Methodist church to try to hang onto this. Let us go and be officially what we have been for 50 years,

Feels kinda like restaurants taking the milk outta ‘milkshakes’....

So SMU should be more like Baylor and less like Wake Forest? I presume isn’t as influenced as SMU by church leadership on the BOT. I heard the Methodist clergy on the BOT had a large role immediately post-DP.

The Methodist clergy have not had any influence to speak of on the BOT for several generations. They are for show only.

gostangs wrote:Yes. We haven’t been a church school for generations. It’s silly for the Methodist church to try to hang onto this. Let us go and be officially what we have been for 50 years,

But how would you reimburse them or the donors who thought they were supporting a Methodist school? Seems like a lot is owed to those folks.

And why couldn't the alternative be that those who want to abandon ties with the Methodist Church simply leave and start their own school? Don't forget the Methodist Church did start the school. The atheist faction would still be the interlopers even if they have become entrenched in recent years. How would this not be stealing? You going to make a claim of adverse possession? Why couldn't the Methodist Church put pressure to clean house and kick the proverbial squatters out?

And if you did run off the Methodist Church, what about the name of the school, you going to change it to Southern Atheist University to reflect its godless identity?

I think you are confusing "atheist" with "secular."

When I give to SMU, I am giving to the school. If I want to support the Theology School only, I could specify my gift. If I want to support my Church, I give directly to them. I was raised Methodist but that had very little to do with why I chose SMU and I suspect that is the case with the majority of our students & alumni.

Charleston Pony wrote:When I give to SMU, I am giving to the school. If I want to support the Theology School only, I could specify my gift. If I want to support my Church, I give directly to them. I was raised Methodist but that had very little to do with why I chose SMU and I suspect that is the case with the majority of our students & alumni.

I am not sure you could make that claim for alumni from the 50s and even 60s. But even if it is mostly true for younger alumni, wouldn't that be a case of reaping what you sow. If you drive God out of the school, naturally in time people wouldn't go there to seek God.

You also said something interesting. You said you were raised Methodist rather than I am Methodist. Are you no longer a Methodist and what did you change to? And when did this transformation take place?

SMU is trying to get out of the way of an oncoming schism within the church. It's not renouncing anything. It simply wants to avoid being dragged off and managed by a a part of the church that's about to be controlled by Africa and has zero interest in the day-to-day operations of an American university.
SMU wants to determine its own destiny. And the folks in Perkins are for this, because it can remain neutral in a Methodist theological tug of war.
SMU should control what happens to SMU. That's all this is about. Period.

ThisIsOurTime wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:When I give to SMU, I am giving to the school. If I want to support the Theology School only, I could specify my gift. If I want to support my Church, I give directly to them. I was raised Methodist but that had very little to do with why I chose SMU and I suspect that is the case with the majority of our students & alumni.

I am not sure you could make that claim for alumni from the 50s and even 60s. But even if it is mostly true for younger alumni, wouldn't that be a case of reaping what you sow. If you drive God out of the school, naturally in time people wouldn't go there to seek God.

You also said something interesting. You said you were raised Methodist rather than I am Methodist. Are you no longer a Methodist and what did you change to? And when did this transformation take place?

Alumni who graduated in the 50s and even 60s are now in their 80s and 90s...

AfricanMustang wrote:

ThisIsOurTime wrote:

Charleston Pony wrote:When I give to SMU, I am giving to the school. If I want to support the Theology School only, I could specify my gift. If I want to support my Church, I give directly to them. I was raised Methodist but that had very little to do with why I chose SMU and I suspect that is the case with the majority of our students & alumni.

I am not sure you could make that claim for alumni from the 50s and even 60s. But even if it is mostly true for younger alumni, wouldn't that be a case of reaping what you sow. If you drive God out of the school, naturally in time people wouldn't go there to seek God.

You also said something interesting. You said you were raised Methodist rather than I am Methodist. Are you no longer a Methodist and what did you change to? And when did this transformation take place?

Alumni who graduated in the 50s and even 60s are now in their 80s and 90s...

People tend to give the most toward the end of their lives or with their estate after death because this allows them their whole life to amass money and they can more easily determine to no longer have a need for it for their own lives. So a lot of that group would have already given money.

ThisIsOurTime wrote:

gostangs wrote:Yes. We haven’t been a church school for generations. It’s silly for the Methodist church to try to hang onto this. Let us go and be officially what we have been for 50 years,

But how would you reimburse them or the donors who thought they were supporting a Methodist school? Seems like a lot is owed to those folks.

And why couldn't the alternative be that those who want to abandon ties with the Methodist Church simply leave and start their own school? Don't forget the Methodist Church did start the school. The atheist faction would still be the interlopers even if they have become entrenched in recent years. How would this not be stealing? You going to make a claim of adverse possession? Why couldn't the Methodist Church put pressure to clean house and kick the proverbial squatters out?

And if you did run off the Methodist Church, what about the name of the school, you going to change it to Southern Atheist University to reflect its godless identity?

I agree that you are confusing "atheist" with "secular."

Re: the name problem - let's just buy Southwestern and take their name. We'll rename them Southwestern University-Georgetown. And then we can initiate the process to separate our new satellite campus in Georgetown from the Methodist church. Problem solved.

How about The University of Dallas? Following OSU lead.