Has the wren chapel cross been "saved"
This editorial in the Richmond Times-Dispatch provides the paper's verdict on the resolution of the controversy over the Wren Chapel cross at William & Mary. The college's decision to return the cross to the chapel "can be called many things," says the Times-Dispatch. "Surrender [by the college president] is the most accurate."
Participants at our Forum are far from convinced, however. Bird of Paradise captures the prevailing sentiment when he wonders:
How in the name of rational objectivity, is it a “compromise” to take a building (chapel) built expressly for the worship of God, take the preeminent symbol of that religious faith (cross) and place it in a display case (probably on a side wall or entry area I suspect) and effectively turn the building into a museum? While visiting the USSR in the early ‘80s I visited numerous “former churches” that had been converted into “Museums of Atheism.” It seem to me that here at W & M we see something similar but, alas, 30 years behind the curve.
What about those who organized to oppose the removal of the cross from the chapel? The Virginia Pilot reports that "Benjamin Locher, a senior from Pittsburgh who helped found Save The Wren Cross said his group would have to discuss it but that he personally applauded the compromise."
Meanwhile, the Times-Dispatch carries this column by Linda Arey Skladany (full disclosure, the wife of a friend and colleague). Linda argues that the issue with respect to the cross ins not one of religion, but one of heritage -- "the Judaeo-Christian heritage of the college that educated Jefferson and that undergirds the very founding documents and freedoms of this country -- and which Americans have exported around the world for the benefit of millions."
UPDATE: My apologies to Linda for misspelling her last name in my initial post.
The Forum conversation is going on here.
