Overflow Mag is not just about Soulforce
Though, Overflow Mag has experienced a recent revival of attention through it’s coverage of Soulforce’s visit to Wheaton, this site is not just about the Equality Ride.
The mission of Overflow is:
“We are alternative voices seeking to share the overflow of our hearts with the Christian College Community.”
Overflow originally started by students at Wheaton College seeking to make known some Christian views and opinions that where not being given enough thought and attention at their school. We are now seeking to expand the efforts to include all college’s that fall into the category of “Christian.”
Overflow, as a publication, is not seeking to take sides on any of the issues presented. It might occassionally appear as such, in that only one side of an issue is usually the “alternative.” We are interested in posting any view that is not being loudly proclaimed, or assumed by the “Christian community” (and generally speaking we are talking about within the USA).
If you are interested in writing for Overflow, please send your article or proposal to Ariah Fine
I will admit first off that I’ve only really looked over the Soulforce items on the first page here, and read through the comments, having only recently re-found the site, but I have a question about your mission to give “to make known some Christian views and opinions that where not being given enough thought and attention at their school,” and give voice to alternative views “that [are] not being loudly proclaimed, or assumed by the “Christian community”.”
I’ve noticed a few problems with your approach that I think maybe stem from a lack of (or poor) definition of terms, specifically “alternative” and “Christian” that might help clarify things for me.
The problem with your use of “alternative” seems to be that you make no crucial delineation between faith/moral concerns, which are necessarily fixed, and pragmatic/prudential concerns, of which there may be legitimate disagreement. For example, your coverage of Soulforce seems to need demarcation from other concerns such as the wisdom of this or that method of global environmental stewardship. Your site seems to make all issues morally equivalent, giving voice to such “alternative” views as “homosexuality is the source and summit of all that is good, noble, true and beautiful” found in the Soulforce coverage and many of the comments there.
This leads into a needed clarification of your second term, “Christian”. You also seem to have no clear conception of what this term means in the context of you mission. It seems from the Soulforce coverage and comments that if someone calls themselves a Christian, then that is all that is necessary for inclusion of their “alternative” view. Thus, you can have Todd Zimmerman citing the Apostle’s Creed and yet reject any sense of traditional Christian morality to which that Creed refers.
Perhaps an example or two will suffice. If I wanted to present an “alternative” Christian view that “there was a time in which Christ was not”, and even through out Biblical prooftexts to support my view, would this classify as Christian in your scheme? It certainly was a legitimate “alternative Christian” voice in the fourth century. A more contemporary example may be the “many Christianities” fallacy popular today in the “Gospel of Judas” flap this Easter. Perhaps a more blatant example of an “alternative Christian” view: the early church apostasized immediately after the deaths of the apostles and the True Church did not exist until Joseph Smith received the magic glasses and tablets of Reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics from the angel Maroni. Are these examples “Christian” in your use of the term? The secular world would seem to think so. They are certainly “alternative”, which is why non-Christians (and many Christians) are attracted to them.
These were just thoughts prompted by your uncritical coverage of Soulforce that I thought might prove helpful in your stated goals. It is a willingness to make these types of definitions of terms and of belief that make Wheaton a fundamentally different sort of Christian college from others like Georgetown or Notre Dame and many others that are now indistinguishable from a public secular state school.
Comment by Matthew Popkes — April 24, 2006 @ 7:42 pm
Overflow,
I find what you are allowing to happen here to be courageous and filled with integrity. It is rare to find a place that allows a format for conversation without commentary. I thank you for this format because it challenges those who profess to be followers of Christ to know what they believe and why they believe it, in their own voice. Whether that is through active participation in conversation or internal processing from reading. Carry on.
Comment by Staycie — April 24, 2006 @ 10:35 pm