Read Aloud · Premium
Listen to any dispatch in the Grok vocal voices. A benefit of membership.
Arizona State University’s provost has ratified the dean’s reduction of a tenured professor’s performance score and merit pay because the professor’s classroom instruction in 2025 reflected his Christian convictions too plainly. This action follows more than two years of litigation in which the same professor challenges the university’s coercive DEI requirements before the Arizona Supreme Court.
The administrators do not name the faith they punish. They instead invoke vague standards of classroom neutrality that apply only to the historic faith of the West while every other ideological formation receives protection and promotion. The annual review process now functions as the first instrument in constructing a record for eventual termination.
Universities once existed as extensions of the Church’s teaching office, ordered toward the formation of souls under the creeds hammered out at Nicaea and Chalcedon. When those institutions passed into the hands of the modern state they retained the outward form of authority while abandoning the substantive allegiance to the Word that once restrained arbitrary power.
The present managers at Arizona State therefore repeat an ancient pattern: they wield institutional office to suppress the confession that alone limits the claims of the earthly city. They demand conformity to a new orthodoxy whose priests sit in diversity offices rather than cathedrals.
Tenure was meant to protect the pursuit of truth against political pressure. It now shields only those who advance the approved narrative while leaving the Christian exposed to incremental harassment that begins with pay and may end in dismissal.
The governing principle remains unchanged since the Reformation: no earthly power may bind the conscience where Scripture and the ancient creeds have spoken. A state university that penalizes a professor for fidelity to those creeds violates both the religious liberty secured in the American founding and the older Christian understanding of ordered liberty under God.
The Faithful Remnant must therefore treat this case as a test of whether Christian scholars will retain any place in the captured academy. They must support the professor’s litigation, expose the mechanism of annual-review punishment, and begin constructing parallel institutions of higher learning that answer to the creeds rather than to the managerial priesthood.
Failure to act will confirm that the City of Man has completed its capture of the last remnants of Christian education within the public universities of the West.
