Pepperdine among the denominations
Three stories of ecumenism in the 1970s
Pepperdine’s relationship with the Churches of Christ has been the focus of much attention throughout the life of the institution. Historians have addressed at length such topics as the university’s attempts to serve the church, the churches’ critiques of university leadership, etc. I have told many of these stories (Against ambiguity, Whether Pepperdine be a church), and I will continue to tell them in the future.
But this focus on the faith tradition of the founder has often neglected a different part of the university’s history: its relationships with the other denominations. In this essay, I’d like to share three vignettes from the 1970s, with the goal of getting a better idea of how Pepperdine related to Catholics, Congregationalists, and Charismatics, which I will take as a more-or-less representative sample of American Christianity. Before turning to these specific examples, I’d like to begin with a brief overview of sectarianism at Pepperdine in the 1970s.
Sectarianism at Pepperdine
From its founding in 1937, Pepperdine has been connected with the Churches of Christ, a sect with roots in the Second Great Awakening that in the spirit of Christian unity sought to restore the universal church of the first century by regarding the New Testament as more authoritative for church practice than human traditions, which had led to divisions between denominations. At the heart of the church’s vision are two elements that have sometimes been in tension: ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ and ᴜɴɪᴛʏ. How can the church remain united amid disagreements about how best to restore the practices of the early Christians? And if all Christians are not united, in what sense has restoration been achieved?
We can think of Pepperdine’s various Church of Christ leaders in the 1970s as employing two different moves (or perhaps, acting on two different instincts), the first of which might be characterized as favoring ᴜɴɪᴛʏ over ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ, and the other of which preferred ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ even at the cost of ᴜɴɪᴛʏ. To caricature them slightly: When emphasizing ᴜɴɪᴛʏ, you regard the dictates of ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ as sectarian and legalistic, and when emphasizing ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ, you fear that the drive for ᴜɴɪᴛʏ might lead the church to deny even Christ himself if that meant widening its appeal.
One of the most consistent practitioners of the ᴜɴɪᴛʏ instinct was president William S. Banowsky, who throughout his presidency insisted that Pepperdine’s roots in the Churches of Christ required an ecumenical stance. In his speeches, Banowsky was always forswearing sectarianism: “We will resist any sectarian spirit,” he said at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Malibu campus.1 In a confidential memo to chancellor Norvel Young, he wrote, “We can soften our sectarianism without weakening our Christian mission.”2 He insisted that this instinct was inspired by Church of Christ teaching: “It is characteristic both of Churches of Christ and of Pepperdine University to affirm a nonsectarian approach.”3
Under Banowsky’s presidency (1971–1978), then, Pepperdine was constantly building bridges to the denominations, a policy inspired in part by the president’s embrace of the ᴜɴɪᴛʏ instinct with its deep Church of Christ roots, and in part by the university’s need to raise money in Southern California, where the churches were few, weak, and generally incapable of supporting Pepperdine’s rapid expansion from a single undergraduate college in South Los Angeles to a multi-campus university with a full complement of graduate schools. To secure the funding for this expansion, Banowsky cultivated friendships with wealthy donors from the denominations who wanted to support a Christian college even if they were not members of the Churches of Christ.
Banowsky’s deployment of the ᴜɴɪᴛʏ instinct for fundraising purposes was balanced by an equal and opposite appeal to the ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ instinct by Pepperdiners like executive vice president Howard A. White, who feared that Banowsky’s reliance on donors from outside the Churches of Christ might lead him to weaken the institution’s particular Christian commitment.
White was fully aware of the division among Pepperdine administrators, even using this terminology to characterize the disagreement in a journal entry: “Probably a good many of my associates at Pepperdine would call me narrowly sectarian, for I believe strongly in the Restoration plea.”4 He was of the opinion that Pepperdine didn’t need to give up its particular church relationship in order to win the donations of outsiders whose “money has been given to Pepperdine with its Christian commitment and not with the promise that the commitment would be forsaken.”5
This, then, was the state of the debate over sectarianism at Pepperdine in the 1970s: the Banowsky camp argued for increasing openness to Christians from the denominations (especially as a fundraising aid) while the White camp was skeptical of such openness. With this understanding, let’s turn our attention to three specific stories about Pepperdine’s outreach to the denominations in the 1970s.
Pepperdine and the charismatic churches
In January 1972, ten Pepperdine students attended a retreat near Escondido, California led by Dr. Albert Grimes, whose Christian Training Center had ties to the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination. At the retreat, all attendees received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and subsequently spoke “in unknown tongues.”6 News of the retreat must have sparked some controversy on campus, because The Graphic framed its article with the tag “Controversial conversations.”
Two weeks later, Graphic editor Elaine Heck ran an interview with Dr. Frank Pack, the chair of Pepperdine’s religion department, investigating Church of Christ teaching about the gift of tongues.7 Pack explained that, in his view, speaking in tongues had accompanied the baptism of the Holy Spirit only twice in the New Testament—once at Pentecost when the Spirit came to the Jews and again at the baptism of Cornelius, confirming the word to the Gentiles. He cited 1 Corinthians 13 as evidence that the gift of tongues was “a unique manifestation in a unique time” that had since passed away, adding that no one had ever required training to receive such a gift.
The Escondido retreat was just one episode in an ongoing conflict between Pepperdine and certain charismatic teachings in the 1970s: There was some discontent about the Jesus Music Festival held in the campus auditorium in February 1972, and in 1978 further controversy attended both a concert by Keith Green and later a disinvited lecture by Ann Kiemel, both of whom seem to have been associated with charismatic gifts and faith healings in the minds of some at Pepperdine.8
Pepperdine’s encounters with charismatic churches were more a result of student interest than fundraising strategy, but they show a university constantly wrestling with how to maintain its ecumenical stance despite doctrinal differences.
Pepperdine and the Catholic church
Pepperdine’s Stauffer Chapel, with its huge stained-glass windows, was dedicated at a ceremony on November 4, 1973. Beverly Stauffer, the devout Catholic whose donations funded the chapel’s construction, attended with her chaplain Msgr. Benjamin Hawkes, and both Mrs. Stauffer and the monsignor spoke during the ceremony. It was seen in certain quarters as unusual that Pepperdine allowed a Catholic priest to dedicate the chapel, but it makes sense within the context of president Banowsky’s drive to make the university less sectarian.9
At the time of the chapel’s dedication, Hawkes was serving as the general vicar of the archdiocese of Los Angeles under the archbishop Timothy Cardinal Manning. The monsignor was a powerful figure in Los Angeles, often dining at the exclusive Jonathan Club and the Los Angeles Country Club, where he courted wealthy donors like Stauffer. His obituaries recall a taste for expensive suits and gold cuff links, remembering him as saying often, “The rich have souls, too.”10 Several years after his death, multiple men accused Hawkes of having repeatedly molested them when they were boys.11
In the 1970s, Hawkes and the archdiocese he represented were competing for the same philanthropists’ dollars as Pepperdine. Norvel Young (himself no stranger to the Jonathan Club) used to say that there is no competition between lighthouses, but the fact remains that Blanche Seaver, whose donations funded much of the university’s Malibu construction, rented her Chester Place mansion from the archdiocese, and every Seaver dollar that went toward grading the Malibu site couldn’t support a parochial school across the bay.12
Pepperdine and the Catholic church probably felt like strange bedfellows, brought together more by Beverly Stauffer’s ecumenism as a donor than Banowsky’s as a fundraiser. Pepperdine historian David Baird reports that Stauffer “would never quite understand why President Banowsky did not authorize weekly Mass in the chapel,” a move which certainly would have alarmed more ʀᴇsᴛᴏʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ-oriented Pepperdiners.13 The chapel instead served as the meeting place of the Malibu Church of Christ.
“The people who run Los Angeles belong to the Jonathan Club; the people who own Los Angeles belong to the California Club.”
Pepperdine and the Congregationalist church
On April 20, 1975, Pepperdine held a dedication ceremony to christen its Malibu programs as Seaver College, in recognition of the generosity of Blanche Seaver. Joining Mrs. Seaver in the platform party was her minister James W. Fifield Jr., leader of the First Congregational Church of Los Angeles, where Seaver was a member. Shortly thereafter, Reverend Fifield was honored in the name of Fifield House, a freshman dormitory in Malibu funded by Mrs. Seaver.14 In 1977, perhaps at Mrs. Seaver’s request, Pepperdine University Press published The Tall Preacher, an autobiography of the 6'4" reverend co-authored with Bill Youngs, a Pepperdine publicity writer.15
Fifield was a member of the California Club, where he made friends with wealthy businessmen who could support the church, and under Fifield’s leadership First Congregational grew to over 4,000 members and installed one of the largest church organs in the world.16 The congregation became so popular with wealthy Angelenos like the Seavers that Fifield started collecting nicknames like “the Thirteenth Apostle of Big Business,” “St. Paul of the Prosperous,” and “the Apostle to Millionaires.”17 Fifield founded Spiritual Mobilization, a national organization aimed at teaching clergy to persuade businessmen that they should support freedom in America and combat communism.18
Pepperdine was more comfortable embracing Rev. Fifield than Msgr. Hawkes, perhaps because Congregationalist theology, with its Puritan roots, has more in common with Church of Christ restorationism than does Catholicism—or perhaps because the university’s leaders were more deferential to Seaver than to Stauffer.
Conclusion
In these three episodes—the Escondido retreat, Msgr. Hawkes’s dedication of Stauffer Chapel, and Rev. Fifield’s dedication of Seaver College—we see Pepperdine working through how it should relate to the denominations. What can the university do when its students embrace doctrines and liturgical practices that the Churches of Christ reject? How can the university attract donors from different religious backgrounds without losing its own distinctive Christian commitment? And how far can the university go in celebrating clergy from the denominations whose teachings (not to mention their personal lives!) might be at odds with the traditional Church of Christ understanding? The answers to these questions were contested in the 1970s, and they may well remain unanswered even today.
William S. Banowsky, “A Spirit of Place,” 23 May 1970, Box 1, Pepperdine University Speeches collection, Pepperdine University Special Collections and University Archives (SCUA). Note, too, that Banowsky quotes the line in his later speech, “A Spirit of Purpose,” ibid.
Qtd. in William S. Banowsky, The Malibu Miracle: A Memoir, Pepp. Univ. Press (2016): 354.
William S. Banowsky, “Pepperdine University’s Relationship to Churches of Christ,” c. 1978, “Churches of Christ—Relationship” file, Box 3, Shirley Roper papers, SCUA: 3. This was Banowsky’s conviction as long as he was associated with Pepperdine. Cf. Banowsky, “The Case for Malibu,” Mar. 1968, Box 62, William S. Banowsky papers, SCUA: 1.
Howard A. White, memo to file, 16 Feb. 1974, “Church Relations Major Items: Feb. 1974,” Box 63, Howard A. White papers (HAWP), SCUA.
Howard A. White, memo to file, 27 Jan. 1977, “Jan. 1977,” ibid. Emphasis in the original.
Gary Collins, “Talking of ‘tongues’,” The Graphic, 27 Jan. 1972: 4.
Elaine Heck, “Religion head tackles ‘tongues’ issue,” The Graphic, 10 Feb. 1972: 6.
For a summary of the Jesus Music Festival, see Laura Patrick, “Festival to ‘explode campus’,” The Graphic, 10 Feb. 1972: 2; cf. Celia Chapman, “Jesus Music Festival here attracts 700 for ‘worship’,” The Graphic, 17 Feb. 1972: 2. The festival later came in for some criticism, which is addressed in Neva Hash, “Pepperdine critics exposed,” The Graphic, 21 Mar. 1975: 3; cf. Helen Pepperdine, “Areas of Concern,” c. Feb. 1972, Box 11, “Dean of Students Office Regulations” file, M. Norvel Young papers, SCUA. For the Keith Green concert and the attending controversy, see Kathy Goodell, “‘Revival’ seminar sparks controversy,” The Graphic, 26 Jan. 1978: 1, 3; cf. Kathy Goodell, “Opinions split over ‘Revival’,” The Graphic, 2 Feb. 1978: 1–2; cf. Warren Robak, “‘Revival’ draws crowd,” The Graphic, 9 Feb. 1978: 1; cf. “revival program sparks controversy,” Impressions, 1978: 74–75. For the disinvitation of Ann Kiemel, see Larry Israelson, “Event cancelled,” The Graphic, 12 Oct. 1978: 1; cf. Connie Nixon, “Beliefs explained,” The Graphic, 19 Oct. 1978: 6; cf. Rod Gaudin, letter, “University ideals,” ibid.
David Baird hints that he found evidence of some discomfort among the church constituency relating to the monsignor’s involvement at the chapel’s dedication. See W. David Baird, Quest for Distinction: Pepperdine University in the 20th Century, Pepp. Univ. Press (2016): 395.
See, e.g., “L.A. Msgr. Benjamin Hawkes,” Chicago Tribune, 29 Sept. 1985; cf. Bob Baker, “Msgr. Hawkes Dies; Ex-Financial Chief of Archdiocese,” Los Angeles Times, 23 Sept. 1985.
Harriet Ryan, “An L.A. church leader’s posthumous fall from grace,” Los Angeles Times, 12 May 2013.
At the peak of the postwar population boom in Los Angeles, Hawkes and Cardinal Archbishop McIntyre were reportedly responsible for overseeing the construction of a new church every 66 days and a new school every 26 days. See “Religion: On Borrowed Time,” TIME Magazine, 2 Feb. 1970. For evidence concerning Seaver’s rental arrangement, see William S. Banowsky, “A Spirit of Purpose,” 20 Apr. 1975, Box 1, Pepperdine University Speeches collection, SCUA. As far as I’ve been able to reconstruct, the Seavers’ Chester Place home was at first rented from Mr. Seaver’s associate Edward Doheny, but Doheny’s widow Estelle willed the Chester Place land to the archdiocese in 1958, at which point the Seavers became tenants of the archbishop. See Cecilia Rassmussen, “Doheny Home Was His Castle, Is Their Campus,” Los Angeles Times, 31 Aug. 2003.
Baird, supra note 9: 289. Howard White specifically addressed the notion of celebrating Mass in the chapel in response to questions from student journalists, saying, “Pepperdine’s tradition has been not to introduce formal, competing religious groups. […] Catholics have always been considered, and always will be considered first class citizens. […] Given our historical development and background, Pepperdine should not allow various sectarian activities.” See also Steve Adler, “Largest Pepperdine denomination lacks representation,” The Graphic, 11 Mar. 1977: 6. Note, too, that Helen Pepperdine objected to a folk mass held on campus in February 1972. See Helen Pepperdine, “Areas of Concern,” c. Feb. 1972, Box 11, “Dean of Students Office Regulations” file, Young papers, SCUA; cf. Jack Mulkey, “MECHA: ‘Revolution through education’,” The Graphic, 10 Feb. 1972: 3.
James W. Fifield Jr. and Bill Youngs, The Tall Preacher, Pepp. Univ. Press (1977): 193.
In honor of other university benefactors, Youngs also wrote Faith Was His Fortune: The Life Story of George Pepperdine (1976), The Legacy of Frank Roger Seaver (1976), The House That Brock Built (1976), and The Man of Action: The Story of Jimmie Lovell (1969).
Fifield and Youngs, supra note 14: 114–115.
Fifield was aware of these nicknames; in his autobiography he speculates that they were invented “more out of envy than anything else.” See Fifield and Youngs, supra note 14: 141; cf. Kevin M. Kruse, “How Corporate America Invented Christian America,” Politico, 16 Apr. 2015.
See Fifield and Youngs, supra note 14: 122–124. Fifield has lately received some criticism for allegedly preaching an early version of what is now called the prosperity gospel. “Fifield dismissed the many passages in the New Testament about wealth and poverty, and instead assured the elite that their worldly success was a sign of God’s blessings.” Kruse, supra note 17.
Excellent article. I laughed out loud at the one word crossed out in the article, which reveals my heritage.