A Brief Revival for Save OBU

As I noted a few times over the summer, I've deliberately scaled back the Save OBU effort.  For one thing, I believe it would be counterproductive to keep hammering OBU's now veteran administrators for offenses that occurred 2-3 years ago.  We made our point.  The last thing I want is to make things more difficult for the students and professors who are still trying to engage in rigorous, intellectually honest Christian higher education on Bison Hill.  Another fact is that I spent too much time on an issue that is near and dear to my heart, but not very relevant to my personal or professional life.

We certainly celebrate the university's many recent successes.  But we hopefully trust that things have stabilized.  Unless the situation at OBU takes another turn for the worst, you won't see daily updates and commentary on every OBU news release here.

Even so, there are a few developments I would like to keep before our friends and supporters.  The most recent Forbes list indicates that OBU's slide in the rankings has, mercifully, stopped.  The Hobbs College of Theology and Ministry has a new faculty member this year.  And sources confirm that OBU is planning to follow the lead of several other Catholic and evangelical institutions and sue the United States in federal court over an administrative rule issued by the Department of Health and Human Services last year.

I'll report on each of these matters in the days to come.

I also want to say more about an idea I considered over the summer.  The several Southern Baptist colleges that have reverted back toward fundamentalism in recent years should band together and petition the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities.  Ideally, other evangelical colleges would join us in solidarity.  The CCCU should give guidance about how to protect academic freedom and ensure ethical administration when fundamentalists threaten and obliterate long-standing norms of institutional behavior.  Or, alternatively, the CCCU should give its blessing to these takeovers and say publicly that it does not care about what many Christian colleges have experienced in recent years.

Let's stay informed and stay connected.  Given that another unethical firing or any number of fundamentalist-inspired violations could potentially occur at any moment, we need to keep our movement active so that we can mobilize more easily when the next crazy thing happens.  Has the war already been lost?  Perhaps.  But if we truly want to be "loyal to our alma mater," the least we can do is stand up for what we know is right.

Save OBU is not dead yet!

Should OBU Be OBU? Or Try to Out-Union Union?

In our last post, we noted that OBU recently honored Union University (TN) President David Dockery with the Herschel Hobbs Denominational Service Award.  We can't help but notice that Union has become the darling of the post-Takeover SBC.  Many SBC elites send their own children to Union.  In contrast, OBU fails to attract the children of the SBC's leading men.

As far as I'm concerned, this is great news.

All indications are that Union is a solid Baptist liberal arts university that has absolutely thrived under David Dockery's leadership.  It has more than doubled in size, scope, enrollment, and budget.  My perception is that Union may be somewhat more intentionally conservative than OBU.  Even so, we haven't heard rumblings about unethical firings or unilateral redirection of entire academic divisions based on fundamentalist ideology, as we have seen at OBU and other Baptist universities.  So maybe Union already went through that change.  Or maybe it's just more uniformly conservative and no one protests very loudly.  I don't know enough about Union's history to know whether it was always a happier home for fundamentalists, or whether Dockery has deliberately ushered it in that direction.  Folks who know him praise him and tell me that, while not as extremely right wing as today's SBC, Dockery is a traditional conservative who saw which way the wind was blowing.  Hopefully, for his sake, he didn't have to compromise too many of his own beliefs and principles to win the adulation of post-Takeover SBC leaders.

Somehow, Union has managed to communicate two things.  First, it is a growing, thriving, nationally recognized Christian liberal arts university with a good academic reputation, good professors, and good students.  (Unlike OBU, Union didn't need to add a football program to boost male enrollment.)  And second, Union enjoys a reputation for being a safe place for fundamentalists to send their children to college.

Union's success with this delicate dance must be vexing to OBU's new leadership.  For some reason, the dance has been more difficult at OBU.  When David Whitlock and Stan Norman arrived on Bison Hill, each pointed to Union as a model.  OBU, though smaller, had at least as good a reputation.  But OBU is not as widely considered to be a safe place for fundy kids.  Of course, OBU produces tons of graduates who are fundamentalist, home-schooling culture warriors.  But not as many as certain other Baptist colleges.  At OBU, the chances seem higher that students will end up taking the Bible seriously, not literally.  It has been much more likely that OBU religion and ministry graduates will attend non-SBC seminaries.  As Whitlock and Norman discovered, OBU's relatively moderate reputation has been hard to kill.  At this moment, I do not know of a single SBC seminary professor or high-level agency staffer who has a son or daughter enrolled in OBU.

That's unlikely to change. And frankly, we don't need more once-reputable Baptist colleges descending into fundamentalism.  The SBC elites with children inclined toward religious colleges will continue to send their kids to Union, or, if they don't care at all about academic respectability, to an undergraduate program at one of the seminaries.

It's fine that OBU honored David Dockery.  I intend no offense toward Union.  As I said yesterday, Dockery has done the impossible: kept hardliners happy while also maintaining some mainstream legitimacy.  It's not an easy feat.  Usually you squander much of your institution's legitimacy when you pander to the hardliners.  Just ask Emir Caner (Truett-McConnell), Joe Aguillard (Louisiana College), Don Dowless (Shorter), and Thomas White (Cedarville).  Thankfully, David Whitlock seems less eager to take OBU over that cliff.  I have always believed that Whitlock has it in him to be a great university president, but I doubt any Baptist college president can do what Dockery has done: Pleased the SBC without turning his institution into a joke.

So you have to choose.

While past OBU presidents courageously risked alienating the increasingly fundamentalist SBC as they were building OBU into a top-rated Christian liberal arts university, today's leaders seem too eager to advertise that the Fundamentalist Takeover is, at long last, coming to Bison Hill.  This seems to be the intent of the Hobbs Award.

But the field of schools trying to out-Union Union is already very crowded.  And it's not going well for any of them.  So we will say what we've said all along. OBU should be what it has been for decades: A hospitable home for moderate and conservative faculty and students characterized by academic rigor, academic freedom, and academic integrity.

Cedarville (OH) Purge Intensifies

It's likely that few people noticed, but I've taken the past six weeks off from blogging.  As I explained last month, I feel that we have raised enough awareness and that the situation at OBU has stabilized significantly since this blog began in December 2011.  OBU's fundamentalist encroachment, though disappointing, has actually been quite minor in comparison to other colleges affiliated with Baptist state conventions.

To cite just one example, our worst fears about Cedarville University have been confirmed.  This spring, I invited a Cedarville alumna to discuss how fundamentalist trustees and administrators were transforming the Ohio liberal arts college.  In the wake of national press coverage of the Cedarville situation, Sarah Jones's four-part series reached many thousands of readers in a matter of a few days.

After a popular administrator was forced out and the entire philosophy major was gutted, we figured Cedarville would soon experience a fundamentalist takeover similar to the one we saw at Shorter University (GA) in 2012, when dozens of faculty were forced out for declining to affirm Shorter's new, fundamentalist direction.

To oversee the purge at Cedarville, trustees unanimously elected the Reverend Dr. Thomas White as president.  White has spent his graduate student and professional careers at post-Takeover SBC seminaries, serving most recently as vice president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, TX.

How quickly will President White move to purge Cedarville of moderates and complete the fundamentalist transformation of Cedarville?  Only time will tell.  For the moment, faculty are obviously very anxious and students are uncertain of what is to come.  Will White merely bring in a few of his own (male) friends and colleagues for important administrative positions?  Or will he lead a Shorter-style implosion?

In the tradition of Save OBU, Save Our Shorter, and Louisiana College student Joshua Breland's very fine blog, a blog called Let There Be Light (@fiatlux125) is monitoring the situation.

I welcome Cedarville constituents to the Save OBU blog.  Next week, I'll have more to say specifically about OBU and where we should go from here.  But now, while students, faculty, and alumni/ae of several Baptist colleges are paying attention, I want to say this:

Many evangelical colleges are flourishing without a hint of fundamentalist encroachment.  Wheaton, Calvin, and Gordon would not tolerate unethical administrative actions or violations of academic freedom.  But Southern Baptist colleges are falling apart before our eyes.  OBU (my alma mater) is actually in much better shape than many Baptist colleges, as administrators there dare not do any more damage than they have already done to OBU's faculty morale and academic reputation.  We need to stand together.  We are all fighting slightly different versions of the same battle.  We must stand for integrity and rigor in Christian higher education.  The reputations, faithfulness to fearless scholarly inquiry, financial health, and even accreditation of our schools will soon be in jeopardy if present trends continue.

Blessings to all of you,

Jacob Lupfer
OBU Class of 2002
Silver Spring, Maryland
Founder and Contributing Editor, Save OBU Blog

What's Going On at Campbellsville University (KY)?

We began the Save OBU project concerned about one university.  But we have seen that dozens of other evangelical colleges have been down some version of our path.  As crazy as this may seem to those who have seen OBU's great liberal arts tradition threatened in recent years, OBU is actually in much better shape than a number of Baptist state convention-affiliated schools, some of which have essentially given up their heritage as liberal arts colleges and become fundamentalist Bible academies, throwing away their histories, their reputations, and perhaps ultimately, their accreditation in the process.

The debacle at Shorter University in Georgia was covered elsewhere, though we definitely spent time agonizing over Shorter's decline here.  Recently, we considered the situation at Cedarville University in Ohio.  Many Southern Baptists are watching with (depending on their perspectives) glee or horror as Louisiana College stumbles along.

No Baptist state convention has been as blatant as Georgia's about its desire to jettison academic freedom and respectability in favor of turning its colleges into fundamentalist Bible academies.  I sense that Tennessee may be next, having already parted ways with Belmont and probably wanting to cast Carson-Newman aside in order to further bolster its flagship school, Union University (and perhaps eventually fund the fledgling Tennessee Temple University).

We haven't assessed the situation in Kentucky, where, in the shadow of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, the state convention has a relationship with a few small liberal arts colleges.  Last fall we noted Georgetown College (KY) President Bill Crouch's retirement.  But we haven't yet offered much analysis on the situation in Kentucky.

That will have to change.

This week, the Kentucky Baptist Convention's executive director, the Reverend Dr. Paul Chitwood, has been dealing with calls to to de-fund Campbellsville University over a tenure decision in the university's theology department.  Chitwood's statement was very diplomatic, calling for patience as facts are investigated:

Recent news that the university will not tenure a popular professor in their school of theology has solicited both an outpouring of support for the professor and swirling accusations about the university. For most Kentucky Baptists, a personnel matter at one of our nine agencies or institutions is a matter that should be handled privately by the administration without interference by the public. 

Claims, however, that CU retains other professors in the school of theology who reject biblical authority and professors in other disciplines who affirm evolution, are difficult for many Kentucky Baptists to swallow. This is especially true when well over $1 million of their missions offerings are helping pay the salaries of those professors every year. 

As I peruse emails I have received calling for the defunding of CU and threatening to defund the Cooperative Program if the KBC does not take action, I understand the concerns but am equally concerned that we do not rush to judgment. I earnestly pray that accusations regarding one institution will not be used to undermine all that Kentucky Baptists support, including the education 16,000 Southern Baptist Convention seminary students and more than 10,000 missionaries and church planters taking the gospel to Kentucky, North America, and the ends of the earth. 

I am, however, genuinely troubled by the testimonies of some current and former CU students. 

Tenuous and fragile are words that describe the relationships between most state conventions and their liberal arts universities. Higher education, by its very nature, requires the kind of academic freedom and exploration that is sometimes difficult to envision being funded by missions offerings. But if academic freedom is no longer afforded to those who hold to “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3) and teach a high view of Scripture (2Tim 3:16), the time for church support has clearly passed.

Chitwood, for the moment, still has to try to be fair to the fundamentalist lay and clergy leadership of the convention as well as the college's constituents.  But I suspect that if KBC leaders think seriously and strategically about this issue, they will realize it's time to part ways.

Separation is obviously the better course of action for both entities.  We'll speak to insiders and offer more nuanced perspectives in the weeks to come.  But for the moment, let us hold out OBU's experience with the BGCO as evidence that, if the KBC and its colleges continue their tenuous relationship, the pain and agony far outweigh whatever modest benefits each entity thinks it gets from the other.

Campbellsville students, faculty and alumni: If your beloved university decides to stick it out with the KBC, you can expect doctrinal witch hunts, fundamentalist-inspired meddling in personnel and policy decisions, a precipitous and irreversible decline in reputation and national rankings, and ultimately the end of legitimate liberal arts education on your campus.  In ways visible and invisible, you will see consequential decisions made out of the Baptist Building, not your administrators' offices.  Tears will be shed, careers will be disrupted, and pain will be widely felt.

KBC pastors and laypeople: If your convention decides to "fight for biblical authority," "return to biblical roots," or whatever you want to call your decision to flex your muscle at Campbellsville, you can expect a long and drawn-out battle that will exhaust your resources, divert needed funds from other vital mission and ministry efforts, and frankly distract you from your core mission.

More on this later.  Prayers for all involved.  We've been there.  It hurts.  It's ugly.  Sometimes we can both be most faithful to our missions apart rather than together.  Consider that such a time may now be at hand.

Fine Arts Fiasco: Intro

Fine Arts Fiasco Series
Part 1 -- Intro
Part 2 -- Getting What We Didn't Ask For


In 2010 and 2011, when anger about OBU administrators' unethical actions and obvious lurch toward fundamentalism was building to a crescendo, most of the focus was on two forced dismissals of religion professors.  There were also widespread concerns about the provost's over-zealous glee in attempting to remake OBU in his own image.  We were concerned about academic freedom and the quality and integrity of OBU's core strength -- its rigorous Christian liberal arts curriculum.

But there have been other problems festering in the background.  One involves widespread student and faculty anger over the treatment of a well-loved administrator who found herself demoted to make way for the new provost.  We've been silent on that situation because that administrator is still at OBU and we simply don't want to make things worse for anybody.

Another problem concerns OBU's Warren M. Angell College of Fine Arts.  Here we find evidence for many of our criticisms of the administration: ignoring search committee recommendations, low faculty morale, censorship/academic freedom concerns, and a vision/mission imposed from above, against faculty and student wishes for the department.

After getting off to a pretty rough start, I sincerely hope Fine Arts Dean Ken Gabrielse is doing better.  Like Provost Norman, he quickly alienated a lot of people.  But with experience, new administrators can avoid repeating rookie mistakes.  When they are brought in as part of a dramatic overhaul agenda, they naturally feel pressure from above to enact the agenda swiftly and efficiently.  If they are wise, they soon realize that the agenda is actually quite out of step with the character and legacy of the institution.  Hopefully their misplaced zeal subsides.  In fact, my hope for this kind of improvement is what convinced me to hold off on telling this story.  A year ago, some students and faculty were not happy with how things were going in the Angell College.  But Save OBU had hit hard on a number of other fronts and were hoping for encouraging signs, some of which came to pass and others of which did not.  It just didn't seem like the right time to introduce another broad set of concerns.

But we are committed to being a watchdog for ethical administration and academic freedom at OBU.  We haven't documented problems in the fine arts area until now.  Many of our concerns have been related to the religion and philosophy areas.  But students in music, theater, art, and communication also deserve excellence.  Their experience should not be degraded by a change of orientation and mission that no one asked for.  While some students in the Hobbs College of Theology and Ministry are themselves fundamentalists and are quite pleased with changes like the promotion of creationism, biblical literalism, apologetics, etc., relatively fewer students in the fine arts are quite so dogmatic.  Most of them came to OBU for its studio/conservatory-like atmosphere and/or its outstanding music/arts education program. Thus the problems in the Angell College may seem even more strange, out-of-character, and unnecessary to fine arts students than to other students in the university.  Also, fine arts alumni will want to know what is going on at their alma mater.

In the days to come, we'll report on recent happenings.

The Center Cannot Hold

Cedarville University Series
Part 1 - Cedarville: A Very Brief Introduction
Part 2 - The Worst are Filled with Passionate Intensity
Part 3 - Things Fall Apart

Part 4 - The Center Cannot Hold

On Saturday, the Board of Trustees ruled in favor of Carl Ruby’s forced resignation and the elimination of the philosophy major. Trustees Chris Williamson and Bill Rudd have resigned from the Board in protest of this ruling. At the moment, Michael Loftis remains on the Board, but Provost John Gredy has announced that the university is conducting an internal review about his failure to investigate sexual abuse allegations at ABWE, and an official statement will be released when the review is complete. Donn Ketcham, the pedophiliac missionary doctor responsible for the abuse, still held an honorary doctorate from the University as of last week; that doctorate has been officially revoked. 

As far as we know, there is also no investigation into the sexual abuse of male students by retired professors Ed Spencer and David Robey.

The Board of Trustees and the Cedarvilly faculty also voted unanimously to approve the following doctrinal statement:

“We believe in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as verbally inspired by God and inerrant in the original writings, embracing all matters which the biblical authors address, and believe that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and life. This unwavering commitment to the Word of God and testimony of Jesus Christ binds together our past and present and must shape our future so that we might be a beacon for, and not a pale reflection of, the world around us.”

These decisions are the result of a fraught weekend that witnessed frantic final appeals for justice and transparency by concerned alumni and students. With few exceptions, these appeals were not well received. Dr. Robert Sumner, trustee emeritus, authored a long-winded reply to my own email to the Board. In it, he bragged of his fundamentalist credentials and his continued influence on the board, and accused me of not understanding what ‘fundamentalism’ really means.

When I explained that I did in fact understand what fundamentalism means, and that I had chosen to reject it specifically because I understood it, Dr. Sumner told me that he hoped my parents died before they found out about my decision.

If Sumner’s email to me is any indication of Cedarville’s future trajectory, then it is likely that Cedarville University will continue to sacrifice academic freedom in favor of Biblical literalism. The faction steering this shift do not see this as a substantive change in the university’s character. According to Robert Sumner, Cedarville has always been a fundamentalist institution; he wrote of its former presidents in heroic terms and expected that heroism to be shared by students and recent alumni. Here, the generation gap is most glaring. I, and the majority of my class, did not choose Cedarville for its fundamentalist reputation. Mentions of Cedarville’s former presidents largely met with apathy, when these mentions were made at all.

The well-organized opposition to the administration’s decisions ought to demonstrate how little support exists for a fundamentalist university. We organized to defend the robustly evangelical university we actually encountered, not the politicized, reductionist vision of men like Robert Sumner.

Last week, thousands of Christians flocked to the annual Justice Conference, held in Philadelphia this year. The Justice Conference is true to its name: its emphasis is social justice, particularly economic and racial justice. This year, speakers included Shane Claiborne, once decried by fundamentalists as being ‘too liberal’ to speak on the campus of Cedarville University. Despite this history a delegation of Cedarville students attended the conference. A Cedarville professor who accompanied them reported the average age of all conference attendees to be no more than 27. Robert Sumner, Lorne Scharnberg and their fellow ideologues have already lost the war. They have lost my generation.

Dr. Carl Ruby cared deeply about social justice. Dr. David Mills and his colleague Dr. Shawn Graves combined their own concern for social justice with serious philosophical enquiry. That’s why petitions to reinstate them received over 2000 signatures combined. And as long as fundamentalists associate that same passion for justice with doctrinal heresy, they doom themselves to failure. This controversy at Cedarville is America’s culture war in microcosm. It’s a one-sided affair, waged by fundamentalists against the rest of the world. Academic freedom, transparency and even simple compassion are collateral damage in their crusade to control the definition of Christian identity in the 21^st century.

But today, I informed the Board of Trustees that alumni would not surrender. We will continue to speak out against fundamentalism. We still wait for answers about Michael Loftis, Dave Robey and Ed Spencer. And I wait, too, for answers about the assault that irrevocably changed my life.

In the meantime, I recall the Cedarville Admissions team’s promise to all freshmen: that at Cedarville University, you become part of a family. You gain ‘friends for life.’ And that is not a lie. My Cedarville family is motley: intelligent and impassioned, compassionate and curious. Its members are truly my friends for life. For this much I give thanks, and I keep the faith, in humanity if not in God.


Editor's Note: Thanks to our guest blogger, Cedarville University alumna Sarah Jones.  Sarah had complete editorial control over the series and we thank her for her thoughtful, passionate writing.  Article titles are derived from ‘TheSecond Coming’ by William Butler Yeats. On behalf of the entire Save OBU community, I warmly welcome to you our little corner of the web. Check out other parts of the site and follow us on Facebook and Twitter.  See especially our recent post asking, in light of problems at many member institutions: Where is the CCCU?!  Over the past 15 months as we've documented fundamentalist encroachment at Oklahoma Baptist University, we've learned that some of our peer institutions have it far worse. Our thoughts and prayers are with each of you. Please join us in standing for academic freedom and ethical administration in evangelical higher education.

Things Fall Apart

Cedarville University Series
Part 1 - Cedarville: A Very Brief Introduction
Part 2 - The Worst are Filled with Passionate Intensity
Part 3 - Things Fall Apart

Part 4 - The Center Cannot Hold

After the Cedars controversy, I spent a semester overseas. By the time I returned to campus, I’d started dating the son of a high-ranking staff member. Though not a student, he had free access to campus, and eventually got a short-term job at the university due to his father’s connections. That relationship should have been a mere footnote to my Cedarville story, but like so many college relationships, it became abusive. My ex, a recovering drug and alcohol addict, started drinking again, and I became the target for his anger.

Abusive dating relationships aren’t unique to Cedarville. What sets Cedarville apart is its campus culture, defined by events like the one I criticized in my Cedars article. Women are sexualized, but restricted from sexual behavior. They are the gatekeepers of sexual purity, charged with dressing modestly in order to prevent male lust.

So it’s probably no surprise, then, that when my ex’s abuse escalated to attempted rape, one of my first thoughts (after the humiliation and fear) involved the modesty panel I’d criticized. Specifically, I remembered a male classmate’s assertion that women should not wear pajama pants in public, because that made men think about bed, which made them think about sex.

My boyfriend tried to rape me while I was wearing pajamas. And at the time, I couldn’t shake the deep-seated conviction that I’d brought it upon myself.

This isn’t easy to write. I write it because I believe it’s necessary. I write it because I want you to understand why I, and so many others, have spoken so extensively about Carl Ruby’s compassion. It is because his compassion stands in stark contrast to the treatment many of us received at Cedarville. We speak about the philosophy professors, Dr. Mills and his colleague, Dr. Shawn Graves, because they encouraged students to think critically about ethics and faith. Cedarville needs that, too.

In the days that followed the assault, I became severely depressed, but I told no one about the attack. I feared retribution, and for several months, I found the event too traumatic to revisit. I did go to Dr. Ruby and others about different aspects of the abuse. And though my abuser faced no consequences for his actions, he, Dr. Mills and other faculty members who have since moved on from Cedarville deserve credit for showing me the emotional support that helped me move on and begin to heal.

Cedarville’s refusal to punish my abuser alerted me to the depths of the corruption in Cedarville’s administration. When I received word this past fall that a Bible professor had been fired for his interpretation of Genesis, that the philosophy major could be cut, and that Dr. Ruby could lose his job, I credited these decisions to these same deeply rooted failures in leadership. These failures became evident to many when the university officially announced its plans.

The backlash stumbled to life when the university fired Dr. Michael Pahl. The reason: Pahl, a literalist, proved not quite literalist enough to suit Dr. Tom Cornman, the fundamentalist academic vice president. Dr. Cornman had recently authored a then-secret series of white papers that codified the university’s doctrinal position, beyond the statement publicly available on the university’s website.

Dr. Cornman and the provost, Dr. John Gredy, also a fundamentalist, later led the charge to eliminate Cedarville’s philosophy major. Neither publicly stated an ideological motivation behind their decision, but behind the scenes, bias tainted every administrative move.

Last month, Cedars thoroughly documented the flaws in the review and appeal processes as applied to the philosophy program. The rushed review process and the obscured rationale behind it fuelled student and alumni concerns that this signalled an imminent fundamentalist takeover of the university. When Carl Ruby announced his unexpected resignation on January 10th, those fears seemed to be confirmed. The resignation seemed especially suspicious after Christianity Today revealed that Dr. Ruby had already undergone a hearing in the fall, and that Lorne Scharneberg, chairman of the Board of Trustees, denied the hearing ever occurred. After twenty-five years of service to the university, Dr. Ruby was forced to leave campus five days after his public resignation. Conveniently, a non-disclosure agreement forbade him from revealing the true reasons for his departure. The conditions of Dr. Ruby’s resignation have prompted one trustee, Chris Williamson, to publicly call for his reinstatement.

During a topical Town Hall chaired by Dr. Gredy, he and Dr. Cornman misrepresented the true number of students enrolled in philosophy courses at the university, and generally avoided specific student concerns about the philosophy major and Dr. Ruby’s resignation. In the wake of the university’s decisions, petitions to reinstate Dr. Ruby and revive the philosophy program received 1071 and 1170 signatures respectively. Either petition by itself dwarfs an older petition about Hoffeditz’s termination. Combined, they represent a thriving opposition to fundamentalist encroachment at Cedarville University.

That opposition has been bolstered by the revelation that trustee Michael Loftis had been forced to abandon the presidency of the Association of Baptists for World Evangelism (ABWE) for failures in leadership. The failure? Although victims first informed Loftis about the activities of a pedophile missionary doctor in 2002, Loftis did not launch any sort of investigation into the crimes until 2011. Loftis remains a trustee and the pedophile, though now dead, still posthumously holds an honorary doctorate from Cedarville.

Loftis is not the only trustee charged with covering up child molestation. Trustee Bill Williams resigned from his position as the superintendent of Worthington Christian Schools in 2008 after it was revealed that he had a hired a known child molester to teach at the school.

To our further dismay, an open letter by Dr. David Olsen, Cedarville graduate and co-founder of Cedarville Out, described the sexual harassment of male students by now retired Professor Ed Spencer, and the sexual harassment and abuse of other male students by former professor, Dr. David Robey. The incidents span decades.

The male victims of Dr. Spencer and Dr. Robey encountered the same cultural obstacles that I did, complicated by the school’s strident homophobia. We had few allies, and reporting the full scale of the abuse seemed impossible. We each found ourselves marginalized by the university’s culture of silence. That culture of silence protects Michael Loftis and Bill Williams. It is responsible for the tactics used to remove Carl Ruby, Michael Pahl, David Mills and Shawn Graves from their positions. It benefits only the fundamentalists who enforce it in order to protect their vision of Cedarville University. Their vision leaves no space for debate or for compassion shown to the marginalized. It does not include justice for gay and lesbian students, or, it seems, for feminist student journalists.

I am 25 years old. I hold a master’s degree from Goldsmiths, University of London, and last month I went public about my assault. My abuser, who also attacked another female student, is currently under investigation by the university. At the moment, there are no investigations into the claims regarding Dr. Spencer and Dr. Robey.

On Thursday evening, we received word that Lorne Scharneberg has confirmed to an alumnus that he intends to return Cedarville to its fundamentalist roots. According to Scharneberg, Carl Ruby and others wanted Cedarville to “become like Wheaton (College)” and that he does not care if this return to fundamentalism results in a drop in enrolment. It is clear that the financial arguments employed by the university to defend its decision to eliminate the philosophy major are entirely facetious, that Carl Ruby’s resignation was forced, and that this fundamentalist faction remains bent on destroying any remaining semblance of academic freedom at the university.

Tomorrow, the board will meet to discuss the elimination of the philosophy major and Carl Ruby’s resignation for the final time. If Scharneberg and his allies succeed, Cedarville University will go the way of Bob Jones University and each of us can forget about our individual campaigns for justice. Please keep the entire Cedarville community in your thoughts and prayers this weekend. On Monday, I’ll report here on the board’s decisions.

Editor's Note: Increasingly, groups from the evangelical and fundamentalist communities are raising awareness about how fundamentalist culture protects abusers and mistreats victims.  I have elsewhere asked where the CCCU is on fundamentalist encroachment at member institutions.  Given the pervasive sexual scandals (and cover-ups), that question seems even more pertinent.  I also want to acknowledge the unkind anonymous comments on Sarah's previous posts.  For obvious reasons, I am disabling comments.

Cedarville University: A Very Brief Introduction

Cedarville University Series
Part 1 - Cedarville: A Very Brief Introduction
Part 2 - The Worst are Filled with Passionate Intensity
Part 3 - Things Fall Apart
Part 4 - The Center Cannot Hold

If you read the NewYork Times on Saturday, then you might be aware, superficially at least, that there is a Christian college called Cedarville University in the state of Ohio, and that there are suspicious goings on at this college, orchestrated by a faction of Christian fundamentalists.

Perhaps you ignored the story. Perhaps you skimmed it, and thought: this is to be expected, this is why Christian colleges shouldn’t exist.

Perhaps you paid it some attention, and decided to Google the situation. If you did, you’re probably confused. Is Cedarville becoming more conservative, or is it becoming liberal? Did its administrators really fire Carl Ruby, Michael Pahl, and eliminate the philosophy major out of ideological spite? Or is the backlash evidence of a liberal campaign to erode Cedarville’s conservative identity? And how do the firings of two fundamentalist professors in 2008 factor into all of this?

But these questions are the barest introduction to the chaos that threatens to topple the administration of one of the most prominent Christian universities in the US. Recent alumni revelations portray an institution so crippled and corrupted by its on-going identity crisis that it has knowingly sheltered, at last count, five members of faculty and staff guilty of either committing sexual abuse, or of covering it up. These cover ups span decades. The victims are male and female, gay and straight. They are missionary kids, schoolchildren, and Cedarville alumni. Some suffer in public, some in silence. And I am one of them.

In so many ways, Cedarville’s story is my story too. I entered Cedarville in 2006, a scholarship student from the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains. Like most members of my freshman class, I came from an Evangelical family, and had spent my upbringing immersed in Evangelicalism’s infamously insular subculture. I dressed modestly, abstained from alcohol and from sex, and anticipated a university experience that would help me combine deep faith and intellectual enquiry. Unlike most of my classmates, I possessed a political perspective firmly located left of center, and I publicly identified as a feminist. If you are familiar with the political environment at America’s Christian colleges and universities, then you can likely imagine the student body’s reaction.

Even if I’d attended Cedarville during a season of calm, my ‘Cedarville experience’ (to borrow the Admissions teams’ language) would have been marked by ideologically motivated harassment from students, faculty and alumni. That’s not a particularly unusual story, by itself. The same story could be repeated by anyone who’s ever found themselves marginalized by a conservative religious community. Instead, my Cedarville experience is made truly unique by a series of controversies that began during my first semester on campus, and now threaten the integrity of the university’s national reputation.

In fall 2006, I had barely settled into my dorm room when the student body received word that Soulforce, a group of GLBT activists and their straight allies, would arrive in Cedarville to protest the university’s anti-gay admissions policies. Soulforce activists, called Equality Riders, made a national tour of the country’s Christian colleges and universities, and most denied riders access to their campuses. Cedarville, however, welcomed riders onto campus. Along with a group of other students, I acted as a campus guide for Equality riders. I also met a group of openly gay Cedarville alumni. The same alumni founded Cedarville Out, for GLBT and allied alumni, shortly after the Soulforce visit.

As an institution, Cedarville maintained its conservative identity throughout the Soulforce visit. The decision to welcome activists on campus lay primarily with Carl Ruby, the former Vice President for Student Life. If you did read that New York Times article, you’ll recognize that name. After 25 years of service to Cedarville University, Carl Ruby was forced to resign last month. Though Dr. Ruby has consistently adhered to a conservative position on sexual orientation and gay marriage, his compassion for gay students and alumni has been equally consistent. That compassion was first evident to me in his decision to permit Soulforce activists on campus. But it also invited accusations of liberalism. For many alumni, students, and parents, Ruby’s decision constituted capitulation to a radical leftist fringe, and threatened Cedarville’s historical identity as a Baptist institution.

The Soulforce visit marked the beginning of a troublesome season for Cedarville University. In my next posts, I’ll explain Cedarville’s decision to end its historic affiliation with the General Association of Baptists, the firing of two fundamentalist professors, its history of covering up sexual abuse, and the current controversy. 

Finding Parallels In Cedarville's Story

I've mentioned lately that one of our tasks moving forward is to build solidarity with constituents of Baptist and other evangelical colleges that are experiencing fundamentalist incursions.  OBU is not alone.  Some schools are in much worse shape, in fact.  Once-proud institutions have been taken over and are being remade from the inside out in ways that threaten their reputations, their academic freedom and rigor, and even their accreditation.

If you are an OBU alum saddened by recent changes, a faculty member who knows that academic freedom and respectability were more secure before the current administration arrived, or a student who perceives that things at OBU are not as they should be, I hope you know you are not alone.  In 2011, "The Norm" and the alumni petition showed how widespread the concern is.  In 2012, Save OBU explored many of the problems.  We examined the histories of a few Baptist colleges that managed to leave their state conventions rather than succumb to fundamentalism.  We watched Georgia Baptist fundamentalists ruin Shorter University.  But we're just beginning to make common cause with the students, faculty, and alumni of the dozens of other Baptist and evangelical colleges that are facing different versions of the same fight.

Next week, we'll closely analyze the case of Cedarville University in Ohio.  Cedarville's plight has been widely discussed in the evangelical blogosphere.  Today, the New York Times has a story on the school's recent changes:

Even by evangelical standards, nearly everyone at Cedarville is theologically conservative. But some conservatives have a greater willingness to hear dissident views. The departures of William Brown, the president, whose resignation is effective June 30, and of Dr. [Carl] Ruby, who left suddenly last month, are widely viewed as strengthening the hands of the most conservative trustees, fearful of a more open Cedarville.

Cedarville alumna Sarah Jones, a freelance journalists who recently completed a graduate degree in the U.K., accepted my invitation to write a series of blog posts.  Cedarville has a different history than OBU and a different relationship with Baptists.  As we hear of the administrative blunders, trustee politics, and attacks on academic freedom, we can hopefully learn from our friends' experience.

In the coming months, we'll examine the goings-on at Louisiana College, Union University, and other institutions.  But for now, please join me in welcoming Sarah Jones to Save OBU!

OBU Winter 2013 Trustee Meeting: Joys & Concerns

Welcome
Now that the spring semester is well underway on Bison Hill, Save OBU will be returning to a more active blogging schedule.  We hope you saw last week's post on Tom Terry's OBU history speech in Raley Chapel.  Also, check out our story about J. Edgar Hoover's visit to OBU in 1938!  We've had a lot of web traffic in recent days, particularly from other evangelical colleges that are contending with fundamentalist encroachment.  Thanks to the friends and supporters who have sent emails, including a member of the Raley family!  And thanks as well to our new Facebook and Twitter followers.

Winter Trustee Meeting
Last Friday, OBU's BGCO-elected Board of Trustees met on campus.  There were no bombshells, and in our case, no news is definitely good news.  The university's P.R. writeup reports a number of exciting happenings around campus, which we celebrate.
Joy
We are particularly heartened to learn of an OBU anthropology professor being granted Senior Faculty Status (OBU's version of tenure).  Several insiders had been concerned that some administrator(s) may use the tenure as a weapon again, either against this individual or against the anthropology department.  After all, it's not a huge leap from "Philosophy leads to critical thought which leads away from fundamentalism. so let's get rid of philosophy and replace it with Christian apologetics" to "Anthropology leads to cultural relativism and anyway and all we need to know about other cultures is how to convert them, so let's get rid of anthropology and hire another missionary." So, we celebrate.
Concern
A widely-loved and long-serving OBU scientist was granted leave for next academic year to work on research for NASA.  Of course, we celebrate this, too.  But given recent history, we fervently hope there is no effort afoot to purge this scientist.  After all, gravity is just a "theory," and certain other scientific theories have fallen out of favor with some of OBU's newest administrators and faculty...

Moving Forward
While the bleeding seems to have subsided at OBU, at least for the moment, there are more problems elsewhere in evangelical academia than I can keep up with.  (See a brilliantly-titled Patheos blog post, "No one expects and evangelical inquisition.")  I am currently in talks with constituents of several of these institutions to find guest writers who will provide reports for us.  Later this week, I'll introduce an alumna of Cedarville University (OH) who happens to be a freelance journalist.  She's working on an in-depth series on Cedarville's Takeover.  It will be instructive to learn from CU's story and hope we can avoid some of the traps.  And, of course, this will help fulfill our mission to join in solidarity with other evangelicals who value academic freedom and ethical administration.

Save OBU Spring 2013 Agenda

Whether you are excitedly beginning a new semester on Bison Hill or just wish you were, I hope this message finds you well.  Save OBU took an extended break during December and January, with only intermittent blog posting.  With a new semester upon us, here are some of the things we'll be watching and reporting on.

• Thus far, the most egregious problems have been in the religion/ministry/philosophy area. However, we continue to hear rumblings from fine arts students as well as other sources about concerns in the fine arts department.  Many of these concerns stem from the fact that the administration ignored a search committee recommendation to hire an experienced administrator from another Baptist college and instead installed a more fundamentalist-friendly dean.  I don't mean to dismiss the very valid concerns many students and alumni have, but I am still researching and fact-checking.  Expect a "Fine Arts Fiasco" series in the coming months.
• Will the provost assert himself again?  Sources indicate that Provost Stan Norman has toned down the pace and intensity of his desire to remake the faculty in the image of a fundamentalist Bible academy.  We don't want to harp on this guy incessantly, but some people who know him and have worked with him believe it is only a matter of time before he gets bored of administrative duties like being editor-in-chief of the alumni magazine (huh?) and starts purging moderates again.
• Spotlight on past protest/reform efforts.  Though most people experience OBU as a very conformist culture, there have been protest movements over the years.  I want to invite alumni to tell those stories.  I have some documents related to the "Heresy Papers" controversy in the early 1980s, when a few professors were harassed for not being fundamentalists.  One alumna is going to tell a story about a short-lived feminist group that arose in the early 2000s in response to a chapel preacher's intemperate remarks about rape.
• Connections with other schools.  Different versions of the struggle to protect academic freedom and to ensure ethical administration are happening at many other evangelical colleges.  It's a real problem.  In addition to being a watchdog for OBU, the Save OBU community has become a leader in building bridges to constituents of other Baptist and evangelical institutions.  We want to continue to build and nurture those connections.  Usually fundamentalists have the power to remake colleges in their own image.  And usually they can't help themselves.  But we are here to tell these powerful men, "When you run roughshod over traditions, values, and norms that we cherish, we will call you out. Publicly. Every time."

What else do you think we should be working on as a community? How do you want to contribute and become more involved? Feel free to respond here or on Facebook or Twitter.

Our very best wishes to the students, faculty, staff, and administration of OBU.  We hope and pray this spring semester is a thrilling journey of intellectual and spiritual growth.

Save OBU One Year Later

Last December 6, I took to the Web to raise awareness about fundamentalist encroachment at OBU.

Funny how much can happen in a year.

Thankfully, things seem mostly stable at OBU right now.  No more firings seem imminent, though you can't blame professors who still fear for their jobs.  2009-2011 saw significant deterioration in trust between administrators and other OBU constituencies.  2012 has been calmer.  If the Lord tarries, we'll make it through this calendar year without any unethical dismissals or overruled faculty committees.

As I look back on that inaugural blog post, I have to confess that some of my perceptions have changed, too.  I was so angry about how absolutely shamefully two well-loved professors were treated that I went looking for any and every reason to be upset, saying "There may be dozens of reasons to be upset about OBU's direction."  That was hyperbolic.  Really, it all boils down to two key issues:

• Academic freedom -- Are professors free to teach and students free to learn?  Do ideology and dogma threaten the pursuit of truth in the classroom?
• Ethical administration -- Are decisions about hiring, curriculum, and program direction collaborative or unilateral?  Is faculty experience, expertise, and judgment sought or ignored?

I'll add a third, only because some at OBU seem to have followed the post-Takeover SBC in gleefully holding reactionary attitudes:

• Gender -- Are women fully free to hold all administrative, religious, and faculty positions for which they are qualified?  Are female students actively encouraged to listen for and heed God's call on their lives?  Or does the institution implicitly hold out an image from a sexist era and say, "This is what a Christian woman looks like. Be like her."

There have been serious violations in all three of these areas.  Let's not kid ourselves.  When professors are installed and removed over adherence to fundamentalist dogma, academic freedom is grossly infringed upon.  Administrators are behaving unethically when they violate the Faculty Handbook and unilaterally redirect vital academic programs and regularly overrule faculty committees that unanimously recommend highly qualified, devoutly faithful candidates in order to hire less qualified yes-men.  Gender discrimination occurs when a college president refuses to even consider hiring a woman to teach certain subjects.  And suspicions arise when a well-loved and long-serving female administrator is essentially demoted to make way for the new guard.

Our message is simple:  When these things happen, administrators will be called out.  Publicly.  Every single time.  This isn't the OBU we know and love.

During the past year, we've reached thousands and thousands of people.  New friendships have formed, even across generations.  Old friendships have been rekindled.  We've connected with hundreds of moderate Baptists all over the U.S. and the world.  Friends at other post-Takeover Baptist institutions have sought our counsel and friends at schools that rejected the Takeover have offered their support.  Significantly, our sister blog at Shorter University in Rome, GA became a national news story after administrators there launched an unprecedented attack against faculty.

We'll do a more in-depth year-in-review piece closer to Dec. 31.  And we'll continue to provide innovative (though probably not daily) content, including an upcoming guest post about a student protest in the early 2000s and a Fine Arts Fiasco series on bizarre happenings in the College of Fine Arts.  We continue to see growing student awareness about the 2009-2011 issues.  Students and alumni alike are delighted to learn that OBU has a long and distinguished history of academic excellence and collaborative governance that has only recently begun to suffer.

In the year to come, we look to formalize a leadership structure, continue raising awareness, and be vigilant in our watchdog function.  If things get worse, we'll move from awareness to actual activism.

On a personal note, thank you for your kind words and encouragement.  I am certainly an unlikely leader for this effort.  But in addition to leading an effort I believe we can all be proud of, I have rediscovered my own wellspring of affection for OBU.  For me this has been an enriching personal, professional, and spiritual experience.  Though I wish things could have been otherwise at OBU in key ways during the Whitlock era, I am most grateful for the opportunity to engage with you in this effort.

As always, our prayers are with all with all who work and study on Bison Hill.

A Kinder, Gentler Save OBU?

This has been a big week for us! In terms of site traffic, it's been our biggest week ever -- even bigger than when Veronica took up the issue of gender and when I wrote about the process (or lack thereof) by which OBU's newest religion professor came to Bison Hill.  In addition to high alumni and faculty interest, more and more students are reading the blog and educating themselves at what has happened over the past few years at OBU.

This week, both Veronica and I reported on homecoming.  We also discussed last Sunday's Save OBU strategy meeting.  As the BGCO convened in Moore Monday and Tuesday, we wondered whether some within the convention could help OBU stand strong academically.  We also reported on the wreckage at Shorter University in GA, a year after its president declared war on academic freedom and abandoned any pretense of ethical administration.

Many perceptive readers have asked about the subtle change in tone.  This comment was typical of the emails I received:

The sudden change to a more positive tone fascinates me as a (very) casual member of SaveOBU. I am not sure I understand why it is warranted. What has changed? A brief pause in an agenda pursued by a president and provost does not indicate a turnaround, nor does it cancel out the latest professorial appointments. It might be a useful tactic on the part of an advocate or activist to give their quarry a moment of relief before sharpening their attack, or it might be that some direct communication from credible sources confirms that some redress of grievances is forthcoming. Absent of either, I am not sure why SaveOBU has become a cooperative venture.

So I'd like to reiterate my response to that comment and speak a bit more about how to most effectively move forward.

These are all good points. 

What has changed is that the administration has come to an awareness that it severely alienated the faculty with the botched dismissals and bizarre actions of the past few years, especially its attempts to unilaterally re-orient the aims of entire academic divisions. Whatever Whitlock's, Norman's, and McClellan's long-term intentions, people on the ground are satisfied that the triumverate now knows it can't just come in and wreck shop without a lot of blowback. Norman seems to be almost completely neutralized for the time being. Current faculty do not believe the same hostility exists today that was everywhere apparent just a year or two ago. Faculty leaders are open to repairing relations with Whitlock and Norman. They now have a chapter of the American Association of University Professors, which will hopefully provide some legal and other support if another unethical dismissal is attempted, or if the tenure process is used as a weapon. Our feeling (reflected in the comments of current and retired faculty, as well as students and alumni/ae last weekend in Shawnee) is that we could undermine efforts at peace if we are throwing bombs all the time. So there is some consensus that we need to be more of a watchdog and less of an attack dog, at least for now. 

Are we still angry about what happened to John and Jerry? Of course. Are we disappointed that faculty are being shut out of hiring decisions for decanal and certain faculty positions? Yes. The model of trust, academic freedom, and faculty-administrative collaboration that existed at OBU for decades has suffered a severe breach. But many on campus are hopeful that the breach can be repaired. Some people on campus are satisfied that there are pastors in the BGCO (mostly OBU grads) who can be counted on to make sure the board of trustees is not dominated by fundamentalists. And we know that there are a number of people who share our concerns but who reject that BGCO separation is even possible. But both active and retired faculty have said that the existence and persistence of Save OBU has helped make the administration think twice before they pull any of this crap again (although it did not stop them from going full steam ahead with shutting the faculty out of the most recent religion hire, and that is still extremely troubling).

Personally, I am less hopeful. I agree that we're in a lull right now, but at some point, the provost will assert himself again and/or the fundamentalists will ratchet up the pressure on the president. It's in their nature. They can't help themselves. As for the ones who talk out of both sides of their mouths -- saying they champion academic freedom and want OBU to be a legitimate academic institution but still love to play nice with the fundamentalists -- I wouldn't trust them any farther than I could throw them. But that's just my personal view. As someone coordinating a movement, I have to defer to the people on the ground and try to build consensus around how we can help protect OBU most effectively. 

To date, we haven't asked people to write a letter, withhold a donation, dissuade a prospective student, or do anything other than raise awareness about what has happened. For now, there is a consensus that we should continue as a watchdog, build ties with constituents of other institutions who are fighting different versions of this same battle, be a resource for students and alumni who want non-fundamentalist avenues for graduate study and ministry service, and let faculty pursue redress of grievances through their own channels.

In the long term, we'll need get the trustees off the fence and find out whether they are going to be cheerleaders for or defenders against a fundamentalist takeover.  The fact that Stan Norman still has a job makes me think they don't realize how serious the breach of trust between the faculty and the administration has been.  The easiest way forward would have been for the trustees to nudge President Whitlock to tell Stan it's time to move on.  Then Whitlock could have hit the reset button with faculty and maybe we could all be confident that things would be different moving forward.  Instead, the inaction (and even refusal to acknowledge harm/mistakes) sends the signal that the trustees and administration either don't get it or don't care.  Neither attitude inspires much confidence.

Even so, a consensus is emerging around a wait-see attitude.  Faculty seem confident that their junior colleagues will be tenured based on ability and achievement.  We can't imagine that the administration would attempt another unethical dismissal, given the outrage such an action would cause.  The core of OBU is still intact.  And the faculty in fine arts and theology/ministry will just have to endure the current regime, however joyless it may be at times.

Has Save OBU become kinder and gentler?  I don't know.  I hope so.  I always hope we embody the Fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23).  For me, the fact of meeting Provost Norman (very briefly) and having a (very brief) exchange with Dean McClellan may give me pause about speaking in such strong terms about people I don't even know.  But it's nothing personal, and I truly wish them well on their journeys.  I may not know them, but I do know OBU.  And some of their actions have been very out of place at the OBU so many of us have known and loved through all these years.

As a young Methodist boy who saw pastors come and go, I was taught never to say "I was here long before you came here and I'll be here long after you're gone."  That wasn't the right attitude.  But the truth is, there is a tradition of excellence, rigor, academic respectability, and collaborative decision-making that is woven into the fabric of OBU culture.  Two or three administrators can poke holes in that fabric, but they can never tear it asunder.  Time will tell if OBU will be restored to its former greatness in the vital areas where it's been attacked.

The attack days are never fully over.   There are more sad stories to tell and violations to report.  But I think the reorientation from attack dog mode to watchdog mode is wise at the moment.  I am satisfied that it represents a broad consensus of thinking from many quarters.  And I hope we can all move forward together as we stand strong for academic freedom and ethical administration at OBU.

Our Resolution for the 2012 BGCO Annual Meeting

Today is the deadline for Oklahoma Baptist clergy and laypeople to submit resolutions for the convention's consideration.  Fortunately for the BGCO, there is a Resolutions Committee to help make sure that resolutions like ours never see the light of day.  We thought of having someone submit a resolution so that when it got rejected, we could do a big story about it.  But in the end, we didn't want to put anyone in an adversarial position or get their pastor in trouble, especially since our resolution would have most likely been submitted by a member of a church that is dually aligned with the CBFO and the BGCO.

As you might expect, the BGCO already regards these people with suspicion.  Many people have advised me that it's an extraordinarily sensitive subject, and for their benefit I have avoided talking about it even though it is directly relevant to some of the problems at OBU in recent years.  Don't go from preachin' to meddlin', they say.

So don't get too excited.  Save OBU will not, after all, have a resolution at the 2012 convention.  But that's not to say our resolution is controversial in any way.  It's not.  And we fully expect that, if messengers actually had the chance to vote on it, it would pass with at least 80% support.  (Our soon-to-be-released survey reveals that fewer than 20% of Oklahoma pastors and church staff want to forcibly make OBU more fundamentalist.)

The last thing the BGCO wants is to draw attention to the problems with its relationship to OBU.  So the resolutions committee would have no choice but to kill our resolution.  Most of the resolutions are not controversial (at least no by Southern Baptist standards).  "We like puppies," "Apple pie is delicious," and "We are so not gay" are typical.  Here's ours:

We, the messengers of the 2012 Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, meeting at First Baptist Church, Moore, Oklahoma, November 12-13, 2012, affirm the vital importance of academic freedom, independent governance, and ethical administration for the continued flourishing of Oklahoma Baptist University.  To that end, we lament recent policy and personnel changes that have disrupted careers and harmed OBU's academic and professional standing.  We pledge our support for a legitimate university in the best of the distinctively Baptist, unapologetically Christian liberal arts tradition.  There is no desire on the part of this convention to transform OBU into a fundamentalist Bible academy, in which case it would alienate bright students, devoted faculty, generous donors, and accrediting bodies.  We call OBU trustees, administrators, students, and faculty to a new relationship of trust and mutuality in service to the ideals of the fearless quest for knowledge and wisdom, in the name of the one true God who is the Source of all Truth.

Rather than getting serious about addressing issues of fiscal equity and missional efficacy arising out of the BGCO's subsidy of OBU, the convention will discourage people from thinking too much about these problems.  Instead, it will take as given that it should contribute 20% of its Oklahoma Cooperative Program allotment to an institution that raises over $50 million a year on its own and has an endowment approaching 9 figures.  President Whitlock will give a brief report highlighting an enrollment boost, new master's programs, and the football team.  He will omit any information about OBU's decline in national rankings, persistently low faculty morale, or any of the problems caused by his provost, now basically a lame duck.  He will thank the BGCO for its financial support without acknowledging that OBU could get by just fine without it.  If he were pressed (which he won't be), he would insist that there have been no "changes" at OBU, even though OBU's theology dean and newest Bible professor admitted in The Bison that there have been.

As a relatively new movement, Save OBU isn't yet mobilized to affect BGCO processes.  But in the years to come, if things continue to get worse, we'll be ready to effectively advocate for academic freedom, independent governance, and ethical administration.

2012 Convocation: Raley, Jr. Receives Honorary Doctorate

I really enjoyed the video of Wednesday's convocation service.  The hymns, the prayers, and the words spoken were all very beautiful and inspiring.  It was wonderful to see John Wesley Raley, Jr. receive an honorary degree from the institution his parents devoted their lives to building.

Some people think I've been too hard on OBU in my writing here.  Others think I've been too soft.  At the moment, I just want to say that yesterday's convocation reminded me of all that is great, even exceptional (to borrow Mr. Raley's term), about OBU.

This time last year, many people legitimately feared that OBU was on the verge of an all-out assault by fundamentalists.  The faculty seriously considered taking a no-confidence vote in the president.  Yet today, many of us feel at least somewhat reassured that the worst of our fears have not been realized.  Sure, OBU administrators continue their troubling pattern of cozying up to fundamentalist SBC elites.  Sure, it will take time for the faculty's wounds to heal to the point that they can begin to trust President Whitlock and Provost Norman again.  Sure, the religion department bypassed the usual, ethical hiring process and installed a fundamentalist Bible teacher who is also an avowed flat-earther young earther.  OBU continues to be without a legitimate university bookstore that sells mainstream books in history, literature, the arts, and the natural and social sciences.

But given the severity of our fears and the path taken by some other state convention-run Baptist colleges, I think it's safe to say that things are not nearly as bad as they could be.

What has happened to keep OBU from going over the cliff?  What good fortune and grace has come our way to enable even OBU's loving critics to find this week's service not only palatable, but also inspiring?  Let's review a few facts:

• This honoree is actually deserving.  Whitlock wisely chose to honor someone who actually has a deep and meaningful connection to the university, and who might actually be inclined to support it financially.  Raley, a semi-retired partner in a Ponca City law firm and former mayor of that town, served as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Oklahoma in the 1990s, having been appointed by President George H. W. Bush.  Contrast Mr. Raley to SBC President Rev. Fred Luter (the last honoree), who has absolutely no connection to OBU and would never give OBU a dime.  The Luter move, done off-site and in the summer, was nothing more than an ill-advised power play.
• OBU has brought in a number of very promising new faculty members, rather than reflexively replacing retiring moderates with fundamentalists.
• Unlike a growing number of other Baptist schools, OBU does not force its faculty to sign creedal statements.  Doing so would be the end of academic freedom.  OBU's convocation explicitly asked students to open their minds, not to close them (as is the case at the fundamentalist SBC seminaries and colleges like Truett-McConnell and Brewton-Parker in Georgia).
• Provost Stan Norman, the force behind all the recent problems at OBU, appears to have been completely reigned in.  When he came to OBU, he saw faculty vacancies as his best chance to remake OBU in the mold of SBC fundamentalism.  Either he's had a change of heart, or has been directed to lay low.  Hopefully installing a young earth creationist in the Hobbs College of Theology and Ministry will keep him happy for a while and he won't try to wreck any other departments.

In spite of a few pretty serious disappointments, we're looking forward to OBU having a better year than it's had lately.

Would I Still Choose OBU?

Hello, my dear friends! I am so glad to be back with you.

As Jacob already said, I left you for a while because I was getting married! In some ways (marrying a Baptist at age 22) I suppose I am very much a typical OBU girl. :) For those of you interested in pictures, some of the teasers are here.

I write this post for fairness (Jacob got to brag about his beautiful new daughter) and also because, believe it or not, my wedding reminded me about some of the things I love about OBU.

It has been asserted that I hate OBU or that I have turned my back on OBU. That may be true in some ways. But on my wedding day, I could not help but notice how much OBU has given me. OBU will always be a special place in my heart-- it is the place I met my husband. And not only that, it is the place I met the majority of my bridal party. Actually, now that I think about it, there was only one person in the wedding party who was not either family or a friend from OBU.

OBU really was a great place for me. I received an excellent education and met some of the best friends that anyone could ask for. Together, all of us questioned, discussed, learned, and grew. As I have said before, I wouldn't trade it for anything. I think that sometimes I forget the huge hand that OBU has played in who I am today. And for that, I am extremely grateful.

But the more I think about it, the more I realize that students like me will not be going to OBU much longer. And the ones that do go are much less likely to have my same experience.

When I was a junior in high school, looking for a place to spend my college career, I was not the typical person who might generally be looking to OBU. I was not a Baptist and I was not an Oklahoman. But I was drawn to the school because I had a friend who loved it there and saw that it was recognized across the board for spectacular academics.

My parents, believe it or not, did not want me to go to a faith-based school. Outside of the "Bible Belt" it is not uncommon to hold the assumption that faith based schools do not have as good academics as their secular counterparts. When it came to choosing a college, my parents were far more concerned about academics. The point of paying for an education is to get an education-- not to become a better Christian.

I think that this is still a pretty fair argument. But I wanted to study religion, and my heart was set on OBU. In the end, my parents were convinced by OBU's excellent rankings and both of them really enjoyed the visit that the three of us made to campus. Believing that the educational investment would be worth the money, they happily sent me to Shawnee, where I believe none of us were disappointed in what I got.

Now, at OBU, I learned that perhaps getting an education and growing in your faith are more related than my parents were willing to believe during my college search. But, as I learned from Arthur Holmes during welcome week, a Christian college is not a church. The primary goal must still be education-- although one may be surprised to find that even in pursuit of that goal Christ is King. At OBU, I saw the beauty of joining a community honestly seeking both God and truth.

I am unsure that if I were looking for schools now if my parents would be convinced by OBU. If you haven't seen Jacob's post on OBU's falling rankings, the numbers are startling. When I chose OBU, my parents trusted that although they disagreed with the school ideologically, I would still get a fantastic education.

But is that still true today? Or has OBU lost sight of its vision? In an effort to protect its "Christian-ness," I fear that OBU has stopped being an excellent institution of higher learning. The problem is that its excellence is part of what made OBU Christian. Each of us was encouraged to study as a means of encountering God-- and to do so with excellence for that is the highest calling of Christ.

Now, I am afraid that OBU is trying to be safe. But encountering God has never been safe. And so instead of good, Christian education, OBU is offering pat answers and certainty.

My parents would never have been willing to pay for that-- and I'm sure I wouldn't have wanted it.

Those of us who are vested in OBU's future need to consider what kind of students we will be attracting with this new path the institution has taken. If we continue in this way, I fear that our story may be similar to the SBC seminaries-- which it seems many OBU grads are avoiding. We will no longer be able to attract the best students; they will find their education elsewhere.

Please continue to help us bring OBU back to the place that made me first fall in love with it. I know I am not the only one.

Welcome Week 2012: The Idea of a Christian College

Welcome Week continues for more than 500 incoming OBU students who moved in Saturday.  Our thoughts are with them, and with all the students, faculty, staff, and administrators preparing to begin a new academic year.

If you've been on Bison Hill during August the past 8 or 10 years, you probably know about a little book by Arthur F. Holmes called The Idea of a Christian College.  I know the faculty has held the book in high esteem for some time -- perhaps since its publication in 1975.  I don't know when it became required reading for Welcome Week.  But for some number of years, a small-group faculty-led discussion of the book has been a critical component of the Welcome Week experience.

Such is the case again this year.  Eleven faculty and staff from across the university are leading new students in a discussion of The Idea of a Christian College.  From every indication we have, these professors are all outstanding.  Given the composition of the list, I'd say there was absolutely no way Provost Norman or any of the new fundamentalist deans had anything to do with putting Welcome Week together -- and that can only be a good thing.  No need for the indoctrination to begin before the first day.  Let's at least wait til the freshmen get to "Apologetics" 101.

Actually, Holmes makes a compelling argument that the Christian college is not the church and thus does not have a role to play in "defending the faith."  The emphasis is on how to integrate faith with learning.  Holmes thus allows for not only empirical knowledge, but also revelatory knowledge.  Christian professors should model and strive to help form a faith that can withstand the most rigorous intellectual scrutiny.

Considering his thoroughly conservative outlook, Holmes offers a strong defense of academic freedom.  With freedom comes responsibility, of course, but it occurs to me that the new sheriffs at OBU would probably have preferred to use a book with a watered-down definition of academic freedom that the new SBC elites could approve to give the illusion of legitimacy to the SBC's "academic" functions and institutions.

Faculty are discussing Holmes's book this week and emphasizing three key concepts: the integration of faith and learning, academic freedom, and Christian worldview.  We've already pointed out how the concept of "Christian worldview" can be easily manipulated into a naive fundamentalism.  But given the extremely high quality and integrity of the people involved and the apparent fact that the faculty and student life staff are still steering the ship (at least as far as Welcome Week is concerned), we're encouraged.

As Welcome Week gives way to the first semester of college for the Class of 2016, our hope is that "all truth is God's truth" is more than a slogan at OBU.  We know that against vocal opposition, the new administration has imported trappings of the overly dogmatic post-Takeover faux-academic fundamentalism to Bison Hill.  But as long as OBU can remain the kind of college Art Holmes envisioned, that fundamentalism will not take root.  If we're lucky, those who propagate it will soon realize that they are unwelcome.  Let's help them realize it sooner rather than later so that the early Whitlock years will be remembered as a sad but short chapter rather than a decisive turn toward ignorance and irrelevance.

And let's hope that President Whitlock cares more about his legacy in the eyes of OBU students and faculty than SBC elites.  But make no mistake: he can't have it both ways.  The new fundamentalists have made that impossible.  Whitlock will have to choose.

Summer in the University

Summer is an interesting time for a university. We have already said that we do not expect dramatic happenings this summer as there have been during the past two.

After all, we have shown that we are vigilant and that there are enough people who care about our movement to keep us informed of what is happening on Bison Hill.

However, this is the summer to keep watching. The last two summers have included dismissals of well-loved, erudite professors. And for those of you keeping score at home, one of those professors has received the W.O. Carver Award for lifetime achievement from the Baptist History and Heritage Society. So while OBU settled this spring for a professor who could hardly manage to have regular lectures during the scheduled class time, people outside our bubble were recognizing those OBU kicked to the curb.  When two top students informed the dean about what a disaster the Baptist History class was, the dean became defensive and rebuffed the students.

But to the point, from an administrative standpoint, summer, when the students are away, is the best time to make big changes, especially if they are going to be unpopular. This is not always necessarily a bad thing -- the best time to make OBU a smoke-free campus was over the summer. But sometimes it is terrible -- as in the case of our two forced dismissals.

All of that to say, we are watching. Our movement has grown tremendously and there are many who are helping to keep us updated. If anything happens this summer, we will be sure to inform our readership.

Thus, as we all take a little bit of break for the summer, be sure to keep checking in. We are going to keep writing about Baptist History, higher education, and especially the current struggles to maintain academic freedom at OBU.

Bible Freedom

Baptists did not write the bible.

No, indeed, we did not. We inherited it from the larger church and we still share it with them. And as such as the story goes, it would be irresponsible to claim we are the only ones who know what to do with it or what truth comes out of it.

As Shurden breaks it  down, Bible freedom means a few things:

Bible freedom means freedom under the Lordship of Christ.

Historically, Baptists have also affirmed the preeminence of Christ over the words on the page. However, in 2000 (post-takeover) the Baptist Faith and Message was changed from saying Jesus is the "criterion by which the bible is to be interpreted" to "all scripture is a testimony to Christ." This is a small change, except that many of the most political stances which come from the bible have been fought against with the claim-- well, Jesus never said anything about that. But, no longer! For Jesus is no longer the rule, but only the message. Now, we can remake Jesus into whatever message we find in the bible.

The 2000 BF&M also removed the clause on the authority of Jesus, "The sole authority for faith and practice among Baptists is Jesus Christ"which is found in the 1963 version.

So there have been some interesting changes to make the current interpretation of the words of the Bible lord, instead of making Jesus lord. This was not the spirit of Bible freedom.

So now, the static words of the page have been exalted over the dynamic presence of Christ, restricting freedom of interpretation. That's why so many institutions which stay affiliated with their convention are going through a sort of doctrinal purging. No longer are we free to interpret, we are stuck in our old understandings and knowing exactly what the bible means already.

Bible freedom means freedom to obey the word.

Something we seem to have forgotten: the word of God is not the Bible. The Word of God is Jesus Christ. But God has certainly promised to speak through the Bible, and through the words on the page, the living and active Word of God may be heard.

That is not to say the Bible is unimportant. By no means. The scriptures testify to Christ, and as such, they are the sole authority for Baptists. (Although, for this idea we probably need to thank Luther more than any of our specific founding forerunners.)

But listen to what Shurden says about the founding Baptists and their understanding of the truth gleaned from the Bible:

"For Baptists, the Bible is and always has been the final authority... the Bible is final, but human understanding of the Bible is never final or complete or finished... Baptists did not begin and apparently did not intend to live out their faith as a static, rigidly fixed, inflexible group of disciples. They did not arrive at The truth in every area of life and then determine to pass it on to succeeding generations. What they arrived at was an attitude of openness to the ongoing study of the Bible..."

He goes on to quote from the 1963 BF&M which discusses a living faith rooted in Jesus who is ever the same. Thus, the authority is Jesus. "A living faith must experience a growing understanding of truth and must be continually interpreted and related to the needs of each new generation."

Yes! That is what Baptists were saying about themselves in 1963! Of course, that statement has been revised in the 2000 BF&M to say, "Our living faith is established on eternal truths," which sounds similar, but is just different enough to sound a lot more like, "We aren't wrong... for eternity."

Remaining true to Bible freedom not only allows, but encourages diversity. Yes, this is dangerous, but the alternative is to become stagnant and irrelevant unto death "resulting from unbending dogmatism." As Shurden says, "Built into [this approach] is the idea that our understandings of the Bible change... with this birthright of freedom and faithfulness... no Christian communion should be better able to meet the changing challenges of the contemporary world than Baptists."

Although recently Bible freedom has been hidden away under disguised creedalism, it is one of our most precious gifts and should be celebrated-- especially for those looking to prepare the leaders of tomorrow in a Liberal Arts University.

To be a people free to change and respond to the changes of life is to be the exact people of faith who can take seriously both faith and education. I do not need to fear the coming together of my faith and learning because my faith is flexible and will not break. I am free to respond to everything I learn, trusting that God is faithful. Perhaps this is what our founding Baptists had in mind in 1910 when they chose a University over a seminary for their little state.

Bible freedom means freedom from all other authorities.

Believe it or not, Baptists are non-creedal people. That does not mean they reject the ancient creeds of faith, but rather that no document (even the BF&M) is the norm for Baptist beliefs. Only the Bible can be that.

To be sure, Baptists have confessions. But those are expressions of what certain Baptists believed at a certain time. They are in no way normative for the whole of the Baptist church. Even the BF&M is actually titled, "A statement of the Baptist Faith and Message." It is only a statement--  not a creed. Even the 2000 BF&M says that it is not complete or infallible and Baptists should be free to revise it whenever it seems wise or expedient to do so. Further, the BF&M should not "hamper freedom of thought or investigation."

But what has happened? As Shurden puts it, the story usually goes like this. 1) Strong statement of aversion to any creed in favor of freedom. 2) A group arises which calls for strict orthodoxy. 3) This group issues a call for a statement to safeguard orthodoxy. 4) They call for the imposition of such a statement to guarantee orthodoxy. -- Now we are creedal.

This is exactly what happened at the SBC seminaries, post-takeover. Suddenly professors were required to sign documents detailing specific beliefs about gender and other peripheral matters. This is what is happening at Shorter with the lifestyle statement. This is what's happening at OBU with Dr. Norman's crazy ideological barrage of interview questions. It is NOT Baptist, it is fundamentalist.

Thus, if professors at any Baptist institution are asked to sign anything which is not the Bible itself, the institution is no longer acting Baptist.

Finally, Bible freedom means freedom of interpretation.

It is the right and responsibility of each individual to seek and find their own understanding of the Bible.

It does not mean anything goes. Rather it means that the Bible should be taken seriously and our best scholarship should be used to understand it.

It seems to me that a Baptist University is the best place to do that. There, we may seek to learn in order that we may better understand our Holy Book. We may disagree and discuss and come to varying conclusions, but that is the only way to take this most important document seriously.

So letting Dr. Norman, or Anthony Jordan, or the BGCO, or the BF&M, or any other authority interpret the Bible for us is not only against what it means to be educated, it is against what it means to be Baptist. The two ideals go hand in hand. Because we take seriously the rights and freedoms of each individual to come to this book with their own mind and conscience, we must educate them.

If we decide we already knows what it means, we are not only being bad students, we are being bad Baptists.


Sources: Shurden, Walter B. The Baptist Identity: Four Fragile Freedoms. Macon, Ga.: Smyth & Helwys Pub, 1993.