Ben Williams
Former Director of Worldview Formation
In the spring of 2000, I received a letter in the mail from Bryan College announcing the disastrous fire that burned the Administration building. Since I had just been accepted into the next fall’s entering class, I found myself faced with a choice – to attend, defer, or find another school. To this day, I am proud to have been part of that entering freshman class. I have fond memories of attending class in trailers backed up to Rudd, eating meals in the yet to be completed student center, and watching as my professors and our administration carefully and intentionally guided us back from the brink of destruction.
Two years after graduating in 2004, I was given the opportunity to return to Bryan as part of the staff and, eventually, as an instructor. Over the next four years, I taught Freshman Worldview, directed the Worldview Initiative and later the Department of Worldview Formation. During this time, I traveled the country speaking to thousands of parents and students about why they too should consider attending Bryan College. I remain humbled by the opportunities I received to give back to the school that so deeply shaped me. I tell you these things in order to introduce myself, but, more importantly, I want you to know that I am not a disgruntled graduate. I love my school.
Over the last two weeks, I have become increasingly concerned about the decision your body has made and the method that has been employed in regard to the recently announced clarification of the Statement of Belief. Over the last few days, many have written emails to you, which the President’s Office has graciously agreed to pass along for your consideration, requesting a formal response to the concerns raised in Paul Gutacker’s letter in the Triangle. However, in addition to these personal communications, I also want to raise two big picture ideas in a public forum that will, I hope, further benefit this dialogue. I do not presume to speak on behalf of the Alumni Association. Rather, I speak individually as a concerned graduate. I respectfully request a response to the following.
1. As you are aware, the school charter states: “Inasmuch as this institution is being builded and subscriptions and donations solicited and received on the basis of the above statement of belief, in justice and equity to those contributing, this platform shall never be changed or amended, but shall constitute the religious position and belief of the institution as long as it shall endure.”
I would like to recognize that the Trustees are not overtly changing the statement of belief. Instead, as the title of the motion indicates, you are seeking to clarify the originally intended meaning of the fourth point in the statement. As time passes, I recognize the need for occasional clarifications in order to ensure consistency. I will admit to being extremely confused about the need for this clarification since no faculty member at Bryan is in any way questioning the fact that God created all of reality. However, I equally affirm that this is within the rights of the Trustees. I would like to respectfully request a response to a couple of related questions.
Questions:
(A) Will the Board of Trustees please explain how it knows that the framers of Bryan’s charters specifically intended the fourth point to mean that which the Trustee’s motion of clarification states?
(B) What speeches, writings, internal documents, etc. can the Board of Trustees offer to demonstrate consistency between the framers’ overt statements and the motion of clarification?
This seems vital to me since, I would suggest that, in the absence of specific, clarifying statements from the framers themselves, any narrowing of meaning beyond the face value of the words is, by default, a change to the Statement of Belief. It is my understanding from another Triangle article that the Trustees are currently working on a position paper to respond to this question, and I look forward to reading it. However, I would equally urge the Trustees to present this paper for discussion before mandating the clarification.
2. Should the Board of Trustees be able to provide satisfactory evidence that would meet the challenge posed by my first question, I would like to raise a related concern. The fact that your body deemed it necessary to assert a clarification implicitly recognizes that common practice in hiring, promoting, granting tenure, and funding departments at Bryan has, apparently, not been consistent with the Trustees’ understanding of the fourth point in the statement. This is especially true in cases where faculty members have been hired after making their opinions, which are apparently now different in position from the Trustees’ statement, known during the hiring process.
Given the Board of Trustees’ apparent self-recognition of its own failure to require the President of the College to uphold and enforce its own understanding of the Charter in matters of faculty placement, will the Trustees please answer the following?
Questions:
(A) Given the Trustees’ implicit recognition of its own failings, what accommodations are the Board of Trustees prepared to make for any member of the long-term faculty who may now be in danger of being without employment and unable to obtain future employment as a result of the advanced stage of his or her career and or loss of retirement?
(B) Given the Trustees’ implicit recognition of its own failings, what accommodations are the Board of Trustees prepared to make for any other member of the staff and/or faculty who suddenly finds him or herself in breach of a previously unknown definition? This is especially important given the fact that the normal college hiring cycle is over at this point in the year.
Respectfully, I find it difficult to believe that evidence exists that the framers of the college intended for their broad perspective and intentionally inclusive language of the College Charter to be interpreted in the narrow manner expressed in the Trustees’ statement of clarification. I would assume that the authors of the Charter, acting shortly after the Scopes Trial, could very easily have clarified, using precise language, exactly the point your body now seeks to make. The fact that they chose not to do so seems to speak in a manner opposite to the Trustees’ current statement.
However, and I do mean this sincerely, I am, as always, willing to be persuaded. If the Trustees are supported by the clear voice of history, I will be the first to applaud this body’s attempt to remain true to the framers’ intentions. However, should the voice of history prove to be less than absolutely clear, I respectfully call on the Board of Trustees to pursue other means of addressing its concerns. I humbly suggest that these alternative means should include a meaningful and open dialogue with the faculty, qualified historians and theologians (both in and outside of the Bryan community), and a renewed attention to common hiring practices.
To reiterate, any concern attendant to this issue is the result of the Board of Trustees’ failings to require the President to enforce the College’s charter.
As a result, should the Board of Trustees choose to continue with the clarification as stated, I strenuously urge your body to consider “grandfathering” any current faculty and/or staff member into this new clarification. This would likely involve an agreement on the part of the faculty regarding their role in this dialogue moving forward, now that the Trustees’ understanding is known.
If such action remains unacceptable to your body, I would suggest that another, adequate form of benefit is required. By making such accommodations, the Trustees would continue to uphold the finest of Bryan traditions –gracious care for those brothers and sisters in Christ who make Bryan College possible.
It seems that there are two issues to be dealt with in this discussion.
The first is the historical dialogue regarding the intended meaning of the original framers. The second is how the Board of Trustees will now choose to care for its own faculty and staff.
I will close with a respectful reminder of the importance of this second issue. Those who work in the halls of our school are not nameless personnel. For some of you, these are your friends and former colleagues. For others of you, these are beloved mentors of the students you seek to serve. For all of you, those who are being affected by your decisions are undeniably and unquestionably your brothers and sisters in Christ.
I trust that you will make your decisions in light of this important, relational truth. It is with genuine respect and appreciation for your positions and task that I write.
Sincerely,
Ben Williams
Bryan Class of 2004
Former Director of Worldview Formation