This letter was sent to me by a Missouri Baptist pastor. Since we have published articles about the controversy at Southwest Baptist University, it seems fair to publish this response by the president, Dr. Eric Turner, to the controversy. It appears to be transparent and forthright.
Dear Missouri Baptist Pastor,
In Matthew 28, Jesus commands us to change the world with passion and compassion. During the past fourteen decades, Southwest Baptist University’s education, founded upon a Biblical worldview, has followed that command. SBU Bearcats are impacting the world as missionaries, pastors, educators, social workers, physical therapists, business leaders, lawyers, graphic designers, doctors, nurses, musicians, computer programmers, and so much more.
SBU is a Southern Baptist university — a Missouri Baptist university. SBU has a fierce commitment to transforming lives through Christian higher education. Indeed, our mission statement calls us to be a Christ-centered, caring academic community preparing students to be servant leaders in a global society. With our rich history, we must be diligent to preserve the core values and Baptist identity that have sustained our University for generations.
Since coming to SBU, I have become aware of concerns regarding our values and identity. Through a strategic and purposeful process, we are addressing these concerns.
A recent step in this process was the commissioning of an external peer assessment committee, led by Dr. David Dockery, chancellor of Trinity International University. The committee conducted a review of Southwest Baptist University’s integration of faith, learning, and doctrine. In particular, the committee evaluated the key elements of Baptist distinctiveness that inform SBU’s identity as a Missouri Baptist institution.
To aid in their assessment, the committee met with SBU administration, faculty and staff, SBU trustees, and Missouri Baptist Convention leaders Dr. John Yeats and Dr. Jeremy Muniz.
The key finding of the committee is the University’s Statement of Faith has not been implemented effectively across the fabric of the University. The Statement of Faith was adopted in 1921 and recently reaffirmed by Missouri Baptist Convention messengers in 2012. For the long-term health and faithfulness of SBU, the institution must clarify its Statement of Faith to be a clear and compelling theological framework.
In addition, the committee determined, due to the lack of a clearly implemented Statement of Faith, the doctrinal position of SBU has been perceived as ambiguous. This lack of clarity has led to an erosion of trust between the University and Missouri Baptists. SBU and the Missouri Baptist Convention must work together to restore that trust.
Since my arrival at SBU, I have recognized the need for SBU to strengthen our relationship with the Missouri Baptist Convention and its churches. This assessment affirms that position. We must collectively work together to rebuild trust between SBU and Missouri Baptists.
Over the coming weeks and months, you will see evidence of SBU’s thoughtful response to this assessment. We are currently working to clarify, boldly articulate, and implement our Statement of Faith that will further align and strengthen our Baptist identity and Christian faith.
Southwest Baptist University values the partnership of the thousands of friends like you who have faithfully supported our mission for over a century. Moving forward, we desire your confidence and trust as we engage the next chapter of SBU. As SBU President, I commit to serve our shared mission with all I have to offer: faith, integrity, and love. I ask you to join me as we work together to make SBU the exemplar Christian University.
Shaping our story together,
Dr. Eric A. Turner
President
Southwest Baptist University
I know what the letter says.
But what does it mean?
I thought the same thing. I’m can’t really tell what it means. If it is just an initial quick letter sharing that there is a known problem, I guess it might be fine. But since one goal is to “clarify,” more communication will be needed. May God guide and bless everyone involved in the process and bring good fruit out of it.
I understand your confusion, but what I THINK it means is that they’ve realized that there is a real problem in the doctrinal standards of the school and they are going to attempt to fix it.
Louis
I took it as some type of preliminary damage control
When you are a college president, damage control is part of the job. But I thought this letter was pretty forthright for such a communication. I appreciated it.
As an alum, I think it’s a good first step.
There’s an old saying: too many cooks spoil the broth. I think I’ve got a new one: too many Ph.D’s spoil the school. I have nothing against people getting Ph.D.’s but I wonder how much hands on experience many of these folks have? I wonder if they lose touch with everyday people when they get into an academic bubble? As a result, they drift – I don’t think it’s necessarily intentional but it happens. As lawyers, when another lawyer became a judge and got uppity we used to call this disease “robe-ite-is” (as in put on judicial robe and you start thinking a bit too much of yourself). Maybe Ph.D.’s suffer a similar affliction?
Having more people who have actually practiced as “missionaries, pastors, educators, social workers, physical therapists, business leaders, lawyers, graphic designers, doctors, nurses, musicians, computer programmers, and so much more” might actually help regain the direct link between academic thinking and actual practice. Theology ought to be a practical and meaningful endeavor, not just a theoretical, academic exercise.
Not sure if what I’m thinking is correct. I don’t have a dog in the fight here. But I’ve been around academia (I’ve been an adjunct at a law school for 14 years) and there is often a lack of connection with everyday life that veers into a very strange brew. This is even more important in keeping our theology and doctrine clear.
5 out of 7 professors at Redford have been either missionaries or pastors
For how long? I’m a lawyer and law schools love to say their professors practiced and it turns out that it was often just two or three years. Also, how long has it been since they were actually a missionary or pastor (on a regular basis?).
I’m a long way off but this looks like an adult and Christian way to handle stuff especially when compared to what has happened prior.
I know what you are saying, but I don’t completely agree. When you are trying to challenge an entrenched bureaucracy at a school or other institution, just getting heard isn’t easy. Perhaps some of the early steps weren’t done perfectly, but after you go through every official avenue and no one will listen, there is a tendency to look for any means to publicize things. I am glad this came to light. I do not know all the details of every interaction, but in the end, doctrinal accountability at an SBC institution is a good thing.
No, I’m not saying the ends justify the means. Not sure what I’m saying, other than the fact that I went through some of this years ago and I know how hard it is to be heard.
As a parent with a son looking into a solid Christian education to be a jumping off point for seminary, I could not pay 1 penny to a school like this. Being raised a liberal, I can smell liberal leanings disguised in just about anything and after reading this and last year’s letter from recent alumni, I would only encourage a child to go to this school after a deep, deep theological housecleaning with no bending of semantics when asked straight forward questions.
Lots of talk about perceptions but not much in the way of clear, concise analysis of exactly where the university was ambiguous and unclear in implementing its statement of faith. Much of the criticism leveled at SBU by a few of its recent alumni and by the professor that was dismissed pointed to concerns about specific doctrine but it should be noted that SBU’s statement of faith is not the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. I have to wonder how much of the problem is related to an expectation that the school’s Bible faculty should be conforming to the BFM 2000 when that is not the school’s officially adopted statement of faith?