Another Baptist college has run afoul of the accrediting agency SACS. In a letter dated July 9. 2014, SACS has alleged non-compliance with their Principles of Accreditation in at least 6 areas and Louisiana College now bears the burden of proving why its membership in SACS should not be withdrawn. They are back on SACS probation.
Here is a link to the full letter from SACS, released by LC today. (LC SACS (here is another version in case the letter happens to disappear from LC’s site).
The six areas with which SACS has a problem are:
PR 1.1 – Principles of Integrity
SACS accuses LC administration of:
- “pervasive culture of avoidance of transparency”
- “conflicting documentation of facts”
- “unauthorized use of restricted funds”
- “forged documents in a submission to SACSCOC”
- Several other misrepresentations of SACSCOC communications
This entire section is troubling to say the least. A Christian school ought to operate with such high standards of integrity that such accusations would be absurd, but that kind of culture evidently did not exist under the Aguillard administration. We can hope that the college will take definitive steps to correct this. This is basic Christianity we are talking about here. Honesty and integrity.
CS 3.3.4 – External Influence
SACS is concerned that the Louisiana Baptist Convention, and in particular its Executive Director, Dr. David Hankins, exerts too much influence over the college.
Jay Adkins has written extensively on this topic.
CS 3.2.9 – Personnel Appointment
SACS observed that a whistleblower (I don’t know which one) was singled out for an interim (and very negative) staff evaluation, after that person had previously received perfect evaluations.
CS 3.2.10 – Administrative Staff Evaluations
Another deeply disturbing charge – that LC submitted at least three staff evaluations with FORGED signatures to SACS and raises the idea that perhaps content was altered in the evaluations, though that is not clear.
CS 3.10.3 – Control of Finances
There are some questions about financial controls, though frankly this is less clear to me than other sections. Maybe some of our accounting experts can explain this better. Issues were raised about the use of restricted (what we call designated) funds, about credit card expenditures, and about control of scholarship accounts.
I’m not sure whether they are seeing misuse here, or just failure to adequately account for expenditures.
FR 4.7 Title IV Program Responsibilities
This has to do with deficiency findings in the administration of the Student Federal Financial Assistance Program. Again, I’m not sure if this is an accusation of malfeasance or just accounting failure. But I’m pretty sure it’s pretty important to comply to the government in financial aid matters.
Frankly, I’d rather watch the Red Sox beat the Good Guys in Pinstripes than wade back into the Louisiana College/Louisiana Baptist Convention nightmare. But this is news and there aren’t many places that Baptists can go to get news these days.
I hope that Louisiana College will admit its mistakes and stop trying to cover up what has happened; stop claiming “exoneration” and simply come clean. Fix the problem. The Board of Trustees has a lot of work to do to restore the credibility of this college.
The last sentence in the whole PDF document is the most concerning, to me: “In all cases, the institution bears the burden of proof to provide evidence why the commission should not remove it from membership.” This is tough spot to start from: demonstrate that you are fixing all of this, or you’re done for. If that’s what it means, then LC could address 90% of the charges and still be in trouble with SACS. And there’s a Gordian knot of sorts to deal with: if they mess about too much with the involvement of state convention people, especially the… Read more »
In the SBC, we select and elect the trustees and then the entities operate somewhat autonomously (under certain parameters, of course).
LC could probably follow that model. Elect the trustees but give them freedom to run the school without direct LBC interference.
I think LC would claim that’s what they do–with the LBC Exec as ex officio on every board for CP receiving entities. And given that it takes some capacity to be convincing to get a state exec position, it’s easy to see how long-term state execs on a board would easily gather power, even if informally. I think that’s the kicker here: LC needs to boot that permanent role for the LBC Exec. Doesn’t matter who it is, even if they hire Dave for the job once Dr. Hankins retires, they need to stop that practice. But if the LBC… Read more »
To answer the above question, in 2012 the LBC gave $3.3 million to LC.
I do not pretend to be a lawyer, but I quickly consulted google and it said that forgery is a felony in all 50 states.
That’s part of what makes this mess interesting:
To convict on the felony, you would have to positively prove forgery.
But based on that letter, if it is accurate and binding, LC has to prove to SACS that the apparent forgeries are definitely NOT forged.
A reasonable doubt that would keep you out of prison for forgery may not be enough to keep your accreditation.
I think you might be right theoretically, Drew, but I doubt that many prosecutors are going to worry about a forged employee evaluation signature unless money changes hands. I’m pretty sure no one is going to jail over this.
However, the SACS people might tend to be unforgiving!
My guess is that LC’s path out of this is not denial, but to admit the failures and to give solid evidence of turning over a new leaf. I’m guessing that they cannot continue to operate in their current mode and keep their accreditation.
~~~Another deeply disturbing charge – that LC submitted at least three staff evaluations with FORGED signatures to SACS and raises the idea that perhaps content was altered in the evaluations, though that is not clear.~~
I confess my ignorance, because I do not understand how forged signatures on staff evaluations correspond with felony theft charges. What has one to do with the other?
Thanks
Forgery is its own felony case.
In Arkansas, forging a commercial document or contract is a Class C felony.
Louisiana law it’s the misrepresentation with intent to defraud, and it looks like it’s graded on a scale of defraud for what value–forging a signature to get a quarter is not as bad as forging one for millions of dollars.
But now, I’m off the phone with legal counsel about other matters, so I’m back to google and guess.
The second charge is troubling for this reason, it does not bode very well for Christian education. I will tell you that in the not to distant future I can imagine a situation where religious institutions wont be able to maintain regional accreditation.
There has certainly been a continual issue here, but I think that SACS has been willing to allow religious schools to go so far and then not cross a certain line.
I suspect that Dr. Hankins’ direct involvement in LC affairs (based on reports, articles, and blogs) is the issue.
But you may be right.
I think there was a great deal of pushback when someone suggested in a major academic setting that no religious institutions should have accreditation–it was connected to Wheaton a few months back. (see here: http://faithandamericanhistory.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/598/ I think there is a legitimate concern going forward, but I expect that long before confessional faithfulness costs schools accreditation, we’ll see government interference instead. My pessimistic 8-ball suggests that the freedom to discriminate based on religion will disappear from Federal Law first, and then it won’t be SACS threatening your accreditation, it will be the DoJ suing you out of existence for insisting on… Read more »
Doug,
No doubt you are probably right. I personally have always held that the only educational institutions that the Convention ought to be involved are seminaries. I believe in BSM ministries by the way. But there have been far too many universities who were started and subsidized by Baptist dollars who later went liberal and eventually eliminated all influence of the denomination in the university…(See Brown University or the University of Chicago or Mercer)
That drift problem is a major one, and those aren’t the only examples. I think there was one in Florida, not sure about Alabama. I think the question at hand for many of these institutions, though, is that since we have them, how do we handle them? I’d vote “nay” to investing in starting another Baptist college here in Arkansas, but I also would not willingly just sever ties with either OBU or Williams. And many of these schools got a start because seminary education was a distant impossibility or because, like here in Arkansas, for many ages self-supporting ministry… Read more »
Good points, John.
I am afraid that perhaps the tendency toward theological drift in Baptist colleges has caused some kind of backlash. Maybe we have overcorrected, with entities attempting to prevent drift by over-control.
Doug,
The SBTC doesn’t own institutions, but we do provide financial support for Criswell College and Jacksonville College. Our governing documents permit no more than 15% of our budget to go to institutional support.
Dave
I think you have made a salient point. Historically it seems to me that Baptist have had a hard time avoiding extremes in some situations.
JOHN, perhaps SACS is attempting to preserve Christian higher education by calling on the college to correct unethical (possibly illegal) practices? certainly SACS has its own reputation to maintain . . . if they ‘look the other way’ in the case of Southern Baptist colleges when there is blatant corruption, then the SACS will lose credibility as a responsible organization. Southern Baptist colleges should be GRATEFUL for the supervision, not fearful for the future of Christian colleges . . . and anyway, if those charges are even remotely true, then the ‘future’ is here isn’t it, and the term ‘Christian… Read more »
Well, they play Huntingdon College on Saturday in their season opener. Here’s wishing them well. I always root for the Baptists over the Methodists—with the exception of Duke and Wake Forest. SACS is like the NCAA of academics. They might slap a temporary probation on you, but ultimately, they’re not going to shut down the institution. Accreditation lost eventually leads to accreditation regained. I’m sure we are all praying for Interim President Smith and the LC leadership team as they put the worms back in the can. We can be reasonably sure that they have a better plan for doing… Read more »
I would say that the thing we should be doing is praying for David Hankins and Pres. Smith as they try to right what’s wrong with LA College. We should also be praying for Ergun Caner, as he and Brewton Parker also try to turn things around in S. Georgia. They have a huge job in trying to fix what’s wrong. May God give them grace to right the ships.
David
Well, if this accusations are true at LC “pervasive culture of avoidance of transparency” “conflicting documentation of facts” “unauthorized use of restricted funds” “forged documents in a submission to SACSCOC” Several other misrepresentations of SACSCOC communications – then to me the problems seem deeper than SACS. … You’ve got lying, misappropriation of funds, avoidance of transparency forget SACS that just ain’t indicative of Christian structural integrity. However, accusations are not necessarily verified by facts – so SACS aside, I hope for the name of Christ, the Louisiana State Convention, the SBC, and the college itself that these things aren’t true.… Read more »
Maybe the interim president will make a Youtube video from his hotel room putting all our minds at rest by assuring us that there is nothing to see here and all will be well.
Bawahahahahahaha!
I don’t get it.
We’re not allowed to explain it to you my friend.
I guess I will just have to die in my ignorance…what a lonely way to go 🙂
This is about LC. Please leave Caner out of it, please.
I am convinced Baptist bloggers have almost no ability to have a productive discussion of Calvinism, but we are WAY better at those interactions than discussions of Caner.
So, let’s keep our eyes on the ball.
I’m all for Dr. Hankins and Dr. Smith trying to turn it around, but based on what SACS is saying, they are the very reason for the infractions in the first place! I realize Dr. Smith wasn’t president, but according to all reports, he was intimately involved in all the circumstances that led to this. Why should we think that the same people who committed the infractions would suddenly change their tune because SACS asked them to? This is evidence of a lack of character and integrity. The board should appoint a subcommittee led by a trustee like Tony Perkins… Read more »
Well said, Jimmy. The deeper issue at LC is about integrity and sin…not accreditation. There has been no accountability. In fact, the parties responsible are still involved and still in power with the lone exception being one that got rewarded for his lack of integrity with a cushy job and a golden parachute. God help us. It appears we value being able to shout “exonerated” and cover up sin while moving guilty parties to other positions more than we value honoring Christ through repentance and accountability. The problem at LC extends far and wide (and into the LBC)…if those with… Read more »
Very, very well said Jimmy and Jason. Non repentance and the covering up of sin are the real issues here. SACS is an important body to whom schools and administrators must answer…as are the trustees and the members of the state convention – but even more so those who claim the name of Christ are specially accountable to the teachings of scripture – in which the ultimate judge clearly speaks to the issues of lying, intimidation, and revenge…all of which have been demonstrated here. Owning up and repentance are clearly needed here – and these biblical expectations heretofore are being… Read more »
Can someone please explain to me in a very short summary whats going on with this school?
I’ll try. There have been some financial issues, personnel issues and theological issues at the school, including some matters that have attracted the attention of the accreditation board. The new Interim President is working with the Board of Trustees to address these issues. It is also fair to say that, in addition to the problems mentioned, an underlying conflict exists between Calvinists and Traditionalists generally in the area of academic freedom, not only at Louisiana College, but at many other institutions, including our seminaries. Sometimes, institutions start hiring only one type of professor theologically. This creates friction, as people defend… Read more »
Not sure SACS is all that interested in C/T stuff.
Tyler’s question was, “What’s going on with this school?” I believe the C/T conflict is *part* of what’s going on.
I don’t think SACS is concerned with that part of it. I do think Southern Baptists are especially interested in the issue because of this “underlying conflict.”
The SACS issues have absolutely ZERO to do with your war on Calvinism, Rick.
It’s not fair to frame it that way.
The OP is not about that at all – it’s about the charges they levied that are laid out succinctly in the OP and in the letter from SACS and “the underlying issue” you purport is not there, sir.
The SACS issues have absolutely ZERO to do with your war on Calvinism, Rick.
This statement is not exactly true. The issues that have escalated within the board of trustees is clearly rooted in this “war on calvinism.” If the trustees were not all up in arms, I am personally convinced that none of these issues with SACS would exist today.
Yea, Hankins is obviously – willing to fight his war on fellow orthodox, BFM2000 affirming Christian Baptists with whom he disagrees on secondary issues – even to the point of making his ridiculous war (and improper influence) so obvious that an independent, outside and secular board who is truly without a dog in the fight has to call foul and say enough!
I was thinking that too Tarheel. Why is it that the secular world can see the ridiculousness of frivolous lawsuits and situations such as has been going on at Louisiana for sometime now, but some here and other places can’t? The ends does not justify the means gentleman. We need to clean up our act, and integrity be brought back to our Convention and churches.
I think the axing of Driscoll and Mahaney is a good beginning, but as has been seen we have an awful long way to go. Bob and Rick your statements somewhat amaze me.
Rick,
I didn’t know that SACS was taking in the “great Calvinism struggle.”
Are they part of the vast Calvinist wing conspiracy too?
Where does SACS fit on your handy dandy little Mohler connection chart?
Funny thing that none of the charges levied by SACS are relating to whether LC profs believe that regeneration precedes faith.
😉
1. They’re not. 2. You mean there IS one? 3. It’s not my chart. They don’t. 4. Not all that funny, really. Mock others, much? No one else took a stab at Tyler’s question. I tried my best. While the SACS issues provide the major public story, I stand by my assertion that part of “what’s going on with this school” (Tyler’s question, not mine) is that Southern Baptists view the conflict differently depending on which side of this denominational fence you are on. I call ’em like I see ’em. If you don’t think that’s a part of this… Read more »
Let’s lay this down, Mr. Patrick and Mr. Cline.
Ok, Mr. Miller.
I will be happy to agree to limit my posts in this thread to the scope of the OP, which is, depite what others have tied to make it, SACS allegations of dishonesty, transparency issues and financial impropriety at LC.
I will no longer allow myself to be pulled into others agendas.
Dave, I won’t address Dave Cline any further on this thread. But I have a question for you: “Is it really out of bounds to go beyond the subject matter of an original post while attempting to answer a broadly worded question in the comment stream?” In response to the question, “What’s going on at this school,” I could have cited a half dozen articles in print that discuss this controversy from the very same angle I mentioned. It’s not like I’m pulling this out of thin air. It’s part of the story. Also germane is the predictable breakdown of… Read more »
Tyler, the former president, who had some real issues, used the Calvinism thing as a smoke screen. If you want to know what is really going on, you could try reading the blog of one of the trusteed of LC, Jay Adkins. The Crescent Crier. He’s a man of integrity and everything he says has been borne out.
The issue involves things like abuse of power, dishonesty, punishment of whistleblowers, issues of honesty and integrity, such things.
Thanks Dave!
This newspaper has also had quite a few stories about the situation.
http://www.thetowntalk.com/story/news/local/2014/09/05/sacs-points-aguillard-hankins-issues-lc/15157167/
I read the “Town Talk” as well and found this excellent quote by Interim President Smith: “Fortunately, the issues don’t bring into question in any way the excellent classwork accomplished by our professors and students,” Smith said by email. “The issues cited by SACSCOC concern aspects of administrative areas. I believe we have adequate to time to respond to the issues cited by SACS-COC. Our goal is to be removed from probation by this time next year.”
Sounds like everything should be fine.
Scott,
Just to keep things real…were you this concerned about Mohler and Southern having such close ties to CJ Mahaney? Were you this concerned about Southeastern having Driscoll to speak on their campus so much?
If not, why? Maybe you and some others need to ask yourselves why you were not as “righteously indignant” about Southern and Southeastern? Maybe there’s another motive going on? Could it be something about LA College that just really stirs yall up a little bit more? that makes you wanna see Hankins taken down? Maybe?
David
I’ve never been an advocate for close ties with either CJM or Mark Driscoll. In fact, on this forum I’ve said both of them have been an embarrassment and thier actions shameful….so yes I’ve been consistent.
However, I’ll say that both men (MD and CJM) have recently stepped down from positions and shown public contrition….time will tell if these actions are sincere – but that marks a distinct difference between them and the subjects of this post that you, and few other posters around here, refuse to acknowledge.
I’m not sure why David keeps bringing those guys up in every single thread. They are irrelevant to this particular discussion. Yet he feels they are proof of something…though I’m not sure what. Were people guilty in the past of giving them the benefit of the doubt? Yes, I think so. They didn’t jump all over them early, they waited for info to come out. What is interesting is that Mahaney and Driscoll have been addressed by those connected to them. T4G and SovGrace dropped Mahaney. Acts29 dropped Driscoll. People who gave them the benefit of the doubt have now… Read more »
Well said, sir. Well said indeed.
“What is interesting is that Mahaney and Driscoll have been addressed by those connected to them. T4G and SovGrace dropped Mahaney. Acts29 dropped Driscoll. People who gave them the benefit of the doubt have now come out and publicly called for repentance.
It appears that there are signs of repentance from those guys. Time will tell.
If only SBC leaders would call SBC guys to repentance as quickly as they call non-SBC guys to repentance. If only SBC leaders called for accountability and transparency among SBC leaders as quickly as they demand it for non-SBC guys.”
Great point my friend.
Jason,
you asked:
~~~I’m not sure why David keeps bringing those guys up in every single thread.~~~
From reading what he and Rick have been saying, it seems that they think Calvinists are overblowing the problems at LC. And he wants to point out that there are Calvinists with shaky problems out there… so quit picking on Traditionalists.
If I have you wrong Volfan, I apologize.
Jason, First of all, this is the first time I’ve mentioned Mahaney and Driscoll in a long, long, long time. So, I have no idea why you would say what you did. Secondly, I never defended Aguillard. I don’t even know him. Thirdly, again, we need to pray for them…not jump all over them. Fourthly, here’s how it works. When a Republican does something, the rest of the Republicans say it wasn’t that bad… it wasn’t as bad as the Democrats are making it out to be. And, the Democrats are making a HUGE deal out of it, and scrutinizing… Read more »
vol, You’re wrong. I defy you to find where any “Calvinist” on this board defended and or justified the actions Of CJM or MD….like it’s been said did many give benefit of the doubt – yes – did many say let’s wait and see – sure – but defend them and thier actions even in the midst of overwhelming evidence of thier guilt…I’m not so sure. You, and others have invoked randomly and irrelevantly into numerous discussions individuals such as the Caners, CJM, MD and of course the whole C/T debate in efforts to either deflect and/or obfuscate uncomfortable realities.… Read more »
Are you serious, Tarheel? lol
David
As a heart attack.
Is that what you’re admitting to?
Vol,
You are so, so right. Your analysis of Republicans and Democrats either making a big deal or a small deal out of issues, depending solely on the party, is completely spot on.
Rick and Vol,
Yes, that’s what happens in the political world.
So, by saying this is analogous here – are you admitting to making small of these realities to forward or protect your agenda?
Rick and Volfan, My comment ended up there wherein the comment stream, so I am just quoting it with the hpe it will be where it belongs>>> ~~~Republicans and Democrats certainly do that, because for the most part they care more about their party than they do about the truth. But we, as Christians, are to not trust our own understandings, but to put all of our trust in the Lord. This means we are to render proper judgments even if it greatly affects our own ‘party’ in a detrimental way. Is God honored by the politicalizing of our convention?… Read more »
Parson,
Yes, we should rise above. But, in reality, many don’t.
David
David,
“Yes, we should rise above. But, in reality, many don’t.”
The only person you can start with is… you.
You don’t even see the irony of your posts, do you? You are guilty of doing precisely what you are accusing others of doing. Defending “your guys” and attacking “not your guys”. In fact, few people that post here are as guilty of that as you are. The fact that you don’t see that at all is crazy to me. I am willing to call my own team to repentance and accountability. I, in this thread, stated that Mahaney and Driscoll were in error and needed to be called out…and they have been. I would state that again. To be… Read more »
Tyler: My guess is no.
Bob
You are probably correct. that is because in every Baptist fight there are at least 18 different sides, complicated by the fact that all 18 are the absolute truth. But I still love us warts and all.
It sounds like all the bad things happened in the previous administration, and now, President Smith and David Hankins are trying to straighten it all out. And, it sounds like the’re going down the right road to get it done.
Let’s pray for them.
David
Dave (vol),
How can you say that with a straight face?
One of those people was named by SACS as one of the main problems. That person’s sketchy involvement has been detailed over the past year or more by several people (linked by Dave above).
The undue influence of that person has been clearly seen by those willing to see…and now by SACS. Are you really going to deny that reality?
Jason, I’m not from Louisiana. I have no connections with Louisiana College. But, from what I’m hearing, the problem was with the last administration, and the things that happened under their watch. And now, David Hankins and Interim President Smith are trying to straighten it all out. I mean, I know that Calvinists don’t like David Hankins, and they love things like this coming out, so they can jump all over him. But still, he and the leadership of LA College are our Brothers in Christ, and we should pray for them. May God give them the grace to fix… Read more »
David Again, nothing to do with Calvinists and David Hankins. An independent agency just described Dr. Hankins as having undue influence. Period. Now you (and others) are advocating for the same person whom SACS has identified as part of the problem to help clean up said problem? Do you not see the error there? It’s like asking President Obama to fix the religious liberty issues with the Affordable Healthcare Act. HE was the reason it got to this point in the first place. For the sake of the school and the integrity of the LBC, Dr. Hankins must recuse himself… Read more »
Let’s pray for them. And then, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
David
Weren’t both Hankins and Smith involved with what “took Place “under the last administration?
Also, doesn’t the guy that you, David, Are saying is to blame President emeritus or something like that and still getting a salary?
I have no dog in this fight. Yall go ahead and say whatever you want to. I am praying that God will help them to straighten up the things that are wrong.
David
Me too and It seems obvious what that is.
David, Sigh. This has nothing to do with Calvinism. Time to stop dragging that dead horse out to beat on in every thread. This is all about the SACS report which specifically named Hankins as one of the problems. You can say that you “hear” whatever you want, but the SACS report is clear about the negativity of his involvement. The ethics of his involvement has long been questioned and documented. Are you denying that the SACS report mentions Hankins as one of the problems? Are you accusing SACS of being biased? I am not sure how this is even… Read more »
This is an issue that needs to be dealt with by the Louisiana Baptist Convention and the Trustees of the University. While I respect the right of everyone to have an opinion and express same I am not sure that we help a lot by all of our verbiage. Too many cooks could spoil the pot. To be sure however just my opinion.
Republicans and Democrats certainly do that, because for the most part they care more about their party than they do about the truth. But we, as Christians, are to not trust our own understandings, but to put all of our trust in the Lord. This means we are to render proper judgments even if it greatly affects our own ‘party’ in a detrimental way. Is God honored by the politicalizing of our convention? Shouldn’t we rather speak the truth in love even if it hurts ‘our side’ and instead trust that God is in control? I lose much respect for… Read more »
Louisiana College got a letter nine weeks ago. Their trustees are dealing with it. That’s pretty much my take, at this point.
I’m not defending. I’m waiting to see the facts. I simply observe that those in different wings of the SBC view this thing differently, and I think that the Cal-Trad dynamic is at work here just like the Republican-Democrat dynamic.
For those of you who think we don’t have two wings in the SBC–the so called “us” and “them” — get real. We do, and it impacts this particular news story.
Rick: Are you saying that SACS is somehow involved in the Calvinism issue? The charges laid against them are pretty serious for a school that purports to operate on Christian principles. I teach at a university with multiple accreditations and I can tell you that loss of accreditation is nothing to sniff at. Even when we are in good shape, our accreditation visits are times of high anxiety and round the clock work to fix deficiencies. Loss of accreditation would cause our reputation to plummet. Our students would find their job prospects harder, and we would have a much more… Read more »
My experience with SACS is they interview quite a few people in the process. I know I was interviewed as part of a review committee for a specific department. I could have easily expressed specific concerns about leadership or the board. So what if some board members are expressing specific concerns to SACS? I agree with Bob: “When an accrediting institution levies a move as it has done with respect to LC, they are like lawyers: they list ANY and ALL potential problems, regardless of the degree of actual infraction.” And if the complaint involves undue influence or lack of… Read more »
And I don’t have to wonder what SACS would thought of the special transfer credit deal SBTS/Mohler made with the unaccredited SGM pastors college.
Let us all hope the deal is really dead. Talk about embarrassing.
I will add this about the SGM pastors college/SBTS transfer credit deal: Mohler wanted to do it until it became publicly embarrassing.
There WAS an agreement. It was even published on the SGM pastors college site. What on earth was he thinking?
That should give everyone here….pause. The SBC does have serious academic problems in many venues.
REALLY, ANOTHER DEFLECTION?
Come on.
A. I am a Calvinistic Baptist. B. Hankins is mentioned as part of the problem in SACS report. C. What I’d like to know, is whether an accreditation organisation can single out a person who is required by the college’s charter or by-laws to serve on it’s board, without hard evidence of that person’s violations or complicity in violations? It sounds like SACS just doesn’t like Hankins. Maybe lots of people don’t like Hankins, I don’t know. But it seems unreasonable for SACS to demand without hard evidence of violations or complicity. Simple suspicion hardly seems compelling. Or can SACS… Read more »
Clark, I believe too much is being made of Hankins’ “outside influence” where SACS is concerned. Understand something. When an accrediting institution levies a move as it has done with respect to LC, they are like lawyers: they list ANY and ALL potential problems, regardless of the degree of actual infraction. The “spin” here is the result of what has been said about that influence by a couple of disgruntled BOT members in the public arena. I believe it is that issue that has in fact precipitated this move by SACS in the first place. Were it not for these… Read more »
If my church had a high degree of division, I would expect most church issues and decisions to mirror the opposing factions as people chose sides. If my church received an official communication from a respected, outside body that claimed there to be a “pervasive culture of avoidance of transparency” where examples were given of breaking several of the Ten Commandments, I would begin to think not how my side could win but why our Christian reputation was so diminished and what should be done to recover it. Observers here in GA, NC, TB, IA, MT etc. have no dogs… Read more »
If you are willing to excuse the kind of things that are alleged at LC simply because its leaders shared your soteriological viewpoint and made extreme anti-Calvinist statements, you really need to review your priorities.
I really don’t have a horse in the Calvinist/Anti-Calvinist race in the SBC.
I think we all ought to be more concerned about honesty, integrity and justice than we are about winning the soteriological wars.
Amen, that is exactly what I am saying. A wait and see approach till the evidence comes out is one thing…but flat out denials and unwavering support of defiant and unrepentant individuals “on your team” is completely another thing all together. There is astounding and ample evidence of sin and unrepentant defiance when it comes the college President in GA who shall not be named, as well as the individuals involved in the saga at LC (whether they be ED of the state convention, President Pro Tempore, or President Emeritus). Yet they still are not without rabid defenders, for no… Read more »
I think we all ought to be more concerned about honesty, integrity and justice than we are about winning the soteriological wars.
I so agree with this statement I’m practically standing up.
When you consider the heat that is evident everytime LC is mentioned it is apparent that few can really be that emotional about a small Baptist college in Pineville, LA. Something is driving the emotions and causing this to be a story to be reported and discussed. Whatever that thing is it is not an accrediting agency nor this college?
Bingo, Dean. Something similar was tried at Campbellsville U this past summer coming in through another door. There waseven a post here a while back on the situation by Dave citing Chitwood/KBC as showing great leadership in dealing with the vague “situation” at Campbellsville college and whether or not to withhold KBC funds. I happen to know about that situation personally and it was NOT leadership at all. In fact, just the opposite. It may not have played out as expected but it got some “loyalty” points for some. In fact, some got their hand slapped for “misusing” social media… Read more »
My post was directed at the WAY things were done. I admitted I didn’t know much about the situation. I contrasted Chitwood’s response to those of other leaders (and yes, I had Aguillard in view at that point). Here is what I identified: *He has scheduled talks with the leadership of Campbellsville to assess the situation. Get the facts first before he makes his response! *He recognizes both the problem and the seriousness of the problem. No polishing the rotten apple! He is meeting the issue head on. *He publicly announces the talks, but reminds us that such talks will… Read more »
You did not find it odd he announced all that publicly BEFORE he talked to the leadership of the college? All he was doing was planting a poison seed in peoples minds before hearing the other side.
Just. Not. Done. In his position.
We have very different ideas of what constitutes leadership.
There is too much water under the Calvinist resurgence bridge for instant unity or trust, at this point.
Not buying that for a moment.
I’ve tried to avoid the whole thing – at the expense of some anger from people I considered friends. But I will say several things. 1) I didn’t even know this place existed until I got to know Drew and Josh and talked to them at the convention one year (not sure which one). They thought LC was the greatest school ever. 2) I now know (from non-Calvinist sources – not that this matters, but it seems to for some) that there have been a lot of issues through the years with Joe Aguillard’s leadership style and tactics. The things… Read more »
I find myself amazed that people would subjugate basic Christian values like honesty and integrity to the pursuit of the soteriological wars.
Again I agree. This is the point. This is the only point.
Dave, I have no idea why my comment appeared where it did. It was meant to stand alone and not be attached to anyone else’s thoughts and appear at the bottom. You shared the information concerning LC and SACS in an informative way with little if any emotion. You didn’t bring any heat with your post. When I read your post my first thought was that you shared this information mainly to vindicate your friends Jay, Drew and Joshua and maybe others. Whatever your motivation I sensed no maliciousness. Immediately the responses became emotional. I offer no conclusion why the… Read more »
You might have noted my statement, in the post, of my reluctance to open this can of worms.
Oh, and it apears that threading has broken down pretty badly, so comments can appear just about anywhere.
I have no idea why that is or what to do about it.
Dean, There are numerous Baptist schools who are led by people unfavorable to positions I hold and sone favorable to positions I do not – but you likely won’t see me “bring such heat” should they be mentioned. Let me try to explain why as best I can. To me this is about coverup. Again. It’s about unrepentant defiance and defense of such. Again. Its about shouts of exoneration when there has been none. Again. It’s about yet another Baptist college possibly not being able to keep its accreditation because of violations of SACS rules tHat also happen to be… Read more »
Anyone interested in this ought to read Jay Adkins’ latest post. He is a trustee. The chair of the trustees (Tommy French) has basically pronounced a curse on him, claiming God spoke directly to him and has assured him that Jay will be judged. It just keeps getting more bizarre.
Here’s a link to Jay’s post. http://thecrescentcrier.blogspot.com/2014/09/part-6-sacs-letter-release.html
Wow. That is a stunning indictment of the trustee leadership at LC. The hammer will fall, I’m certain of that. May truth win the day.
Yikes! Are you sure these folks are SBC and not IFB?
If this is out of line then feel free to delete, not trying to start another argument, but since we’re talking about small Baptist schools and accreditation – is there any update on BPC’s appeal? Last I heard the meeting was supposed to be in August; if it was pushed back due to the Caner funeral, then that would be very generous of SACS, but I did not know if there was a public announcement either way.
I am not aware of any resolution to that issue.
I appreciate your sensitivity to that. We’ve had enough trouble discussing this college. I really hope we can leave BPC out of this.
I’m still trying to figure out the responses on this thread. Are people saying that LC would not be on SACS probation if not for the Calvinism issue? (in other words, are you saying it is the fault of Calvinists that LC is on SACS probation?) I guess I don’t understand the “wait for all the facts” statements. This isn’t an investigation is it? SACS has put them on probation for a year, citing some very serious things. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Regarding Driscoll, I’m not yet convinced we are seeing repentance so much as we are seeing… Read more »
BillMac, I hope you are not understanding me as defending Driscoll. I have never liked his persona, honestly. Most everyone agrees that he was/is in the wrong – his statements that now seem indicative of humility and repentance have come late – that is for sure. Perhaps too late to save the “empire” as you called it. Same with CJM…although he seems to have gotten out of the picture enough for others to perhaps rescue that ministry…we shall see. I know he stepped aside of visibility T4G14, and that has seemed to have been a good move. However, sometimes people… Read more »
David: No, I wan’t really responding to you. The problem is, these men shouldn’t have an empire. That’s the problem. How many people are really able to stay objective, faithful and humble when they find themselves atop a pyramid like this? I don’t want them to save their empires. We don’t really need to oppose individuals per se, as much as we need to oppose empires. This is why I’m so anti-mega-church, and why I’m frustrated that the mega-church continues to dominate the SBC. I vaguely remember the dustup at LC, and it surprises me that when serious allegations of… Read more »
I’m still trying to figure out the responses on this thread. Are people saying that LC would not be on SACS probation if not for the Calvinism issue? (in other words, are you saying it is the fault of Calvinists that LC is on SACS probation?) I guess I don’t understand the “wait for all the facts” statements. This isn’t an investigation is it? SACS has put them on probation for a year, citing some very serious things. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Regarding Driscoll, I’m not yet convinced we are seeing repentance so much as we are seeing… Read more »
I also think if I hear one more imprecatory prayer against someone or one more Old Testament curse thrown I am going to scream. It’s against everything I as a Southern Baptist see the Bible teaching and for those leaders to use it against those who are calling for integrity in all dealings as well as honesty in all things, is ridiculous. This type of control is over. The truth is more apt to come out with the internet.