ARPTalk 133 – Kooistra Takes Cheap Shot at Former Acting Dean of ETS

 

News UPDATE

President Paul Kooistra of Erskine College & Seminary took an unprofessional “cheap shot” at former Acting Dean of Erskine Theological Seminary RJ Gore. Kooistra wrote an unnecessary evaluation of Gore’s performance as Acting Dean of the Seminary. In response to Item 6 of the evaluation (“I would encourage the evaluated employee to focus on the following area of improvement during the next year”), Kooistra writes, “This question is mute [sic] given the fact that R.J. has resigned from the deanship and will leave that position effective June 30, 2016.” It astounds one to learn the President of Erskine College does not know the phrase should read “This question is moot.”

Whether the question is “mute” (that is, silent and not needing expression) or “moot” (that is, having been previously decided by Gore’s resignation), the evaluation is unnecessary, unless Kooistra desires to create a personal confrontation.

Kooistra acts in a narcissistic and juvenile manner. Instead of evaluating Gore on whether he upholds the mission of the seminary, is loyal to the institution he serves, and has accomplished the tasks of Acting Dean of the Seminary, Kooistra creates a new orthodoxy of service — that is, “Blessed are all those who bow down and tell me how wonderful I am.” Kooistra acts like a little girl in grammar school who sends a note to a beau, saying, “Do you like me? Check ‘Yes’ or ‘No.’”

Besides not knowing the difference between “mute” and “moot,” Kooistra does not know the difference between “prospective” and “perspective.” He writes, “from my prospective [sic] he has not tried to work with me.” Are these truly the words of a college president?

Good heavens, exercising his “mute” and “prospective” analytical skills, Kooistra comes up with the following: (1) he gives a negative evaluation to a man who is a VOLUNTEER; (2) he gives a negative evaluation to a man without an official appointment or job description; (3) he gives a negative evaluation to a man who is not paid for his work; (4) he gives a negative evaluation to a man who saved his bacon with both SACS and ATS numerous times; and (5) he gives a man a negative evaluation whose salary and benefits he slashed 35%. At this point, vindictive fails to describe Kooistra. Parsimonious fails to describe Kooistra. Even louse-like, villainous, shameless, and toad-spotted fail to describe Kooistra!

After the May meeting of the board, Kooistra was overheard saying the members of the board did not like him, and he was going to resign. Because his sentiments were well known, certain board members refrained from pressing forward with a formal vote of “No Confidence.” Football, the only plan he has for Erskine, was voted down, and members of the board expected him to resign. The general feeling was: “Let him resign with dignity.” Indeed, on many occasions, he said he would know when it was time for him to go before the members of the board knew it.

Kooistra does not understand ARPs and is of the opinion members of the General Synod do not like him. He is correct. At General Synod, he was overheard saying he could not go on as president and was going to resign after the meeting. Once again, a vote of “No Confidence” was not pushed forward because most of us saw no reason for such a drastic action if he had decided to resign. We wanted to preserve some dignity for him.

In my evaluation of General Synod, in regard to Synod’s vote to support the petition from the seminary’s faculty for separation from the college, I wrote, “Interestingly, President Kooistra spoke in favor of the motion” (http://www.arptalk.org/2016/06/14/arptalk-131-general-synod-was-a-surprise/). Honestly, all of us were surprised when Kooistra rose and spoke in support of the motion for separation. Why did he do it?

Well, it was not because he was in favor of separation. Just minutes before the debate and vote, Kooistra was in a fluster over the matter. He was against separation. The word he was heard to use was “dumb.” However, when it was pointed out to him that the vote was going to be overwhelming in favor of separation, a calculated political decision was made.

Since the meeting of General Synod, folks are asking, “Didn’t Kooistra say he was going to resign?” Well, a wiry, career-ecclesiastic who has made an art of church politics, who is very apt at passive-aggressive ploys, and who has spent a lifetime developing “Jesus-Jesus” talk has played us! Yes, Kooistra has played us, and, so far, we have bought it!!!

At this point, as self-delusional as Kooistra is, I think he has deconstructed the events of both the May board meeting and the actions of General Synod as “Well, that wasn’t so bad!”, and has decided on a “Samson” strategy: “I will bring the house down with me if they dare touch the Lord’s anointed!” Indeed, he is delusional!

Kooistra is a silly, self-important man who thinks ARPs are the only people who do not like him. Well, let me be the first to inform him many in the PCA do not like him, either. Since the meeting of the General Assembly of the PCA, a number of PCAers called me and thanked me for calling Kooistra out. One PCA minister thanked me for doing what members of the PCA should have done years ago. One minister said to me, “Chuck, you have run over Kooistra with a train. Would you back up and run over him again? Because of the things he has done to people over the years, Paul deserves it.”

With permission from Dr. RJ Gore, I am posting Kooistra’s evaluation of Gore and Gore’s response to Kooistra below.

These are my thoughts,

signature

Charles W. Wilson


Kooistra’s Evaluation of Gore

Erskine College Logo

Annual Performance Appraisal – Staff

PURPOSE:

Erskine College’s annual staff performance appraisal process is intended  to:

  • link employee performance to the institution’s mission;
  • provide guidance and consistency to the performance evaluation process;
  • measure the extent to which an employee’s performance meets the requirements of a particular position;
  • strengthen the relationship between supervisor and employee;
  • open up channels of communication; and
  • appraise past performance; recognize good performance; and identify areas which might require improvement.

INSTITUTIONAL MISSION STATEMENT:

Erskine College exists to glorify God as a Christian academic community where students are equipped to flourish as whole persons for lives of service through the pursuit of undergraduate liberal arts and graduate theological education.

INSTRUCTIONS:

  • Supervisors should complete Sections 1 and 2 below by June 17, 2016.
  • Evaluated employees should review their performance appraisals in your designated folder, and both the employee and supervisor should sign the completed performance appraisal in Section 3. An employee who wishes to have a hard copy of his/her appraisal may print one. If an employee wishes to meet with his/her supervisor, the employee should schedule such a meeting directly with his/her supervisor
  • If a Performance Improvement Plan is required (under Question #4), the supervisor and employee must meet in person as soon as is practical to discuss the nature of the evaluated employee’s low job performance and to identify a plan for improvement and future assessment.

Section 1:  Employee Information and Accountability Approvals

Employee Name: R. J. Gore
Date PA completed: June 30, 2016
Title: Interim Dean of Erskine Theological Seminary Reviewed by Area Vice President:
Supervisor’s Name: Paul Kooistra
Date Reviewed:  June 30, 2016
Supervisor’s Title: President

Section 2:  Supervisor’s Evaluation

1: In thinking about the employee’s job performance during the past year, briefly describe how the evaluated employee has contributed to the mission of Erskine College.

There is no doubt that R.J. has worked hard this year and has performed the duties of the deanship of the Seminary well. On the other hand, from my prospective [sic] he has not tried to work with me personally or to support me personally as the president of Erskine Seminary.

2: Given what I know of this person’s job performance during the past year, the evaluated employee consistently meets the expectations of his/her job.

☐  Strongly Agree
☐  Agree
☒  Disagree
☐  Strongly Disagree

3: Given what I know of this person’s job performance during the past year, the evaluated employee is regularly engaged in the life of the institution.

☐  Strongly Agree
☐  Agree
☒  Disagree
☐  Strongly Disagree

4: The evaluated employee is at risk for low performance.

☒  Yes (see answer under #1)
☐  No

If yes, a separate Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) must be completed.

5: Assuming a position were available, the evaluated employee is ready for promotion today.

☐  Yes
☒  No

6: I would encourage the evaluated employee to focus on the following area of improvement during the next year.

This question is mute [sic] given the fact that R.J. has resigned from the deanship and will leave that position effective June 30, 2016.

Section 3:  Confirmation and Signatures

By typing my name in the signature field below, I, the evaluated employee, acknowledge receipt of my annual staff performance appraisal.  I understand that my signature does not necessarily indicate agreement with the evaluation of my supervisor.  Further, I understand that I am free to schedule a meeting with my supervisor to discuss my evaluation and any questions or concerns I may have.  If I disagree with my supervisor’s assessment of my job performance, I may indicate so below.

Employee’s Comments:

Employee Signature / Date:

Supervisor Signature / Date: Paul D. Kooistra, June 30, 2016


Dr. RJ Gore’s Response to President Kooistra

Dear Dr. Kooistra,

This is my response to your performance evaluation I have just received. This evaluation will become a part of my employment record and be a factor in any future employment I may seek elsewhere. I have chosen to make my response public. Also, I believe that this performance evaluation represents real, underlying issues that threaten the viability of Erskine Seminary and therefore should be available to the ARP Church for consideration.

Since 1996 I have been a member of the faculty in the Department of Theology and Church History. Since that time I have also been a member of Second Presbytery having transferred in from the PCA. From 1998-2003 I served as the last Vice President and Dean of the Seminary and from 2003-2006 served as Dean of the Seminary in the new structure which divided the responsibilities. Afterwards, I served as Associate Dean of Ministry for several years and for the last twenty-one months I served as Acting Dean of the Seminary (not Interim Dean as on the performance evaluation I am contesting). In my twenty years at Erskine I have had the word “Dean” in my title for approximately fifteen of those years.

First, in my humble opinion, your evaluation is completely improper. There is no job description for “Acting Dean.” I have never received such a job description nor have I ever received a Letter of Appointment naming me as Acting Dean (Employee Resource Handbook, E-5). Furthermore, there has been no performance counseling during the past two years that established Individual Objectives (Employee Resource Handbook, E-6). You are evaluating me for holding a position I HAVE NEVER HELD OFFICIALLY. In essence, I was a volunteer, and your evaluation of my volunteer services is uncharitable at best. My love for Erskine and desire to see the seminary hold together was such that I served for TWENTY-ONE (21) MONTHS without a Letter of Appointment, a job description, or one penny in pay for my services. I did what needed to be done when it needed to be done for one simple reason: if I did not do the work, we had no one else to do it.

While I did not have a job description, I did keep a list of duties I performed. That list includes, but is not limited to the following:

  • Senior Audits for all master’s level graduates
  • Advising (all programs, all students) as needed
  • Review and post syllabi in advance of each term
  • Maintain Student Documents Folder on Google Drive
  • Create and manage Summer Schedule- post on Google Drive
  • Create and manage Fall, Winter, Spring Schedule- post on Google Drive
  • Maintain rolling two year DMin proposed schedule- post on Google Drive
  • Create detailed DMin schedule Fall and Spring
  • Assign professors to teach approved courses
  • Manage professors’ work loads
  • Submit requests for overload and supervision payments
  • Create and circulate packets for faculty meetings
  • Appoint Committees annually and ad hoc committees as needed
  • Ex officio member of all Seminary committees
  • Evaluate Transcripts for Advanced Standing and Transfer Credit
  • Manage requests for Incompletes and Extensions
  • Oversee updates/revisions of catalog and Faculty, Student Handbooks annually
  • Write all documents for Accreditors: responses, petitions, etc.
  • Represent ETS at ESDC, ATS meetings
  • Chair Faculty Meetings in absence of President or Vice President
  • Manage Assessment Calendar and Term Assessments (Summer, Fall, Spring)
  • Adapt Academic Calendar for Seminary requirements
  • Update degree worksheets annually and post on Google Drive
  • Supervise Seminary Staff
  • Submit annual ATS Report
  • Update (annually) Educational Effectiveness Statement on web
  • Produce Seminary-specific Academic Calendar based on College Academic Calendar
  • Represent Erskine at Fall and Spring meetings of the Atlanta Theological Association

Second, I have tried to work with you as President, though clearly not to your satisfaction. I am sorry this did not turn out better. When I was informed you were becoming the next President of Erskine College and Theological Seminary, I said “I am stunned at the goodness of God. We have been blessed above and beyond anything I imagined possible.” (See ARPTalk 101). When you were called a liar at the 2015 Synod I took to the microphone to defend you (ironically you implied I was a liar on the floor of this year’s Synod when you disputed the budget numbers I quoted directly from the Erskine report, Index 34 and 34 Supplement). Over the last year I have supported Erskine by carrying a heavy teaching overload (150% of target load, 16 courses), have carried triple the usual DMin advising load, and have written six accreditation reports (of various sorts), all of which have been approved by SACS and ATS. I would point out that these efforts have not only been without compensation, but have gone largely unappreciated.

I have privately shared my opinions with you about your lack of connection with the seminary, your lack of leadership over the seminary, and the inequitable distribution of financial pain to the seminary’s detriment. Proverbs tells us faithful are the wounds of a friend. I have made suggestions to you that would help the seminary: to involve the leadership of the ARP Church in our strategic planning, to gain an online presence for our online MATS degree, to reconsider the 85/15 college and seminary shared costs ratio, and to increase advertising in the upstate.

Any public opposition to you has been in the course of my responsibilities as a faculty member engaged in collaborative, shared governance. That is part of the give and take of academic life and to take such disagreements personally is simply bad form. This performance evaluation has the smell of “payback” about it, but I will not pursue that. I do not know your heart and thankfully I do not have to. That is above my pay-grade. My differing with you at Synod was part of my responsibility as a presbyter, for I was not only the Acting Dean of Erskine Seminary, I remain a concerned member of Second Presbytery of the ARP Church.

Third, in the performance evaluation, you portray the issue as a personal problem between the two of us, as though the seminary faculty had not expressed itself clearly on several occasions. In reality, you do not have an Acting Dean problem; you have a seminary faculty problem. Now, your evaluation does sting. I have NEVER received such an evaluation, not in three decades of military service and, until now, not in two decades serving the seminary. But, I am much more concerned about how my colleagues view me than I am by your performance evaluation. I shared your evaluation with most of the faculty (I did not send it to the new Acting Dean; he does not need to be caught in the cross-fire, as I well know). Nearly all responded and I have cut and pasted their responses below (from the shortest to the longest). I also have included two unsolicited comments received mid-semester. No names are attached to these comments to maintain anonymity.

FACULTY COMMENTS

Faculty Member 1:

“RJ, I cannot believe this.”

Faculty Member 2:

“I am embarrassed for him. It is amazing to me that in the wide world out there he is thought of as a normal person.”

Faculty Member 3:

“Looks like Kooistra put a lot of work into that performance eval. Shoddy! Apparently his perception of one’s personal loyalty to himself is the only criterion for a performance eval.  The narcissism is stunning.”

Faculty Member 4:

“I applaud you and your commitment to both the visible leadership and untiring efforts to secure the academic and administrative integrity of the Seminary.  Your performance far exceeds most if not all of your colleagues. I want to personally thank you for your confidence and encouragement shown to me over the years.”

Faculty Member 5:

“His comments and evaluation are outrageous. They do not reflect any reality as it relates to your performance. Paul is simply striking out at you because you stood up to him and challenged him. He prefers to be surrounded by sycophants and toadies. Anyone who actually works at the seminary knows that you kept the seminary alive these past 18 months. When will Erskine employees get a chance to evaluate the performance of the President or any of his cronies? That would be very revealing. Keep the faith brother. Consider the source and move on.”

Faculty Member 6:

“I am embarrassed that such a report as this would come out on the stationery of our school! And over the signature of the President, no less!  Frankly, it is petty and contradictory. Let me see, now, it says that you did a good job as Dean. It does not mention that on top of the Dean’s responsibilities (which I understand you took on voluntarily to help our school and hence, its President) and the overload you took in teaching, assisting Doctoral students with their research and dissertations, preparing for successive, successful accreditation evaluations, you also took something like a 35% salary and benefit cut. How in the world did you do all that and survive? . . . Now, the thanks you get for all your hard work and commitment is a terse, childish sounding note that basically says, ‘You were a good Dean and you worked a lot of extra hours but you didn’t show me enough that you support me.’  Isn’t that a contradictory conclusion for a report like this! Narcissism taken to a new extreme, I’d say!

Is it any wonder that after the college faculty passed a resolution of no confidence in this President (they read him early!), he went on a course of destruction with our seminary. He basically frittered away the collateral that was handed to him by the faculty when he arrived on campus just two years ago. He overlooks the leadership you provided by encouraging faculty to take a salary and benefit cut to save some jobs. No! His only ‘solution’ has been to fire people, disregard their dedication to the school, and criticize them in a number of places. Is that ‘Leadership’?  Under whose theory of leadership does that fall? . . .  Well, I’m embarrassed and I am sorry beyond words that you are the latest target of one of his senseless tirades. God bless you. You have demonstrated unequalled commitment to Erskine and I am sorry for this abusive behavior of a good and faithful servant of the ARP church and the school.”

Faculty Member 7:

I am so troubled by this evaluation, which sadly can be read in less than a minute.

I am troubled by what was unsaid in speaking about a man whom I respect immeasurably and who has served sacrificially:

  • No words of thanks or gratitude for this man in serving unswervingly faithfully, effectively and wisely as our Acting Dean (unpaid).
  • No thanks for being a key person in holding this faculty together and faithfully serving together in the present and wisely preparing for the near future- even more so after the departure of [seminary Vice President] Chris Wisdom.
  • Stunningly, no thanks for his major role as a key figure in preparing six lengthy reports in a mere 21 months to our two accrediting bodies that were crucial components in Erskine’s successfully coming out of probationary status with SACS, avoiding the Seminary then going into probationary status with ATS when they learned about our SACS probationary status, and winning us the new online MATS program.

I am also troubled by what was said and assumed in the evaluation. In an extremely difficult and crucial time period for the Seminary it is apparently now a high crime to do the following things:

  • To speak respectfully and truthfully behind closed doors in Seminary Faculty meetings with the President, or in private meetings with him.
  • To respond faithfully and speak truthfully as Acting Dean when requested to do so by the Seminary Committee of the Board, providing them with crucial information, which is one of his responsibilities.
  • And finally, as an ordained Gospel minister, a member of Presbytery, a faculty member of the Seminary and the Acting Dean of the Seminary (which is an agency of the ARP church), speaking faithfully and truthfully at Synod when matters crucial to the existence of the Seminary are at stake.
  • It is also, last of all, deeply troubling and profoundly disillusioning that all these things are happening at a Christian institution.

EARLIER COMMENTS (unsolicited remarks received in Spring semester 2016)

Faculty Member 8:

“I will be using the example of Dr. R.J. Gore, the Dean of Erskine Theological Seminary, as I have observed him acting as a collaborative leader, working across the lines of the organization in an institution of higher education and a Christian denomination, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, to lead an effort at revitalization of a college and seminary. His work on this particular project, also, traversed the boundaries of a national accreditation agency.

Model the Way

First of all, I observed that Dr. Gore modeled the way through his spiritual life. While the institution was going through this he continued to model his own walk with God. He, also, modeled a professionalism by maintain a strong work ethic. He accomplished much in the classroom and in research and writing even as he embraced this added role. He often came to the faculty meetings with prayer requests for his family and, particularly, his grandson. This showed a vulnerability, that allowed the faculty to support and encourage him. In all of these ways, we also wanted to follow him into the difficult tasks of accreditation, in addition to our ordinary work as faculty.

Inspire a Shared Vision

Dr. Gore inspired a shared vision as he listened to our dreams and our visions. He listened to students’ dreams, their concerns, and he listened to the board members as well as the members of the denomination who sponsored this college and seminary since 1839. This act of listening inspired us. As he presented the vision of the seminary to the accreditors he even talked about ‘the vision of the community,’ not his vision.

Challenge the Process

He shined in this area. He is not a rebel. Yet, in meetings when assumptions were made, he politely interrupted, ‘Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?’ Everyone eventually knew that the next thing to come would be, ‘I see where the data says …’ This quiet, careful challenging eventually caused a climate of necessary accountability in the community at the very time when it mattered most, as accreditation was on the line.

Enable Others to Act

Dr. Gore empowered others throughout the process. At faculty meetings as well as at cross-level meetings, with members of the staff and members of the community, he led by encouraging groups comprised of broad, diverse membership so that many voices could be heard. Through this he also ‘took risks’ on young leaders to step out. He seemed to see the process of accreditation as a unique opportunity for growth in others.”

Encourage the Heart

There is no doubt that Dr. Gore showed just how much he loved the students, the faculty, and the greater community of the college and seminary through it all. Anyone who went through this time came away with a greater appreciation for his heart for others. He is a servant-leader. This, in turn, created a climate of encouragement.

The seminary passed its accreditation last week. There is a sense of rejoicing for this small, historic seminary in South Carolina. Yet, the greater, longer-lasting impact will be the lives touched in the journey to that milestone.

Faculty Member 9:

“There are no doubt a few others to whom thanks are due for this good report from ATS, but I am quite sure no one put in more blood, sweat, and tears in it than you.  The institution as a whole — students, faculty, and staff — along with the ARP denomination, and many other denominations as well, owe to you a great debt of thanks — far more than will ever be expressed or noted in this world, but which is not forgotten above.  From the bottom of my heart, thank you.”

Final Thoughts

In light of the irregularity of your evaluation, the fact that I was not officially appointed, and the positive evaluations offered by my colleagues, I would ask that you rescind your evaluation. I would further invite you to petition the board to evaluate your performance as President. In the past such evaluations have been done online and have included faculty, staff, and board input.

Finally, a copy of your performance evaluation of me and my response will be forwarded to Dr. Belle Wheelan, President, SACSCOC, and to Dr. Debbie Creamer, Director, Accreditation and Institutional Evaluation, ATS.
Sincerely,

/////Original Signed//////////////

R. J. Gore Jr., D.Min., Ph.D.

Professor of Systematic Theology and Ministry

Share This:
Facebook Twitter Email Plusone Linkedin Pintrest

Filed Under: Newsletter

RSSComments (36)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Rick Barnes says:

    Wow, I am floored by this. I apologize for the comments I made to you in response to your earlier criticism of Dr. Kooistra.

     
    • Chuck Wilson says:

      Dear Rick Barnes,

      Thanks for the comment.

      Rick, it is astounding.

      Thanks for the apology, brother. You’re a good man.

      Regards,

      Chuck Wilson
      ARPTalk

       
  2. Chris Wisdom says:

    As the most recent previous Vice President of Erskine Seminary, prior to my resignation in January 2016, I fully concur with Dr. Gore’s rebuttal of the performance evaluation given to him as contained in his comments above. I fully concur also with the comments of the faculty regarding Dr. Gore. His unimpeachable personal integrity, selfless sacrificial service, exemplary ministerial competence and consummate academic professionalism have earned for him the humble and heartfelt thanks of all these, who, like me, have benefited from his labors as a senior executive academic leader, as well as a deeply compassionate and highly decorated military chaplain and combat veteran. Since my illness prevented me from writing an annual evaluation for Dr. Gore, let these comments stand as a rebuke to the unfair treatment given him in the annual evaluation posted above. The ninth commandment requires nothing less, and I freely offer this, my commendation of Dr. Gore’s excellent work.

     
    • Chuck Wilson says:

      Dear Chris Wisdom,

      Thanks for the comments.

      I am sure RJ Gore appreciates your commendation. I am sure Kooistra does not appreciate your commendation of RJ Gore.

      Regards,

      Chuck Wilson
      ARPTalk

       
    • Jerdone Davis says:

      I concur with Chris Wisdom from several perspectives: as RJ’s student, as one who was going forward in higher education toward a terminal degree–RJ encouraged me every step of the way; as a faculty member under RJ’s leadership as VP/Dean of the ETS; as a faculty member praying for him as he served in Iraq; as a fellow faculty member upon his return; as assessment director for the seminary having him advise me with his knowledge-base; as a retiree having him still utilize my talents and gifts and continuing to see that I am a part of the Seminary that has imparted to me so much of my professional life. I owe RJ the moon and at least the few words of acclamation. I cannot say enough and may say more in a future post.

       
  3. Rob Roy McGregor says:

    President Kooistra is right in his evaluation of R. J. Gore: “There is no doubt that R.J. has worked hard this year and has performed the duties of the deanship of the Seminary well.”

    I would have said that without setting foot on the Erskine campus in recent years. The evaluation is in sync with the character of the man.

    I had the opportunity to be an adjunct professor for a year at Erskine Seminary in 2005-2006 when he was the Dean of the Seminary. That opportunity followed twenty-seven years of experience with department heads and college deans and service on department, college, and university committees at Clemson University.

    That year at Erskine Seminary, I attended every faculty meeting to see how things were done. Dr. Gore kept close tabs on the Seminary’s work by attending faculty committee meetings, and when the chairmen of committees gave reports, he implemented and clarified items he considered important to the faculty’s general information.

    He was well aware of all the details of what was going on in the work of the Seminary, a practice which made for efficiency and collegiality. And what surprised me most was Dr. Gore’s awareness of what was being practiced at other seminaries with which Erskine compared itself theologically and professionally, making sure that Erskine was at least on a par with them in their goals and offerings.

    My general observation was that he did everything straightforwardly and by the book, which is in keeping with his military training and rank, one to which an officer does not rise without composite knowledge, effective leadership, and collegiality.

    Frankly, I was surprised and disappointed that he was not invited to be President of Erskine when the office became available.

     
  4. Mike Horne says:

    Well let me say I am truly disappointed with the attack on the character of a man like RJ Gore. I had RJ for several classes when I attented ETS and he served as my mentor for the last two years of my time at ETS. I got to know RJ well and I am deeply indebted to him for many hours of council in which he guided me to a better knowledge of Christ. Having spent many years in management from first line supervision to middle management I have done many evaluations on employees under me. I have never seen one like that which RJ received. How can anyone evaluate someone who has no job description? I feel that it is time for Dr Kooistra to resign and save what little face he can. We need more leaders like Dr RJ Gore and less like Dr Kooistra. Hang in there RJ I am willing to do whatever is needed to help restore your honor. Mike Horne

     
    • Chuck Wilson says:

      Dear Mike Horne,

      Thanks for the comment.

      Of course, you’re correct on all points.

      Regards,

      Chuck Wilson
      ARPTalk

       
  5. Dear Chuck:

    It was with utter dismay and disgust that I read Dr. Kooistra’s recent personnel review of the Rev’d Dr. R.J. Gore, Jr.

    R.J. Gore is a friend and mentor whom I have been privileged to know for over twenty years now and, as a mark of my high regard for him, he preached the sermon at my ordination as a presbyter. I am, therefore, astonished that he would be treated this way by an administrator who, it is increasingly clear, is a petty and vindictive man. Like yourself, R.J. and others, I rejoiced when I learned of Dr. Kooistra’s election as President of Erskine College and Seminary based on his reputation for doing great things at Covenant Theological Seminary and Mission to the World. Whether those reports were fluff or whether the fellow is just past his prime I do not know, but I do know that while I am no longer an Associate Reformed Presbyterian I am a seminary alumnus and it is as such that I hope that he departs soon.

    The Rt. Rev’d Edward L. Salmon, Jr. was the XIII Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina and, afterward, President and Dean of Nashotah House. While in the latter role I disagreed with a decision that he had made and emailed him about it as a friend (he was never my bishop and I was never one of his priests and I have no official relationship to The House although I have considered their D.Min. program). Bishop Salmon telephoned me the next day and I was candid as I reiterated my disagreement with his decision; we graciously agreed to disagree and every time that I saw him after that he was unfailingly kind and gracious — the very model of a Christian gentleman — without a trace of vindictiveness in the least. Bishop Salmon died last week and this Wednesday I will attend a memorial service for him. I would humbly suggest that Dr. Kooistra could learn much from Bishop Salmon’s example — I know I could.

    R.J. Gore recently retired as a Chaplain (Colonel) in the U.S. Army Reserve. One does not attain that grade without knowing how to write a performance evaluation (by that point one will have written many of them and received many others) nor does one attain that grade without knowing what an unfair and inaccurate one is. Clearly this was the latter. I think his decision to forward his response to Dr. Wheelan at the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and to Dr. Creamer at the Association of Theological Schools is a good one and I for one intend to contact them to register my support for Dr. Gore and my dismay at Dr. Kooistra. Should anyone else wish to follow suit they may do so at the following:

    Belle S. Wheelan, Ph.D., President
    Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges
    1866 Southern Lane
    Decatur, Georgia 30033

    Debbie S. Creamer, Ph.D., Director, Accreditation and Institutional Evaluation
    The Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada. The Commission on Accrediting
    10 Summit Park Drive
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15275-1110
    creamer@ats.org

    I hope that the Erskine College and Seminary Board of Trustees will address this gross injustice to Dr. Gore and I for one would be interested in speaking before them at their next meeting if a mechanism exists to do so.

    Drew Collins+ (M.Div., ETS ’02)

    P.S. Dr. Kooistra’s use of the word “moot” reminded me of a comedic skit in which another clergyman also used the term and did so in a way to squelch dialogue.

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xewlks_moot_tech

     
  6. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Drew Collins,

    Thanks for the comment.

    I look forward to your comments. I like your way with words.

    Of course, I agree with you. You’re right!!

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
    • Jerdone Davis says:

      Drew says all very well, Chuck. He learned how to write at Erskine Theological Seminary. LOL :D

       
  7. Todd McCoy says:

    I’m sorry, Chuck, but I’m going to have to disagree with you on a point! Speaking of Dr. Kooistra you say he is “a wiry, career-ecclesiastic who has made an art of church politics.” Well, he may be wiry and he may be a career-ecclesiastic, but his evaluation of Dr. Gore is an act of political ineptitude not political artistry. Dr. Kooistra was not being a friend of his own administration in writing an evaluation that comes across as sour grapes. Someone who had a real case and political sense would have spelled things out plainly and succinctly. Generally a negative evaluation requires more work and more explanation than a positive review since the point of the evaluation is to mark out areas for development, growth and improvement. Sadly, this review’s negative evaluation is based simply on a generalized and personal statement by Dr. Kooistra; “he hasn’t tried to work with me personally or support me personally.” What this is really is a “poke in the eye” of Dr. Gore…it’s poor form, poor leadership, and poor politics. Dr. Gore should be commended for his dedication to the seminary and to its faculty, not smacked in the face due to “personal issues.” I know him to be cooperative, respectful and dedicated not just to the seminary, but also to Christ and the church. Dr. Kooistra’s evaluation should be retracted. In addition, the board should meet (as has been requested) in order to take up the work of mapping out a plan for the separation of the college and seminary…and I hope someone has the good sense to perhaps offer Dr. Gore the presidency of the seminary when the time comes.

     
  8. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Todd McCoy,

    Thanks for the comments.

    Todd, I like the way you disagree with me. Actually, I don’t think the disagreement amounts to three cents in change.

    Thanks for your support of Dr. Gore. I’m sure he is appreciative of it.

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
  9. Jerdone Davis says:

    RJ Gore, Distinguished Gentleman, Professor, Army Chaplain, Leader in Many Venues

    These words do not begin to describe this man created in the image of God to reflect the character of God through the talents and gifts thought out by the Creator well before Dr. Gore was ever born. When I first met Dr. Gore, I was interviewing to become a seminary student. Dr. Marshall was showing me the campus and introduced me to Dr. Gore out in front of Bowie Divinity Hall. She thought I might like to meet a fellow PCA’er. He had been a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America, my denomination.
    Once enrolled I signed up for my required classes, finding myself in Dr. Gore’s Systematic Theology classes, one on the Due West campus and the next semester, one at the ARP Center in Greenville. He was a true academician, knowing his subject inside out. He taught from his heart and his head, not from his notes. He taught us to think critically, not just blindly accepting doctrine because we were being spoon fed, but because we were reading, researching, writing, discussing the doctrines of the faith. I only wished I had had more classes that he taught. The ministry of the Holy Spirit was very evident as I was being spiritually formed by Scripture in those classes.
    Sometime after I graduated from the seminary, Dr. Gore became the Vice President and Dean of the seminary. He encouraged me to go forward in my studies and directed me to various institutions and toward a terminal degree, so that I could return as the Christian education professor taking over for the retiring Dr. Marshall. I followed his advice and he became my advocate and academic counselor during those years of study. Once on the faculty, I prospered under his leadership and benefited from his wisdom and insight.
    Dr. RJ Gore always had the health of the seminary, its faculty and staff, and its students at the center of his prayers, concerns, priorities, and politics. He kept himself up to date on accreditation policies and procedures, what other seminaries were doing across the nation, what the ARP denomination was espousing theologically, and what we as a faculty believed and taught in the classroom. He was always quick to defend the Reformed position of the ARP Church and Scripture. Dr. Gore was a mover and a shaker, attempting to move us, the faculty, toward higher ambitions for the seminary. He talked with me about extending the Christian education master degree in such a way that we might encourage our students on toward a doctorate in Christian education at Erskine Seminary. I was not prepared for that, but in the interim I wrote up the necessary proposal and letters to ATS and SACS to have the name changed from Master of Arts in Christian Education to Master of Arts in Educational Ministries in order to make the way for a future progression toward the doctoral degree. This was granted and the name was changed under my leadership. Dr. Gore was forward looking in his leadership role and he pressed us the faculty to strive toward those goals.
    No doubt had he continued as Vice President and Dean, Erskine Theological Seminary would be a different place today.
    His departure from his responsibilities was in good standing as he left to serve our country in Desert Storm, serving for 18 months in Iraq as an army chaplain. Through the years he has been promoted up the ranks to Colonel. Upon his return from the conflict he entered conflict at the seminary. Regaining his composure from war and re-entering civilian life, he continued his efforts to make Erskine Theological Seminary one of the top reformed seminaries in the country. No longer the dean and now as a faculty member, he never ceased his commitment and loyalty to the ARP denomination and to the betterment of Erskine Theological Seminary through all of these years. I served with him on various committees in both the college and the seminary, continuing to glean from his wisdom in leadership and his knowledge-base regarding assessment, accreditation, administration, as well as academics. I might say that he worked tirelessly in writing the necessary documents that would keep the seminary accredited. The work involved in this is a full-time job in itself, apart from teaching, mentoring students, leading the faculty, assigning faculty loads, and much more. I know because I was party to writing parts of those documents.
    After my retirement from the seminary and after he volunteered to act as interim dean, Dr. Gore with Chris Wisdom (then the Vice President) hired me to edit the syllabi of the faculty. Dr. Gore recommended me to edit based on the fact that I understood some of the accreditation standards and could help faculty build their syllabi and courses to satisfy the standards of ATS and SACS. I continue to do this even today. Again, Dr. Gore proves himself to be a faithful warrior for the Reformed tradition and as far as I can tell handled his job responsibilities as interim dean, professor, mentor, and advisor with ease, with professional acumen, and as a Christian gentleman.
    It saddens me to read such a flip evaluation by a man whom I have respected and listened to through the years. Dr. Paul Kooistra was one of my PCA administrative and pastoral heroes because of his leadership in turning Covenant Seminary around from financial devastation to an excellent seminary. I understood that he did similarly with Mission to the World of the PCA as well. I have heard him preach to our RUF college students, speak at missions conferences at my church in Clemson, and have had short conversations with him in the sanctuaries where he spoke. To have him denigrate Dr. RJ Gore with such a punitive evaluation that carries with it no evidence of poor performance, lack of leadership, refusal to attend administrative meetings and so on truly disappoints me to say the very least. As an interim and as one who volunteered to lead the seminary to keep it afloat, doesn’t Dr. Gore deserve an evaluation that has meat to it? The evaluation that I read with Dr. Kooistra’s signature smacks of “well now, this is off my desk, and I can move to other things.” There is no thought, no reflection at all in this evaluation. If I was the administrator receiving this evaluation of one of my employees, I would walk the paper myself to Dr. Kooistra and face-to-face ask him to think about his words, think about Dr. Gore’s performance and redo it. The evaluation says more about Dr. Kooistra than it does about Dr. Gore. I must admit that I am embarrassed and ashamed for Dr. Kooistra whom I have admired for many years.
    Dr. Gore has my full support, my accolades for jobs well done. I have watched his integrity, his honesty, his kindness, his zeal for right theology, his love for the Lord and His Church since 1996. So, in this year of 2016, I sign this document to speak on his behalf and to his godly character.
    M. Jerdone Davis, RN, BT, MACE, EDD
    Adjunct Professor of Christian Education
    Erskine Theological Seminary

     
  10. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Jerdone Davis,

    Thanks for the comments.

    Well said! The Georgia Girl can write!

    Indeed, you are spot on in your evaluation of RJ!

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
  11. Will Anderson says:

    Chuck,

    I cannot begin to improve upon what has already been said in support of Dr. Gore. But I do want to be counted among those who count it a precious providence that RJ has been part of his professional and theological training. I completed my M.DIV at Erskine. He was my systematic theology professor, and, while a Student of Theology of Second Presbytery, Dr. Gore was always available and conversational with me. Now, as I am a MEDCOM student through the Army, Dr. Gore once again proves his value is gold. I cannot speak for the whole group but I have heard numerous words of appreciation for his classes, professionalism, knowledge of the Army and his candor. There are several luminaries at Erskine College and Seminary, but RJ outshines them all in my opinion. God blessed ETS the day he arrived. God bless you RJ.

    Will Anderson

     
  12. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Will Anderson,

    Thanks for the comment.

    Will, you have spoken well and truthfully. RJ Gore fights for the life of Erskine Seminary. Kooistra fights to kill Erskine Seminary.

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
  13. John Paul Marr says:

    Dear Dr. Gore,

    Last October my wife Melanie returned from her doctor’s appointment and shared with my daughter Caitlin and me the results of the recent tests she had been enduring: two lumps embedded deep in her left breast. After serving twenty years in the U.S. Navy, my wife took it as the soldier she is and committed to “warrior through” with prayer and hope. After almost twenty years of marriage, our togetherness intimately deepened in the ensuing months as we waited on doctor’s reports and recommendations. I strived to maintain my ministry as a husband and a friend to my wife while improving my ministry as a father during those difficult months. As Melanie and I discussed the many “ifs” of the future, one question quietly lingered in my mind: how would I minister to my wife as her pastor? That pressing concern soon led to another avenue of thought: if God would, in His wisdom and love, call Melanie home, who would I ask to officiate her funeral? The obvious and only answer would be you.

    Several times I have sent you notes of thanksgiving for your teaching ministry to me. Most of them have had that student sentimentality of simply surviving your demanding courses. Some semesters my wife would look at my unsharpened studies and say, “You need to take another Dr. Gore course.” She recognized that your approach to teaching, to equipping students for service to the Christian church for the glory of God, kept me from the morose of plodding through the seminary experience for a mere degree. She understood that my sitting under your skillful instruction would transform me into a man who could better handle God’s word, better care and feed God’s people, and better respond to the demands of living in a world that resists and rejects God.

    In the acknowledgements of my Th.M. thesis (a fledging attempt at scholarship) I praised your “five class” series (Sys Theo I-III, Apologetics, Ethics). Those courses connected me to the world of Reformed Theology and challenged me to engage critically the prevalent worldviews of today. I told every incoming seminary student I met to take that series of courses. Now as I serve Second Presbytery’s Committee on Candidates and Credentials I exam students under care through the lens of those five classes with the same goal of preparing would-be ministers to serve His Church to the glory of God. I too am continuing the trajectory of your profound lessons by studying the “father of the ARP of the South” all because you pulled me into your office one day and told me to press on in my Th.M. thesis and apply to the University of Aberdeen’s Ph.D. program. Not only was I accepted, but I received full tuition under the Elphinstone Scholarship (named after the University’s founder). That would not have come to pass without your encouragement and your constant vigilance to guide students like myself. Little wonder I chased you down at General Synod – I wanted you to be the first to know (even before my wife). My wife likens your academic awareness to a shipboard radar always detecting student opportunities as they appear on the horizon. Allow me also to remind you that several of the faculty at the University of Aberdeen are familiar with your writings. One professor attended lectures you gave in London over a decade ago. He was impressed by your insights; remembering them, he said I was fortunate to have you write my recommendation. I know I am fortunate… blessed as a man, a husband, a father, and a minister to have you as a mentor.

    Those are just three small paragraphs that could be expanded by adding several unexaggerated accounts of that personal blessing of knowing you… including my teenage daughter’s yearly desire to take a Dr. Gore class or your powerful preaching of my ordination service five years ago. Rather I close with this: my wife has not shared her recent medical journey with many people (including friends at Troy ARP Church), but with her permission I share it with you and with the readers of ARPTalk. If the Lord were to call my wife home and I had to plan a funeral that would minister the gospel of the Lord Jesus to me, to my daughter, to my in-laws, to my congregation, I would give my wife one of God’s best – and that is you.

    Your ever-student,
    John Paul Marr
    Minister, Troy ARP Church
    Erskine Theological Seminary, M.Div. and MATS 2011; Th.M. 2015

    P.S. Upon reviewing this my wife objected to my using “soldier” rather than “sailor,” but I will not enter into your Army verses Navy debate with her.

     
    • Chuck Wilson says:

      Dear John Paul,

      Thank you for the comments. This is touching and beautiful.

      God bless,

      Chuck Wilson
      ARPTalk

       
  14. R J Gore says:

    Dear JP,
    I have been working on a response to the many kind remarks that have been posted. However, your posting requires an immediate response. Let me begin by saying that I plan to join with you and Caitlin in praying regularly and fervently for the Lord to touch Melanie, sanctifying her through this process, and granting her many, many more years to serve him faithfully. I also want to say that your words of affirmation remind me how much I want to be the person my students think I am. I am not altogether that person, but I want to be. Finally, let me thank you for your walk of faith and learning. Long ago you ceased being “just a student” and became a fellow pilgrim in search of truth, sharing your new learning and insights as we walk together and learn from each other. At the school where my wife serves, their motto is “a love for God . . . a passion for learning.” You exemplify that motto and I count it a privilege to be your ever friend- RJ

    P.S. Melanie is right. Swabbies should be called sailors and not soldiers! (-:

     
  15. Ray A. King says:

    Chuck, it was good to talk to you this morning. You will note below that I found out about RJ’s evaluation from ARP Talk. I exchanged emails with him after reading that sad excuse of an evaluation that is totally inappropriate and does not target a man that I have known from the first time I met him when he appeared before the search committee I was on. He had the highest army evaluation of his person and performance any military chaplain could have. I liked him from the very beginning. As soon as I read the eval I wrote him the following: On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Ray King wrote:
    R J, I just read Chuck’s post of your eval, your response, and the well deserved overwhelming support from faculty, and perhaps also friends. I’m with them. From the first interview of you for a faculty position until now I have been amazed and blessed to to know you as a colleague, friend, a brilliant intelligence, and deeply loyal and caring person.

    I hope this email gets to you, but if not I’ll try another way. If you know any way I can support you, please let me know. I still miss being a part of the seminary, and especially under your leadership. Those are good memories.

    Blessings, Ray

     
  16. Jerdone Davis says:

    John Paul,
    May I give a loud second and whole-hearted AMEN to your post! In my academic pursuits RJ exemplifies all that you said in those “short paragraphs.”
    On another note, give Melanie a huge hug from me and assurance that she will be in my thoughtful prayers. Also, if she needs a nurse to walk beside her at any point in this journey, I would count it a privilege to do so. In my retirement I am a “faith community RN” and am teaching in nursing.
    May God bless you three with strong physical and ever-deepening spiritual healing as well as strengthening the already strong cords of your family’s bonds with Jesus holding those cords together.
    Much love from a fellow pilgrim and fellow learner.
    Jerdone

     
  17. Brian Walker says:

    Chuck,

    As you know, I attended Erskine Seminary from 1999 to 2002. In my opinion, these were some of the Seminary’s best years due largely to Dr. Gore’s wise and steady leadership as VP and Dean. He hired men with theological integrity coupled with genuine pastors’ hearts. He structured the M.Div to serve as a solid biblical/theological foundation for us as we entered into our various ministry callings. Without apologizing for his reformed convictions, he fostered a spirit of unity that allowed men and women from various denominational backgrounds to feel respected and cared for. And Dr. Gore is the only theology professor who made me read Calvin’s Institutes cover-to-cover (for which I will always be thankful).

    On a personal note, I remember when he took time to minister to me after class, as I was dealing with the miscarriage that my wife and I had just been through. This is just one example of his care for not only the institution of Erskine Seminary, but for all of its students, faculty, and staff.

    For all these reasons (and I could list more), I’m appalled that Dr. Gore is being misrepresented in this way. I’m normally reluctant to comment here at ARPtalk, as I’m no longer an ARP Teaching Elder. But I am compelled to speak on behalf of this good man. Indeed, it would be wrong to remain silent.

    Warm Regards,
    Brian Walker

     
  18. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Brian Walker,

    Thanks for the comments.

    Just because you’re no longer an ARP does not mean you’re not welcome on ARPTalk or at my table.

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
  19. Daniel Wells says:

    I don’t know Dr. Koistra, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment on his work ethic or his character.

    However, I do know Dr. Gore. Even though I never had a class with him, I have always viewed him as a mentor and teacher in my life.

    Thanks for all that you have done for our denomination and pursuing gospel faithfulness, Dr. Gore.

     
    • Chuck Wilson says:

      Dear Daniel Well,

      Thanks for the comment.

      Well said, Daniel! Well said!

      Regards,

      Chuck Wilson
      ARPTalk

       
  20. Mike Whitehurst says:

    I have read this post and subsequent comments. I have not met the aforementioned Dr. Gore or Chuck Wilson. I am an Erskine College Parent, Volunteer and Donor. I would like to provide the following perspective.

    Our son is an Erskine College Senior and is considering Erskine Seminary. Interesting enough, Dr. Kooistra has been one of the biggest proponents of asking him to consider Erskine Seminary.

    Also, when our son visited another “reformed theology based seminary, they pointed out that Erskine Seminary was not a consideration/option for a lot of their students. In speaking to others about Erskine Seminary their feedback has been neutral at best. Most have advised him to go to RTS or Covenant. However, Dr. Kooistra has continued to be one of the staunchest proponents.

    Also, please understand that in most organizations, if someone would have put their personal evaluation out on social media, their judgement would be highly questioned and they would be fired immediately.

    I don’t know the full history of this dialogue around Dr. Gore and whether the proper steps outlined in Matt. 18 have been taken. However, I do know that Matt. 18 teaches us not only how to handle confrontation but demonstrating grace in those confrontations. i.e. The Unforgiving Servant.

    If God continues to impress upon our son to pursue ministry, this specific dialogue will be taken into consideration as we pray with him about where God would have him go

    Additional Thoughts:

    On a daily basis, I work with Higher Education organizations of different sizes/types. I have a pretty good understanding of the Higher Education business. I think that Dr. Kooistra understands that even though Erskine is a Christian liberal arts college and seminary, it is a business. He has not been perfect in all of his leadership. As part of the Erskine community I would like to see him and the administration outline a go-forward vision that aligns with the mission of the college. Also, I find the consideration of football to be misguided. These are just a couple of things that come to mind.

    However, Dr. Kooistra has worked hard on the financial/tactical side of this institution. He, Dr. Gore and the entire Erskine College & Seminary Faculty and Staff have made extreme sacrifices and should be given credit for that accomplishment. Anyone that is part of the Erskine College and Seminary administration, faculty, & staff have my utmost respect and prayers for the sacrifices that they have made.

    The opportunity has never been greater to prepare those with a Christian Worldview to be effective in this world. I do hope that we will get about that work and seize the opportunity!

    God Bless…..

     
  21. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Mike Whitehurst,

    Thanks for the comment.

    On this you are correct: “I don’t know the full history of this dialogue.”

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     
  22. R J Gore says:

    Mr. Whitehurst:
    1) I have spent 20 years trying to get Erskine centered on orthodox theology
    2) My rater is Kooistra as VP of the seminary
    3) My senior rater is Kooistra as President of the college and seminary
    4) There is no provision for the board as an appellate authority in the Employee or Seminary Faculty handbooks/manuals for performance reviews. Appeals end with the President. Thus, my public appeal.
    5) Meanwhile, back at the ranch, this unjust eval is still part of my record. Prior to Kooistra’s decision to retire I was pursuing relief through the EEOC. That may still happen.
    6) I have followed Matt 18 meticulously re Kooistra’s intemperate (and widely known) temperamental outbursts. His vicious performance review of my sacrificial efforts as dean (ask any faculty member how we are still in operation) is prima facie evidence of his veangeful and vindictive spirit.
    7) If I have done anything inconsistent with Scripture or my ordination vows please feel free to file charges with my presbytery. I will provide the needed contact information.
    Best, RJGore

     
    • Herb Vollmann says:

      Dear R.J.

      Until I found this ARPTalk website I had no idea of the path of patient endurance that you have followed all these 30+ years since you were my first teacher and opened God’s Holy Word to me. He in you and you in Him. I pray that your demonstrated good works, your love and faith and service be acknowledged by those who choose not to know you and loudly declared by those who have and will come along side you. You are in my prayers.

      His, Herb Vollmann

       
  23. Mike Whitehurst says:

    Thank you for your additional perspective. Matt. 18 was written to believers. The public forum/social media is non discriminate regarding believers and unbelievers. In your letter, you indicate the following, Now I am “telling it to the church” through this Open Letter to the Board. However, when you allowed the letter to be entered into the public forum/social media you and Chuck went awry of the teachings of Matt 18.

    Also, to indicate that there is no due process for this type of matter within the Erskine or ARP denomination human resources procedures seems to be a reach to me. If an employer is legally required to keep this information as well as medical information, etc. confidential. should an employee not exhibit professionalism and sound judgment in the handling of this information as well.

    So, I stand by my initial perspective and assessment of your handling of this performance evaluation matter and your subsequent letter to the Board of Trustees.

    I would be remiss not to provide a Scripture basis for my premise. In addition to Matt. 18, the following Scriptures come to mind.

    1Peter 2:20-25
    Matt. 5:11-12
    Titus 3:1-2
    Romans 12:14-21

    God Bless,
    Mike

     
  24. Chuck Wilson says:

    Dear Mike Whitehurst,

    Thanks for the comment.

    As I bring this conversation to a close, Mike, I give you the last word.

    With the resignations of Kooistra and Vigus, events have overtaken the discussion here.

    This article draws very few hits now. Let me direct your attention to the most recent ARPTalk which was posted today.

    Once again, thanks for your comments.

    Regards,

    Chuck Wilson
    ARPTalk

     

Leave a Reply (Please note: Anonynomous Comments Are Not Posted)