Written by Philip P. Bliss, the old gospel hymn sings of Jesus as the light of salvation in this manner:

 .

Indeed, “the light of the world is Jesus.” There is no metaphor better than Christmas to proclaim Jesus as the Light of the World.

On Friday evening, December 2, I journeyed with my wife, oldest granddaughter, a young friend and his wife, and their two sons to Greenville, SC, to participate in the annual Christmas carol sing and lighting of the front campus of Bob Jones University. I had never participated in this or seen nearly a quarter of a million Christmas lights turned on simultaneously.

The Christmas carol sing started at 6:30 PM and lasted an hour. The sound of over 5000 voices singing in the evening air was emotionally and spiritually uplifting. Christmas carol after Christmas carol was sung until a crescendo was reached with Joy to the World, and then, with the words “let heaven and nature sing” reverberating in our ears, someone flipped a switch and 250,000 Christmas lights illuminated the December night with glorious brilliance and glowing beauty that proclaimed the joyous message of Jesus’ birth and His reign.

The photograph above freezes a bit of the splendor of that spectacular moment. Around me, I heard the muted whispers of “Wow! Look! Look!” For me and many others, it was a moment in which to reverence the One who is the Light of the World and the One who has overcome “the darkness of sin.”

The metaphor of light as it is used with reference to the coming of Jesus is Biblically driven, so much so, that in John 8:12 Jesus refers to Himself as “the light of the world.” In so doing, Jesus was not inventing something new; rather, He was reaching back and pulling forward the fabric of Old Testament prophesies. This Biblical use of light fascinates me. Consider the following:

• The first “And God said” of creation in Genesis 1 is God’s creative work of bringing forth light that dissipated the darkness of the primeval earth that was “formless” and “void.” It was a word that brought forth day’s light.
• Light is the place of the living (Ps. 56:13); shadows and darkness are the hues of death (Ps. 23:4).
• According to Psalm 103:2, God robes Himself in light, and, in the words of the beloved hymn, Immortal. Invisible, God Only Wise, God dwells “in light inaccessible, hid from our eyes.”
• In Psalm 27:1, the Psalmist declares that Jehovah is his light and salvation.
• Often, both the knowledge of God and God’s law are portrayed in terms of light (Ps. 36:9; Ps. 119:105 and 130; Prov. 6:23; and Isa. 51:4).
• Sin, defined as “any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God,” is depicted as rebellion against the light of God’s revelation and person (Job 24:13 and John 3:19-20).
• Woes and curses are cast against those who put darkness for light by their willful disobedience and apostasy (Isa. 9:2).

Along with these concepts, light is also used for the ruler of the people (1 Kings 11:36). The promise is that God will not leave the people without a “light” – a ruler who will judge them in equity (Ps. 67:4 and 98:9).

The sum of the above is that light is a metaphor for life, the garments and abode of God, knowledge of God, salvation, God’s law, and His rule over His people through His king. Faithful obedience to God’s Word is described as walking in the light. Sin, in contrast, is depicted as walking away from the light and into the darkness of terrible judgment. The promised King is the light of His people who both saves and rules the people of His love.

In the midst of this multifaceted metaphor of light, there is the promise of the Messiah who is the Savior and Light of the World. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great Light (Isa. 9:2). Arise, shine! Indeed, the Light is come, and the gross darkness that covers the minds and hearts of men is dissipated by the brilliance of God’s glorious light in the face of Jesus, and the peoples and kings of the earth shall come to the dawning of His light and the brightness of His coming (Isa. 60:1-3; 2 Corinthians 4:6).

In the midst of this language that portends fulfillment of superlative promises that are stupendous, the story continues and concludes with these royal words spoken by Magi: “Where is he that is born King of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him (Matt. 2:2).

Indeed, worship is the proper response to the One who is the Light of the World. But if one is blind to the Light, that worship is not going to be given. The Apostle John writes that Jesus is the Life that is the Light of men. He is the Light that shines in the darkness of sin’s night; however, that darkness has not comprehended the Light. “Yet to all who receive him, to those who believe in his name, he gives the right to become the sons of God” (John 1:4-5, 12).

The dark evenings of Christmastide glisten and gleam with a billion points of light declaring that Jesus is the Light of the World. Dancing in celebration of His Incarnation, these lights call us to believe and receive Him as the Savior. Dancing in celebration that Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords, these lights call us to bend our knees and to worship the One that John called “the Almighty” (Rev. 1:8).

Wow! Look at those lights prancing in the dark evenings of Christmastide lighting the path to Jesus! With the old songwriter, I sing: “The light of the world is Jesus.”

Christmas light points out that Jesus is the only Savior. Christmas light reminds us that unless our faith is in Jesus we are hopelessly lost in the darkness of sin’s night. Christmas light announces that Jesus is King Jesus and we bow and worship before His majesty.

Merry Christmas!

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

A former member of Second Presbytery once referred to our presbytery as “The Star Wars’ Cantina Presbytery”. By that, he meant that the presbytery was made up of the oddest people.

I was taken aback by his cutting sarcasm; however, after the Fall Meeting of Second Presbytery on Tuesday, October 11, 2011, I am now convinced that Second Presbytery is indeed the “the Star Wars’ Cantina Presbytery” of the ARP Church. We are much more than odd. We are a gallimaufry of various blends and shades of strangeness that makes Second Presbytery a caricature of a presbytery that is then a caricature of itself – a garish Hudibrastic burlesque of Presbyterianism!

Attached and at the end of this article, is a copy of the “memorial” that was brought before Second Presbytery, first, by the Session of the Spartanburg ARP Church, and then the Sessions of the Redeemer ARP Church and the Unity ARP Church joined in support of the “memorial” by adding the names of their Sessions. This memorial was the most important item before Second Presbytery for consideration. The salient points of the “memorial” are three:

1 – The EC Foundation:

Established after “the March 2010 ‘Snow Synod’ to support resistance to the efforts by the General Synod . . . as it sought to ensure missional fidelity at Erskine College and Erskine Theological Seminary as agencies of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church,” the EC Foundation exists (a) to “support these [Erskine] institutions as they are involved in any civil litigation” against the ARP Church, (b) to impugn “the honor and reputation of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church by alleging on its website that the General Synod acted ‘illegally’ at its March 2010 meeting, and by speaking of the General Synod as ‘an unreliable and capricious partner’ in its dealings with Erskine,” (c) to express “gratitude for the support of ‘some alumni and friends of Erskine’ who ‘object to the current direction of these institutions,’ who ‘have suspended their financial support of Erskine,’ and who have instead ‘chosen to make gifts to this foundation’” and has thus jeopardized the financial stability of Erskine College and Seminary, and (d) to support “the recently terminated Dr. William Crenshaw, a man known for his opposition to Evangelical Christianity and to the mission of Erskine College as an Evangelical Christian liberal arts college.”

2 – The Question

The question regarding Mr. John R. Hunt, an elder in the Young Memorial Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and Messrs. William W. Lesesne, Lee W. Logan, and James W. Gettys, Elders in the Due West Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church:

Since “elders in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church have solemnly promised ‘to submit in the spirit of love to the authority of the session and to the higher courts of the Church’ (Form of Government IX.D.3.6), and ‘in all things to promote the unity, peace, purity, and prosperity of the church’ (Form of Government IX.D.3.7),” have these Elders violated their ordination vows as “Directors” of the EC Foundation?

3 – The actions called for:

That the Sessions of these Elders “investigate the activities of Mr. William W. Lesesne, Mr. Lee W. Logan, and Dr. James W. Gettys, and Dr. John R. Hunt respectively as Directors of the EC Foundation, to determine whether their activities as Directors of the EC Foundation have been in conflict with their role and responsibilities as elders in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and to ascertain whether ecclesiastical charges should be filed against these elders. Both Sessions shall report back to Second Presbytery with their findings and proposed courses of action at a called meeting of Second Presbytery to be held no later than November 30, 2011.”

In the simplest of terms, the Sessions of the Young Memorial ARP Church and the Due West ARP Church were asked to investigate the activities of four Elders as they are both Elders in these congregations and “Directors” of the EC Foundation and to determine whether or not their involvement with the EC Foundation is in violation of their ordination vows as Elders in the ARP Church.

Others may see the story of the October 11th meeting of Second Presbytery differently (and I invite the views of others), but these are my recollections and observations.

1. For the record, I had NO part in framing or putting forward this “memorial.” I was surprised by it. I support its sentiment; however, I would not have presented the motion in the manner that it was presented. When the “memorial” was debated, I did not speak to it; nevertheless, I did vote for it.
2. The emotions that had been fomented against the “memorial” verged on hysteria. If I had been Messrs. Lesesne, Logan, Gettys, or Hunt, I would have spoken for and voted for the investigation. As a mater of fact, I would have insisted on it. I would have wanted both the wisdom of my cause explained and the righteousness of my cause seen. As it is, there is a blanket of doubt and distrust over the affair.
3. The performance by Mr. Neely Gaston, former Executive Vice President of ETS, has to be the most bizarre show of the day. With a red face, neck veins bulging, and voice warbling, he once again declared the actions of the “Snow Synod” illegal as he attempted to read page-after-page from South Carolina law. Finally, the Moderator asked him to speak to the point. I do not think he ever did, but he did sit down. This chimera that the “Snow Synod” acted “illegally” is simply an act of self-delusion. Yes, the actions of the “Snow Synod” were taken to civil court; however, I do not know how Mr. Gaston and others get to the notion that General Synod acted “illegally”. In point of fact, the affair was settled by what is called by many as “The Compromise,” and the legal actions were dropped before the civil court could rule on the matter. It was not one of Mr. Gaston’s better days.
4. The most convoluted speech of the day was given by Mr. Randy Ruble. Without speaking to the issue that was being debated, Mr. Ruble rehearsed his role in the lawsuits that were filed by the BOT and members of his faculty after the “Snow Synod”. He seemed to give the impression that he was an innocent bystander in the affairs; He declared that he was a faithful churchman, and then he acknowledged his complicity in the law suits and financial matters regarding the EC Foundation, stating that he had given $4,000 to the EC Foundation to assist in paying attorneys’ fees for the plaintiffs. He also said that his actions were efforts to help newly appointed President David Norman. Well, as I remember the story, many of those actions occurred before President Norman appeared on the scene. No doubt, time has passed, and I am sure that Mr. Ruble’s recollections of the details may have corrupted.
5. The saddest speech of the day came from a member of the Session of the Due West ARP Church. This Elder informed the presbytery of what “wonderful and good men” Lesesne, Logan, Gettys, and Hunt were. In the past, he pointed out that Lesesne, Logan, and Gettys, Elders in the Due West congregation, were men who had worked hard for the cause of Erskine College and Seminary – even giving their lives in the employment of Erskine. He also noted that Hunt had given faithfully to Erskine. The Elder said that the Due West congregation and community had been bitterly split by this controversy between the ARP Church and Erskine College and Seminary. He said that too many people had left the Due West congregation because of this clash. It was time, he said, to let bygones be bygones. Every one sins; does it really matter what these men are doing on the EC Foundation? An investigation of the activities of these men would hurt the Due West ARP Church, the community, and Erskine. To ask these men if their vows as Elders in the ARP Church and their activity on the EC Foundation as “Directors” were in conflict was too controversial and disruptive. This matter should be overlooked for the sake of peace. The great imperative before us was that we should “love one another” and forget what had taken place and that these men were still attempting to subvert the ARP Church and the present Erskine administration. A friend has written the following words regarding this Elder’s words: “From time to time during debate at meetings of Presbytery, we are reminded that we are all sinners, and the reminder is proffered as a rational for excusing those whose actions or words are being examined. That is non-information and immaterial to any debate, and it does not relieve the body of its responsibility to examine infractions of duties, theological standards, or ethical behavior in an effort to maintain presbytery, denominational order and, hence, peace.”
6. The responses of the representatives of the Young Memorial ARP Church were troubling. The elder representative was horrified that the Session was being asked to investigate the activities of Mr. Hunt. A Session should not be asked to investigate the actions of one of its members, he declared. Mr. Jeff Bost, the Pastor of the Young Memorial congregation, confessed that he was so distressed over the matter that he would not have been able to sing the “Psalm of Unity” (Psalm 133) if the “memorial” had passed. That is, if the Session of the Young Memorial ARP Church had been asked to do something that is very vanilla Presbyterian, Mr. Bost would have been devastated by it.
7. Mr. Matt Miller, the Pastor of the Greenville ARP Church, did the most surprising thing of the day when he introduced the Erskine administration and BOT into the debate by reading an e-mail from President David Norman and Chairman Joe Patrick to the presbytery. Essentially, the communiqué stated that the matter of the EC Foundation was an Erskine matter and informed the presbytery that they were dealing with it. At the time, no one seemed to notice that what Mr. Miller did was a violation of presbytery’s protocol and “out of order.” That is, the audacity of the action was such that everyone was caught by surprise. Likewise, at the time, no one seemed to notice that Erskine matters took precedence over and trumped Second Presbytery in the oversight of its own house. In fact, Erskine (the tail of the dog) wagged the dog (the church). If anything demonstrated that Second Presbytery has become “The Star Wars’ Cantina Presbytery,” that did!

There were three extraordinarily distressing issues that arose from this debate that have been publicly demonstrated on the floor of Second Presbytery for all to see. Let me explain.

1. The Erskinolatry of “olde Erskine” was unmasked and put on display for all to see. The direction of affection was clear, and, for many of those who spoke, it ran toward Due West rather than vertically. I was stunned by what I heard and saw. I came away with the impression that the first and great commandment is written in these words: “Thou shalt love one another as thyself and permit anything without question or rebuke for we are all sinners and not to do so is not to be nice. The second is like unto it: with all thy mind and soul and strength, thou shalt love thy Higher Power as thou art able to conceive him. On these two hang all the Twelve Commandments.” By the way, if you are not familiar with the Eleventh and Twelfth Commandments, they are: “(11) Thou shalt be nice”; and “(12) Thou shalt say no critical thing about Erskine no manner the depth of the evil, for in so doing our god is pushed over on his face.”
2. Everyone is tired of this conflict over Erskine and wants it to “go away”; however, instead of doing the thing that will resolve the conflict, we run from it. We run from “peacemaking.” We attempt “peacekeeping” rather than “peacemaking.” According to Matthew 5, Jesus did not sanction “peacekeepers” – those who do the expedient thing and cover up the issues! We attempt to keep the peace by “peacekeeping” because we fear how others will esteem us. We show little or no fear of the God of the Bible who placed us in a position of leadership. Moreover, doing the right thing is hard if we cherish calm and the accolades of others. Perhaps I expect too much from the small pond of the ARP world where egos, reputations, and careers are forced into tension with biblical/confessional/ecclesiastical fidelity. However, the tensions that divide us can only be resolved through “peacemaking,” for in “peacemaking” issues are resolved rather than “swept under the rug.” I think the following words by Martyn Lloyd Jones are particularly applicable to both Second Presbytery and General Synod: “There is no purpose in having a basis or a confession of faith unless it is applied. So we must assert the element of discipline as being essential to the true life of the church. And what calls itself a church which does not believe in discipline, and does not use it and apply it, is therefore not a true church.” (What is an Evangelical? The Banner of Truth Trust, 1992, p. 83.) It is heart-wrenching to watch men seek to maintain the status quo by “peacekeeping” rather than attempting to bring health to the church by “peacemaking” – resolving the issues that divide us! However, as they say, it is what it is!
3. I was amazed at how little the members of the Sessions of the Due West ARP Church and the Young Memorial ARP Church knew about our Presbyterian polity. They could have done a great service for Second Presbytery and the General Synod by: (1) Noting that we are divided on Matthew 18:15-20 and have no consensus as to the difference between a “private” and “public” offense and asked presbytery and General Synod for instruction; (2) Noting that we are divided on the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 6 and asking presbytery and General Synod for an official interpretation; and (3) Noting that our “Book of Discipline” is a contradictory and convoluted document and therefore useless, and asking Second Presbytery to memorialize General Synod to revise and update it. Instead, they became defensive and fled from the opportunity to be constructive.

I close with this story. When Raphael was painting his famous Vatican frescoes, a couple of cardinals stopped by to watch the master and criticize his work. “The face of the Apostle Paul is too red,” said one of the churchmen. Raphael retorted, “Paul blushes to see into whose hands the church has fallen.”

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

Memorial to Second Presbytery

Whereas, elders in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church have solemnly promised “to submit in the spirit of love to the authority of the session and to the higher courts of the Church” (Form of Government IX.D.3.6), and “in all things to promote the unity, peace, purity, and prosperity of the church” (Form of Government IX.D.3.7), and,

Whereas, Dr. John R. Hunt is an elder in the Young Memorial Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and Mr. William W. Lesesne, Mr. Lee W. Logan, and Dr. James W. Gettys are elders in the Due West Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and,

Whereas, Dr. John R. Hunt, Mr. William W. Lesesne, Mr. Lee W. Logan, and Dr. James W. Gettys are Directors of the EC Foundation, and,

Whereas, the EC Foundation was formed in the wake of the March 2010 “Snow Synod” to support resistance to the efforts by the General Synod of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church as it sought to ensure missional fidelity at Erskine College and Erskine Theological Seminary as agencies of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and,

Whereas, one of the stated “values” of the EC Foundation is “to support these [Erskine] institutions as they are involved in any civil litigation,” and,

Whereas, the EC foundation raised substantial funds to support the lawsuit of Dr. Richard Taylor, Mr. David Chesnut, and Dr. Parker Young against the General Synod, and,

Whereas, the EC Foundation has impugned the honor and reputation of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church by alleging on its website that the General Synod acted “illegally” at its March 2010 meeting, and by speaking of the General Synod as “an unreliable and capricious partner” in its dealings with Erskine, and,

Whereas, the EC Foundation on its website has expressed gratitude for the support of “some alumni and friends of Erskine” who “object to the current direction of these institutions,” who “have suspended their financial support of Erskine,” and who have instead “chosen to make gifts to this foundation,” and,

Whereas, such intentional diversion of funds from Erskine to the EC Foundation poses a hardship and threat to the wellbeing of Erskine, and creates further challenges for the Erskine administration as it seeks to faithfully implement the stated mission of the schools, and

Whereas, the EC Foundation on its website has expressed support for the recently terminated Dr. William Crenshaw, a man known for his opposition to Evangelical Christianity and to the mission of Erskine College as an Evangelical Christian liberal arts college,

Therefore, Second Presbytery hereby instructs the Sessions of the Due West Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church and the Young Memorial Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church to investigate the activities of Mr. William W. Lesesne, Mr. Lee W. Logan, and Dr. James W. Gettys, and Dr. John R. Hunt respectively as Directors of the EC Foundation, to determine whether their activities as Directors of the EC Foundation have been in conflict with their role and responsibilities as elders in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and to ascertain whether ecclesiastical charges should be filed against these elders. Both Sessions shall report back to Second Presbytery with their findings and proposed courses of action at a called meeting of Second Presbytery to be held no later than November 30, 2011.

1. Mr. Buddy Ferguson and the team that was with him are to be commended. They were confronted by a hostile crowd, and he and his team performed admirably.
2. Some of the people present were Mary Elizabeth Todd, Kevin Metz, Jay West, Kevin Brock, Nan Campbell, Charles Blakely, and John Tribble, who had come up from Atlanta to make his thoughts known. I sat at the same table with Mary Elizabeth Todd; however, the noise level was so high that she didn’t know who I was, and we had a civil conversation.
3. The first question was: “Where is David Norman? Why isn’t he here? We have a word for ‘the young man!’” Mr. Ferguson explained that Dr. Norman was in Virginia visiting a donor. Then they wanted to know how many of the chapter meetings Dr. Norman had attended. Mr. Ferguson answered about half. These alums seemed to be very put out that Dr. Norman wasn’t there; they had come for a piece of “the young man.”
4. John Tribble startled me with his question. Erskine has engaged a national recruiting consultant, and he asked: “Where is the money coming from to pay the consulting firm? Why is this money being paid to people who are not Erskine people?” He gave the impression that he was entitled to this information. He gave the impression that the Erskine administration was doing something underhanded. A young lady named Tobe Frierson, an Erskine employee who works in recruiting and who was also a part of Mr. Ferguson’s team that evening, explained the merits of the consultant. She noted that the “old” system was “broken” and that this arrangement was working very well. At this point the tired old canard of the “Bible College” was paraded out like a ghoul to frighten the alums one more time. It was clear that the point of this interrogation was a fear that Dr. Norman’s administration might be focusing on recruiting evangelical Christian students to attend Erskine. Their desire is a secular diversity that only tolerates a generic, insipid, and empty form of Christianity. Such is their broadmindedness that evangelical Christians need not apply. It was astonishing to watch anti-Christian xenophobia at work. Clearly, the attitude was this: we are entitled to what we want and we don’t want the Christian faith taken seriously. John Tribble announced that he was a fifth generation Erskine grad. He then opined that he needed to be heard and that all those people who were trying to “change” Erskine were second- class interlopers.
5. These alums know little of how the Erskine Board of Trustees (BOT) works. They asked: “Why isn’t a representative of the BOT here to speak with us? We are entitled to information!” They failed to understand that the BOT exists to oversee the work of the administration and that the administration is the public voice of the institution.
6. Indeed, the alums are upset with Dr. Norman and his administration. There are too many changes and new people they don’t know or trust! They are going to withhold their gifts to Erskine. The most vocal on this matter was Jay West. After a couple of drinks and a bottle of wine, he was still very clear in his opinions. He stated that he had changed his will again so that a 1.4 million dollar gift had been withdrawn. He said that he would re-instate his 1.4 million dollars if Erskine would listen to him and the alums instead of the ARP Church. Well, I have been hearing this out of West since about 1998 when I was on the BOT. He treats his will like a “Yo-yo.” Yawn! This antic has gotten old. Erskine will never see any money out of Jay West! That you can take to the bank!
7. Regarding the constitution of the BOT, the refrain went like this: “We have the money. We have the voice. We matter. How dare the ARP Church control the appointments to the BOT?”
8. The most bizarre and jaw-dropping question of the evening was this: “How dare David Norman and his administration not speak out on behalf of the EC Foundation and defend the names of Lee Logan, Jim Gettys, John Hunt, and Bill Lesesne since a motion (“memorial”) by the sessions of three congregations in Second Presbytery has been made calling for an investigation of these men as Directors of the EC Foundation”? Incredible!! I didn’t believe my ears! The EC Foundation has no connection to Erskine. In fact, the EC Foundation hurts Erskine by siphoning contributions away from Erskine. Logan, Gettys, Hunt, and Lesesne are not employees of Erskine. The matter before Second Presbytery involves four ordained elders in Second Presbytery. Why are these ARP elders Directors in the EC Foundation (1) when the EC Foundation has paid for litigation against the ARP Church, (2) when the stated purpose of EC Foundation is to collect money in order to sue the ARP Church, (3) when the goal of the EC Foundation is to oppose the ARP Church’s oversight of Erskine, which is one of the agencies of the ARP Church, and (4) when the EC Foundation regards the ARP Church an “outside influence” in its oversight of Erskine? I do not know what those people were drinking for supper; I was drinking water.
9. Generally speaking, the alums’ animosity toward the ARP Church and President Norman in particular and evangelical Christianity in general was palpable.
10. An interesting tidbit is that only about 6% (about 40) of the student body of Erskine is ARP. It seems that ARPs no longer trust Erskine.
11. The BIG surprise of the evening: NOT A WORD WAS SPOKEN IN PUBLIC ABOUT DR. BILL CRENSHAW! I wonder why!?

Well, I’m sure I have missed something; however, I think I have hit on the salient points. I’m sure others will add points I have missed. I’m also sure some will interpret the evening differently. Be that as it may . . .

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

When the Editor of ARPTalk first saw this photograph, the words that came out of his mouth were: “FAR OUT!” Indeed, far out in beauty! Far out in space! Far out in technology!

Other than the photograph, there is NOTHING beautiful about this issue of ARPTalk. It is about as FAR OUT as one can get in the realms of the bizarre and surreal without going through the Looking Glass and having mercury and lead laced tea with the Mad Hatter at the cotillion of the evil and insane Queen of Hearts. Reading the comments posted is something like eating a Lay’s potato chip: “Bet you can’t eat just one! Indeed, the Editor challenges the reader to look at the third part of the issue and read just one post and stop. The content is so FAR OUT that it is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. You cannot take your eyes off the scene. Read some of these comments and see if you do not exclaim: FAR OUT!

This issue of ARPTalk is very long – in fact, the longest by far!! It is divided into three parts:

1. The Reasonable;
2. The Wounded; and
3. The FAR OUT Crazies.

(Forgive the Editor’s liberties. He could not think of another word to describe what he read.) The Editor suggests that the Reader peruse parts one and two first (“The Reasonable” and “The Wounded). These are short. The comments from AFE (“Alumni for Erskine”) and AFIE (“Alumni for an Independent Erskine”) are very long. Those comments make for excellent bathroom reading, far more entertaining than Southern Living or Field and Stream.

All comments below are presented as the are found. Some formatting changes have been applied, and the highlighting is the Editor’s. As they say, they are what they are!

I. The Reasonable

Editor’s Remarks:

The posts below are reasonable and noble. Now, in the words of Paul Harvey, “Page 2: The rest of the story.” Both Mr. Nussbaum and Mr. Prohaska have been attacked by the BOIs for their “impertinence” in disagreeing with the party line. Mr. Nussbaum was so mauled by the AFE alums that he removed himself from the site.

Jason Nussbaum

Jason Nussbaum

[Editor’s Note: The “bold” type is by Mr. Nussbaum for emphasis]

I have spent the majority of the day in Due West meeting with faculty, staff, students, and even a 90 minute conversation one-on-one with Dr. Norman. A few observations which I feel need to be communicated to the alumni on this site. I count it a privilege to be both an alumnus and former faculty member, as this has given me an added insight. I do not want to betray the confidence of anyone, and thus will speak in generalities. Please know that as I make these comments, they come from conversations with individuals who I can trust have Erskine’s best interests in mind, namely faculty that I have developed very close relationships with during my time at Erskine. Time will be the true test as to whether Dr. Norman is successful in his efforts and aspirations, but I am at least reassured that things are not as bad as everyone makes them out to be.

1. The consensus of the faculty and staff is that there are some reservations about speaking up because they do not want to lose their jobs, but most state that the “day to day” of how Erskine operates has not changed. The faculty have not been asked to change the way or the content of which they are teaching.
2. The faculty I have spoken with, none of whom support the Commission or the concept of the Synod taking control of the college, all adamantly support the removal of Dr. Crenshaw. I never took Dr. Crenshaw’s class, and do not wish to argue one way or another in regards to his situation as I have not been made privy to all the facts. My encouragement to the alumni is to be very careful in what you believe out of the postings on this site. It is in our own human nature to assume the worst, and to construe facts in our minds to support our own position. I came into today deep down hoping to find that what has been posted on this site is true, but I cannot say that and uphold my integrity.
3. Dr. Norman has agreed that videotaping the Columbia alumni meeting is a good idea, and has given me the permission to do so. I will be recording with my personal camera, and posting the video directly to this page in its entirety
4. I addressed a major concern in regards to the lack of communication from the BOT and the administration to the alumni. It is my firm belief that the alumni will choose to believe ARP Talk or the postings on this page, and in many cases I feel like these two mindsets are not an accurate reflection of what is happening in Due West.
5. Dr. Norman stated repeatedly that the alumni and our loyalty during this time of transition are vital. He was adamant in that he does not support the extreme views of either side of this rift, as neither side has Erskine’s best interest at heart. Alumni or church members who are 100% polarized in one direction or the other do not see the reality of the situation. The reality is that those of us in the middle ground who truly want what’s best for Erskine, and are not hell bent on letting “our side win” need to speak up and voice our opinions more. Those who are most polarized are also the most vocal, and truth is not always upheld to the utmost degree.
6. The alumni who have posted on this site that “Erskine has changed and is not the same” are simply not accurate in my opinion. Sure, you may come onto campus and do not feel the warmth you did as a student, simply because the people are different, and you are not plugged into this community anymore. I have been gone 2.5 years, and felt like a celebrity walking into Moffatt today. The truth is that for alumni who graduated 10-20 years ago, you aren’t going to have the same connections here as you did when you were a student. Erskine will not be the same place as when you were a student, because the students do not know who you are anymore!
7. I was very impressed with Dr. Norman’s vision for what is happening with the admissions process. Only time will tell, but I feel his current strategies are hitting the nail on the head. His desire is to increase enrollment so that tuition will cover the operating expenses of the college, and the annual fund will become the added bonus that will help Erskine improve its facilities, technology, scholarships, and endowments. The statement that Dr. Norman does not consider the alumni essential is simply false. If the college can sustain its operational costs and not dip into the annual fund for basic functions, alumni money becomes the added bonus that will push Erskine higher and higher.
8. It is absolutely essential that all alumni verify the facts of what they are hearing before reacting and getting upset. Admittedly, I was very upset and anti-administration because of the influence of this website, but my impression has been completely changed today. When long time, trusted faculty voice their overwhelming support for Dr. Norman to me in a one on one conversation, I feel comfortable trusting that his vision is in line with what is best for Erskine. These are faculty who have shot straight from the very beginning, and who admittedly did not think Dr. Norman was the right choice for this position. To hear them offer their overwhelming support for him was very encouraging, especially when not prompted to do so.

In closing, please hear me when I say that I am not converted to “the other side”, but have more confidence today that Dr. Norman is not in support of them either. I don’t feel that the true views of the majority of people in the ARP church are being represented by the loud voices we are hearing, and that he is willing to stand up against the extremists of both sides. I am not fully endorsing Dr. Norman, because now his actions have to line up with his words, and only time can tell whether that will happen or not. My faith in the goodness of Erskine has been restored, and I will continue to support and pray for the faculty, staff, administration, and students who are suffering the consequences of two bickering extremist parties who do not truly have Erskine’s best interests at heart.

[Editor’s note: The Editor is not privy to whom Mr. Nussbaun is responding; however, from the context of the discussion, it seems that the questioner is Ms. Mary Elizabeth Todd. Mr. Nussbaum is respond to a question regarding the recruitment of students.]

Jason Nussbaum

‎1) Absolutely not. They are focusing on targeting students with information directly received from SAT/ACT, which now includes the student’s GPA. Instead of spending $100K a year in mailings to students who may not have any interest in Erskine, they will send an e-mail to the students who meet the Erskine standard for admission. This will include a link to apply online, and a detailed system of getting the student the information that is most pertinent to their area of interest, including letters from alumni who discuss how Erskine has helped them achieve success in their field. Instead of standing at a high school fair and waiting for students to come to us, he is taking a very proactive approach in going after the students who can be academically successful at Erskine. Also having a better management of admissions in the fall to work more closely with students who are on the borderline to increase numbers, while also preventing the end of spring panic which has often resulted in letting anyone with a pulse in the door just to put a butt in a bed

Mary Elizabeth Todd

Another question are the people you talked to concerning Dr. Crenshaw aware of how it has been reported as being handled? and another one- what was said about the concern about the Synod’s actions- And I think most of us here would just let them let it go back to the way it was way back where there were no statements of inerrancy- which may or may not being asked of the college- how do they feel about what has occurred recently with Dr. Gettys. I mean many of us are vocal but I think what concerns us most is not necessarily Dr. NOrman but more what the Synod is going to do- is this constant threat of change of the BOT so that they can have more control. If this was the ARP church that I remembered I would not be worried- but there are some that pull sneaky tactics- like the snow synod. Dr. NOrman indicated to me that both these sites and the site that must not be mentioned are frustrating to him. So what you say there is in line with what he said to me.

Jason Nussbaum

The faculty I have spoken with are aware of what Dr. Norman and Dr. Crenshaw have said, and all have supported that what Dr. Norman have said are true. I have been told (by faculty, not Dr. Norman) that his firing was the result of not only the culmination of his actions for the past years, but are most specifically related to a conflict and unprofessional actions towards another faculty member. I have been told that this action was faculty requested, and that the case against him was being built long before Dr. Norman took charge. From my understaing, Dr. Norman and others have called for the charges against the EC Foundation board members to be dropped. The ARP church is going to continue to nominate members to the BOT who represent the best interests of the church, however, I think many ARP ministers are realizing that the Synod which bought into the DeWitt/Wilson/Wingate scandal were not in the best interests of the college. The ones who have been coerced into Chuck’s mindset are in the minority, and speak out of turn, mis-representing the views of the majority of the ARP’s.

Daniel Prohaska

Daniel Prohaska

Here’s a vision for Erskine; tell me what you all think! (For the record, this was someone else’s idea, but I think it’s worth examining):

• An academic institution second to none.
• Incorporating Biblical truth into every classroom and every aspect of student life.
• Building a strong academic foundation during a student’s first two years, then applying that background to a rigorous set of critical thinking courses.
• Building students up in the Christian faith.
• Have members of the Board of Trustees, Synod, and Alumni occasionally spend time in residence halls with students.
• Have every member of the Erskine community embody what it means to be a follower of Jesus Christ.
• Expand Erskine’s student base to include the entire southeast.
• Bring the student body up to 800 or even 1000.

Is everyone seeing what this person is trying to say? What is the vision of Erskine that Alumni are trying to protect? What values are being threatened and by whom specifically? What has changed on campus that threatens the legacy of Erskine?

One thing I have found that EVERYONE agrees on is this: Erskine will be dead in ten years tops, probably sooner. If we all agree on this, why can’t we start working to settle the differences we have peacefully? Why must both sides of this debate get bogged down in online spit ball contests on Facebook and blog sites? Real talk will yield real results. If we are all the Christians we claim to be, it is high time we start acting like it. Nothing will ever get done through yelling words of hate and fear. Real progress is made when leaders from all sides of a conflict come together with mutual respect to reconcile their differences. If this has been done before, I’d love to see proof of it.

II. The Wounded

Editor’s Remarks:

Note this blog post on The Aquilla Report. The following story is “used with permission.” The story demonstrates the effects of the “critical thinking,” tolerance, and understand of “freedom of speech” for which the BOIs are noted.

The Unsuspecting ASSAULT: An Alum Looks at the Erskine Story

By Cathy Craig Neil

When did God leave our educational system? Why did he leave? Is he coming back? These are questions that many Americans are finally asking. This is based on information I have been reading on forums and social networks like Facebook concerning the major assault of adverse theology in our Christian colleges. Living in an area for 17 years and connected deeply with a very small Christian college I was unaware that quietly and slowly it was being stripped of its heritage, values, morals and most of all the Christian foundation it was created upon so many decades ago.

The atmosphere changed over the time period I lived there. The college was in the middle of a battle it was not prepared to fight. This endeavor emerged from those who had the desire to change the foundation of God’s church to meet the current ambitions of an American society that is caught up in a travesty of selfishness, greed and political correctness.

The fallout of the mess hit my family directly. My husband along with many who worked there were in various ways shown the door. Basically, many good Christian families’ lives were torn apart by an invisible enemy that slyly crept through each facet of the campus like a snake. We and those others in the same boat had to pick up the pieces, and start over somewhere else leaving family, friends and many years of hard work behind. It was devastating.

At the time, I was not aware of the devious plan of the enemy. He would take one school and pick it apart and then move onto another.

Now, the fight has catapulted to a war in the backyard of my own alma mater. It was heartbreaking enough to be among one of the many who watched the decline of one of God’s great institutions. I cannot wrap my brain around the surge of in-fighting, bickering and name calling that has become the speech on Facebook and other websites about the college I graduated from along with many of my family members dating back to my grandfather.

It makes me sad. We have allowed our greed, personal causes and selfish desires to run God out of our public schools, neighborhoods, government and now our Christian colleges. It is one thing to be called a liar, yelled at through cyber space or questioned by many who decided they knew more than I did and I lived in it! I witnessed this demolition in one college; I don’t want it happening again especially where I received my degree.

In my effort to reach those that I hold dear through forums it became technological warfare. I was trying to warn them. This occurred in about a 24 -36 hour turn around that I was extended hate, verbal abuse and even informed by a certain past alumnus who claimed to be “gay” he would not give another dime of his money to that institution until their liberal agenda was accepted. His sly attack on me started with a message that questioned the validity of what I had written. I have never met this man or heard of him, but he let me know in no uncertain terms that he disagreed with me almost as a threat.

As far as his withholding his contributions I am sure that God can get money anytime from anywhere and that his would not be missed.

Writing my entries on the forum I told them “the names may have changed, but the game is still the same.” It has just found a new home to do business. Apparently, very few agreed with me and the ones who did not as I wrote lashed out at me with a vengeance. I had to make sure I was not on a secular website that hated Christians. No! I was on a forum of my own alumnus from a Christian college! I became acutely aware that they didn’t believe me or that I had already been a pawn in this clever scheme of the devil. We had “already been there and done that.”

This so bothered me that I lost sleep over it. I never dreamed that anything like this would happen to the cherished college of my family and so many friends that I thought were friends. The divisions are so thick you “can cut them with a knife.”

Within a 48 hour period of making the effort to warn this family of friends, the Lord showed me these words of his, Titus 3: 9-11: “But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.”

The storm that is now on the other side of the horizon had worn me out physically and mentally but I knew what God wanted me to do. It is like watching your adult child make mistakes that you know will eventually catch up to them. They refuse to listen because they believe they know everything and don’t need advice. God was telling me to leave this group to their fate. I had warned them.

Leaving the love I have for this great institution to follow Jesus I wrote my last entry. I warned them once more of the fate of our alma mater if they didn’t stop the fighting. If a non-Christian had stumbled onto this particular forum he would have decided he never wanted to be a Christian if this is the way we act. No wonder our country is in the mess it is in. The Christians are setting an example that we are no different than anyone else. You cannot give what you don’t have, and if Christians do not exhibit the love of Jesus in their hearts even with each other, we have all lost. There was no love in the comments written that I could see; it felt like an all out attack on the cross of Jesus.

In the end of my entry I wrote that the words spewing out on the pages of this forum were not making God happy. That was when God revealed to me the Scripture from 1Corinthians 14:33, “For God is not a God of disorder, but of peace.” There was nothing peaceful about what I was reading or the actions being taken among those involved with the actual decisions of the future of this Christian college.

This unsuspecting assault would never have happened if Christians would follow the truth of God’s Word; not twisting his Word to meet our own agendas. Following God’s Word as he wants us to understand it would show us how to live our lives so that we will know how to keep his institutions in line with what he desires.

So let me ask you again: When did God leave our educational system? He left when God’s church stopped standing up for the truth. Why did he leave? He moved out of the way because he is a gentleman and will not force us to love him or to do his will.

Is he coming back? I hope so. But we need to ask him and really intend on doing things his way.

Cathy Craig Neil and her husband Mark own their own property management business. Cathy is a licensed PMIC and a graduate of Erskine College. She is also a columnist/author for www.believersbay.com.

III. The FAR OUT Crazies

Editor’s Remarks:

There is not much to be said here by the Editor. The venom and vituperation evident speak volumes.

Selected posts from AFE, 9/5

David Dangerfield I think this group needs to get back on topic. I appreciate individuals who’ve chosen to remind everyone they hate the fighting on both sides. I hate it too.
Perhaps even more, I’m disgusted by the notion that this group was founded for fighting. No. This group was founded for defense. I’m not sorry for reacting when Erskine, my friends, and truth itself is attacked. Period.
That being said, I will continually protest proposed changes to the Charter that give the Synod official/legal power to do what it did at the Snow Synod. And, unless any new information comes out, I will continue to ask why Dr. Bill Crenshaw isn’t in the classroom – where he has been for 35 years. I will continue to promote academic freedom against any and all challenges. I will continue to mourn the loss of so many employees who for various reasons are not at Erskine anymore, even as I strive to promote an Erskine where any and all would desire to be employed. These are the things we need to focus on!
I want peace too, but NOT if it means turning my back on what is right and what is true.
And, I’ll do this all while being, far from secular, but firmly convicted that our cause is indeed a cause of Christ. Constructed in fellowship, affection, and care for our fellows who still call Erskine home. In righteous outrage at the lies and attacks that some have maliciously carried out in the name of some perverted version of Christianity. I’m outraged. More than outraged at being called secular. I was taught that God is honored by truth and virtue, loving thy neighbor as they self. Didn’t Christ command that? Wasn’t that the greatest commandment? What love is there in attacking innocent employees and a fine Christian Liberal Arts College?
The bitter fruit we’ve seen with Erskine, it is simply part of a larger harvest in the ARP Church. A symptom of some deep division that they must work out. We know one another by our fruit. And, instead of celebrating when someone falls – we need to be true Christians. We must pray for those people, even those with whom we so ardently disagree. None of us can relish in any institution or person’s tragedys and still be keeping Christ commands. Amid it all, we are commanded to love and pray for one another.
I pray for the ARP Church and, I will not, I will never, turn my back on Erskine

Ann Clarke Judd Thank you, David. I and many, many, others will not turn our backs either!

Gerry Lord David, I stand with you. Well said. I believe Jesus was against a rigid orthodoxy, such as appears to be promoted currently by factions in the ARP church. For Erskine to not only remain who she has been, and move far ahead, she must not bow to one perspective of viewing the world and faith.

Scott Fleming The latest and greatest I’m hearing out of Due West today is that Dr. Norman has forbidden Dr. Crenshaw from going on campus. Has anyone else out there heard it or can confirm or dispute it?

Becky Lauderdale Can’t confirm or dispute, but if it’s true: All these years Bill has been teaching, and now he’s considered “dangerous”? Wouldn’t want critical thinking to break out on campus, would we?

Marie Richardson Holy Flying Spaghetti Monster. Sheesh. I feel honored to have been taught by someone ‘dangerous’ then.

Jonathan Breazeale Wouldn’t surprise me at all. What a childish thing to do.

Jim Ogilvie How old was Norman when Dr. Crenshaw began teaching at EC?

Nancy Hall Gautier Confirmed by Dr. Crenshaw on the other site.

Jim Ogilvie Sounds like more grounds for a protest march ! The streets and sidewalks of DW ARE open to the public, right ?

Jonathan Breazeale Hate to suggest this but this is something the ACLU would love to jump into.

Selected posts from AFE, 9/6

Vicki Lown Maybe it is time for alumni to make an appearance together to support the cause. Only then will students become involved. You know how it is when you are a student. You really do not think how these issues are so important no matter what side you are on until you get a little older. And I know that does not apply to all students, but the majority. So finding ways they can get involved whether there is media or not could be the place to start. If it gets large enough, media will come.

David Dangerfield Some alumni board members are talking about having the SGA President at the next Alumni Directors meeting. That might be a step in that direction. A few students have also expressed interest in having lunch next time a few of us are on campus

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/6

Beth Caldwell Buzogany Regarding news coverage for a protest march, I think it is a good visual that television stations and newspapers would carry. Getting the cameras and reporters there will need to be coordinated well in advance of the march. Do we have a PR person in our midst who could take on that task and either be or assist a spokesperson, once we decide on a date and time? If we get a commitment from a station, we will need a sizable turnout to insure that they run the piece.

Gerry Lord I will volunteer to be an assistant PR person. As a pastor, I’m used to public speaking, and have dealt with media–however, I am in the lowcountry, and know there are probably experienced PR folks on here. I have the time to make calls, send letters and emails. So whoever wants the big job, I’ll help. (Could we get a float at Homecoming and let Bill Crenshaw ride???)

Beth Caldwell Buzogany Perhaps the float could honor Dr. Crenshaw’s being named Professor of the Year for 2010. They haven’t named one for 2011 yet, have they?

Rick Beard I’ll try to find out if we can get in the parade.

William Crenshaw

American Association of University ProfessorsAcademic Freedom for a Free Society

September 6, 2011

VIA ELECTRONIC AND U.S. MAIL

Dr. David A. Norman President
Erskine College
P.O. Box 308
Due West, South Carolina 29639

Dear President Norman:

Dr. William B. Crenshaw, a tenured full professor and holder of an endowed chair in the Department of English with thirty-five years of service at Erskine College, has advised this Association of your August 12 letter notifying him of his immediate suspension with pay from his academic responsibilities pending the outcome of dismissal proceedings. Professor Crenshaw has informed us that he has been denied access to his office and to his college e-mail account. We understand that the letter was sent after Professor Crenshaw declined to accept an early-retirement agreement which would have paid him his salary through August 2013.

Assuming the accuracy of the information in our possession, we are writing to advise you that this action is unacceptable under the enclosed 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and the complementary 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings (also enclosed). We note that the procedures for dismissal set forth in pages 35-36 of the Erskine College faculty manual are essentially consistent with the key provisions of the 1958 Statement.

One of those provisions, which the faculty manual incorporates almost verbatim, is the following: “Suspension of a faculty member during the [dismissal] proceedings is justified only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by the faculty member’s continuance.”
In an August 21 e-mail message to you, Professor Crenshaw questioned the basis of the suspension “because,” he wrote, “your documents have never indicated that you considered me a harm to myself or others. . . . ” You responded on August 23:

“Immediate harm to yourself or others would be threatened by your continuance. The reasons for this were set out in my letter to you dated August 12, 2011. There is one reason in particular that I would like to call to your attention. The College cannot permit you to hold your position on an active basis and while doing so [permit you to] encourage people to quit donating to Erskine and to quit sending their kids to Erskine.”

As far as we can ascertain, the August 12 letter did not ascribe any bases for Professor Crenshaw’s suspension, much less a perceived threat of immediate harm, and the reason given on August 23, even if true (Professor Crenshaw sharply contests its accuracy), hardly seems to involve an imminent threat to anyone’s safety or well-being, though its being employed as a basis for the suspension does lend additional credence to Professor Crenshaw’s claim that the actions taken against him were based on considerations that violate his academic freedom. In addition, since by your own account Professor Crenshaw’s allegedly “disloyal” speech occurred in an online forum, suspending him from his faculty responsibilities will clearly do nothing to prevent further such expressions.

We find it puzzling, moreover, that the same faculty member who, according to your August 9 proffer of early retirement, is “leaving Erskine in good standing” and whose “many contributions over the years are greatly appreciated” should by August 12 become such a danger that you would be compelled to suspend him immediately.

An administration’s action to suspend a professor from service, absent threat of immediate harm, is a matter of basic concern to our Association. We urge that the suspension be lifted, that Professor Crenshaw’s access to his office and to the campus e-mail system be restored, and that any subsequent action be consistent with the above-cited procedural standards. We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Gregory F. ScholtzAssociate Secretary and Director
Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Governance

Enclosures

cc:
Mr. Joe Patrick, Chair, Board of Trustees
The Rev. Andrew K. Putnam, Moderator of the General Synod of the ARPC
Dr. Norton Bradley Christie, Interim Vice President and Dean of the College
Professor Brooks Kuykendall, Faculty Chair
Professor Larry Watson, President, South Carolina Conference AAUP
Professor William B. Crenshaw

Marie Richardson The insanity of this entire situation is astounding.

Helen Elizabeth Malone Ditto Marie. It is like we are watching a strange sitcom/reality tv show unfold and no matter how much or how loud we yell at the characters on the screen, nothing will change the story lines.

Gary Bordogna Right now, I bet Dr. Norman is saying !@#$%^&*.

Nancy Hall Gautier Gary, I bet Chuck is too.

Timothy P. Bradshaw Give ‘em hell Bill! I think all they understand is fire and brimstone…

Stacy Hall ‎”Mama always said, ‘stupid is as stupid does’.” (Forgive me if I missed the punctuation, it’s been a long time since high school

Jim Ogilvie Sounds like a “warlock-hunt” at Erskine !

Jonathan Breazeale Dr. Norman cannot curse! It would violate his Statement of Faith!

Stacy Hall Do we still have spies here? If so, ARPTalk will be interesting tomorrow.

Jamie Cheshire-Opp Dr. Crenshaw – YES!!! Amen!

Hayden Mills Pollack Too cool, this makes my day!

Marci Tuten Greci Wonderful.

Joe Sullivan Yeah- Go Bill!

John Brawley Wow! I’m glad that you’re are defending yourself and getting some very strong backing. My initial response was “Give ‘em hell, Bill.” But that is tempered with the realization of the damage this could mean for Erskine. My experience with regulating bodies is that when an institution violates its own published regulations they really start smelling blood. I can’t see this ending well for Erskine without more administrative change. A move like this, in violation of Erskine’s own policies, shows inexperience and ineffective leadership. I am sure that we haven’t see all the cards that each side has to play but I imagine that there is potential for blood to be spilt. Still, give ‘em hell!

Jonathan Breazeale In the immortal word of Ferris Bueller, “sometimes, you just have to say ‘what the f…’” My point being, in this current world, playing nice is like urinating your pants. You’ll get a warm feeling but down the road, you’ll realize you “hurt” yourself in the interest of others.

Jay Daniel Maurer Jr. I know it’s easy for me to say “go Dr Crenshaw”, but GO DR. CRENSHAW

Lewis McKelvey Common sense would lend one to believe that with the AFT&G folks weighing in here, some sense of sanity might return to Dr. Norman and the Synod decision-makers. Unfortunately, I too often tend to be pessimistic in these situations, thinking that Dr. Norman and his ilk will find cause to yet again trivialize the situation – continuing along their blind, merry way. I hope I’m wrong.

Anyway, glad to see Dr. Crenshaw’s fighting back!

Beth Caldwell Buzogany Dr. Norman has got to be thinking, “Why did I ever come to Erskine?” But then, as he reassured Stacy Hall in his response to her letter, he and his family will be fine no matter what happens. Take no prisoners, Bill!

Jay West Just one more flaming example of Norman’s inexperience and inability to lead. How long will Joe Patrick and the board allow this incompetent brief era to continue. They are allowing an outside influence (ARP) to exercise a hit list through the faculty and administration. In the end, they will use Norman’s own incompetence as the excuse and deflect the blame. To the BOT, enough is enough, it is time to do your job. Do not play with the legacy of an institution or the legacies of our professors. Joe Patrick, i have known a long time, his father Jody is a man I love dearly, and I hope that Joe’s former resolve and foresight will urge him to do the right thing. Enough!

Mary Elizabeth Todd WOW- is my first response- second response what is next-well I am sure the phones are burning up the lines today- on what to do next byt the TOS. I am also sure that there are some of those calls that Dr. Norman will have no idea that are being made. It also appears that in this letter he is caught is telling a lie in the battle of his own letters or emails August 12 and Aug 23 letters- also from my understanding they are taking as the rule -that is true with any mental health professional- meaning that a professor is in immediate risk of killing himself/herself which should have him removed for a mental evaluation to protect them or he is a threat to bodily harm someone else- which would have the police arrest him- even a restraining order has to have at least that part so I doubt legally Dr. Crenshaw can be kept off campus but at this point I would stay off simply because I am sure his attorney has told him to do so. Besides I do not remember that Dr. Crenshaw has ever told us not to give money to Erskine- We have done so but that is our right as alumni-

Ray King Does any of this mess resemble the noble tradition that our fathers knew? How is this praiseworthy?

Mary Elizabeth Todd I would like the men involved to ask if themselves if the results are all that matter- what kind of lessons are they teaching the students -you can do whatever you want just say that “God said…” reminds me of the song the street preacher sings in the Mass by Leonard Berstein.

Jay West This is by far not the first lie Norman has told to the alumni. I have an entire list.

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/8

Jay West Homecoming Media Coverage. I am working to bring the news media to the Erskine campus for Homecoming. Some of you may remember a spot I did with a local news station after the Snow Synod. Just wait for homecoming. I encourage everyone to attend and voice your concerns for Erskine. We need someone to design a T-Shirt for the occassion. Maybe Helen can pull off another good one that we can purchase online. Nonetheless, I am assured the media will be there, and it is time for all of us to be heard. If Norman won’t listen to the alumni, I promise the viewing area will listen. I want to encourage Crenshaw, Gaston, O’Cain, McAllister, Gambrell, Hendricks, and eveyone else to come and speak your mind. The mic is yours.

Selected posts from AFE, 9/9

Eric Goodwin Dr. Norman closes his email to the faculty regarding Dr. Crenshaw with the following valediction – “All for Christ!”

Eerily reminiscent of the rallying call of the Crusaders slaughtering infidels? God wills it!

Harry Meyer III When I was a boy, I accepted God because of my parents. As a young adult, including the years I was at Erskine, I was a “believer” out of habit…but I did not give it much thought. In graduate school, as I grew in my understanding of science, I became convinced that “faith” was no longer necessary…a crutch I no longer needed. In the years following graduate school, I matured (at least a little) and found that the faith of my youth had a place in my life and it grew into a maturing faith. Then I wasted an enormous amount of time trying to reconcile biblical teaching and scientific fact. Now, I have come to understand that my profession and my faith can coexist without tainting the other. One of the things that has allowed that personal reconciliation is remembering the men who first introduced me to “real” science…Bright Lowery, Howard Thomas, and Bill Junkin. Men who taught science well and lived faithful lives. The investment they made in me and the example of their lives has served me well for 30 years.

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/9

William Crenshaw Headed back to Due West to clean out my office, and because my internet is down, I may be going dark for a few days — so this seemed to be a good time to share some thoughts with the alumni boards.

FIRST, Diane and I can’t thank you enough for the support you all have shown over the last months and especially the last days. The alumni sites were lifelines that countered the inevitable depressed feelings that come from being fired. The comments from ex-students are extra special: students, constantly passing through Erskine and Due West, are the raison d’être for Erskine and its teachers.

And that brings up the SECOND point: the focus has been temporarily on my being fired but the focus should and will return to Erskine. Actually, my firing is not so much about me as it is about Erskine — the new Erskine of Dr. Norman and the men behind him. My firing isn’t even personal — it’s just a symptom of the New Erskine disease. I told my colleagues on the Grievance Committee last spring, when we heard Dr. Hering’s case, that I was next. The administration is going down a list provided to them from the famous undue outside influence; I knew where I was on the list; I know, within a couple of candidates, who is next. So my firing was both predictable and inevitable. The problem is that Erskine is being hijacked; the good news is that the hijackers can be stopped.

Which means that THIRD, we must all be steadfast and patient. Right now the administration is facing a hurricane of criticism. They have the sails reefed and the hatches battened down; they’re determined to wait until this squall blows over and then the sails will be unfurled, the hatches opened, and the ship will sail ever on, always bearing starboard. Well, we have to show them that the squall won’t blow over, that Erskine will not drop off our radar screens, that they cannot just wait us out. They need to know that we’re always here, watching, judging, moving to block their plans to hijack the college. We can’t let them feel secure or comfortable, not for a second. It won’t take much to do this — just as reminder now and again that we’re still here, that we’re not going to let them get away with just anything.
As I said at the beginning of this struggle, back in March of 2010, we can lose but they can’t win. So in that sense, they have already lost. Our job now is to make sure that we don’t lose too.

Thanks again for your support of the Erskine we all knew. That is the focus and the prize of this struggle.

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/10

Selected posts from AFE, 9/10

Beth Alexander Rickenbaugh For those alumni that remain in the ARP Church, please send your concerns to Rev. Andrew Putnam, moderator of Synod. His email address is andrewputnam@mac.com. I just did. Not only should the BoT know how we feel about what is happening, but the Church should also know. I don’t know, it may just be “spitting in the wind” but I felt like I needed to make my views known to him.

Selected post from AFE, 9/15

David Dangerfield It has been reported that the Erskine Faculty Executive Committee met and voted to affirm that Dr Crenshaw’s procedural rights had not been violated. I am working to confirm and to fi out if Dr Crenshaw addressed the committee.

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/14

Selected posts from AFIE, 9/17

Ron Barnett If there are any current Erskine students in this group, or if any alumni in the group know of any current students who would be willing to talk on the record about these issues for The Greenville News, please email me at rbarnett@greenvilleonline.com

This e-mail edition of ARPTalk is in response to an e-mail from a Christian sister and a phone call from a Christian brother.

As you are aware, both ARPTalk and the Editor have never been shy about speaking clearly and boldly to all issues relevant to the health and well-being of the ARP Church. In fact, that is precisely why ARPTalk exists: to promote the well-being of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church! This is clearly stated in all ARPTalk documents.

The Editor is aware that in our exceedingly “nice” ARP culture that sometimes his bold speech and manner are probably offensive to some. Prophetic speech is often misunderstood. Indeed, there have been occasions when his passion and zeal for the well-being of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church and the integrity of our evangelical and Reformed Christian faith have produced both heat and light. However, the Reader may be confident that everything that the Editor has reported has been accurate, and, on the rare occasions, when a mistake in reporting has occurred, a correction has always followed quickly.

In point of fact, the Editor has apologized when he realized that he had crossed a line in dealing with an individual or two. In pondering this, the Editor wants to remind the Readers of ARPTalk that, as a faithful presbyter and member of Second Presbytery of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, he has always been open and willing to repent when convinced by the Scriptures that he has erred. That is what all faithful presbyters do! That is what all faithful Christians do! Should a Christian or presbyter not be willing to repent when it is clearly demonstrated to him that he is in sinful error according to the Scriptures, there is a serious problem.

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

I don’t know if Bob Seger wrote “Turn the Page,” but doesn’t he perform it well!? It is time now to TURN THE PAGE on the “Bill Crenshaw Era” at Erskine. The last chapter of this story has been written. The only dangling question that was left was whether Crenshaw was going to file a lawsuit against Erskine. The e-mail that was sent out last night from the Erskine Faculty Executive Committee and which is posted below settles that question.

The Faculty Executive Committee has met confidentially with President Norman and Dr. Christie concerning the termination of Dr. William Crenshaw’s tenured faculty appointment. From the information we received at that meeting, the FEC is satisfied that the College followed the procedures for dismissal as outlined in the College Faculty Manual (p.35-36), and that Dr. Crenshaw’s procedural rights have not been violated.

The memo asserts that the “t”s have been crossed and the “I”s have been dotted in the matter of Crenshaw’s “termination.” Crenshaw’s attorneys have probably informed him that he has no hope in court. SACS is not going to be interested if the faculty is satisfied with the procedure. And who cares about the AAUP!

The letter that Crenshaw made public on Facebook from the AAUP to President Norman was fascinating in what it revealed. Indeed, it revealed that Crenshaw turned down two years of salary. That is, he walked away from about $140,000 plus benefits. Why would he do that? The answer is obvious. He could not sign the non-disclosure clause of the deal. He wants his freedom to talk and talk and talk!

As I have said, Crenshaw’s attorneys have probably informed him that he doesn’t have a case; however, there is a more compelling reason for him not to go to court. If he did take this to court, it would be publicly and clearly demonstrated that he was terminated from his position “for cause.” In other words, he would be discredited and the next page of the continuing saga of the life and times of Bill Crenshaw would be difficult for him to tell.

Well, what is the next chapter in the continuing saga of the life and times of Bill Crenshaw? Stay tuned!

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

Below is a copy of an e-mail that Bill Crenshaw posted on the AFE site today, and I have also been informed that he posted it on the “closed” AFIE site last night. The post is a copy of an e-mail letter that was sent to President David Norman from the AAUP.

Dear President Norman:

Dr. William B. Crenshaw, a tenured full professor and holder of an endowed chair in the Department of English with thirty-five years of service at Erskine College, has advised this Association of your August 12 letter notifying him of his immediate suspension with pay from his academic responsibilities pending the outcome of dismissal proceedings. Professor Crenshaw has informed us that he has been denied access to his office and to his college e-mail account. We understand that the letter was sent after Professor Crenshaw declined to accept an early-retirement agreement which would have paid him his salary through August 2013.

Assuming the accuracy of the information in our possession, we are writing to advise you that this action is unacceptable under the enclosed 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and the complementary 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings (also enclosed). We note that the procedures for dismissal set forth in pages 35-36 of the Erskine College faculty manual are essentially consistent with the key provisions of the 1958 Statement.

One of those provisions, which the faculty manual incorporates almost verbatim, is the following: “Suspension of a faculty member during the [dismissal] proceedings is justified only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by the faculty member’s continuance.”

In an August 21 e-mail message to you, Professor Crenshaw questioned the basis of the suspension “because,” he wrote, “your documents have never indicated that you considered me a harm to myself or others. . . . ” You responded on August 23:

“Immediate harm to yourself or others would be threatened by your continuance. The reasons for this were set out in my letter to you dated August 12, 2011. There is one reason in particular that I would like to call to your attention. The College cannot permit you to hold your position on an active basis and while doing so [permit you to] encourage people to quit donating to Erskine and to quit sending their kids to Erskine.”

As far as we can ascertain, the August 12 letter did not ascribe any bases for Professor Crenshaw’s suspension, much less a perceived threat of immediate harm, and the reason given on August 23, even if true (Professor Crenshaw sharply contests its accuracy), hardly seems to involve an imminent threat to anyone’s safety or well-being, though its being employed as a basis for the suspension does lend additional credence to Professor Crenshaw’s claim that the actions taken against him were based on considerations that violate his academic freedom. In addition, since by your own account Professor Crenshaw’s allegedly “disloyal” speech occurred in an online forum, suspending him from his faculty responsibilities will clearly do nothing to prevent further such expressions.

We find it puzzling, moreover, that the same faculty member who, according to your August 9 proffer of early retirement, is “leaving Erskine in good standing” and whose “many contributions over the years are greatly appreciated” should by August 12 become such a danger that you would be compelled to suspend him immediately.

An administration’s action to suspend a professor from service, absent threat of immediate harm, is a matter of basic concern to our Association. We urge that the suspension be lifted, that Professor Crenshaw’s access to his office and to the campus e-mail system be restored, and that any subsequent action be consistent with the above-cited procedural standards. We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

I have five points.

First, it is gratifying to see that the stipulations of the deal that was offered to Crenshaw are about what I surmised. It certainly was a good deal. It’s a pity that Crenshaw violated confidence and broke the deal. Indeed, it was a good deal.

Two, look up the American Association of University Professors. It’s an “I-want-to-be-a-professors’-union-and-just-can’t-make-the-grade” organization. The AAUP is like a piss ant’s sting, or a mosquito bite on a blue whale. It’s annoying but not much more! Since 1963 the AAUP has had a ban on Grove City College (a Christian College in Pennsylvania). Now, look up Grove City College. Has the AAUP’s ban on Grove City College hurt the college’s growth or influence? To God that Erskine was as healthy as Grove City College!!!

Three, as of this afternoon, Dr. Norman has sent out two e-mails. The first was sent to Crenshaw that informed him that his employment at Erskine had been terminated. The second e-mail was distributed to the Erskine community and it informed them that Crenshaw was no longer an employee of Erskine College. For the last couple of months, Crenshaw has made an art form out of insubordination to and the bullying and insulting of Dr. Norman. Crenshaw’s past antics do not work with this brave young president. Crenshaw got what he wanted and deserved.

Four, what is Crenshaw going to do now? Does anyone want to wager with me that he doesn’t take this to court? So, how is Crenshaw going to pay the fees of his attorneys? Well, how were the attorneys’ fees paid for Chesnut, Taylor, and Young? What is the EC Foundation going to do with the “war chest” of money that they have? BTW, does anyone know how to find out what a 501.c.3 does with its money? Someone needs to look into what the EC Foundation is doing with the thousands of dollars that have recently been donated to the foundation this year. Is it kosher for a 501.c.3 (that was founded to provide scholarships at Erskine College) to pay attorneys’ fees so that a former Erskine employee can sue the college in civil court?

Five, I call on all ARPs and all evangelical Christians who love righteousness to stand with President David Norman. We have asked this young man to do the right things. He is a man of courage and integrity. We should stand with him! Indeed, God help us to stand with him!

Regards,

Chuck Wilson

Editor, ARPTalk

A senior English professor, Crenshaw has made a career of using his classroom to ridicule both the mission of Erskine as a Christian college and the faith of Christian students. For years, Bill Crenshaw has been the bane of multiple Erskine administrations that were unwilling and seemingly unable to deal with his antics.

The following has been made public: (1) Crenshaw has been suspended for the Fall semester; and (2) his institutional email account has been closed. At this time, in Due West and on Facebook, there is a great deal of speculation as to what this means and where it is going.

First Question

One of the questions that are circulating asks why Crenshaw was suspended at this time. Did President Norman suspend Professor Crenshaw for his frequent attacks on Christianity and Christian students? In point of fact, we do not know and may never know the answer to this question. Perhaps Dr. Crenshaw’s lengthy history of personal conflict with others in the Due West community finally caught up with him.

Second Question

A second question that is circulating asks the meaning of “suspended for the Fall semester” and the canceling of the institutional email. Well, these developments are code for “gone,” and do not expect to see Dr. Crenshaw back in an Erskine classroom again! “Suspension” is used for “face-saving.” “Canceling of the institutional email” is what takes place when an employee is removed.

The Deal

On the basis of what the Editor knows from his time on the Erskine BOT, it looks as though a deal has been cut. From the Editor’s BOT experience, the law firm that represents Erskine prefers to negotiate rather than litigate in these matters. That deal probably looks something like this: (1) Dr. Crenshaw will get his salary and benefits this year; (2) he will also get some “going away money”; (3) there is a non-disclosure clause that prevents both parties from speaking about the stipulations of the agreement; (4) there is an indemnification clause that relinquishes the rights of the parties to sue each other in these matters; and (5) there are stiff penalties that secure the silence and cooperation of both parties.

Pragmatically, this is a good deal for both sides. Dr. Crenshaw settles for a bag of money that will carry him through until he is 65 and he does not have to work. Dr. Norman has essentially silenced Dr. Crenshaw by pulling out his tongue and cutting off his fingers. Dr. Norman has removed a significant distraction and liability to the institution’s mission.

The Editor is not rock-sure of his speculations; however, he is willing to bet his hat. There are a number of reasons for the Editor’s confidence: (1) the silence of Dr. Crenshaw that began about six weeks ago; (2) the unwillingness of President Norman to discuss this manner when he announced it to the BOT on August 18; and (3) Dr. Crenshaw’s continued silence. It ain’t natural for Crenshaw to be silent about anything! The boy loves to talk . . . and talk . . . and talk!

Editor’s Question

The Editor has a question. Did Bill Crenshaw engineer this? The Editor’s answer is Yes! Dr. Crenshaw is shrewd – very shrewd. He is well aware of the direction of the ARP Church. He knows the direction that Erskine is now drifting. He wanted a way out. What was the best way out with maximum effect for him?

The Editor thinks that he found the way out. Well done, Bill! You played your cards well!

The Loser

Well, is there a loser in this affair? That answer is Yes! The losers are the nearly 2,000 secular Erskine alums who belong to and may participate on the “Alumni for Erskine” and the “Alumni for an Independent Erskine” Facebook sites. They have held Crenshaw in high esteem. They venerate him as their guru and their voice. He has been their champion for a secular Erskine since their college days. From his vitriolic writing on Facebook and elsewhere, the secular alums expected him to lead them in their “righteous war” against the forces of Fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism. “Crenshaw the Champion” would stand against the benighted and evil forces of evangelical Christian ignorance in the ARP Church and on the BOT and the Erskine administration and community. Instead, it appears that when given the choice of leading a crusade for secularism or “thirty pieces of silver” for his pocket, “Crenshaw the Champion” became “Crenshaw the Coward” and took the bag of money and ran to his North Carolina home on the lake.

Now, the Editor’s assessment of the situation may be wrong. How will we know? The Editor’s calculus has failed if the following happens: (1) Crenshaw again cranks up the rhetoric on Facebook, on his blog, and elsewhere and goes after Erskine and President Norman; (2) a lawsuit is filed by Crenshaw against Erskine; and (3) Crenshaw files a complaint with SACS. Indeed, time will tell whether the Editor has ciphered correctly.

Has the Editor Changed His Mind?

A number of you have asked the Editor the following question: “Now that Crenshaw is gone, have you changed your mind on the relationship between Erskine and the ARP Church?”

The answer to that question is NO! As a matter of fact, the Editor is more convinced than ever that the ARP Church should sever the relationship with Erskine. The business of Erskine College and Seminary is not something that the ARP Church should be involved in! We lack both the resolve and the resources that are needed to sustain and oversee the business of a college and seminary.

The Bible has something to say about knowing a tree by its fruit (Matthew 7:16-20; 12:33; Luke 6:43-44). Currently, the “fruit” (the secular alums) of Erskine College and Seminary represent a flat contradiction of the theological standards and philosophical understanding of the ARP Church in higher education and theological training. Is the purpose of the ARP Church in her endeavors in higher education and theological training through Erskine College and Seminary to produce a large number of graduates who hate and reject the evangelical Christian faith of the ARP Church and who unwaveringly oppose the philosophy and oversight of the ARP Church as her educational agency? If that has been the purpose of the ARP Church for the last 40 years, we have succeeded splendidly. However, if our goal was to do liberal arts education from an evangelical perspective and theological training that affirmed the ARP Church and have graduates who reflected the educational philosophy of the ARP Church and the theological verities of the ARP Church, we ARPs have failed miserably.

Luke 13:6-9 reads in this manner:

A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why encumbers it the ground?

And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that you shall cut it down.

After 40 years of attempts, it is time that we acknowledge the truth. We in the ARP Church do not have the financial and personnel resources to turn Erskine College into a Christian liberal arts college that exists to the glory of God, nor do we have the ability to run Erskine Seminary so that it functions to reflect and promote the ministry of the ARP Church. We have struck out! It’s time for a batter other than the ARP Church!

The Editor wishes that what he has written were not true; however, wishing does not change reality.

These are my thoughts,

Charles W. Wilson

A number of people have suggested that the comment below, previously published as a comment under the article A Vision for Erskine as Articulated by the Erskine Facebook Participants be posted as an article. After discussion with the ARPTalk team, I am turning my comments into a post.

Regards,

Chuck Wilson

ARPTalk

Ms. Stacy Hall wrote a very nasty and demeaning letter to President Norman. President Norman responded with a blunt but respectful letter to Hall. The interesting thing about President Norman’s response is that he didn’t say anything to her that he hasn’t said in public to General Synod, to the BOT, and, yes, to me. However, Ms. Hall is a delicate flower! The BOIs (‘bunch of idiots”) must also be delicate flowers! They seem to be able to give; however, THEY CAN’T TAKE!!

As you read the comments below, it will be helpful to remember that Stacy Hall, Cecelia Hall Dunleavy, and Nancy Hall Gautier are sisters, and, I’m sure, there are others who are their cousins in this cauldron of sensitive feelings and brain dribble. Well, I suppose we now have both the three witches of Due West (TWODW) and the BOIs on the alums Facebook site.

It’s beginning to look like a Due West family reunion! I wonder if Mary Lou Holmes will join in and introduce us to the family connections.

Well, whatever the family relations, it now seems that the BOIs and TWODW want a vote of “No Confidence” in President Norman from the alums.

Regards,

Chuck Wilson

ARPTalk

Another Day In the Life of the FaceBook Alums

[The letter below: from Stacy Hall to President Norman]

My letter – sorry for the length:

Dear Dr. Norman,

I am an alumna of Erskine. As are many others, I have been alarmed at what has been going on the last several years. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt to see if you could act as a filter between the people who wish to bring sudden, radical and potentially damaging change to Erskine and the Institution and its heritage. Sadly, it has become apparent that you are not. That’s what the leader of an institution does – work to balance the long-lived heritage of the institution with the whims of short-lived individuals or parts of an institution whose goals and wants will pass on with them. If a leader works to protect the heritage while implementing such goals that help the institution to grow and prosper, his legacy becomes legend. If the leader allows undue small, narrow, divisive and short-lived influence to destroy that heritage and the institution, his legacy becomes nothing, or worse.

I understand that there are clear leadership differences between your generation and mine. Adult boomers have been known for respecting their elders, listening to advice, thinking a decision through thoroughly before implementing it (not so much as adolescents, but as adults). 30-somethings do not do those things, according to research. They have grown up with video games, where if you make decisions that result in catastrophe, you just “do-over”. So for 30-somethings, I understand, the trend is make snap decisions without considering the consequences, and deal with the consequences when they come up. You have removed any number of loyal Erskine employees, whether through your direct action or through concurrence, employees who have nurtured both the institution and its legacy – the students and resulting alumni. The consequence is dire. Beloved professors with inspiring legacies, were they to apply to work at Erskine now, would be denied in the interest of, apparently, eliminating diversity of thought among staff. Elimination of diversity of thought of staff has a likely fallout of eliminating diversity of thought of students. What a shame.

It is also a trait of your generation to surround yourself with those who will simply agree. It may be wise to seek the advice of those who disagree with you. Of course, you didn’t ask for my advice, but I am giving it to you, anyway. I disagree with you, so take or leave my advice as you will. I can’t be “fired” from being an alumna, fortunately.

The alumni have been “dismissed” by some of the folks that want to see Erskine’s legacy go by the way. I believe that’s a mistake. Look at alumni contributions, last year to this year, your first. Look at the names, look at the amounts, be aware of the trend that is shaping up. Alumni dearly love Erskine, and that has been obvious in the past. However, they will not love an Erskine that has been allowed to be destroyed, because that will no longer be Erskine.

Erskine is a wonderful legacy. I hope that you have read or heard of it, and not as a history, but as a living legacy. I can hope that Erskine is a strong enough legacy to recover from the damage of a small number of people who really don’t care about that legacy, but if there is no-one in leadership to filter those narrow goals, to temper them to preserve the legacy, heaven help her. I still have hope that you could be that leader, but it is a diminishing hope. And it may be wise to remember that if one is the pawn of others, it is not the same as being the king. Pawns are dispensable, once they’ve set the strategy in motion.

I do not expect to hear back from you, as that is also, in my experience, a trait of 30-something leaders. And I understand you may have too much correspondence to deal with in a timely manner, at any rate.

Sincerely,

Stacy Hall

Mary Elizabeth Todd: Very well said.

Jim Moore: An excellent letter!

Carrie Ann Shriver: Way to go!

Cecelia Hall Dunleavy: Wonderfully stated!

John Randolph Harrison: Beautifully written Stacy.

Becky Lauderdale: Thanks again, Stacy, for taking the time to write this excellent letter and sharing with us, too!

Stacy Hall: I got a reply:

Stacy Hall:

Wow. How kind of you to write.

I was never much of a video game fan, but it seems you have decided that you have seen enough on the Internet to know the real me, so anything I could say now [to] correct you would just sound dishonest.

I hope, in time, your opinion may change, but please know that I will do what I believe is right whether you or anyone else agree.

I love Erskine, and believe I can help move her beyond the fits of Blog-induced psychosis with which she has suffered these past few years. But if not, I know God will provide for my family another way. Until you are able to run me off, however, please know that I will be doing all I can for the good of your alma mater.

Hope you are having a restful Sunday afternoon.

David Norman

Mary Elizabeth Todd: Boy the tone in that one was way different from the tone in mine. He has got p&^%ed.

P. Mark Wilson: Dear David, WE did not start this fire.

John Randolph Harrison: WOW!!!!!!! Thats harsh.

Becky Lauderdale: Obviously intends to keep doing what he’s been doing – ridding the college of good quality people and curricula, and he has no use for us..

Gary Bordogna: WOW-A letter like that to an alum!

Nancy Hall Gautier: Good to know that he and his family will be fine once Erskine goes under.

Rick Beard: UNTIL YOU CAN RUN ME OFF!!!

Nancy Hall Gautier: Anyone else get a similar response?

Ann Clarke Judd: Unusual tone from a chief executive particularly when it might be shared with a wider audience.

John Randolph Harrison: He would have been better off keeping those comments to himself. Guess we are getting the other side of the coin now.

Ann Clarke Judd: Probably not quite enough experience at the executive level to understand the ramifications of this type of response.

Becky Lauderdale: What an opening: “Wow. How kind of you to write.”

Rick Beard: this is not good. I don’t understand why the EC Foundation is tip toeing around this situation. They are afraid they are going to make someone upset? Come on!

Ann Clarke Judd: This is an example of the flippant and churlish behavior that the staff deal with on a daily basis.

Gary Bordogna: Rick: It’s usually best to respond after 24 hours or so. That way emotions have died down and you address the issues.

Mary Elizabeth Todd: I have been debating showing my response- I took a religious direction with him- in that pointed out that just because a person does not sign said statement it does not mean that they do not believe in inerrancy- in fact they may have a problem stating the Bible as being inerrant simply because only God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are that. I also pointed out matt 7:1-2-which has the Judge not lest you Judged and goes on to say in the second verse that how you judge you will be judged measure for measure- and that by signing that statement they are passing judgement on their fellow Christians who believe differently and therefore can not do it for ethical reasons. I spoke to him about there are two things that drive us- Power and love- If Power rules you become ruthless- and if love rules- you no longer need power- I asked him was he motivated by power or by love. I told him that I did not need answers to this but he needed to examine his heart to determine which kind of man he was- this is a rough summary of what I sent.

Gary Bordogna: Somewhere Dr. Bill Crenshaw is laughing.

Jim Moore: The only two Erskine presidents I ever had a conversation with were Dr. Stan Bell and Dr. Randy Ruble. I thought a lot of Dr. Bell, and hold Dr. Ruble in equal esteem. In my opinion, they would never even consider communicating like this to anyone, let alone an alumni.

I did notice that Dr. Norman disputed absolutely nothing that Stacy stated.

Ann Clarke Judd: That response does not exactly make alumni want to write a big check to the Annual Fund.

Stacy Hall: Or even a miniscule one.

Ann Clarke Judd: And doesn’t help validate the message we received from Nan, the BOT chair, and the Moderator today.

John Randolph Harrison: You took the words out of my mouth Ann. Glad I gave my last check to help save Philo Hall.

P. Mark Wilson: Instead of assuring us that things would settle down and that he saw a great future for Erskine, he fanned the flames and actually said “until you are able to run me off”. Does he mean like he ran off Woody, Cory and others? If you have any connection to the school, you are no longer welcome. If you love Erskine then you are an impediment to the changes they want. He cleaned out the entire admissions department and hired an outside firm to recruit the students they desire. Hmmm let’s see, why on earth would we be suspicious of him?

Nancy Hall Gautier: I am always telling my kids to not put things in writing that they would not like to be posted for everyone to read. Seems like some thirty somethings have not learned that lesson.

Jim Moore: I suggested this before the last alumni association meeting, and will suggest it again. I think it’s time to consider a vote of no confidence in Dr. Norman.[Ed. emphasis] Hopefully, a measure such as this will help communicate to those alumni not aware of what is going on in Due West to start paying attention. Loyalty is a two-way street. If Dr. Norman chooses to talk to alums the way he spoke to (not with) Stacy, I don’t see how we can honestly place any confidence in him.

Whitney Tillman Marcengill: I think I am going to be sick after reading Norman’s response. Are they drinking the koolaid over there?!!

Stacy Hall: I totally agree, Jim. Who can tell us how to go about lodging such a vote of no confidence? It’s a bit tricky, from my understanding.

Jim Moore: If Robert’s Rules or Order are followed, I would think that any alum can be asked to be placed on the agenda. I imagine that Nan Campbell could give you the details. It is, after all, OUR association!

Stacy Hall: I agree, Whitney. What adult responds to a serious letter from their mobile device, where you cannot see and reflect on the entire text?

Stacy Hall: Jim, am corresponding with ACJ, we’ll see what happens.

Jim Moore: Stacy, I really believe that all it takes is a motion, and a vote. Anything over 50% carries.

Whitney Tillman: Marcengill I hear you, Stacy!

Jim Moore: Stacy, I think you should be the one to make the motion, and Whitney second it.

Cecelia Hall Dunleavy: His response is just bizarre. If he thought Stacy’s assessment of him was wrong, that is his prerogative. However, as a president of a college, you have to show diplomacy at all times, ESPECIALLY, when you are putting things in writing. And to make statements like “I will do what I think is right no matter whether you or anyone else agrees” indicates that he has a huge ego with a “my way or the highway” mentality. This letter alone demonstrates poor leadership qualities. Stacy, your letter was very good and obviously touched a nerve. His letter makes him sound a bit paranoid too, with “blog-induced psychosis ” and “until you run me off”. Well, I must say that my opinion of him has changed in time, but not for the better. I actually initially wanted to give him time to prove himself. Silly me.

John Randolph Harrison: He made a couple of strange comments a few months ago on the other site from his IPAD while out of town. It was late and only a few people saw them. He deleted them almost instantly and changed the whole content. Makes you wonder.

Jim Moore: Cecelia, I actually was pulling for the guy too, until he started letting so many employees go. People don’t treat people like that.

Gary Bordogna: Stacy, Jim, and others. IMHO, if you are going to follow the “no confidence” route, you first need to meet with Dr. Norman. If he doesn’t answer your questions, or refuses to meet with you, then proceed. Otherwise, it looks the same to me as when Dr. Norman got rid of Dr. Gid as Dean without even an interview.

Folks who know me know that I’m usually not one to proceed with caution, but IMHO this is the best way to do it to be taken seriously.

Don’t beat me up too bad over this!

Rick Beard: do you have a fever or something tonight Gary?

Jim Moore: If Dr. Norman is to meet with any alumni, it should be those duly elected to represent the association, in my opinion.

John Randolph: Harrison ‎Gary, David Dangerfield and others have had a number of meetings and conversations with him. I think Dr. D has also.

Stacy Hall: Yes, I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, myself. No more. Jim,Gary, f I could make such a motion from such a distance, I would. I think it’s an “in-person” action, isn’t it?

Gary Bordogna: No Rick I’m fine. Believe me, I’m not in Dr. Norman’s corner, but I taught for 30 years and it is best to follow certain procedures if you want to remove an administrator and avoid a law suit.

Jim Moore: Stacy, Robert’s Rules of Order have been amended many times in order to utilize technology. I believe that as long as any alum is offered the opportunity to monitor via skype, cellular telephone, or what have you, there is no problem. Still, I would run this by Nan.

Gary Bordogna: Why don’t a group of us ask to meet with Dr. Norman. It doesn’t have to be the Alumni board as frankly, I think a better cross section of alums are here. If he refuses to meet, or if the group doesn’t like his answers, then proceed.

Gary Bordogna: Gee, no likes about my comments?

Nancy Hall Gautier: So ,Gary are you going to do it and hook those of us to far away up with a Skype feed? I would do that. I just can’t necessarily be there in person. Of course, if he finds out I am Stacy’s sister, he might not let me participate.

Gary Bordogna: Nancy: I type with two fingers and my son has to fix any computer problems I have. We need a younger (and smarter) alum to handle IT.

Jim Moore: I think that the college should provide the skype for any meeting with Dr. Norman, and at the alumni association meeting

Nancy Hall Gautier: Gary no one in my family fits that description. I am the youngest and I am well past young.

Nancy Hall Gautier: I have it on computer and I do know how to use it…..more or less.

Mary Elizabeth Todd: Gary- David Tabor courted Doreen using Skype when he was in Germany.

Rick Beard: Skype is very cool

Mary Elizabeth Todd: Can you image David Tabor going into the president’s office and setting all of this up. Somehow that is funny to me

Gary Bordogna: I doubt seriously if Dr. Norman will agree to Skype. I think that well respected people in the Erskine community, like Rick, whose family ties to EC go several back generations, and well respected people (mostly) outside the Erskine community like Jim, who held elected office, and is on several community boards would be great folks to ask questions of Dr. Norman.

Rick Beard: We are checking out the billboard option. The politically correct route seems to be going way to slow.

Nancy Hall Gautier: I agree Rick. We have been way too nice. Where has that left Erskine? The most telling thing to me in his comment is that however it turns out he will be fine.

Rick Beard: we have tried for over 30 years to get help with Philo Hall.

Mary Elizabeth Todd: Yeah- I like the old embarrass them route of the billboards because they cannot hide it anymore.

See the letter below. I commend this ministry to both your prayer and financial support.

Chuck Wilson

ARPTalk

We are in the midst of a revitalization effort at New Covenant ARP Church in Charlotte, NC. Those who want to know more can look at the “about” section on our website www.ncarp.org

By God’s grace, we are growing. The growth is coming from our immediate neighborhood, which is inner-city and multi-ethnic. We are happy to report that the only changes that we have made to our worship hour have been in a more traditional direction; we added Trinity Hymnals to the pew racks. Dean Turbeville’s church, All Saints, gave a generous donation for that. We’ve added the reading of the Law, confession of sin, and assurance of pardon to the liturgy.

We are mindful of the commandment to honor our fathers and mothers, so we are traditional in our worship. The worship hour is not our time for outreach; we do outreach on Sunday afternoons by providing a free meal every week, by doing door-to-door evangelism, and by leading a worship service at a neighborhood nursing home. Ideally the Lord’s Day at New Covenant will begin to look more and more like Isaiah 58:6-14 both in our activities and in the receiving of those promises. Sabbath-keeping, there, is shown to be a means of individual and community revitalization. Sabbath-keeping as a means to church revitalization – that’s the only paradigm we’re aware of which God guarantees to bless (Is. 58:14). We have merely entered into this; we are mindful of our many faults, but we pray that we will be more faithful.

The New Covenant congregation was all Caucasian, when I was called to New Covenant in January 2010; yet the neighborhood is 50% African-American. Thankfully, our Sunday attendance, now, looks very much like the neighborhood. Shortly after my installation as pastor, I took a vacation. On the following Sunday I was told that a very nicely dressed black man had visited. No one had asked him for contact information, but a few people told me that they had nice conversations with him. A couple of weeks went by, and one Sunday morning, a man walked by my office, I called out, “You must be the nicely dressed black man who visited three weeks ago.” Yes, he was the man. His name is Mark Jones. I found out that he sells men’s clothing at Nordstrom’s in Charlotte. I also learned that Mark attended Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids for three semesters, prior to moving to Charlotte. Mark is now an elder at New Covenant. He enjoys reading anything by Banner of Truth Publishing, and enjoys listening to recorded sermons by Dick DeWitt and other ministers who are like-minded. Mark is a pastoral intern. He is wrapping up his first class, Greek 1, at Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS).

New Covenant currently supports three interns at the rate of $3,000.00 ea per year (a fourth intern will live in the manse rent free, beginning Sept. 19th). That money is sent to RTS and is doubled by them up to a third of the cost of tuition, so each intern effectively receives $6,000.00 per year. That still leaves a need of about $4,000.00 per year (includes books), if they take classes on a four-year pace. Mark needs help coming up with that amount for each of the next four years. If you wish to help, you may make tax-deductible contributions to New Covenant ARP Church. Simply indicate, separately, that you want the money to be used for Mark’s education or for the education of the interns in general.

Your brother in Christ,