According to an article published by ADvindicate yesterday, Dr. Lee Greer, one of the main evolutionary biologists involved with the current debate over neo-Darwinism being promoted at LSU, has been fired by La Sierra University (Link). The article did not list any further details, but this may have been as a result of Dr. Greer signing an article with certain members of LSU’s school board, outside of the knowledge of President Wisbey or the rest of the board, entitled, “Joint Proposal of Individual La Sierra University Faculty and Trustees” back in October of 2011. The LSU administration was not at pleased and issued a response noting that the individuals who signed and published the document, without permission, “failed to recognize normal and established governance protocols…”
The La Sierra University Board of Trustees expressed its concern to the officers of the North American Division over the precipitous action taken to publicize the “Joint Proposal” without adequate prior consultation with the La Sierra University administration and board, especially in light of the ongoing discussions with Adventist Accrediting Association and Western Association of Schools and Colleges over issues of university governance and institutional autonomy (Link).
It is interesting to note, however, that Dr. Lee Grismer, also active in promoting neo-Darwinism to the exclusion of any support for the Adventist position on origins, also signed the “Joint Proposal” document. Yet, Dr. Grismer has so far been maintained by LSU – possibly because he is tenured, while Dr. Lee Greer is not or because he agreed to sign a statement of apology for his involvement with the “Joint Proposal” (see Lee Greer’s press release on this issue published by Spectrum on May 9, 2012).
Also, it seems like Randal Wisbey, President of La Sierra University, signed a $25 million dollar bond agreement with the State of California in 2008 (to include $17 million dollars to refinance the new Thaine B. Price Science Complex) where one of the stipulations of the bond was that no forms of “sectarian instruction” (presumably to include the active promotion of creationist or intelligent design concepts) would be presented within any of the buildings funded by the bond. It appears other Adventist schools have taken out state bonds as well, such as Loma Linda University (LLU). However, the restrictions associated these bonds are reportedly not as strongly opposed to the presentation of the Adventist position on origins as the language of the bond accepted by LSU appears to be.
In any case, it is no wonder that President Wisbey and the LSU administration have been so unwilling to work, in any kind of substantive manner, with efforts to reform the school when it comes to supporting the Adventist position on a literal six-day creation week within LSU’s science classrooms.
The consequences of failing to uphold the stipulations of the bond are that a lawsuit would be filed against LSU equivalent to the value of the bond. Yet, according to a statement put out by LSU (Link), President Wisbey, along with the Vice President for Financial Administration, David Geriguis, signed such a restrictive bond with the approval of LSU’s school board (though not all of the board members where aware of the restrictive language of the bond – according to one board member).
How is it not self-evident to anyone charged with oversight over the administration of one of our Adventist schools that they should not accept funds from anyone where strings are attached such that the very reason for the existence of our schools is significantly undermined?
Prohibited Use Covenant – Part 2
First we see this warm fuzzy group-hug style post so typical of liberals being tolerant to a fault with those they disagree with —
And then we get the oft repeated response to it.
The idea is that any opposition to evolutionism “is hateful” by definition unless it is cast in a “evolutionism is probably right but I believe creationism anyway” sort of fashion.
Kent keeps reminding us of that canard every now and then.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
View CommentI looked at the securities statements. Interesting. The bonds were issued through Wells Fargo Bank.
Was the additional 8 million taken out part of the original 24 mil?
Lou Westphal M.D.(Quote)
View CommentW-R-O-N-G. According to Elder Graham himself, who was quoted in the LSU statement in response to the malicious articles posted here and at ADvindicate, there was a lengthy deliberation followed by approval of the board.
Some have quite the imagination.
Professor Kent(Quote)
View Comment@Professor Kent:
All the worse for Richardo Graham. He should never have agreed to the restrictive language of the bond agreement or bond application…
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman(Quote)
View CommentDave, I agree with you completely. We need to have this investigated by somebody or some SDA group, preferably the GC. But, I do not think anyone there will step up to do it. So, we do need Shane, Sean, or someone.
Holly Pham(Quote)
View CommentCharles, I agree with you. But, this type of reasoning is very common among liberals. This past Sabbath on LLBN, John Jones and Ivan Blazen tried to convince Carolyn Thompson that sin is “relative” meaning that something may be a sin to one person, but not to another.
She questioned them, and offered examples, and they stuck to this idea.
Holly Pham(Quote)
View CommentFor those aghast about the LSU situation and wondering what other SDA institutions have taken out bonds, hold on to your britches. You’ll be stunned when you learn (soon) how many of our other schools, and which ones in particular, have taken out these bonds. You will be amazed to learn just how many other administrators have deliberately secularized their institutions besides Randal Wisbey, presumably because they too hate the SDA Church (as David Read has put it so tactfully).
Be sure to protest equally loudly.
Professor Kent(Quote)
View Comment@Professor Kent:
All Adventist school boards, and I’m sure there are many, who have taken out state bonds with such restrictive language are not wise. They have placed another one of our schools at the mercy of the civil government to tolerate that which the bond language itself does not allow…
How long will the State continue to turn a blind eye is anyone’s guess, but it will not be forever. Eventually the State will enforce the bond-agreement language which gives the state power over all those who have accepted such bonds in perpetuity for the entire life of the bonded buildings.
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman(Quote)
View CommentTo love the historic truths embraced by the SDA church and to defend them is not “hate”.
Charles(Quote)
View CommentI read something today that seems relevant to these discussions. I am incredulous that we should be having a discussion within the SDA movment about evolution as having a role in our origions.
But teaching evolution as truth is not the only inroad that Satan has made into our church. In fact, there is little area to our core beliefs that has not been compromised.
Read what Ellen White wrote in GC 509: “Conformity to worldly customs converts the church to the world; it never converts the world to Christ. Familiarity with sin will inevitably cause it to appear less repulsive.”
Jesus is coming soon. Not only is there a great work to be done in taking the 3 angels messages to the world; there is a great preparation to be worked within each of our hearts individually.
Charles(Quote)
View Comment