LSU Board says ‘we apologize’

In a surprising turn of events, LSU Board’s appointed Creation-Evolution Study Group issued a detailed memorandum to the board, outlining their report and recommendations regarding the allegations against LSU.

In addition to the memorandum, Randal Wisbey and Ricardo Graham issued an open letter, summarizing much of the memorandum. There are some noteworthy revelations in the letter, such as an apology and a concession to what Educate Truth and others have been claiming was occurring in the biology department:

[1] “We found that only 50 percent of the students surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that our Adventist view of creation was presented, and only 40 per- cent agreed or strongly agreed that our Adventist view was supported. This is not acceptable, and we apologize.”

[2] “Instruction at the university, while being strong in many areas, has not adequately presented the denomination’s position on the subject of creation.”

[3] “There is some evidence that students have not always been respected for their belief in the Biblical creation position.”

The letter ends with this final thought:

“La Sierra University is committed to being an institution that does not just present the Church’s view of creation, but fully supports it. We pledge our commitment to work prayerfully and diligently to ensure that our mission to provide a rigorous and faith-affirming Seventh- day Adventist education is carried out on behalf of our students and our Church.”

OpenLetterReCreationLSU

127 thoughts on “LSU Board says ‘we apologize’

  1. @Professor Kent:

    You said:
    “For having those views, and for sharing their doubts, I don’t believe they should be faulted any more so than faculty who share their honoest views on dancing, caffeine or alcohol consumption, abortion, homosexuality, sex on the Sabbath, or other Adventist “hot potatoes.”

    My reply:
    The faculty did far more than ‘have a view, and share a doubt”. They TAUGHT their views on evolution as the only logical explanation of our origins. It is one thing to HAVE a view, quite another to TEACH it to the exclusion of and in opposition to the one and only Bible-based belief of origins on which the SDA church was founded.

    You said:
    “What the faculty should unquestionably be faulted for is insensitivity and failure to be more accomodating toward those who had divergent views.”

    My reply:
    Divergent views? So now, a view of Creationism as an explanation of origins in an SDA school is considered ‘divergent’? Did I understand that correctly?

    The mere fact that this whole, sad and pathetic saga has gone on for this long is proof enough that incompetence has reigned supreme. Just because La Sierra’s administrators have now sprung into action does not undo decades of misuse of power, and leaving them in office going forward will only serve to fester the current situation of mistrust.

    That said, I was honestly blown away to read they were issuing an apology. Not quite sure yet what the apology is for, but I am hopeful it is a step in the right direction. The next step should be a call for letters of resignation/termination. Yes, back to that, I’m afraid.

    Sincerely,
    Angelina

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  2. @Angelina:

    Keeping these professors because there may not be others would be a testament to our lack of faith. God will provide in His time.

    …As he has done so generously at Southern Adventist University with, what is it, four Biology positions open?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  3. It appears that most of the changes are superficial. Why? Where is the evidence that something is being changed in the classroom? What’s happening to the curriculum?

    The survey is a joke. I’d like to know how many students actually took general biology or were biology majors in the last 4 years. I bet it was more than 400.

    I’ve done some digging around LaSierra.edu and found out they don’t have that many graduating biology majors. I think the average is around 26.

    I’m retracting my earlier comment about the number of students who tool general biology. There are other GE science classes available, so not every student ends up taking this class.

    I do have questions about how representative the survey is the biology students.

    For example, take question number 8 which asks, “The Seventh-day Adventist view of creation was presented in biology classes.” Fifty-percent agreed, and 44% were neutral or disagreed. We have no idea what non-respondents would have answered. In other words, we don’t know how the other 278 students who didn’t respond would have answered. So only 46 (12% of students surveyed) students over the last four years plus 2000 agreed the Seventh-day Adventist view of creation was presented in biology classes.

    They tried. Aren’t there more accurate assessments of what students have learned than a survey?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  4. If we have any hope of winning back any of the precious souls lost because of this, then the message has to be clear and unequivocal — What happend was not right. What you were taught was not right.

    Oh right, because having a papal bull style declaration is somehow going to change the position of those who have examined real, mainstream science and come to their conclusion.

    Interesting line of thought…

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  5. While I agree that the problem isn’t solved with this letter and that the issue still needs to be monitored we must also appreciate this as an excellent first step.

    It may seem a long time in coming but I’d like to point out that it hasn’t been very long since the GC new administration took over. Ted Wilson (GC President) and Lisa Beardsley (GC Dir. of Education) and Dan Jackson (NAD President) are new to this post and became actively involved in this situation as soon as they were appointed by the world church. If they got LSU to reverse its denials and actually directly apologize (Apologies almost never happen in these kinds of cases) then maybe with time and encouragement more changes will take place.

    Take courage! God is still in control!

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  6. Professor Kent,

    Thank you for your reply, but I’m not sure you answered my question, at least I hope you haven’t: How exactly are these professors (administrators etc) held accountable? From your relatively non-commital comments above, it seems you would leave it up to these professors (and I include administrators and any others in position of authority who should have taken action but didn’t) to decide whether, under new, more explicit job descriptions they choose to stay or leave. Really? Is this what you would do? Are you implying that the church does not have cause to terminate their employment? Are you saying that after a decade or more of their lies and deception, this is all we can do, revise the job description? Are you telling me that it is not a condition of employment to uphold the church’s fundamental beliefs, whether implicit or explicit? Please tell me this isn’t your solution.

    Many years ago, I worked for a Catholic charity organization. At worship one morning the President who was also a Priest, made a jaw-dropping statement. He said, “There is no such thing as good and evil. God and Satan don’t really exist.” What do you think happened? He was quietly relieved of his duties and sent to work in a mission field with natives struggling with addictions such as glue sniffing, alcoholism and pornography, to see first hand the effects of evil. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church’s track record is abysmal when it comes to taking action for wayward priests, but in this instance their reaction was swift and unequivocal. Do you think it was stipulated somewhere in this Priest’s contract that he has to believe in good and evil?

    Since we are also short on pastors, maybe we should hire a few from the Presbyterians, or from Jehovah’s Witnesses….Doesn’t matter, does it?

    Keeping these professors because there may not be others would be a testament to our lack of faith. God will provide in His time. The primary concern, as I see it, is not who will replace these professors, but rather, how to restore trust and credibility so that our youth and their parents, past, present and future can feel certain once again that we are all on the same page.

    I fully agree with your final point. However, firing these employees would not be punitive in my perspective. They repeatedly made choices, and perhaps still stand by those choices, that went counter to what our institution is about. They lied when questioned, conveniently “laid low until it blew over”, openly ridiculed students for their bible-based beliefs and on and on. By making these choices, they also chose the consequences that they should have faced ions ago. Did Jesus stand by and give the moneychangers the choice to stay if they changed their behaviour? No. He loved them none the less, and undoubtedly prayed for them, as we should too for these employees, but our Christian duty, to protect and promote Truth, demands we do more.

    Thank you
    Angelina

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  7. We’ve been reassured that all our universities teach about evolution, including Southern and Southwestern. We have to teach about it. We just cannot indoctrinate it as the more plausible explanation.

    I think many people see apostacy wherever they look.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  8. When NPUC decided to solve the problem at Walla Walla – significant changes were made in the staffing of the WW religion and biology departments.

    I don’t see anything close to that level of resolve in the Pacific Union.

    Hopefully I am wrong.

    in Christ,

    Bob

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  9. I know for a fact that Walla Walla is still teaching evolution, as is Avondale College. Their reps proudly told me so at the GC in Atlanta. The letter of apology is encouraging, but it isn’t over until it’s over! God bless everyone that is standing up for God’s truth in these tumultuous times! We must be firm and not waver. If our students decide they no longer believe the Bible account of creation they have plenty of options open to them. They do not need this opportunity at the churches expense.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  10. LSU’s Feb. 2011 announcement of the AAA’s findings, which included the names of the visiting team’s names, disappeared from LSU’s website just prior to the release of the memorandum and open letter.

    I wonder why Wisbey published the AAA findings, along with the visiting team’s names, and then, without explanation, abruptly pulled the report from LSU’s website when the committee’s memorandum was published.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  11. So the biology professors will continue to teach under a new level of restraint? There is an old saying that “one convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” Religious resolve would seem to dictate true repentance and sorrow by cleaning house after their discovery interviews with students. What is the value of a soul when their findings conclude some left religion altogether after sitting at the feet of some of these professors? Do Wisby and Graham sigh and cry over that? Will someone in authority over that institution seek them out in an effort to apologize, ask for their forgiveness and attempt to regain them?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  12. I’m not quite sure how professors who already believe in mainstream evolutionary theories of life existing and evolving on this planet over hundreds of millions of years of time are going to be effective in presenting the SDA position on origins? – i.e., that life was created in just six literal days within recent history?

    It seems futile to me to make these professors attend GRI workshops – like that is going to change their minds or make them more effective at promoting the Church’s position on origins in their classrooms as remotely rational or scientific compared to the mainstream scientific perspective on origins.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  13. @Angelina: …As he has done so generously at Southern Adventist University with, what is it, four Biology positions open?

    Perhaps this 4-year wait speaks to how far SDA scientists have strayed from Truth, scientific or not. I don’t know, but I choose not to question God’s ways. Not always easy, but liberating for sure.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  14. Wayne, I totally agree that the Church’s employees MUST abide by employment conditions. I also agree that the biology and religion faculty MUST teach and treat SDA doctrines with respect. I have never suggested otherwise. I’m continually amazed by how my position gets distorted.

    However, I don’t think that we should be in the business of firing every employee who does not adhere to every general position of faith and behavior. I know for a fact that many Church employees drink alcohol. Many dance. Many eat meat, including unclean meats. Many have divorced for inappropriate reasons. [edit] Many believe that God’s Word cannot be accepted on faith. Should they all be fired outright, or should we attempt to educate and rehabilitate them when we learn of their shortcomings? So far as we know, the LSU administration has made clear to these employees that they are to cease and desist with any teachings and treatment that gave rise to the ongoing witch hunt. And the employees may well have reformed.

    The documents released by La Sierra include the names of MANY Church individuals, including prominent church leaders, who have made a sincere effort to address the issue at hand. When you label the apology that was accompanied with very extensive documentation as “fraud,” you are indicting all who have been involved with the process of discovery and finding a solution. Can you be a little more charitable?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  15. Angelina, upon re-reading, I fear I insulted you with the head-in-the-sand remark. As a biologist, I find amusing images of animals, like the ostrich this idiom is based on, engaged in humorous activities. However, I recognize that I relate to such images in a different manner than others, and I apologize if I offended you.

    Wayne, I appreciate your optimistic take on the matter.

    Shane, there is no such thing as a perfect survey, and I understand your frustration. Response bias is very difficult, and most impossible, to get a handle on. However imperfect the survey may have been, it DID reveal some sobering facts that caught the attention of both LSU and denominational administrators. The fact that LSU has come forward with the findings and openly shared the pointed criticism should be commended. I think it would be easier now for them to be more forthcoming (i.e., “transparent”) rather than defensive if the spotlight glared a little less brightly. What the documents unmistakably reveal is that Church leadership HAS taken a proactive role toward resolving the issues. There is clearly a process in place to straighten out the situation. I hope the process is not derailed by well-meaning people who fan the flames to the point of combustion.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  16. “…..but our Christian duty, to protect and promote Truth, demands we do more.”

    Thank you
    Angelina

    This is correct. And sometimes restoration is by way of punishment. Professor Kent needs to consider this reality when he said…..

    “On a final point, God is much more interested in restorative than retributive (punitive) actions.”

    None the less, I doubt much will be done in the final end of all this.

    Bill Sorensen

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  17. Professor Kent,

    And exactly how are these people then held accountable? For so many years/decades, our youth has been misled even humiliated, concerned parents have been lied to, and the Lord’s money, wasted. Charitable? That’s exactly what the church(on every level) has been until now, and I believe our church leaders will answer one day for being asleep at the helm.

    Teaching in our schools is not just another job. It is an awesome responsibility, the effects of which will have repercussions for generations of people and either help steer them to Christ or away from Him. When one accepts this responsibility, wouldn’t you agree that this is far different than a single person’s choice to drink alcohol and the effect it has, on one or a small number of lives? Personally, I believe that the church should stay consistent with expectations for its employees on all levels, even “general positions on faith and behaviour”, but if it does not, then can what LaSierra’s professors have done really fall in this same category, or do we need to asses first and foremost what the fallout has been, and what the potential risk is if they were to continue to teach?

    One more point: If we have any hope of winning back any of the precious souls lost because of this, then the message has to be clear and unequivocal — What happend was not right. What you were taught was not right. These professors have no place teaching at our schools — The charity we extend has to do with continued patience and love for them as church members, not as employees. Just like you would not award custody of an abused child to his abusive, albeit remorseful parents, neither should we leave these professors to continue teaching our youth. How could we trust them again, or ever?

    I look forward to reading your suggestions.

    Angelina

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  18. @Ron Stone M.D.:

    So, for Sean and Shane to say a “so and so” other person is “hurting” their cause is pure baloney!

    The people whose opinion we most care about don’t work for or likely subscribe to Spectrum – let me tell you 😉

    When those on “our side” make needlessly pejorative comments and use vulgar or crude language (as you are prone to do on occasion), it makes people at Spectrum or AdventistToday quite pleased to be able to point such things out…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  19. Dr. Chadwick,

    You are an SDA biologist devoted to exploring issues involving creation and origins. Do you think we need to have science, reason, and empirical evidence to inform us whether the Bible is true? Is Sean correct insisting this to be the case? Is Sean’s position what you folks teach at Southwestern Adventist University?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  20. My understanding is that there were biology faculty who sincerely questioned the literal interpretation of Genesis and others who genuinely accepted it. I also understand that some of the doubters made disrespectful statements. I don’t question these facts; I have it on word from two well-informed colleagues who are biologists within the SDA system that these unfortunate events indeed happened.

    What I’m not clear on is the claim that these faculty lied. One was quoted by the press giving what could only be deemed an honest disclosure of his views. If anything, the biologists should have be more secretive of their views, but instead were openly honest about them. For having those views, and for sharing their doubts, I don’t believe they should be faulted any more so than faculty who share their honoest views on dancing, caffeine or alcohol consumption, abortion, homosexuality, sex on the Sabbath, or other Adventist “hot potatoes.” Seventh-day Adventists have always engaged in discussion of divergent views, and universities in particular are a proper place to engage in these discussions. What the faculty should unquestionably be faulted for is insensitivity and failure to be more accomodating toward those who had divergent views. But that is hardly legal grounds for justifying termination. Bear in mind that the legal issues involved in dismissal of clergy is a very, very different situation than what an academic institution has to contend with.

    The administration, clearly, should have addressed the situation long before things became such a public spectacle. Had the faculty been told to immediately cease and desist any kind of teaching of theistic evolution, and were told that doing so would be a condition of continuing employment, then from that point on they could and should be held accountable. For all we know, that message may well have been communicated to the faculty (which seems highly likely to me), and the errant professors may well have complied.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  21. @Angelina:

    With all due respect, true scientists remain objective until they have exhausted and considered ALL angles, including thoroughly considering Creationism.

    That would be nice if creationism was science. Perhaps you should read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. My friends and I read it at Academy together. Asking a Scientist to prove that evolution is true is akin to denying that Latin ever existed to a Spanish teacher. A quite ridiculous proposition. Thus, all scientific angles should be considered, and when I say science, I mean, mainstream peer-reviewed science.

    …ridiculed students if they dared bring it up. Interesting…. Who has been the bully exactly?

    Those are unsubstantiated accusations. What we had was a largely orchestrated campaign of character assassination against professors at La Sierra by the extreme right-wing element in the church, the equivalent of the Tea Party in modern day politics.

    Like I said, falling to these ridiculous attacks will do little to help La Sierra. I know quite a few of my friends and I plan to attend non-Adventist colleges as a result of these concerns.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  22. Angelina,

    The Southern Adventist University situation was a very strange one. I have a lifelong buddie who is an SDA biology professor, and I have recently befriended several others. These are good people–very faithful, very well-informed individuals whom I respect. I was told that a lot of people became very upset last year when Southern interviewed some perfectly acceptable candidates–very “safe” ones–and then rejected them because they lacked a passion for teaching and research specifically on creationism. In one or two cases, the department refused to hire a candidate who stated they could not “prove” creation. How ludicrous is that?!!! I was told that not all of the faculty were happy with the decisions, which resulted in a work overload for all. (I think maybe one or two faculty also put off their retirement; sorry, I’m a bit fuzzy on the facts, as amusing and riveting as they were.) If SAU wants to teach and indoctrinate creationism rather than biology, more power to them. I just hope that their output of future scientists and physicians is not negatively affected.

    I don’t know what became of the rejected candidates, but if I was in their shoes with the current climate of outright hostility, I would not want to apply for any other openings within the Church. Who would want to teach at an institution with constituents who assume a priori you’re an evilutionist, dissect endlessly any statement that could be twisted to mean something sinister, expose to public ridicule on the internet anyone who fails to state “the weight of evidence favors the traditional SDA position” (Sean Pitman’s favored tactic), and send blanket hate mail to every biologist on the staff?

    You don’t think we have a problem finding replacements for all the faculty you want to fire? Pull your head out of the sand! (Okay…the last comment was tongue-in-cheek; I believe you simply fail to grasp the significance of the problem.)

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  23. This so-called “report” is nothing more than a smokecreen to avoid any action. Take simply one statement: “In order to get the most accurate and objective assessment…the group went directly to the source.”

    Unfortunately, the “source” they went to was not the “objective” and easily obtained information which we are discussing on this website, but students’ perceptions about what they thought was taught.

    Why didn’t the “the group” actually to THE source, which is the actual materials taught and used during the Biology classes in question, some of which has been printed on this website?! Then they could all see exactly what was taught and what was not.

    This report by the Board is a total embarrassment.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  24. @Professor Kent:

    Unfortunately, I am not at all in a position to comment on SAU’s search for biology professors. I can only imagine how hard the task would be for them, and as you have described how frustrating, on the flipside, it would be to be interviewed for such a position. I’m afraid I don’t have answers, even any suggestions (strange because I always have something to say), only that I would leave it in the Lord’s hands. He is my go-to person.

    You said:
    “Who would want to teach at an institution with constituents who assume a priori you’re an evolutionist, dissect endlessly any statement that could be twisted to mean something sinister, expose to public ridicule on the internet anyone who fails to state “the weight of evidence favors the traditional SDA position” (Sean Pitman’s favored tactic), and send blanket hate mail to every biologist on the staff?”

    In all fairness to Sean/Shane, you know that going viral was preceded by their repeated attempts to draw attention to the issue in other ‘quieter’ ways: in person and through letters. Didn’t work, did it? I’ve been on that end with my own battle, and believe me it’s no picnic. Being ignored, or politely listened to THEN ignored when there is a pressing issue at hand, certainly one which involves our youth, or in my instance young children, you don’t have time to sit back and wait hoping something will happen. You act. And, as a parent I am grateful to people like Sean/Shane for their willingness to take a public stand. You may not like their ‘tactics’ and mine were also criticized, but if standing for what is right means ruffling a few feathers resistant to change, then so be it.

    Sincerely,
    Angelina

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  25. When NPUC decided to solve the problem at Walla Walla – significant changes were made in the staffing of the WW religion and biology departments.I don’t see anything close to that level of resolve in the Pacific Union.Hopefully I am wrong.in Christ,Bob

    I don’t think you’re wrong, Bob. Nothing in this thing speaks of any signigicant changes at LSU. A few “adjustments” as Graham spoke of last year, but nothing else.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  26. Ken and Sean are both making the case that the idea that LSU would actually put the horse back in the barn – after it is out to this extent — is highly unlikely and the fact that GRI itself is somewhat fractured on this topic only plays into the hands of anyone that may not be on board with reform at LSU.

    in Christ,

    Bob

      (Quote)

    View Comment

Leave a Reply to Adventist in High School Cancel reply