I just wanted to make a few clarifications regarding the Reacher's blog entry and my responsive blog entry (which has been surprisingly popular and led to the most comments I've received on any blog post). I think there's a little confusion about my stances as well as the facts about the happenings at Southwest Baptist University, plus I also hear that some other blogs are spreading some mistruths.
1) Dr. Huser was offered early retirement last year along with three other faculty members. No one was being "forced out" but instead an opportunity to step out gracefully was offered. Dr. Huser declined that offer. At least one, Dr. Dan Cochran, one of my favorite professors in my time at SBU, did accept the offer and retired early from his position at SBU, although it's odd that there's no mention of a "Dr. C" in the Reacher's original post.
2) Dr. Huser was again offered early retirement this year along with three other faculty members, and this time, he accepted.
3) Dr. Huser was not fired. He accepted an offer to walk away gracefully, and I respect his willingness to do so.
4) Dr. Huser's Darwinist beliefs had nothing to do with his leaving. While his beliefs and his teachings have fueled debate for many moons at SBU and within the local Baptist community, my understanding is that those beliefs and his teachings did not lead to the offer for early retirement. And, to be clear on my stance with Dr. Huser, I totally respect the man's intellect, but I do believe he is/was teaching at the wrong institution. And as for those who, in his case, are arguing for academic freedom, who fear that Christian universities allow no room for free thinking, and who are taking this opportunity to beat the drum of oppression of liberal thought, I must dissent. Although I had only one class with Dr. Huser, which was "Earth Science", the most basic of science courses, I found his teaching and his curriculum to be one of the most regurgitative courses of my university years -- if anything, his class was the fulfillment of every fear of the "thought police" in that he would consistently rebuff any attempts to bring any opposing ideas into the classroom that did not skew with his naturalist worldview.
5) Dr. Huser is not filing any type of grievance against the university. I don't know where this rumor came from, but it's come up, and it's not true.
6) The "powers that be" at SBU are in no way seeking out or hunting down those who express "academic freedom" outside the realm of what one would consider conservative Baptist thought. Academic freedom is alive and well at SBU, as is evident in that the Reacher's identity is no secret on campus, but he maintains his faculty role with no limitations whatsoever. If the "liberals" feel oppressed and alone, they should try walking a mile in the shoes of a "fundamentalist" on the SBU campus -- it is just as lonely an experience. The semantical and theological battles within the Southern Baptist Convention appear to be here to stay, and until the day everybody can get along (which I don't see happening when basic theological points are in question) or one side walks away, there will always be both "fundies" and "libs" in every Southern Baptist institution.
7) I in no way "condemn" the Reacher himself, or for that matter, Dr. Huser. The Reacher commented on my last post as follows:
I read this as a tongue-in-cheek statement that he believes that I do actually condemn him and Dr. Huser. This is completely untrue, and if he believes this, I encourage him to rethink this belief. In law school, one of the biggest things we learned was how to "disagree without being disagreeable", and while in law school and since in the legal profession, I have experienced that maxim in reality.
I am great friends with people I wholeheartedly disagree with on many issues, and I have many a head-to-head intellectual battle, in political, religious, and legal discussions. But simply because I disagree with someone, especially a Christian brother, does not mean I condemn them.
Condemnation is an outright expression of absolute disregard for another person, and I have not expressed this about the Reacher or Dr. Huser. Heck, I don't even know the Reacher, so I honestly have no opinion whatsoever on him. I just responded to his polarization of fundamentalists and his attempts to show Dr. Huser as an innocent in these matters, but I know nothing of him beyond that and his apparent association with Dr. Huser's views through his blog post.
The Reacher is correct -- I do believe some of Dr. Huser's scientific views are bull, and I do believe that Dr. Huser's evolutionary teachings (with no expression of or room for balance in a Christian educational environment) should be purged from the university, and I believe that he has no regard for the denominations view of science. But, in no way does that mean that I "condemn" Dr. Huser or the Reacher. I can disagree wholeheartedly and express my disagreement strongly, but that's not condemnation by any means.
And, lastly, I would like to make one more point about Dr. Huser. I mean Dr. Huser no ill will. And if I have characterized his views incorrectly, I do apologize. In my experiences with Dr. Huser in both education and personal settings, it was clear to me that his views of origins theory were that of a "Darwinian naturalist," meaning that the universe was formed through random and unguided processes. At the same time, I will acknowledge that in those years of time around him, I was a staunch young earth creationist, and I could have easily misinterpreted his views. Dr. Huser may actually be an old earth creationist, and if so, I have no qualms with him in the realm of Christian orthodoxy. While I still don't feel he offered any balance of thought in his classroom for any views other than his own, which is my real issue with Dr. Huser in the one semester I took part in one of his courses, I hold nothing personal against Dr. Huser and I wish him the best.
And one last thing about myself. Please, if you choose to comment, don't talk down to me about liberal thought or academic freedom or about the "grey areas" of Christianity, and please don't treat me like you know me and make assumptions of my beliefs or opinions if you haven't sat down and worked through a practical theological discussion with me. I'm a much broader personality than I can express in one or two blog entries, I will readily admit that I don't have it all figured out, and if you don't know me, don't turn me into a "strawman" you can knock down. In the same way that I've really not expressed any opinions about the Reacher himself because I don't know him at all except his posts (and yes, I do know his identity), please give me the same grace.
I'm glad to see that you don't condemn me or Dr. H, even though you think we're full of bull, should be purged from the University, and have no regard for the denomination's view of science.