Dear Editor:
I was there on the night of Sept. 20, 1990, when Herb Reynolds met with a small group of trustees to present a plan to transform Baylor’s governing board into a self-perpetuating body, independent of Baptist General Convention of Texas control. I was there the next day when that plan was presented to the (then) Baylor board of trustees, and I gave a seconding statement.
When Baylor’s new board of regents negotiated with the BGCT over a revised relationship, offering to amend Baylor’s bylaws to grant the BGCT the privilege of naming 25% of the Baylor regents in cooperation with Baylor, I was there. And, when this new relationship was approved by the BGCT during its 1991 annual convention, I was there.
The reason for Baylor’s 1990 charter amendment was fundamentalist infection of the BGCT following complete fundamentalist control of the Southern Baptist Convention. A BGCT controlled by fundamentalists, who would then control appointment of the Baylor governing board, would spell the death of effective higher education at Baylor. As fiduciaries of the institution, we could not let that threat exist.
The 1991 settlement between Baylor and the BGCT recognized the history of cooperation and responsible leadership in Christian education between the two organizations. Such cooperation has resulted in excellent higher education for thousands over the past 35 years. Now, that cooperation is endangered by threats of “investigation” emanating from the BGCT executive director.
A couple of facts should be understood by everyone involved in this matter. First, whenever dogma rules higher education, higher education suffers. Fiduciaries of higher education are under a duty to not let their institution be damaged by dogma’s destructive control.
Second, the free exchange of ideas is essential to higher education. I abhor what Turning Point USA represents and espouses, but Baylor has the right to determine who may or may not speak on its campus.
Third, criticizing one group for being “unbiblical” and ignoring the log in the eye of another group makes the critic something dreadful — irrelevant.
Fourth, Baylor does not need the BGCT; the BGCT needs Baylor. Terminating that relationship could very well make Baylor stronger, but most assuredly would further devastate the effectiveness of the BGCT.
Randall Fields
Baylor University board of trustees, 1990-91
Baylor University board of regents, 1991-99