2 of 5

Soon after its publication, Root learned his contract was being "temporarily withdrawn" based on the article as well as a complaint from a student's parent over his use of the "lifeboat example" in class. Root said the illustration was used to explain Thomas Hobbes's state of nature argument. "Acting academic dean [Marian Sanders] told me I couldn't use that any more," said Root. "She said that there are some questions we can't ask in class or entertain."

In a February 28 e-mail message, Farris asked Root to respond to seven "questions."

"The overall question is the fidelity to the biblical worldview in your role at PHC," stated Farris. The letter claimed "the well-known 'lifeboat' game" was "a recognized tool of those who wish to contend that there are no absolute values." It further asked for an "explanation about this episode and the underlying philosophy that this represents."

"I thought it was an academic freedom issue," said Root, adding that he did not respond to Farris's questions as his contract had already been pulled.

In March, five professors resolved not to sign their contracts for the following year based largely on Root's suspended contract.  The decision stemmed from a previous agreement nine professors made last fall, said Noe. "Many of us, including the five of us who left, made an informal agreement to do everything to defend anyone who was wrongly terminated, including leaving."

Among them were Root, Noe, Bates, Stacey, and history and literature professor Kevin Culberson, and Robert Stacey. "The gravity of this decision is underscored by the fact that, at the time, only one of us had a job lined up for next year," said Culberson.

On March 8 another Source article, this one by Noe and Culberson entitled "The Role of General Revelation in Education," again prompted the administration's response. 

"A common misconception among American evangelicals, and one that cannot be supported by the Scriptures themselves, is that the Bible is the only source of truth," the article began. "We argue that this misconception amounts to a blasphemous denial of Christ's words in Matthew 5 that 'he sends rain on the just and the unjust.'"

The 900-word article argued that "a Christian must refuse to view special and general revelation as hostile to one another. Nor should he hesitate to learn from a pagan. There is much wisdom to be gained from Parmenides and Plato, as well Machiavelli and Marx." 

The article prompted a 2,600-word response by college chaplain Raymond Bouchoc, sent to students, faculty, and staff. The response, endorsed by Farris and Sanders, discussed seven "harmful implications" that could be drawn from the professors' article and claimed the piece "diminishes the import of Scripture."

The official response prompted Noe, Root, Culberson, Stacey, and, later, Bates to turn in letters of non-intent stating they would not be signing their contracts for the following school year. The next day, in a March 17 "Q&A" with the campus newspaper, The Patrick Henry Herald, Farris said the resigning professors "quit because the leadership utilized academic freedom. If somebody wants to quit because they believe we have too strong of a view of the Bible, then so be it. I believe God's going to bless us for standing up for his Word."

"For the president to say this implies that these men were somehow guilty of blasphemies or heresy," said Paul Bonicelli, PHC's former dean of academic affairs and government professor. "That's not something any Christian should say about another Christian unless you are absolutely sure they have uttered blasphemies or heresy, and we are terribly far away from that here."

next page... |  2 of 5

share this page

May (Web-only) 2006, Vol. 50