jQuery Slider

You are here

SEWANEE: University of the South Regents' refuse to rescind Charlie Rose honorary degree

SEWANEE: University of the South Regents' refuse to rescind Charlie Rose honorary degree
Sewanee students object to non-action by institution

By David W. Virtue, DD
www.virtueonline.org
Feb. 21, 2018

In Nov. of 2017 VOL broke the story, asking the University of the South in Sewanee, the Episcopal Church's only university, which awarded an honorary degree of Doctor of Humane letters to Charlie Rose, anchor and executive editor of "Charlie Rose" and co-anchor of "CBS This Morning" if it would rescind the doctorate in light of sexual harassment charges against Rose.

VOL never got an answer from John McCardell Jr., Vice-Chancellor and President of the liberal Episcopal university known for its endorsement of pansexuality. Silence reigned.

The now outed sexual harasser of women had a lot of advice to offer the class of 2016, including "being humble, dreaming big, and being crazy." He was described as "the architect of American culture".

Now, three months later, Sewanee students are raising holy hell and they strenuously object to the Regents' refusal to rescind Charlie Rose's honorary degree.

From Inside Higher Ed:

... some students anonymously put up posters all over the campus addressed to John McCardell, the vice chancellor (the equivalent of president). "VC John McCardell: Why won't you condemn sexual assaulters?" read many of the posters, including one placed on McCardell's campus home. The posters, which were quickly removed, stunned many on the campus, who see civility as a cherished, all too rare value in higher education today.

A rally is being planned for later this week, and there are no signs that the debate is about to die down.

Richard Pryor III, a student, published an essay Monday in The Sewanee Purple in which he challenged the theological underpinnings of the leaders' letter.

The faculty of the School of Theology of the University of the South responded to the actions of the Board of Regents that declined to revoke the honorary degree for Charlie Rose and asked, "Because your letter invokes the concept of forgiveness, we wish to situate the matter of the revocation or retention of Mr. Rose's honorary degree within the larger, theologically grounded tradition of pastoral response to sin and forgiveness. In church tradition, forgiveness is offered after repentance and contrition. Typically, that means making appropriate restitution to those whom the individual has wronged, and the grace of forgiveness is singularly theirs to offer.

"What steps Mr. Rose may or may not have taken in this regard are not known to us. But we note that forgiveness does not cancel the serious consequences of sin, nor does it require restoring an individual to the same places of honor that he had held before."

McCardell said Sewanee has never revoked a degree -- honorary or otherwise -- in its history. "We have no procedure or process for revoking a degree," he said. McCardell also asked whether revoking the degree would accomplish anything.

Doing so would be "to add a feather to a thousand-pound weight," he said.

A letter from School of Theology students to Sewanee undergraduates said, "We believe we must confess and repent of those times when the church, its ministers or its members have been antagonistic or unresponsive to people--women, children and men-- who have been sexually exploited or abused" We believe the church has a central role in upholding moral authority and seeking justice. We do not always get this right, and when we fail, we must confront the truth and commit to reconciling work."

VOL asks, what if Charlie Rose had used the Nr-word when he sexually abused vulnerable women, would Sewanee have revoked the degree instantly because the Nr-wording is unforgivable, whereas just abusing can be okay, if the Nr-word is left out?"

Episcopal leaders have steadfastly stood up against the sexual assault of women, so the cowardly non-action of the Regents is nothing short of hypocrisy and is appalling.

*****

An open letter to the Board of Regents from the School of Theology tenured faculty

BY THE SEWANEE PURPLE
FEBRUARY 20, 2018

Joseph DeLozier, Chairman
The Rt. Rev. John Howard, Chancellor
Margaret McLarty, Secretary
John M. McCardell, Jr., Vice-Chancellor

Dear Officers of the Board of Regents,

We believe that the recent action of the University Regents declining the petition to revoke the honorary degree conferred upon Charlie Rose in 2016 was taken with the best interests of the University in mind. We also know that under constraints of time and without opportunity for wider consultation, all of us can make decisions that with further reflection we may wish to revise. And so we, tenured members of the faculty of the School of Theology, want to contribute to this conversation by writing a public letter explaining why we are troubled by some of the theological assertions contained in your letter to the student trustees.

Because your letter invokes the concept of forgiveness, we wish to situate the matter of the revocation or retention of Mr. Rose's honorary degree within the larger, theologically- grounded tradition of pastoral response to sin and forgiveness. In church tradition, forgiveness is offered after repentance and contrition. Typically, that means making appropriate restitution to those whom the individual has wronged, and the grace of forgiveness is singularly theirs to offer. What steps Mr. Rose may or may not have taken in this regard are not known to us. But we note that forgiveness does not cancel the serious consequences of sin, nor does it require restoring an individual to the same places of honor that he had held before.

Respectfully, we must insist that there is a hierarchy of sin, long recognized in the tradition. In the gospels, Jesus himself makes such distinctions, and he forcefully censures those who place a "stumbling block" before others--that is, create scandal that impedes faith (Matt. 18:6-7). In late antiquity, it was only grave sin that excluded anyone from the fellowship of the church. The medieval categories of mortal and venial sin underscored the point that some sins were, indeed, worse than others. The Reformation's insistence that we are all sinners nevertheless did not preclude pastoral distinctions about the gravity of certain sins. And present- day pastors and bishops certainly recognize that some sins are more harmful than others, both to the sinner and to the victim of the sin, and the disciplinary canons of the church reflect this.

Further issues arise in the case of public offenses. When sin becomes a scandal, it is treated differently from private sins. This is embodied in the disciplinary rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer: clergy are to repel from communion not all sinners but those who are "living a notoriously evil life" and those "who have done wrong to their neighbors and are a scandal" (Book of Common Prayer, p. 409). Public scandal is, in the tradition, regarded as a reason to send a message. One struggles to think of a case of public scandal more obvious than the behavior of Mr. Rose. A skandalon is literally a "stumbling-block," and it seems clear to us that the continued investiture of Mr. Rose with honors by this University constitutes a stumbling- block to the University community.

We also hold it necessary to distinguish between issues of sin and redemption, on the one hand, and those of good order on the other. No one has seriously proposed excommunicating Mr. Rose from the altars of Sewanee; no one has argued that the revocation of a degree would entail his loss of salvation; no one has asserted that the University Senate and Board of Regents can grant or withhold salvation. We do not believe that the revocation of an honorary degree constitutes an inappropriate "condemn[ation of] the individual" but rather a recognition that the actions of one that once had seemed meritorious no longer appear as such, as more information has come to light. Withdrawing the degree, in those circumstances, is a measured response, signifying that the behavior of Mr. Rose was dishonorable.

It is our understanding that the University awards honorary degrees not only for specific achievements, but also for the general cloud of merit around an individual--the aggregation of a lifetime of achievement, high moral character, and the perception that the individual is worthy of honor. Rescinding an honorary degree is different from rescinding an earned degree, which might be done in the case of a subsequent discovery of plagiarism on a thesis or comprehensive exam, but would not be a measured response to an offense unrelated to the completion of degree requirements. It is difficult to see Mr. Rose as either meritorious or honorable, now that we know more about his conduct. But the decision to grant an honorary degree lies with the Regents and the University Senate, acting in concert; the decision to reverse such a degree would rest with the same bodies.

The revocation of an honorary degree is, of course, a symbolic act, but it is no more or less symbolic than the decision to confer one. In the School of Theology, we traffic in symbols: we teach the rituals of the church to our students; we teach them to convey the symbolum of faith, the Creed; we form them as priests so that they will know the power of symbols, symbolic action, and symbolic language to those whom they will serve. Withdrawing an honorary degree from a serial sexual offender whose behavior has become a skandalon may be a symbolic gesture, and on its own it would surely never be sufficient. We are grateful for all of the steps to address the malformed sexual culture of this institution that are outlined in your letter. We believe there are more steps to be taken, not least a critical examination of Greek culture on campus. But symbols do matter, and the retention of its honors by one who has behaved in such a scandalous way dishonors this University. Symbols speak: while symbols without matching substance are hollow, symbols convey the deep values of a culture, a people, a University. Allowing Mr. Rose's degree to stand is its own symbolic declaration of the University's values.

In their letter of January 22, the Presiding Bishop and the President of the House of Deputies called on the Episcopal Church to use Ash Wednesday to meditate "on the ways in which we in the church have failed to stand with women and other victims of abuse and harassment and to consider, as part of our Lenten disciplines, how we can redouble our work to be communities of safety that stand against the spiritual and physical violence of sexual exploitation and abuse." They urged us to examine our history and to "confess and repent of those times when the church, its ministers or its members have been antagonistic or unresponsive to people--women, children and men--who have been sexually exploited or abused." We pray that this University will have the courage to respond to this call, and that it will seek to demonstrate in symbol and in substance that it respects the dignity of every human being, and demands similar respect be shown by all whom it honors.

Sincerely,

William F. Brosend
Professor of New Testament and Preaching

Cynthia S. Crysdale
Professor of Christian Ethics and Theology

Julia M. Gatta
Bishop Frank A. Juhan Professor of Pastoral Theology

Paul A. Holloway
University Professor of Classics and Ancient Christianity

Benjamin J. King
Associate Professor of Church History

Robert MacSwain
Associate Professor of Theology

James F. Turrell
Norma and Olan Mills Prof of Divinity and Professor of Liturgy

Rebecca Abts Wright
C.K. Benedict Professor of Old Testament

*****

Here is the letter from the Sewanee Board of Regents explaining its decision:

Dear Claire and Mary Margaret,

We are indebted to you both for your recent presentation to the Board of Regents regarding the honorary degree of Charlie Rose and aspects of Sewanee culture that bear examination. Your talk sparked a vigorous discussion by the Board that proved its members' passion for Sewanee and led it to reflect on our unique values, which are not found amongst many colleges. For us, the central question is how do we embrace academic and ecclesiastical considerations and meld the two? What follows attempts to capture the essential elements of what was a serious, respectful, and quite lengthy discussion.

Respectfully, we submit that we should look to our own Honor Code for a tradition that combines both the academic and the ecclesiastical. In its essence, we do not condone perverse behavior. We want to be clear that we have stood, and always will stand, against sexual harassment of women or men. At the same time, we do not believe it is our place to condemn the individual. In fact, we think there is grave danger were we to go down that path. We impose a penalty where appropriate, but we also offer forgiveness. That said, it would be easy to condemn Mr. Rose and rescind the honorary degree. It is harder not to do so. The opportunity to forgive should always be taken. Condemnation has no place here.

Clarification comes in the question "Is there a hierarchy of sin?" Quickly followed by "Are we all not sinners?" Therein lies the ecumenical rub. If we condemn a person then who among us sinners should not also be condemned?

Moving forward, the most important part of your presentation gave us opportunity to revisit our own Sewanee culture which should be that "we respect the dignity of every human being." From your talk we are clearly not there completely. Yet we are working hard, have been working hard for a very long time, and continue to seek ways of ensuring that our own campus culture and our own workplaces are models of right behavior. For example, we have added, this year, a Deputy Title IX Coordinator among whose duties will be to provide training across the campus at all levels.

For the last three years new students have received Bringing in the Bystander training during Orientation. There is currently a Task Force on Sexual Climate, co-chaired by Dean Gentry and Title IX Coordinator Professor Kelly Malone and announced last April, which is revisiting and updating the 2012 Rethink report. The Regents will receive an interim report from this Task Force in June. Its recommendations will be presented to the Vice-Chancellor in the fall. Many of our administrative colleagues are actively involved through the Associated Colleges of the South in addressing issues of sexual misconduct. These are all substantive actions that will have real consequences for the University community. Finally, going forward, the University will ask of all honorary degree nominees the same questions asked of Bishop candidates.

What (else) might students do? By way of example, the Thistle Farms initiative to aid battered women is under way in the current semester. The Board of Regents will match, dollar for dollar, the money raised by students in this effort.

We thank you again and hope that despite our human condition we will aspire always to treat our brothers and sisters with respect.

Respectfully and on behalf of the Board of Regents,

Joseph DeLozier, Chairman

The Rt. Rev. John Howard, Chancellor

Margaret McLarty, Secretary

John M. McCardell, Jr., Vice-Chancellor

Subscribe
Get the latest news and perspectives in the Anglican world.
comments powered by Disqus
Prayer Book Alliance
Trinity School for Ministry

Land of a Thousand Hills Coffee

Drink Coffee

Do Good

Sustainable Ministry

Coffee, Community, Social Justice

DrinkCoffeeDoGood.com

Go To Top