Untitled

April 25, 2010 Mr.
Robert Gustafson Headmaster The Stony Brook School Stony Brook, NY, 11790 Dear Rob, An unsolicited floodtide of putative concerns have reached me in upstate New York concerning the school and changing its founding platform of principles, most specifically, a recent amendment applying Martin Luthers sola scriptura interpretation and wording to the schools fifth platform of principles. For the past fourteen years, I have deliberately stayed clear of SBS politics and have always staunchly and categorically supported your administration and the school. I write to you in order to seek clarity and weigh in on this issue so that our school may continue to thrive and remain true to its founding vision as clearly and expressly articulated by my Grandfather and other founders. Stony Brooks Protestant tradition is obvious, undeniable, and deliberate. Maintaining this tradition is proper, but not to the point of unnecessarily creating unneeded restrictive theological definitions and boundaries, such as sola scriptura doctrine and wording. My Grandfather and founding colleagues were brilliant theological scholars intimately familiar with sola scriptura and all its implications. Though Protestant in tradition, the schools founding fathers intentionally left out sola scriptura wording, so the school officially could always be inclusive and embracing of the rich traditions of all Christian denominations. The ability to find common ground in Jesus Christ rather than draw narrowing, exclusionary sectarian, denominational lines and definitions is the genius of Stony Brook. Understandably, there might be a concern of a faculty member proselytizing on behalf of his or her particular denomination, whether it is a Catholic passing out rosary beads or a Baptist insisting only full immersion for baptism as acceptable. In either case, both would be wrong and in need of reprimand. The Headmaster routinely handles these personnel actions on an individual basis. It is his discretion to decide if a particular faculty members actions have crossed the line from properly celebrating various faith traditions to improper proselytizing and address them accordingly. The traditional mechanism of relying on the Headmasters discretion in all personnel matters, from hiring and firing to coaching and reprimanding, has been functioning well for eighty years within Stony Brooks varied non-denominational Christian community. My Grandfather even talks about this in his writings. Altering the schools founding platform of principles, in order to address such routine internal personnel matters, is overkill and unnecessary. It is the managerial and theological equivalent of trying to
shoot a mosquito with a cannon. The target is rarely hit, but much unintended damage is done. To introduce a sola scriptura criteria would overturn eighty years of governing tradition, contravene my Grandfathers and founders intent and vision, and more importantly, open the door to inevitable division and discord, leading to crippling economic and spiritual consequences. All board members and faculty are required to sign an oath to affirm and uphold the schools platform of principles. If sola scriptura criteria is applied, any Christian of Catholic, Orthodox, or Episcopalian denomination is technically and even legally disenfranchised. Simply put, they could not in good faith, sign the schools amended platform of principles since their faith traditions do not subscribe to sola scriptura doctrine. It puts them in a terrible position. Over time, Catholic, Orthodox, and Episcopalian Christians can and, would be, purged from employment and board membership at the school. Stony Brook, the worlds premier Christian secondary school, the shining light, would now institutionally be excluding Christians! How ironic. How tragic. This is not what the founding fathers envisioned. Rob, for the past fourteen years, you have clearly demonstrated the ability to manage a faculty, and make the inevitable tough calls. You obviously know how to handle sticky personnel issues. You do not need a board intervention or an amendment to the founding platform of principles to handle internal faculty issues. I implore you to dispose of the matter with expedient haste and transparency. Failure to do so will only fuel the fires of doubt and suspicion that you and / or a fundamentalist faction of the board have a deeper agenda and covertly wish to redefine the school in a direction diverging from the founding vision. I can assure you that these fires are already burning and gaining in intensity. With each passing day, trust in the schools leadership erodes. Discerning faithful constituents logically conclude that the amendment intended for the stated purpose of handling internal personnel matters, is actually a thin veil masking ulterior motives of bigger changes, changes that were never publically discussed before the broader school constituency. Simply put, stated reasons for the amendment are viewed inconsistent with true intent. This is a contradiction. Absence of transparency and debate on such a critical issue only further reinforces the fear that there is some sort of power play underway. Your reply to Dave Hicks honest inquiry was painful to read and reflects the contradictions and quibbling you and the board are caught up in. This is both untenable and unbecoming. A wise old Headmaster (my father) once told me that, in the school business, if you even suspect you have a problem, you do. In fact, it is usually far bigger than you previously thought and you better act decisively. This amendment incorporating sola scriptura wording and theological implications into the fifth platform of principles is a problem. It
needs to be revoked immediately and the broader school community notified. Transparency and expediency are your guides. Rob, as Headmaster, you have faithfully and ably led Stony Brook for the last fourteen years. Your service has been noble and worthy. I have been your biggest supporter. Do not put your legacy or the school at risk. Yours Faithfully,
Thad Gaebelein cc: Board of Trustees

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

April 25, 2010 Mr.

Thad Gaebelein cc: Board of Trustees

You might also like