Dear Signatories of BASE (Biola Alumni Standing for Equality),

The BASE team (Dr. Jacob Daniel, Logan Zeppieri, Claudia Kalmikov, and Anthony Costello) wants to again thank you for your support of this petition. Below is the BASE team's response to the concerns pointed out in Biola's original response to our letter. This response was sent on July 27th, 2020. More updates are soon to follow.

(Note: Our response to Biola's concerns appear in italics)

------------
Scott,

Thanks for this engagement with the concerns. Our responses are in blue.

Tony

1.   Re: Concern #1, I don't believe that there is any faculty support for the use of violence against property or persons to achieve racial goals. To imply that there are faculty who support the use of violence is misleading.  I'm not aware of any faculty member of any school who would sign on to the use of violence. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the last sentence of that section referring to acts of calumny or detraction . . .

Scott, as you can see in this point, we did not accuse any faculty of supporting violence against property or person, rather we said there is evidence that some faculty may be supporting groups or organizations that “directly or indirectly fund or support violence, either against property or human life.” If there are faculty members who are actively supporting BLM, for example, then there is reason to believe they are supporting an organization that does use violence; violence in physical form (e.g. against persons or property), or violence against persons through the sins of calumny (i.e. slander) or detraction. Detraction being the “unwarranted or unjustified exposure of moral failures of others in order to destroy their good name.”  

2. Re: Concern #3, I think it's misleading to imply that Biola's leadership is being strong armed into doing anything--we are continuing what we began in doing diversity in a biblically and theologically well grounded way.  That's not how it works in an organization as complex as a university.

Scott, there is an abundance of evidence that universities across the country are being strong-armed through exactly the kinds of tactics mentioned in Concern #1. This was exemplified by the vitriolic BASIS petition, and the goal is clear: to force administrations to act immoderately, and even go against fundamental principles, like the principle of free speech. Also, evidence that BASIS publicly claimed victory in its petitioning of Dr. Corey and Biola, strengthens the narrative that Biola will acquiesce to any petitions from CRT protestors. Moreover, the correspondence in both time of issue and in the content of Dr. Corey's June 10th letter with the BASIS petition justifies the suspicion that it was a response to BASIS. Therefore, if Biola was not being strong-armed by the BASIS alumni, and if Barry Corey’s June 10th letter was not a response to BASIS, then that needs to be made explicit, and public.

3.  Re: Concern #5,  I don't know of any faculty member who believes that it is morally permissible to do evil in order to accomplish good.  As I previously mentioned, such a crass form of utilitarianism would be rejected by every faculty member I know.  The military metaphor and the IRA reference don't help your cause.

Again, the claim is that if there are faculty and staff who support organizations like BLM, and if there is at least a reasonable suspicion that organizations like BLM use sinful means to achieve other, potentially good ends (see recent attacks on police in Chicago, for example), then there is indirect support by Christian faculty of “doing evil so good may come.” Or, there is a naive assumption by faculty that apparently peaceful organizations or protests have nothing to do with more violent ones. This point, for partial disclosure, was given to me by a faculty member. If there is a public repudiation of the organization BLM, then that would probably take care of many of these concerns.

4.  Re: Concern #7, I don't know of any faculty member of any school who holds that resentment, rage and vengeance are virtues. That's what the concern as stated implies.  I do admit that in some circles, story takes precedence over reasoned argument, which I find very problematic.  I do believe that the term "white fragility" can be used as an ad hominem argument.

Scott, again, the language clearly suggests that it is speakers at the SCORR conference who promote a virtue of resentment, and that in “enthusiastically promoting” SCORR Biola is tacitly approving of such an understanding of ethics. The question here is why promote SCORR? Here too, this entire point was given to me by a faculty member. I have never been to SCORR personally, and received this language from people much closer to the issue than I. That said, here is evidence of this problem: Please listen to this talk available on Youtube, where the speaker is clearly making a claim that white culture is built on stolen ideas. Basically power abuse equals white culture (@ 21:30 & 24:30) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQP9gtozNE8 )

5.  Re: Concern #9, there may be some faculty who support overturning some social structures such as capitalism (I've had several discussions with faculty who view markets and market economies quite differently than I do, and differently than the majority of the faculty do).  But to imply that the majority of faculty or Biola as a university supports these kinds of major overhauls of social structures, is overstated.

Scott, I know you have been in the thick of that debate. But this point, again, has nothing to do with particular views of faculty and the variations that exist among them; but rather with the call for Biola to publicly distance itself from the organization BLM. Again, it seems like a public denouncement of BLM will go a long way in clearing out some of these concerns.

6.  Re: Concern #10, I would delete the last 2 sentences of that paragraph--it may be that what many of the signatories are saying is that they didn't get enough on race at Biola and consider that a deficit in their education.  As I read the BASIS petition, they called Biola out for how they were not formed/educated, not for how they were formed/educated. In this section, I would be careful to distinguish between correlation and causation;  as you know, those aren't the same thing. In any case, I don't think that the last 2 sentences help your cause because it's speculating on what people's motives were for signing the petition.  

Scott, if that were true, then this whole petition, meaning our petition, is horribly misguided. The whole crux of the issue here is the warranted concern over Biola endorsing Critical Race Theory, or at least a version of it, that is leading young minds astray. It is a causal claim. If it is false, then the counter evidence should be made public by Biola.

I would offer the Southern Baptist resolutions and the Liberty Univ. prof Kelly Hamren article--I hope all your group has had the chance to read those--they articulate what I believe is a balanced and biblical framework for assessment of CRT.  I can't seem to connect to the SBC material at present, but will send the link along when I can.

Scott, yes I have read this. Actually I read it when it first came out. There are many good points in there. Nothing I would disagree with, although I am not sure that it is a terribly penetrating analysis of the kind of cultural Marxism that has taken root in the institutions since the 1940’s. That is a much bigger beast than what she is describing here. Herbert Marcuse’s book Eros and Civilization is in the Biola library. Considering how influential Marcuse was in the 1960’s and ‘70s; that book should be read. There is more going on here than just pointing to structural oppression, there are forces in cultural Marxism that want to explicitly dismantle the entire moral framework of Christianity. While we understand there is always an ongoing academic debate about the merits of any world view, we also realize as members of the Body of Christ that the preservation of the unity of the Church cannot be compromised out of a desire to tinker around with worldly wisdom. These ideas are having serious effects at the popular level, and are already tearing apart local churches.

My door is always open to you all, and I look forward to continuing this conversation when the dust settles this fall.  I appreciate all of your love for Biola and your desire that the university flourish and stay missionally faithful.

Scott, at this point, since we do not see that there are any factual errors in the document, we would like to see the next step being a Zoom meeting with you and President Corey. With over 500 signatories of the petition in just 5 days, this is obviously a concern on many people’s mind.  

Scott, thank you. We know you are totally strapped with all kinds of issues. We will keep praying for that vaccine, and that this issue of COVID can be depoliticized. I really hope you are enduring well through this turmoil. It cannot be easy for you or the staff.

God bless