The Truth About the GBC/Shorter Schism

The following was written and sent to us by Jim Morris, Class of 1984, approximately 7 years ago. It was originally published in the Rome News-Tribune. Morris grew up on Shorter Hill, as his mother was on the faculty there for 46 years. In sending this information, he writes ” I want for the public to see the pattern that the GBC has exhibited over this time period so that the public understands that this pattern of deceit and unscrupulous behavior on the part of the GBC is nothing new.”  We find his words of 7 years ago quite prophetic. Thank you, Mr. Morris, for sharing this with us.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in response to recent publicity, exchange of letters in the Rome News-Tribune and other newspapers, and inaccurate information apparently being given to Georgia Baptist pastors, regarding Shorter College and the Georgia Baptist Convention. Many allegations have been laid forth regarding who initiated the conflict in which these two institutions are currently embroiled. I am a graduate of Shorter College and come from a long line of Shorter College graduates. I also attend and actively participate in a local church that aligns itself with the GBC. I have accumulated the following information from publicly available documents and interviews with people who have first- hand knowledge of the circumstances.

One of the most inflammatory and inaccurate allegations is that Dr. Ed Schrader came to Shorter College with the intent of separating Shorter from the GBC. This is scurrilous at best. To allude that he would come to Shorter and intentionally create the controversy in which these two institutions are involved is just flat out wrong. Dr. J. Robert White, Executive Director of the Georgia Baptist Convention and a member of the Shorter College presidential search committee in the years 1999-2000, enthusiastically supported Dr. Schrader for the position of president at that time. One would have to question the motive of those who would spread such harmful, false and unchristian tales about Dr. Schrader. Innuendo and rumor do not equal proof, no matter who starts the rumor, and there is no proof since the allegations are false.

Shorter College approached the GBC in the late 50’s to request assistance in managing some financial affairs. The college was in a difficult financial situation. The GBC agreed to partner with Shorter at that time. Part of that agreement was that the GBC would have the right to elect the Board of Trustees but the actual selection process of Trustee candidates was left up to the two groups to work out. For many years there was an amicable relationship between Shorter and the GBC regarding this process, a “give and take” if you will. The Shorter’s Trustees and administration would select two potential candidates for each opening on the board and would submit them for review and selection by the GBC.  In rare instances, the GBC would submit the name of a qualified candidate to the president of Shorter. The president would meet with that candidate, conduct interviews with him or her, interview associates and would generally, based on the outcome of those interviews approve that individual for a position for a seat on the board. It is important to note that was the same process used regardless of who nominated the candidate, the college or the GBC.

Soon after Dr. Schrader assumed the presidency of Shorter, he received a communication from Dr. J. Robert White, the Executive Director of the GBC. Dr. Schrader was told that an influential member of the GBC nominating committee, Reverend Mike Everson, wanted to meet with him. Dr. Schrader met with Mr. Everson, who proceeded to question him about his professional and personal beliefs about his vision for Shorter College. It was during this meeting that Mr. Everson stated basically, I am the “new sheriff in town” and this is the way that the Trustees for Shorter College will be selected and this is what we want them to do. He presented Dr. Schrader with a list of five candidates who were of these same political convictions as he for openings for the Shorter Board at that time. This was approximately one month prior to the time that the new board members were to be nominated.

Mr. Everson also stated that the Board members needed to be “conservative” (I take that to be in the Baptist “political” sense meaning fundamentalist) like him. He also specifically pointed out two highly qualified religion department faculty members whom he believed to be too liberal for his liking and apparently needed to seek employment elsewhere. I need to stress here that the mark of a good faculty member is the ability to be an expert teacher of their specific area of the curriculum and not what their personal beliefs may or may not be since those beliefs are not the subject of the courses to be taught.

From what I have researched, of those five candidates, two said “no” from the start. One of the candidates was out of the country and could not be contacted. One was concerned about the time issues, but agreed to be placed on the list of nominees for the following year. The remaining candidate was placed by the College on the list of potentials. The College presented its nominees to the GBC Nominating Committee containing the one remaining candidate from Mr. Everson’s list. About two weeks after this meeting, Shorter received a revised list of the candidates from the GBC. Three names were included from Mr. Everson’s list of political allies, two of whom the College had not nominated including one with whom the college’s representatives had never even spoken. Excluded from the list were former trustees of the College that the GBC had elected previously (including one previous Chairman of the Trustees), one of the best known and respected African-American Southern Baptist Pastors in the country, and several Shorter College alumni including all of the women nominated by the College. To anyone’s knowledge at the College and in its written record, this was the first time this one-sided, politically based substitution of nominees had occurred and it happened in the actual academic year that SACS was reviewing the college’s reaccreditation. A year later, after much discussion about SACS accreditation concerns and attempts by the College to reach a middle ground with the GBC, the GBC Nominating Committee refused to collaborate on any new trustee nominees and rejected all16 candidates from the College and replaced them with 8 nominees whose names were not given to the College until the night before Trustee elections at the GBC Annual Convention

All schools that have any intrinsic value in their degrees have to pass a stringent inspection every ten years by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). SACS determines a college’s ability to meet a number of requirements that primarily have to do with its ability to provide a valuable scholastic opportunity for its students. Without accreditation, a school’s diploma is virtually useless. A student would not be able to get into any type of graduate school, is not eligible for any type of Hope grants or any type of federal assistance, and the “degree” is next to useless in using with potential employers. Without accreditation, you might as well not bother.

SACS guidelines clearly state that the Board of Trustees must be able to govern without any undue outside influence. The actions of the GBC most certainly constitute that undue influence. Without SACS approval, Shorter will be just another unaccredited “Bible College” and almost 150 years of academic excellence would have been gone. Another request of the GBC’s nominating committee member was whether all faculty and staff would sign the new “Baptist Faith and Message Statement” as a condition of their employment with Shorter.  Guess what? Not everyone at Shorter is a Baptist, and they don’t need to be. For academic excellence and diversity to occur then there needs to be a wide variety of teachers with a wide variety of beliefs. That is the process of learning and is why God gave us a brain…to be able to think! The God that I understand allows me to reach conclusions and a level of comprehension that is comfortable for me. Religious and spiritual beliefs cannot be mandated. In the relationship that I have with God, He tells me that I don’t have to always agree with others, but I do have to respect their right to believe differently. Does this mean that we will always agree? Of course not, but in the academic world this is how the learning process takes place. If the GBC has its way, and the faculty and staff are required to sign the Baptist mission statement, then many well-qualified teachers will leave in droves, simply because they will be unwilling, and justifiably so, to be in an environment where intolerance is encouraged.

The general response from the GBC about the accreditation issue was “so what?”  The most probable scenario if the GBC were to win the case is that they install their own Board of Trustees, try to structure the Trustee Board as though it appears that they have not had undue outside influence, and then you will have a school with many problems: an exiting faculty, an accreditation crises, declining enrollment and bottom line, just another “Bible School” with over 100 years of academic excellence, diversity and tolerance for one’s fellow man and beliefs tossed like yesterdays garbage. Even if the GBC wins, it loses.

During this same 40-year period, the GBC donated over $ 21 million in operating expenses and scholarships.  Seven million of those dollars remain under GBC control in the Georgia Baptist Foundation.  It is noteworthy that during the time of this relationship, the annual contribution from the GBC to Shorter was an average of approximately $500,000. The College’s annual budget today, however, runs approximately $20 million annually. The Executive Director of the GBC, Dr. Robert White, in his recent editorial to the Rome News-Tribune stated that it was through this relationship that the new buildings at Shorter College were built. This is misleading at best. The buildings at Shorter were constructed through fund-raising campaigns and bond funds, some of which Shorter is still paying off.

Dr White and his colleagues at the GBC seem to have the misguided notion that they “own” Shorter College. This is a physical impossibility since Shorter is a Georgia nonprofit corporation, which can have no owner under Georgia law.  That fact has been upheld by both court rulings. With the GBC’s contributions to Shorter averaging eight percent of the operating budget, it is a little difficult for anyone to believe this idea that the GBC could have any claim to “ownership.”  The GBC is currently as close to ownership as is possible with two other schools, Brewton Parker and Truett McConnell. These are two schools that are a classic example of how not “to run a railroad.” They are in heavy debt and are consistently near the bottom of the U.S. News and World Reports annual review of Southeastern small colleges. Shorter, on the other hand, is consistently near the top. The GBC, through a power play, seeks to instill its vision for a fundamentalist school at Shorter and achieve the same result as the aforementioned schools.

Mike Everson was quoted in the Magazine Georgia Trend, that at the moment he’d be willing to let Shorter College part ways amicably with the GBC:  “It’s not worth wasting money,” Everson says. “We could go on and pour our resources into schools that are glad to be Georgia Baptist. But if Schrader goes on and keeps playing his little games and goes after our money, we’ll come after him. And when we do, this time we’re going to nail his hide.” What kind of graceful and Christian attitude is that?

Shorter College has always considered itself a Baptist school, and always will. They have been grateful for the support that the GBC has provided up till recent times and the GBC has benefited from that relationship as well, at a minimum expense to them. It is not Shorter that is “going after the GBC money” it is very much the other way around and a definite power play as well. It looks like pride will not let the GBC leaders back down now. Do they think that they have too much to lose with the other colleges that they have a relationship with now? If Shorter wins this dispute, as I pray that they do, or if the GBC were to miraculously “part ways” with Shorter, do the GBC leaders think they lose all semblance of authority with the other colleges that they have a relationship with?

I urge Shorter College stakeholders to speak to their pastor about this issue, particularly if your church is affiliated with the GBC. Let’s end this spectacle in front of the secular press and public. The Rome News-Tribune reported that Shorter College faculty has voted 99% in favor of the Trustees and the administration. My pastor and I have had to agree to disagree on this issue, but just like the issue of academic freedom and the ability to make one’s own decisions, in my church I also have the ability to disagree from time to time with the beliefs espoused there and not follow blindly.  I have specifically changed my tithe, so that no money whatsoever will go to the GBC to support their misguided tactics. I urge others to do the same. Be active in this affair. The heritage and future of a major piece of Georgia’s heritage is at stake here.

This is an unconscionable action by the GBC and must not be allowed to happen.

Jim Morris

Silver Creek, GA.

6 responses to “The Truth About the GBC/Shorter Schism

  1. Larry T. Burgess

    Because I have lived in Tucker, GA, since 1985, I did not read this when it was originally published. I do not have a subscription to the Rome News-Tribune. However, I write now to confirm the accuracy of what Jim Morris wrote seven years ago. My similar account is on this website under the title “Lex Veritas.” Jim Morris’ account does stir several memories which had previously faded. Dr. Schrader, during the most contentious days of the conflict, contacted a very conservative, well-respected pastor in the Georgia Baptist Convention to ask his assistance in mediating the conflict. If I were to name him, the name would immediately be recognized by all who were involved. His response—“I think I could have helped in earlier days, but today you are dealing with tire-slashers. They are impossible to deal with.” I was in the middle of this situation as a Trustee when the court case was litigated. Though I certainly do not claim to have knowledge of all the details, I can categorically report that , in my observations, Dr. Schrader acted with integrity and Christian grace throughout. Meanwhile, I repeatedly observed and heard the “tire-slashing” mentality on the other side. Thank you, Jim Morris, for telling it as it was!

  2. Dr. Burgess,
    Thanks for your feedback and concern about Shorter. It is greatly appreciated.

  3. Shorter has again become the subject of an story. Shorter leadership in exile may want to consider conversations with the several attorneys that consulted the likes of Mercer, Samford, Baylor and Furman in their more agreeable break with the fundamentalists Southern Baptists in their respective state conventions. And again, I encourage all from Shorter folks to the civic leadership of Rome to do a thorough reading of Giberson and Stephens The Anointed and ask yourself if you want a Tea Party bastion fronting as an institution of Higher Ed locked in your city limits.

    Also see John Pierce’s recent blog of May 7 or so at blogs.

  4. Larry T. Burgess

    Dear Jim, Please forgive me if I have previously met you, becuse if I have I do not remember the meeting. I simply say that to make it clear that you and I have never communicated about anything, including the Shorter College situation. However, your article is so thorough and accurate that I write again to confirm details and to show that the descriptions of what happened in the Shorter/GBC conflict are being accurately described here. These accounts are in not imaginary or embellished. [1] The accusation that Dr. Schrader came to Shorter with the intention of “stealing the school.” I, like you, have heard this so often that it is a widely believed “urban legend.” Dr. Scrader and I talked often about our shared hope to see the GBC and Shorter maintain relationship. We were mightily struggling to find a compromise that would satisfy the SACS concerns and also allow such continued relationship. The above-mentioned contact with a conservative pastor is just one of many evidences of the efforts made. He was then and remains now a darling of the most conservative element of the GBC. He has never been even casually identified with the Moderate movement. So it was a fundamentalist who described some of his fellow fundamentalists as “tire-slashers.” The Georgia Trend quote from Rev. Mike Everson is an example of the tire-slasher mentality. I heard with my own ears Rev. Mike Everson make very ugly comments about Dr. Schrader on the floor of the annual meeting of the Georgia Baptist Convention, comments which would have been ruled out of order if the Parliamentarian had not been asleep at the wheel. Another little known anecdote—just after the Trustees voted to sever relationship with the GBC, Dr. Schrader reeived an offer for Shorter to become a school aligned with The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, including funding from them, AND HE TURNED DOWN THE OFFER. Even at that point, Dr. Scrader held out hope of reconciliation. [2] In my article, found on this website under the title, “Lex Veritas” [a title given by the web-site manager—I titled it “Reflections of a Shorter Alum and Former Trustee to his Shorter Alum Daughter”], I mention the Executive Director of the GBC several times. This is Dr. J. Robert White named in your article. I talked with him several times and always found him cordial. I never found him to be of the “tire-slasher” mentality. However, I did find him predictably preaching the “party line” and unwilling to consider compromise or negotiation which would take seriously the SACS concerns. The GBC had to be the ultimate source of authority in the conflict, with Trustee convictions relegated to a secondary position. [3] The time-honored process of selecting Trustees mentioned in your article is exactly what the Trustees sought to formalize in the compromise mentioned in my earlier article. That is, with the approval of SACS, both parties [the GBC and Shorter Trustees] would codify the process of working through a list of potential Trustees, with suggeations from both parties and numbering at least twice the required number for that year [to be continued]…

  5. Larry T. Burgess

    [continuation of reply]…This is exactly the process as practiced for decades. However, the GBC would not consider making it binding, and totally dismantled it in the election of the three from Mike Everson’s list of five. One of the three was Dr. Nelson Price, who if memory serves me correctly is the one mentioned in your article who was out of the country. Thus, Dr. Schrader was unable to contact him to determine if he were willing to serve. Now get the picture clearly in mind—Rev. Everson, the unnamed Douglasville Pastor mentioned in my earlier artice, essentially threatens Dr. Schrader—and Dr. Schrader graciously still agrees to contact personally the five on Rev. Everson’s list to see if they are willing to serve if elected. Dr. Price and two others were elected, in place of candidates on the college-suggested list. In my earlier article, Dr. Price is the unnamed replacement trustee who spoke eloquently of his embarassment at the treatment Dr. Schrader had received at the hands of Rev. Everson. He is the one who claimed Rev. Everson had “no constituency” and was just a ‘loose cannon,” speaking for himself and no other. [4] In a Rome News Tribune article attached to my earlier article, an e-mail exchange between Dr. Price and Dr. White is detailed. This exchange confirms your concern, Jim, when you speak of electing trustees with a pre-set agenda and then claiming that they are independent and free of undue outside influence. It is obvious that the GBC was conspiring behind the scenes to elect only those truetees who were “in their back pocket” from the outset and thus needed no further direction/influence. The above-named e-mail exchange makes this transparently clear. The SACS concern was right on target! [5] Finally, I can only guess who your pastor is based on where you live. If I am guessing correctly, he and I had many a lively exchange during my days as a pastor in Rome. I respected him greatly, and I think both of us would acknowledge that we love Jesus and were seeking to serve Him. However, we agreed on almost nothing else, especially when it came to Shorter and GBC politics.

  6. You want to know about Mike Everson, J Robert White and the GBC as a whole just go to these websites. It is amazing how this has evolved and how the real personalities have been exposed.

    Ok here is just a start. Just google these following words ” pastor mike everson prays mill ” or go here :

    or here:

    or here: ( this is where the GBC wrote a “resolution” protecting Mike Everson against the Ga Blogger who exposed him.

    or even here:

    Happy Anniversary

    Read away!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s