Dear University administrators, faculty, and staff: On Monday, Lori Walton distributed an open letter alleging that Andrews University is practicing gender and religious discrimination. She also distributed some additional documents. Much of Dr. Walton’s letter contains inaccurate statements or unfair implications. While I choose to believe that Dr. Walton is not intentionally spreading inaccurate or unfair information, she nevertheless is doing so. Early in 2015, Dr. Walton shared with her department chair that her faith journey led her to conclude that she is an adherent of Islam. I am convinced that Dr. Walton’s decision was made after sincere searching. Indeed, Dr. Walton’s deep convictions are an obvious part of her life and character and they are among the many reasons why Dr. Walton has been respected and admired. Although Dr. Walton was, and remains, a capable and talented professor, her Muslim faith contradicts the employment letter under which Dr. Walton was hired. Andrews University expects and requires that students will be taught from a Christian world view. Faithfulness to Christ, and to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, is a significant part of the university’s mission. For that reason, the University decided not to renew Dr. Walton’s faculty appointment and promptly informed her of that decision. Was the University’s decision motivated by Dr. Walton’s gender (or hijab)? Absolutely not. The University’s decision would have been the same whether she was a woman or a man. And, as Dr. Walton herself pointed out, what is “in a person’s head” is far more important than what is “on a person’s head.” Does the University believe that non-Adventists and non-Christians are our brothers and sisters, loved by God, and our equals? Absolutely. The University’s decision is not based on a feeling of superiority. All faith traditions have much to learn from, and teach, each other. However, the University does have a right (as do all faith-based institutions) to insist that its professors will teach in support of its institutional mission. Has any student been “intimidated” into not sharing their opinion? Absolutely not. When an announcement was made to students in the department about the non-renewal decision, the department chair

! 1

specifically invited students to be heard: “If you have further questions or complaints please handle them professionally by following the ‘Student Rights and Responsibilities’ policy Section 11 of the student handbook.” Does the University believe that Muslim students are “second class”? Absolutely not. All students are equally cherished and the University makes no distinction among students of different faith traditions. Did the University President encourage Dr. Walton to be deceitful? Absolutely not. In fact, just the opposite took place. When I met with Dr. Walton, I thanked her for being forthright and affirmed her integrity while expressing that I would have that same expectation for all University employees. I also expressed the necessity of the University being transparent about its own faith commitment. I cannot understand how my statement to her became so misunderstood. Is the University troubled by the “examples” provided by Dr. Walton about statements attributed to University faculty and staff? Absolutely. Because Dr. Walton inaccurately and unfairly represented my words, I am concerned about the accuracy of the words she quoted as coming from members of the faculty and staff. However, allowing for some inaccuracies, I would join Dr. Walton in being troubled by ignorance and insensitivity. None of the things that Dr. Walton now reports have ever, to my knowledge, been reported to the University. The University would take seriously any derogatory comments made toward any ethnic or religious group; such comments are not acceptable to the University and do not reflect the warm and welcoming spirit which is most often associated with Andrews University. Isn’t there a way that Dr. Walton could have appealed the decision not to renew her faculty appointment? Absolutely. As the letter from the dean (provided by Dr. Walton) made clear, there is an appeal process involving faculty colleagues on a grievance committee. Dr. Walton chose not to pursue that path. She did make an informal appeal directly to me and, after considering the matter, I supported the decision of the academic administrators. Summary

! 2

Andrews University has appreciated the quality of the service provided by Dr. Walton during her faculty appointment. She was a valued colleague and will remain a good friend to many. The University’s decision not to renew her teaching appointment for next year had nothing to do with her “performance.” Unfortunately, some people may view (as apparently Dr. Walton herself views) the decision not to renew Dr. Walton’s faculty appointment as an act of hostility toward Islam. I certainly do not view it that way. I see what has happened as this: Dr. Walton followed her faith convictions. In response, Andrews University has followed its faith convictions. Just as Professor Walton has acted out of deep conviction, so too has Andrews University. Both decisions – Professor Walton’s decision to become a Muslim and Andrews University’s decision to not renew her faculty appointment – are deserving of respect. This remains true even if you think that one or the other (or perhaps both) of the decisions were “wrong.” Decisions have been made in good faith and based on the decision-makers’ best judgment. While no institution is perfect, Andrews University is well within its rights to insist that its full-time professors advance the institution’s mission in the ways that it sees fit. Sincerely, Niels-Erik Andreasen President

! 3