My Thoughts for Greenway #2

The reason for meeting on October 17 is ostensibly to act in relation to President Greenway’s insubordination. I do not know all the details behind this charge. I know that it at least involves 1) his failure to return to his evaluation on October 31 and 2) apparently he issued a number of strong demands regarding the governance of the chair and other trustees.

My second recommendation for President Greenway is that he fully and sincerely "repent" of these actions.

I believe he has already apologized to the board. He stands no chance if he cannot convince the board not only that he is sorry he did these things, but that he will never do them again. It seems difficult to do this if he is not there in person.

Believing that the board understands mercy and not only justice, they would surely be willing to forgive Greenway of his failures in these areas if they had reason to think 1) that there were mitigating factors and 2) that he had learned his lesson. It is difficult to see how it would serve Christ's kingdom or Asbury's future to "make an example of Greenway." We are all about redemption and forgiveness. There are consequences, and those must be taken into account to be sure. But Christ's way is to pardon whenever possible.

I trust that the board believes this way as well, that the charge of insubordination in itself is not sufficient Christian grounds in this case to fire Greenway. In my limited opinion, it is only if these actions play into much broader issues that they would merit his firing.

1) With regard to mitigating factors, if in fact he had legitimate concerns about the way he was being governed, this is irrelevant now as far as his actions now are concerned. He will have to rely on sympathetic board members to raise these issues on his behalf. He cannot. The faculty have already raised a number of mitigating factors and the board already knows them.

2) What is the lesson? That there are channels of authority and protocols to be followed (even when you believe those channels are unjust and are abusing their power). There is a time to stand up for what is right, but this was not the time. There are processes that can be used to address such concerns. This was a "sheep to the slaughter" moment, not a "fight for freedom" one.

He should have submitted to the Task Force. Greenway likely could have survived the evaluation process with ease if he had submitted to the process until it came before the broader board.

So all that he can do now is make clear that he knows he messed up big time. If I were him, I would send a letter to the board asking if he can be invited to the meeting to publicly ask their forgiveness for causing this crisis and to tell them the steps he is taking so that he never does this again. Maybe he already has.

I think that letter must 1) go deep into the underlying issue of his personality and leadership style and 2) must include steps of accountability for the future. More on these to come.