Newspaper says Wren Cross university chief 'unfit'

Newspaper says Wren Cross university chief 'unfit'
College rankings drop after president takes Christian symbol out of chapel

ollege of William & Mary President Gene Nichol, who created a furor by arbitrarily ordering a Christian cross removed from the school's historic Wren Chapel, is "unfit" for office and his contract should not be renewed, according to an editorial by the staff of The Virginia Informer, the independent student newspaper at the school.

The newspaper noted the university's recent statistics: the law school ranking dropped from 29th into a tie for 32nd since Nichol arrived, a college donor withdrew a pledge for $12 million, applications have risen by one percent or less, and fundraising plummeted from a 12 percent growth rate to 2 percent.

"The only way for the College to escape this downward spiral is for the [Board of Visitors] to announce that we want to move on with a new leader and allow Nichol to finish out his last year, if he so chooses," the newspaper editorial said. "The next president should be an alumnus, or, in the least, someone much more closely connected to the College as a faculty member or administrator.

"He or she needs to be someone who understands the community and the traditions at William and Mary," the editorial said. "Nichol's deficiencies are clear, and it is now time to part ways with him, or suffer the further decline of our beloved and illustrious College."

A telephone message from WND requesting a comment from Nichol was not returned.

The issue of the cross is being resolved only now, months after the dispute erupted. The college confirmed this week the antique cross will be placed in a glass display case at the front of the chapel. "The display case, which is still under development, will be accompanied by a plaque commemorating the College's Anglican roots and its historic connection to Bruton Parish Church," the school announcement said.

"The location of the case and the plaque that will accompany it will remind us of the traditional importance of the cross to the College," said Alan J. Meese, a law professor. "The cross remains available for altar use during appropriate religious services."

The newspaper's cover story traces Nichol's work record from the law school at the University of Colorado in Boulder to his work at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. "When Nichol came to the law school, it was ranked in a tie for 21st among the nation's best law schools. By 2002, it had dropped to 31st place and has still not recovered…," the report said.

It was there that his wife, Glenn George, was part of the University Council, and letters that had been approved by her office were sent out threatening a dozen Christian groups on campus with de-funding because of their membership practices, which required Christians to lead the Christian groups.

"The controversy dragged on for months until a federal judge entered an injunction against the university…," the report said.

At William and Mary, the ranking of the law school has dropped and "application numbers have also lagged behind University of Virginia's and other peer colleges."

Then there was the decision by alumnus Jim McGlothin to withdraw a $12 million pledge, the report said.

The Hampton Roads, Va., Daily Press had reported a letter it obtained showed McGlothin, a former Board of Visitors member, had described Nichol's termination of the cross display as "unbelievable."

"This has been so disturbing to me that I have decided to withhold any future contributions to the College," he wrote in the letter.

"The truth is that Nichol has failed in most of his presidential duties," the newspaper said. "In areas in which Nichol has shown the capacity to lead, such as student voting rights, he sadly no longer has any political capital left to spend. Most was lost during his stubborn and foolish handling of the Wren Cross debacle.

"Anything that Nichol fights for in the future, whether in Williamsburg or Richmond, will be tainted by the embarrassing memory of the cross controversy," the editorial said.

WND broke the story on Oct. 27, 2006, when university administrator Melissa Engimann circulated an e-mail noting that the cross was going to be stored in order to make the chapel "less of a faith-specific space."

Nichol said he'd gotten a complaint about the cross, and ordered it removed without consultation. But alumni and students launched a website campaign, called Save The Wren Cross, and collected more than 17,000 names demanding the cross be restored.

As the number of names on the petition rose, Nichol at first admitted he "acted too quickly and should have consulted more broadly" and dictated that a plaque would be installed in the chapel.

The move failed to satisfy those who wanted the donated bronze cross restored to the historic chapel, and the university eventually assembled a special committee to deal with the crisis.

"We are very thankful that the Wren Cross will be returned to permanent display in Wren Chapel," supporters of the cross said. "We urge the Committee to follow through on an implementation of a cross display practice that is consistent with those used by other Colonial Colleges with historic Christian chapels."

The group also said it would urge the committee "to follow through on its original charge to examine broader questions involving the role of religion at public universities, and to solicit a wide spectrum of student, alumni, and community input.

"Specifically, there is still a significant amount of clarity that the Religion Committee can provide to the issues involving the display of the cross. With the removal of the cross from Wren Chapel last October, there was a theory advanced over the last several months – as late as March 1 – about the inappropriateness of the ongoing display of a Christian cross in an historic Christian chapel. With the Committee's unanimous recommendation, this theory has clearly been repudiated. Yet, in the 71-word recommendation by the Committee, no explanation has been advanced for why its new approach to the cross display policy has been adopted," the group said.

"We believe it is important to ground in sound reason and logic the rationale for departing from the previous cross display policy that had been in place for nearly 70 years."

"This is especially important since we are a university community, and since as the second oldest university in America – and one of her great liberal arts universities – the decisions made on this campus have great significance. They must be thoughtful, made with deliberate consultation, with accountability, and above all, with respect to the traditions and heritage that make William and Mary the Alma Mater of a Nation," the group said.

"When we proceed to alter traditions, a decent respect for public and College community opinion would suggest that a thorough accounting and explanation for such a departure is warranted," the group said.

As WND also reported, only a short time after the cross was removed from the chapel, the College of William and Mary was the site of an explicit pornography show.

The Virginia Gazette reported about 400 people filled the auditorium for a show that included a 200-pound-plus performer named Dirty Martini.

"It's just so out there and expressive," Josh Campbell, a member of Lambda Alliance, one of six student groups to sponsor the event, told the local paper. "It's hip, it's in your face, and it's exciting."

At least two professors objected to the show citing studies that pornography incites sexual violence. But Nichol issued a statement defending it in the name of free expression.

"I don't like this kind of show and I don't like having it here," he said. "But it's not the practice and province of universities to censor or cancel performances because they are controversial."

The cross had been given to the university by Bruton Parish Episcopal Church in the 1930s, and had been in the chapel since. The Wren Chapel, built nearly 275 years ago, became an integral part of the university when it was a Christian school.