When I was considering a position at Perkins School of Theology in 1985, the crucial question for me was one of academic freedom. I had dinner one-on one with Schubert Ogden, a legendary, hard-headed liberal in every sense of that word. I came to Perkins because he convinced me that at SMU I would have the freedom to pursue any and every issue thoroughly. That freedom is now at stake in the decision to bring the Bush museum, library and institute to our campus. If the decision is derailed, it will be clear that the academic and theological wells at SMU are poisoned. We will be revealed as a community that does not value diversity of opinion and that shuts down alternatives. The first step in responding to the potential poison is to do all we can to ensure that the Bush institutions come to SMU.The Bush institutions furnish an invaluable opportunity to explore the historical, political and philosophical issues of a critical period in American history. They also provide the site for the careful examination of the theological and religious dimensions of politics. Coming from Ireland, I know that theology and religion matter; they have become extraordinarily and globally important over the last decade. We neglect them at our peril. I welcome enthusiastically the opportunity to work as a theologian at the frontiers of contemporary politics and history.The division of labor and responsibility envisaged should work well. President Bush will be given real space to set out his position and legacy clearly and robustly; faculty and students will have a front seat from which to examine them openly and critically. This arrangement fits snugly with our history. In a famous statement of principle, Professor John Deschner caught the issue nicely: SMU is a church-related, independent university. The church insists on a fair hearing; the university insists on independent thought. President Bush should have a fair hearing, the university should have independent thought, and the proposed arrangement guarantees both. This ordering also fits with the ethos and history of Methodism. John Wesley insisted that Methodists were people who think and let think. He fought hard to get a fair hearing in his day and sought the same for his opponents. There are no litmus tests for politics or scholars in Methodism; we argue and disagree. Methodists have been proud to produce politicians and academics from across the political and intellectual spectrum. Methodists have also stood firm when it came to suffering. When I was a Methodist minister in Belfast, loyalist terrorists tapped my phone; so I genuinely worry about the threat from terrorism. I have no doubt that the university will do everything possible to address this danger. However, I cannot believe for a moment that we will run away and let terrorists kill Baptists at Baylor. If we do so, we will be killing our souls. As a theologian I stand firm on academic freedom and on saving our souls.

William J. Abraham is an Albert Cook Outler Professor of Wesley Studies and an Althshuler Distinguished Teaching Professor in Perkins School of Theology. He can be reached at [email protected].