Bexley Hall Seabury Western Theological Seminary Federation: Student Discipline, Dismissal & Federal Court

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at Bexley Seabury?

Bexley Seabury is a private Episcopal seminary formed in 2012 when Bexley Hall in Columbus, Ohio, federated with Seabury-Western Theological Seminary in Chicago. It calls itself “The Seminary Beyond Walls”: most classes are online, and since December 2025 its offices have been at St. James Commons, 65 E. Huron Street in Chicago, Cook County. The Association of Theological Schools accredits it to award the Master of Divinity and the Doctor of Ministry, and it reported 109 students to that accreditor in fall 2025. The fact that matters most is structural: in a disciplinary case the Academic Dean runs the hearing, decides it, and decides the appeal — “There are no other appeals available beyond the Academic Dean.”

Bexley Hall Seabury Western Theological Seminary Federation is a private institution. There is no state action, so there is no constitutional due process claim, and arguing one wastes an appeal. The theory is contract: Illinois holds that a college and its students have a contractual relationship whose terms come from the catalog and the handbook — Raethz v. Aurora University, 346 Ill. App. 3d 728 (2004), restated by the Fourth District in Urso v. Bradley University, 2023 IL App (4th) 230165 — while adding that the relationship “is unique and cannot be strictly categorized or characterized in purely contractual terms.”

The limit is the standard of review, and it decides most of these cases before anyone reaches the facts. A student has a remedy for an adverse academic decision only if it was made arbitrarily, capriciously, or in bad faith. Frederick v. Northwestern University Dental School, 247 Ill. App. 3d 464 (1993), puts it bluntly — courts have been loath to review, much less overturn, academic dismissals — and Bosch v. NorthShore University Health System, 2019 IL App (1st) 190070, holds that a school which departs somewhat from its handbook still wins unless the departure was material. The federal courts in Chicago apply the same test: in Doe v. Columbia College Chicago, 933 F.3d 849 (7th Cir. 2019), the Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of a student’s contract claim where the college had investigated and reasoned its way to a decision, and in Gash v. Rosalind Franklin University, 117 F.4th 957 (7th Cir. 2024), it held that calling a process arbitrary or predetermined, without specific facts, is not enough. What survives is specific: in Liu v. Northwestern University, 78 F. Supp. 3d 839 (N.D. Ill. 2015), a former law student’s claim went forward where the school imposed what amounted to an integrity charge while denying her the handbook procedure for contesting one. Which federal statutes reach Bexley Seabury depends on facts worth confirming early — whether it receives federal financial assistance, and, for a religiously controlled institution, whether it claims the religious exemptions some of those statutes allow.

A federal claim arising at Bexley Hall Seabury Western Theological Seminary Federation is filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois — Cook County sits in its Eastern Division under 28 U.S.C. § 93(a), and the statute fixes the places of holding court for that division at Chicago and Wheaton. I am a member of the general bar of that court, admitted on my Florida license under its Local Rule 83.10, which opens the general bar to an attorney in good standing before the highest court of any state. That means a Title IX, Section 504 or ADA complaint for a Bexley Seabury student is one I file and litigate under my own name, with no pro hac vice motion. The Northern District abrogated its local-counsel designation rule in July 2023, so a member of its bar with no office in the district no longer has to designate local counsel. One limit, stated plainly: the court keeps a separate trial bar, and under Local Rule 83.12 a general-bar member who is not on it — that is me — appears alone in everything except testimonial proceedings, meaning evidentiary hearings and trial, where a trial-bar member must sit as advisor unless the judge grants the rule’s narrow waiver.

One decision-maker, a three-day answer, and no one beside you

The procedure is Section XIX of the 2026–2027 Student Handbook (published July 29, 2026, revised September 11, 2026), and it runs in calendar days. Notice comes “in writing and through certified mail within five (5) calendar days” of the seminary learning of the violation. You owe a written answer within three (3) calendar days — “It is the accused student’s responsibility to prepare a written answer” — and the seminary aims to hold the hearing within ten calendar days of receiving it. The panel is the Academic Dean and one other faculty or staff member. Attendance is compulsory: “If the student fails to attend the hearing, by virtue of the absence, the violation will be upheld.” And the rule that shapes everything else: “No one is to accompany the student during the hearing (including family members, friends, attorneys, etc.).” Recordings are barred; a panel member’s notes are the record. You are told who the complainant and witnesses are unless the Academic Dean grants anonymity, and you may question the panel “based on relevancy to the complaint.”

The standard is written down: “The measure of guilt shall be the standard of ‘preponderance of the evidence.’” The findings letter is due “within ten (10) days of the hearing” — the handbook does not say whether these are calendar or business days. Sanctions run from a warning through probation and suspension, “usually for a period of a semester or a year,” to expulsion, and “Dismissal for disciplinary reasons normally precludes readmission.” An appeal may rest only on new information, process concerns “that could change or affect the outcome,” or a sanction too severe. It returns to the Academic Dean, who may make the sanction “either less or more severe” and must answer within ten calendar days. No deadline for filing the appeal is published — so file within days and ask for written confirmation that it is timely. One more point worth raising in writing: Section XVIII says “The faculty may choose to suspend a student” or dismiss one, while Section XIX gives the decision to the Academic Dean. If suspension or expulsion is in play, ask which body is deciding. See conduct code defense.

Plagiarism, AI, and what reaches your bishop

For a student in an ordination process, an integrity finding carries a second penalty. Plagiarism expressly “includes the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate content and submit it as one’s own work,” and “Unfamiliarity with these requirements and practices is not an acceptable reason for unintentional plagiarism.” The instructor grades the work and refers it, with the evidence, to the Academic Dean, who “in consultation with the faculty and the President” chooses the disposition: course failure, probation, suspension or expulsion. Then: “The student’s bishop will normally be notified of the situation.” No hearing, standard of proof or appeal is published for this track. The nearest route is the petitions section — “Students may appeal decisions of the Academic Dean to the full faculty” — written for exceptions to policy, so ask in writing whether it applies. An AI-use accusation should be answered with drafts and version history before the disposition, not after.

The faculty must also send your bishop a candidacy assessment with a recommendation, under the canons of The Episcopal Church. Under Appendix 1, your advisor drafts it with faculty input and reviews it with you, and it weighs field education and Clinical Pastoral Education evaluations and “personal readiness for ordained ministry,” including “personal maturity and emotional stability.” Your protection is concrete: students may review evaluations before they are sent and “may correct errors of fact by written request to the Academic Dean.” A degree does not assure candidacy or ordination; those decisions belong to the diocese.

Academic standing: a 3.0 line and a faculty vote

A course-assessed master’s student must pass every course “in a timely manner” with a 3.0 GPA; a mentor-assessed MDiv student must demonstrate competencies on the Mentor Team’s timeline, at least four paths a year; a DMin student must pass courses and stay on track for the thesis. Fall short and you are placed on academic probation and may be barred from registering. Probation more than once, or for several terms, brings the decisive sentence: “the faculty may vote to continue probation, to suspend the student for a specific length of time, or to dismiss a student for poor academic performance.” No hearing before that vote and no appeal from it is published.

Separation can also happen without a vote. A master’s student who registers for nothing in a fall or spring semester without an approved leave goes inactive, and an MDiv student inactive for two consecutive semesters is separated; “Re-admission is within the discretion of the Academic Dean.” A DMin student on an extension must renew it every year, or “the student will no longer be continued in the program.” An involuntary health-related leave, imposed after notice and consultation, “may be appealed within twenty (20) days by a letter of petition to the Academic Dean” — no unit is stated, so count calendar days (see forced medical withdrawal). A grievance against a faculty member must be filed “no later than thirty calendar days” after informal resolution fails, then moves in business-day steps to a faculty Appeals Committee and finally the President, whose decision “is final.”

Sexual misconduct: two procedures, neither with a hearing

For sexual misconduct, the federal rule is the 2020 Title IX regulation: the 2024 rule was vacated nationwide on January 9, 2025, in Tennessee v. Cardona, and on September 29, 2026 the Department of Education formally repealed it and restored the pre-2024 text (91 Fed. Reg. 61,308). Bexley Seabury’s handbook routes these cases two ways. Section XXII sends discipline for sexual violence to “the student disciplinary process” — the hearing above, where no one may accompany you. Section XXIII says the anti-harassment procedures apply to “both sexual harassment and Title IX Sexual Violence and Sexual Assault”: a Harassment Panel, normally the President, the Academic Dean and one appointee, conducts “whatever investigation they deem appropriate,” may reject a complaint as unfounded “at any point,” and reports to the President, who makes “a final decision.” That track publishes no hearing, no standard of proof, no advisor and no appeal. If you are a party, ask one of the two named Title IX Coordinators in writing which procedure governs before you discuss the facts. The Title IX page covers the federal side.

What a student defense lawyer can do here

Most of the value is early and quiet. It is reading Bexley Seabury’s handbook against what the seminary actually did and finding the gap; writing the response or the appeal so it argues the grounds the handbook recognizes rather than the ones that feel most unfair; preserving the federal issues — Title IX, Section 504 and the ADA, FERPA — so they are in the record if the case ever leaves the seminary; and identifying comparators, because a sanction far outside what similar cases drew is one of the few arguments that reliably moves a decision-maker.

Two moves matter most here. First, because no lawyer may sit beside you and one Academic Dean decides both the case and the appeal, the three-day written answer and the appeal letter are the defense — drafted as the record a court would later read. Second, where ordination is in play, correcting factual errors in a candidacy evaluation, and asking in writing what will be sent to your bishop after a plagiarism disposition, can matter more than the campus outcome. Know one tension in the documents: the handbook and catalog both call themselves “not binding upon the seminary,” while the acknowledgment form says that by enrolling “you agree to abide by the policies.” Expect the seminary to cite the first; its written procedures remain the yardstick for what it did.

What a lawyer cannot do is turn a seminary hearing into a trial. The rules of evidence do not apply, there is no discovery, and the school decides its own case at first instance. That is exactly why the written record built during the campus process is the whole ballgame: by the time a court looks at it, the record is closed.

The one Illinois statute that gives you procedure

Illinois has no general statute setting notice periods, hearing formats, standards of proof or appeal rights for college students. The Illinois School Code, 105 ILCS 5, has a detailed suspension and expulsion scheme, and it applies to elementary and secondary schools, not here. The exception is the Preventing Sexual Violence in Higher Education Act, 110 ILCS 155, and it is a real one. It reaches every higher education institution in the state — public universities, community colleges, and private not-for-profit and for-profit institutions alike — and it requires timely written notice of the allegations to all parties, an investigation that is adequate, reliable and impartial, written notice of the outcome, and appeal rights. It requires the school to make confidential advisors available, trained to a statutory standard and kept separate from the people deciding the case. Both parties are entitled to an advisor of their choice, and that advisor may be an attorney — although the institution may limit how far an attorney-advisor participates in a hearing, which is why Bexley Seabury’s own rule on that, set out above, still governs what your lawyer may do in the room — and why, in a sexual-violence case, its flat rule that no one may accompany the student should be raised with the seminary in writing before the hearing. The standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence, applied the same way to both sides.

What to do first

1. Count calendar days from the certified letter. The answer is due in three. The appeal has no published deadline — file it within days, on one of the three permitted grounds.
2. Save the handbook that governed you — the 2026–2027 edition, revised September 11, 2026, or the edition in force when the events happened.
3. Ask in writing for the evidence and the hearing notes. With recordings barred, the notes are the only record of what was said.
4. Attend the hearing. Absence means the violation “will be upheld.” If the date is impossible, ask in writing for another one beforehand.
5. Protect the ordination file. Ask what will go to your bishop or Commission on Ministry, review evaluations first, and correct errors of fact in writing.
6. Raise any disability now with the Dean of Student and Community Engagement; documentation may be self-reported. A condition that explains the performance is a Section 504 and ADA question for the record. Other schools are on the Illinois student defense hub.

One honest caveat about geography. Illinois has three federal districts. I am admitted to two of them, the Northern and the Southern. A federal claim arising at a school in Springfield, Peoria, Champaign-Urbana or the Quad Cities falls in the Central District; I am not a member of that bar, and those matters I handle with local counsel in that district or by pro hac vice admission. Appeals from the Northern District go to the Seventh Circuit, which keeps its own bar; my appellate admission is in the Eleventh. I say so before a retainer rather than after.

Where I am licensed. I am licensed to practice law in Florida. I am admitted to the bars of the U.S. District Courts for the Southern, Middle and Northern Districts of Florida, the District of Colorado, the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois, the District of Nebraska, the District of New Mexico, and the Western District of Wisconsin, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Federal court admission is not a license to practice the law of the state in which the court sits. I am not licensed in Illinois and do not advise on Illinois state law or appear in Illinois state court.

Other schools in the Northern District of Illinois

Every school writes its own dismissal, appeal and conduct rules, and the deadlines are rarely the same from one campus to the next. These pages set out the procedure at other schools in the Northern District of Illinois:

• CAAN Academy of Nursing
• Catholic Theological Union at Chicago
• Chamberlain University (Illinois campuses)
• The Chicago School (Chicago campus)
• Chicago State University
• Chicago Theological Seminary

Common questions about Bexley Seabury student cases

How long do I have to appeal a disciplinary decision at Bexley Seabury?

The handbook does not say. Section XIX allows an appeal on three grounds — new information, process concerns that could change the outcome, or a sanction too severe — and says the Academic Dean will answer in writing within ten calendar days, but it sets no filing deadline. File within days of the findings letter, name your ground, and ask for written confirmation that the appeal is timely. There is no appeal beyond the Academic Dean.

Can I bring a lawyer to a Bexley Seabury disciplinary hearing?

Not under the general rule: “No one is to accompany the student during the hearing (including family members, friends, attorneys, etc.).” A lawyer can still help you write the three-day answer and the appeal, which is where these cases are decided. In a sexual-violence case, the Preventing Sexual Violence in Higher Education Act gives both parties an advisor of their choice who may be an attorney — raise that with the seminary in writing before the hearing.

What standard of proof does Bexley Seabury use?

Preponderance of the evidence in the student disciplinary procedure — the handbook calls it “the measure of guilt.” The Harassment Panel procedure, which the handbook also applies to Title IX sexual violence and assault complaints, publishes no standard, and neither does the plagiarism provision. If your case is in one of those tracks, ask in writing which standard will be applied before anything is decided.

Can Bexley Seabury dismiss me for poor grades?

Yes. A course-assessed master’s student below a 3.0 GPA goes on academic probation, and a student on probation more than once, or for several terms, can be suspended or dismissed by a faculty vote. The handbook publishes no hearing before that vote and no appeal from it. Separately, an MDiv student inactive for two consecutive semesters without an approved leave is separated, and readmission is at the Academic Dean’s discretion.

Will my bishop find out about a plagiarism accusation?

Probably. The handbook says “The student’s bishop will normally be notified of the situation” when plagiarism is detected, and plagiarism includes submitting AI-generated work. The faculty also send your bishop a candidacy assessment with a recommendation. You may review evaluations before they are sent and correct errors of fact by written request to the Academic Dean — do it in writing and keep a copy.