Bob Jones G.R.A.C.E. news in New York Times

42 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Since
Thu, 2/11/10
Posts: 2334
Bob Jones G.R.A.C.E. news in New York Times

Tags: 

Christian School Faulted for Halting Abuse Study

"At Bob Jones, most of the stories that have been made public do not involve assaults on campus. They are about people who were abused as children and then looked for help in college."

Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 780
I know BJU said they were

I know BJU said they were going to pursue re-establishing their relationship with G.R.A.C.E. after they dismissed them.  Has there been any progress on that?  If not, do they have another investigative ministry in mind?

Jim's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 6526
I find the quote above interesting

"most of the stories that have been made public do not involve assaults on campus. They are about people who were abused as children and then looked for help in college"

Interesting to me because:

  • If true, BJU does not have a primary abuse problem. The abuses were outside the BJU direct sphere of influence
  • And if that indeed is true, any failure was the failure to appropriately counsel those who were abused.
  • So it would be different, for example. from various Catholic archdioceses where the abuse was within their direct sphere of influence
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 3505
Question

Wasn't Camille Lewis fired by BJU and a KEY player in the Do Right BJU group(s) along with Jocelyn Zichterman and others?

The CNN article about the "student who had criticized the university over the affair was not allowed to graduate and alleged retaliation" is the very same Chris Peterman who tried to plead his case on SharperIron.  

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
Abuse Off-Campus

The abuses were outside the BJU direct sphere of influence

Don't overlook the word "most", as in "most of the stories" and, the phrase "made public."  We can't know (and neither does the NY Times) stories that have been related to GRACE confidentially.  Also, keep in mind that the GRACE investigation involved Bob Jones Academy, as well, the "affiliated primary and secondary school" mentioned in the NY Times article.

If BJU was being BJU, this is the advice that would have been given to any abuse victim that related their prior experience to a BJU administrator (dean) or counselor:

  • they can't change what happened to them
  • eschew bitterness and forgive the perpetrator (abusers)

Because of the long-lasting and devastating effects of abuse on a person, this advice, though not necessarily wrong, was insufficient at best, i.e., the "poorly served" claims.

Knowing BJU's penchant for keeping things squeaky clean, if a BJU affiliated pastor/church/parent was accused of being involved in or knowing of abuse to a BJU student, the University would call the accused and question them.  But, if the accused denied it, BJU may note it, but leave it and not notify any official law enforcement agencies.

Many of these BJU counselors who would have heard such abuse claims have since retired.  I wonder if some of these retired administrators are complaining to BJU about being questioned over events that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago or more?

Mark_Smith's picture
Offline
Since
Mon, 4/29/13
Posts: 402
My View

Sexual Abuse...true sexual abuse...is a felony! This is not something you take to "church leadership" in the hope they will "take care of it". If your child is sexually abused by a church leader/worker at church YOU DON'T GO TO THE CHURCH first. You call the police and report the crime. Same goes for students at a Christian school. If you are raped...you don't call your dorm supervisor...you dial 911.

 

DavidO's picture
Offline
Since
Mon, 5/3/10
Posts: 727
Avoiding Genetic Fallacy and more

Jay, say what you want about JZ, and I'm sure there's plenty to say, but she and her activism were instrumental in bringing to pass the  sitting of Ernie Willis in prison having been convicted of forcible rape by a jury of his peers.  JZ got it done where the church involved did not.

Same for Dr. C. Lewis.  If the info she provides is accurate, then, as far as this matter goes, any other baggage isn't too relevant.

Mark, people in those situations often go to people they know and deeply trust.  It's up to that person to handle it properly from there.  Tough to fault the victims here.

Offline
Since
Sat, 1/11/14
Posts: 124
A further perspective:

 

Excerpts:

"We can’t know at this point, but BJU’s actions make it sound like GRACE was getting too close to the truth."

"Bob Jones University is about to find out the first rule of modern crisis management: trying to prevent the truth from coming out not only fails, usually, but also causes worse problems for you in the long run. If there really were victims of abuse at BJU, may they find the strength to come forward on the record, and challenge the alleged culture of cover-up at the school. And may the news media see the smoke signals that sacking GRACE sends up, and start looking for the hidden fire at BJU."

- http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/why-is-bob-jones-universit...

 

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
The Players

Wasn't Camille Lewis fired by BJU and a KEY player in the Do Right BJU group(s) along with Jocelyn Zichterman and others?

The CNN article about the "student who had criticized the university over the affair was not allowed to graduate and alleged retaliation" is the very same Chris Peterman who tried to plead his case on SharperIron.

Dr. Camille Lewis (and husband) were not fired, but left BJU because of irreconcilable differences regarding BJU faculty employment policies and university policy restricting her from freely expressing her opinion in her area of expertise.  Most of it was centered on Camille's academic criticism of another faculty member's book.  To say she was "fired" is inaccurate.  Camille took (and takes) great pride in organizing the "12-12-11 Red Balloon Protest" on the BJU campus where about a dozen people showed up to protest Dr. Chuck Phelps (who two weeks earlier had resigned from the BJU Board).

Zichterman, author of I Fired GOD, is another ex-BJU'er, but I don't believe she was ever faculty, just a former student - not even sure she is a grad.  She and Dr. Lewis vie for publicity and are usually at odds with one another.

Peterman is the student who claims he was shipped (expelled) for watching Glee on his laptop while in Starbucks.  BJU may have expelled Chris because of his involvement with Dr. Lewis and the protest.  He was two weeks from graduation.  It does look suspicious, which is why his story has legs.

Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 3505
OK

Thanks for the information, Easton.  I thought she had been fired.  And I'm sorry that I ever brought Zichterman into this discussion.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Offline
Since
Sat, 1/11/14
Posts: 124
February 7, 2014 article by Boz Tchividjian:

 

BJU is not mentioned in the article, but it (coincidentally?) came out very shortly after BJU terminated the investigation.

http://boz.religionnews.com/2014/02/07/struggle-report/#

 

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
Differences

What bothers me are the inconsistencies between the original "termination" letter, the GRACE update announcing the termination and the Stephen Jones video posted by the BJU PR Department.

Jan 24 2014 BJU Termination Letter to GRACE -- Reasons for termination:

  • We [BJU] made some changes, had some seminars, etc.
  • I [Stepehn Jones] am resigning as president.
  • BJU cannot afford to focus on GRACE right now.

Feb 06 2014 GRACE posted update -- Reasons for termination:

  • None.  It was a "complete surprise" - unexpected.  We have no idea.

Feb 07 2014 Dr. Stephen Jones BJU PR Dept. posted video -- Reasons for termination:

  • GRACE investigation had gone "askew".
  • It was only a "suspension" NOT a "termination".
  • Despite repeated requests, GRACE would not meet with BJU.
  • ​GRACE had not reported any immediate problems since the commencement of the investigation.

The video left me more confused and made me more than a little suspicious of BJU's attitude and motives.

Chip Van Emmerik's picture
Offline
Since
Thu, 6/4/09
Posts: 1698
What bothers me is the

What bothers me is the rampant speculation and premature judgment. Someone posted Proverbs 18:13 on the other BJU/GRACE thread, and I think it is equally apropos here.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Offline
Since
Thu, 7/9/09
Posts: 254
Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

What bothers me is the rampant speculation and premature judgment. Someone posted Provers 18:13 on the other BJU/GRACE thread, and I think it is equally apropos here.

 

Because there are a number of people, just hoping that sexual abuse is rampant at BJU, that people are hiding it, and if it comes out they can take down the University.  I agree there is too much speculation and almost zero fact here, except for some examples of abuse decades before a student arrived at BJU and the connection with Chuck Phelps, where nothing happened on the campus of BJ or linked to the faculty and administration of BJU.  Lets see how both BJ and GRACE work this out.

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
No Questions, Please

What bothers me is the rampant speculation and premature judgment.

No "speculating" here - so you can't mean me.

All I did was take the words written/spoken by both parties and compare them.

This "no speculation and premature judgment" command is only enforced when an entity (like BJU) is questioned.  Otherwise, people here on Sharper Iron speculate and judge all day long.  No one says a word.

Chip Van Emmerik's picture
Offline
Since
Thu, 6/4/09
Posts: 1698
Easton wrote:

Easton wrote:

What bothers me is the rampant speculation and premature judgment.

No "speculating" here - so you can't mean me.

All I did was take the words written/spoken by both parties and compare them.

This "no speculation and premature judgment" command is only enforced when an entity (like BJU) is questioned.  Otherwise, people here on Sharper Iron speculate and judge all day long.  No one says a word.

Easton,

Perhaps you "speculate and judge all day long," but that does not describe me - the person you are both quoting and responding to. Are you arguing that it is a biblical action in other instances or agreeing that it is unbiblical here, because you cannot complain about it there and excuse it here.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Chip Van Emmerik's picture
Offline
Since
Thu, 6/4/09
Posts: 1698
Easton wrote:

Easton wrote:

What bothers me is the rampant speculation and premature judgment.

No "speculating" here - so you can't mean me.

All I did was take the words written/spoken by both parties and compare them.

This "no speculation and premature judgment" command is only enforced when an entity (like BJU) is questioned.  Otherwise, people here on Sharper Iron speculate and judge all day long.  No one says a word.

And just for the record Easton, it seems like these statements constitute speculation and/or judgment on your part.

 

Easton wrote: If BJU was being BJU, this is the advice that would have been given to any abuse victim that related their prior experience to a BJU administrator (dean) or counselor:

they can't change what happened to them
eschew bitterness and forgive the perpetrator (abusers)

 

Easton wrote: Because of the long-lasting and devastating effects of abuse on a person, this advice, though not necessarily wrong, was insufficient at best, i.e., the "poorly served" claims.

 

Easton wrote: Knowing BJU's penchant for keeping things squeaky clean, if a BJU affiliated pastor/church/parent was accused of being involved in or knowing of abuse to a BJU student, the University would call the accused and question them.  But, if the accused denied it, BJU may note it, but leave it and not notify any official law enforcement agencies.

 

Easton wrote: Many of these BJU counselors who would have heard such abuse claims have since retired.  I wonder if some of these retired administrators are complaining to BJU about being questioned over events that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago or more?

 

Easton wrote: The video left me more confused and made me more than a little suspicious of BJU's attitude and motives.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Sean Fericks's picture
Offline
Since
Thu, 9/24/09
Posts: 200
Chip, I agree with your

Chip, I agree with your sentiment, and I know it comes from a noble heart.  It would apply better there was a single accusation from an isolated source, and it appeared that BJU were attempting to get to the bottom of things.  However, this is not the case.  There are multiple accusations from many sources.  BJU told the world that it was hiring an independent investigation by a reputable Christian organization.  Now, it has terminated the very audit that was supposed to lay the accusations to rest.  BJU's, perhaps unintentional, obfuscation that GRACE is going far afield is not an accusation consistent with the premise of an independent investigation. 

The fact that BJU terminated the investigation ought to be met with some skepticism.  Proverbs 18 does not negate discretion.  Rather, it requires us to use our God-given minds to asses the facts on the ground, and then use discretion.  We ought not take BJU at face value when the facts on the ground are pointing in the opposite direction.  Rather, we should apply a bit of healthy skepticism, hoping and praying for the best.  I certainly hope that BJU is doing right.  I pray that I will be pleasantly surprised at the outcome.  But the inconsistency in word and deed lends itself to justifiable concern for the impact on the Name of Christ, negative effects on the victims, the reputation of the Church, and the future of the University.

This is a serious matter.  Real people have been hurt.  The Name of Christ is being impugned (unjustifiably).  BJU must act quickly to mitigate the damage.  No more obfuscation.  Prompt, clear communication and consistent action are required.

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 57
Grass

I'm so glad the paper pointed out that you can't walk on the grass at BJU. It shows how desperate they are to do a hatchet job on BJ.

Offline
Since
Wed, 6/3/09
Posts: 52
Ken Woodard wrote:

Ken Woodard wrote:

I'm so glad the paper pointed out that you can't walk on the grass at BJU. It shows how desperate they are to do a hatchet job on BJ.

That was a cheap shot, to be sure. The entire lead paragraph was too.

As someone who has worked for several years as a newspaper writer, I have been in situations where one side is desperate to get their story out and the other side, usually the side with the most to lose, is not cooperative. Sometimes the only solution is to go with what you have and hope the negative publicity will encourage the other side to finally explain their side of the story. It will be interesting to see if there is a follow-up story. If there is not, that will mean one of two things: either your suspicions are completely confirmed or BJU decided not to respond. Either way, at this point, BJU loses, to whatever extent this single article harms them.

No wisdom, no understanding, and no counsel will prevail against the LORD. Proverbs 21:30

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
Unbelievable

I'm so glad the paper pointed out that you can't walk on the grass at BJU. It shows how desperate they are to do a hatchet job on BJ.

Unbelievable that this is the focus.

The "hatchet" is not in the hands of the NY Times.

I guess I'll sit back and wonder how long it will be before someone comes on the forum and declares: "Only psychos feel 'abused.'"

Offline
Since
Mon, 7/2/12
Posts: 90
Open Letter from Robert Peters

I'm not sure this has been posted, but it's worth reading.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/robert-peters/an-open-letter-to-stephen-j...

An Open Letter to Stephen Jones and Bob Jones University

February 8, 2014 at 6:37am

Stephen Jones and Bob Jones University,

Your decision to terminate GRACE days before the final interview and weeks before their final report had an impact on survivors and advocates in ways you do not understand. Your message, unintended or not, was blatantly clear: We care more about our institutional “objectives” than institutional transparency. We care more about us than about survivors.

I begin with facts that no one disputes, that you, Dr. Jones, reiterated in your statement yesterday. You initiated the process. You have raised awareness about the issue of sexual abuse at BJU. This is very commendable. These are important steps that BJU would not have taken a decade ago.

It is also undisputed that GRACE has been compassionate, effective, and helpful throughout the process.

It is sadly also undisputed, by you, that you have not told GRACE about your concerns. You admitted this in your statement yesterday. You say that GRACE diverged from your objectives and you have had concerns for several months, but you openly admitted that you did not bring those concerns to GRACE prior to terminating them. To quote a supporter of BJU, you changed the rules of the game in the fourth quarter.

You also spent a lot of time on how GRACE has diverged from your “objectives,” but you won’t disclose those “objectives” or how GRACE has diverged from them because it’s between you and them. It is not. Hundreds of survivors and alumni have a right to know exactly what part of your “objectives” conflicted with the investigative goals of an objective third party firm. How did GRACE “go beyond the original outlined intent?” Did they uncover more than you expected? Was their investigation not narrow enough for your comfort? When you say “it had gone askew,” what do you mean? Do you mean they looked where you didn’t want them to? Was it too painful for BJU to face abuses when they were complicit?

Furthermore, why do you expect a third party investigation to align with your  objectives? If GRACE followed your “objectives,” they would cease to be objective! This illustrates a fundamental flaw; the goal of the investigation should not be narrow, as your response implies (and if you’re honest, this is the goal of terminating GRACE’s agreement: gain contractual leverage, narrow the scope of the report). It should bring darkness to light, institutional and otherwise. (John 1:5) We are a City on a Hill, not a fortress of secrecy and intentional vagueness.

It is not GRACE’S job to “complete the review to achieve our [BJU’s] objectives.” GRACE’s role is to bring light to darkness, truth to secrecy, and hope to survivors, not to accomplish an institution’s narrow objectives.

Also, your reason for the termination was “so that we could sit down and get back on track.” You run a business. Explain to me how it is a professional business model to never bring your concerns to the party, and before working them out you fire them to get back on track. How does that create a good working relationship? You then complain that GRACE went public with it, when, by your own admission, you 1) had concerns for months, 2) never disclosed those concerns, 3) terminated without disclosing the reasons, and 4) still haven’t communicated your concerns to GRACE. And GRACE is being unprofessional? 

Furthermore, this rationale is blatantly opposed to the reason you gave in the termination letter, where you said the change of leadership (and a shift in institutional focus?!) was the real reason. 

I have no doubt that BJU will move forward with an independent third party. I have grave concerns that the full scope of the report will not be made public. That is, after all, the real reason for the termination. You can sugarcoat it all you want, but in your heart you know why you terminated. 

I’m glad you’re “concerned about people that have been interviewed in this process.” Your response caused them incredible pain. I pray you resolve this with an honest, open, unfiltered report. 

You say “nothing is being covered up” because BJU “wouldn’t have initiated” the process. Dr. Jones, initiating costs you NOTHING. It means NOTHING. It’s easy to point to a seminar, an awareness campaign, an initiation, to point to how you care for survivors. That is not what shows you care. 

What shows you care is not initiating, but finishing. 

Not finishing in accordance with your narrowly construed objectives, but in accordance with the light, openness, and transparency that is the Gospel. 

I will get personal. Dr. Jones,  in your time as President you made important, incremental reforms. I believe you are a good man. This will anger many, perhaps even you, but you are better than your predecessors. And you are certainly better than this. 

Please, if you value the name of Christ, if you care at all for the survivors of abuse, let GRACE complete this investigation in full--not to accomplish BJU's "objectives," but to pursue justice, transparency, and restoration for all involved. The longer you wait, the more news outlets pick this up. And the more others see a flawed depiction of Christ that looks nothing like your Savior.

Robert Peters

Chip Van Emmerik's picture
Offline
Since
Thu, 6/4/09
Posts: 1698
I don't know who Robert

I don't know who Robert Peters is, but this letter is filled with more of the sinful speculation and judgment I mentioned earlier. I do not think it is wrong to be concerned, but judging motives and pontificating on things currently unknown is wrong, and two wrongs still don't make a right. 

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Offline
Since
Tue, 8/4/09
Posts: 119
What is with this use of "open letters", lately.

I am not sure what is supposed to be accomplished by such a communication, but it is sure used a lot. It always appears to be someone who has an overstated view of why they think their opinion is so much more important than anyone else.

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 766
BJU and GRACE to meet

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Offline
Since
Sat, 1/11/14
Posts: 124
To be fair...

Barry L. wrote:

I am not sure what is supposed to be accomplished by such a communication, but it is sure used a lot. It always appears to be someone who has an overstated view of why they think their opinion is so much more important than anyone else.

Open letters have been used in all manner of situations, by many.

Central Seminary/Dr. Kevin Bauder have issued some.  Here is one example: http://www.centralseminary.edu/resources/nick-of-time/462-an-open-letter...

I seem to recall numerous others issued in regards to the concerns about Northland International University a while back.

A quick Google search shows that BJU has been on the sending end of some in the past, too; as well as being on the receiving end, such as the one posted here.

 

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 77
The BJU Statement

Perhaps we can now get past the false assumptions that BJU was stonewalling the investigation and was unwilling to move forward with GRACE.

Here is the statement from the BJU website:

Bob Jones University and GRACE will meet next week to discuss the concerns of both parties and determine a plan for moving forward.

Bob Jones University and GRACE remain hopeful this project can be completed with GRACE and in so doing raise sexual abuse awareness and minister to victims whose lives have been ravaged by abuse.

Published February 13, 2014

 

Ken Fields

Jim's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 6526
GRACE Statement today

http://netgrace.org/wp-content/uploads/Update-February-13th.pdf

During the past week, representatives of GRACE and BJU have continued to 
communicate for the purpose of working out a time for an in-person meeting. The parties 
were recently able to schedule such a meeting for next week. The purpose of this 
meeting is for the parties to articulate expressed concerns, as well as to dialogue about the 
possibility of GRACE completing the independent investigation process started last year. 
GRACE will post another update shortly after the meeting next week. 
 
We ask for prayers for everyone involved in this upcoming meeting. We also ask that we 
continue to pray for God to work mightily on the behalf of all the amazing individuals 
who have been impacted by this most recent development.

Offline
Since
Tue, 8/4/09
Posts: 119
Larry Nelson wrote:

Larry Nelson wrote:

 

Barry L. wrote:

 

I am not sure what is supposed to be accomplished by such a communication, but it is sure used a lot. It always appears to be someone who has an overstated view of why they think their opinion is so much more important than anyone else.

 

 

Open letters have been used in all manner of situations, by many.

Central Seminary/Dr. Kevin Bauder have issued some.  Here is one example: http://www.centralseminary.edu/resources/nick-of-time/462-an-open-letter...

I seem to recall numerous others issued in regards to the concerns about Northland International University a while back.

A quick Google search shows that BJU has been on the sending end of some in the past, too; as well as being on the receiving end, such as the one posted here.

 

I know, but I still stand by what I said. In each case, I am not sure what it accomplishes. I guess the writer feels that a direct private letter would not be answered. Or maybe the intention is not for the recipient, but to the public. In that case, why not just make a public statement instead of this false pretense of you writing to the recipient to which you never actually send.

Jim's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 6526
Link to BJU statement

http://www.bju.edu/news/2014-02-13-bju-grace-meet.php

Bob Jones University and GRACE will meet next week to discuss the concerns of both parties and determine a plan for moving forward.

Bob Jones University and GRACE remain hopeful this project can be completed with GRACE and in so doing raise sexual abuse awareness and minister to victims whose lives have been ravaged by abuse.

Published February 13, 2014

Offline
Since
Wed, 4/10/13
Posts: 158
Open Letter from Robert Peters

To me this open letter is decades of BJU behavior coming home to roost.  On the one hand it is filled with speculation, which in some cases is unnecessarily over-the-top.  The author seems to forget about the two other ministries that terminated or had problems with their relationship with GRACE.

But on the other hand after decades of BJU having an attitude of superiority the reaction in this letter is understandable.  BJU is/was all about BJU looking good.  Now we see Stephen Jones & BJU finally making many needed and well past due changes & apologies, but still not quite free from the past.  Stephen is better than his predecessors, but it looks like the ghosts of the past still are in the background.

Maybe this conflict between BJU and GRACE is legitimate - nor not.  Maybe BJU is scared about following through with this investigation and report - or not.  Time will tell.

If BJU follows through with this investigation with GRACE or another organization it still will have to work hard at convincing Many the report was truly thorough & independent.

Question.  If BJU decides to permanently terminate their relationship with GRACE and to finish with another organization will that new organization need to start the research and investigation process all over again?

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 29
On open letters....

Why is it that people with no apparent connection to BJU or G.r.a.c.e. feel the need to post open letters? I don't know who Robert Peters is, other than what his facebook page says, but I don't see any connection to either group. So what makes his opinion so important? (of course what makes mine any more relevant? ... "Just sayin'" ). I just get frustrated with so many who seem to have such little real understanding of the whole situation being so dogmatic on "what is really going on here." I agree with others that Proverbs 18:3 seems quite relevant. 

And why do people keep saying "Stephen is better than his predecessors"? I never met Bob Jones Jr. or Sr. but I attended BJ during Bob Jones III's tenure and I have not met a more gracious and godly man. Stephen has been great for the school, and I am sad to see him go for genuine health reasons, but at least in my opinion(fwiw) Bob III was a tremendous leader and I have been blessed by his ministry for years now. 

 

dcbii's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 951
Exactly: Wait and see

mmartin wrote:

Maybe this conflict between BJU and GRACE is legitimate - nor not.  Maybe BJU is scared about following through with this investigation and report - or not.  Time will tell.

Exactly.  That's why all the current (i.e. post GRACE firing) protests, open letters, etc., are just blowing smoke when they react in this way before all the truth is known.  Some of the past attitudes of those at BJU are definitely to blame for the kind of reaction they are getting, but it's also true that most of these groups that work so hard at opposing anything from BJU are incapable of seeing anything good.  I'd bet money that *if* GRACE finishes the report and *if* there is no big cover-up found, there will be plenty who scream that BJU somehow suppressed the truth anyway.  At least if that happens, I'll be able to completely ignore all the current batch of protesters as having no credibility.  That won't be true for the media at large, but I wouldn't expect anything better from them.

In the mean time, let's all agree to wait and see what actually happens.

Dave Barnhart

dcbii's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 951
BJU and changing times

Ryan wrote:

...I attended BJ during Bob Jones III's tenure and I have not met a more gracious and godly man. Stephen has been great for the school, and I am sad to see him go for genuine health reasons, but at least in my opinion(fwiw) Bob III was a tremendous leader and I have been blessed by his ministry for years now. 

What you are saying here is true, but no man is perfect, and the "control" issues that BJU has had in the past have been manifest in some of the things BJIII has said/done over the years.  I can think of two instances that convince me that it's a good thing the new generation is different.  One of these was public, and one private.

The public one is hard for some to forget.  When BJIII went on Larry King Live to announce that the interracial dating policy was being done away with, he said one thing that was completely untrue -- he said that that policy was "no big deal." However, for many who were there at least in the 80's, it was a *huge* deal (i.e. an expulsion offense, if not an offense against God), and we were told often that there was a scriptural basis to that rule (even if no one I know ever got a good explanation from the university what those reasons were).  He should have (as Stephen later did) just said "we were wrong."

The private one was a time that my wife and I (she was my girlfriend at the time) had an appointment to speak with BJIII in his office about something we believed the university had handled badly.  When we didn't immediately bow to his arguments, he completely lost his temper and blew up at us.  I think he was expecting us to be cowed by his authority and just accept what he was saying without argument.  That was not at all what I had expected, and I think, was more an outgrowth of the whole attitude of control that BJU had at that time.  I don't know how Stephen would handle things, but I would bet that the whole current attitude is quite different from what it had been in the past.

Neither of these incidents would make me believe that BJIII is not a "gracious and godly man."  We all have our faults, I'm sure mine are worse than his, and I've certainly had my share of temper problems over the years.  Nonetheless, I'm grateful that the current leadership is not handling things the way they were handled in previous generations.  BJU is a better school for it.

Dave Barnhart

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/14/11
Posts: 378
Easton wrote:

Easton wrote:

...Peterman is the student who claims he was shipped (expelled) for watching Glee on his laptop while in Starbucks.  BJU may have expelled Chris because of his involvement with Dr. Lewis and the protest.  He was two weeks from graduation.  It does look suspicious, which is why his story has legs.

Of course, in obedience to Prov. 22:10 and other passages they may have expelled him as a "scorner" who they had tolerated too long.  While we're speculating we might as well put all the possibilities on the table.  Just sayin'...

 

Lee

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 29
Dave

While I realize that Dr. Bob III doesn't need me to stick up for him, I just felt as though the tone of many posts were derogatory towards the the school an past administrations and in my experience unnecessarily so. I think he would be the first to recognize and admit that he wasn't perfect. I am sure he has regrets. I don't envy the task he had presiding over the school during those difficult times. the 80's and 90's were a time of significant transition in our culture, especially regarding how people related to authority and leadership. To be honest I would probably have difficulty with a couple of teenagers coming into my office and telling me that I handled things badly and not buying the reasons I gave for it. I hope that I would handle it with grace, but probably not always. I am sorry that this was your experience. I attended school in the late 90's early 2000's and my every interaction with Dr. Bob both publicly and privately (and I had both) during my college years and since have left me with profound respect and appreciation for his godly character and gracious spirit. I realize this wasn't everyone's experience, but I am thankful for his influence in my life. 

I know that the institution isn't perfect, but I do thank God for it's place in fundamental Christianity and in my life. I am praying for them in these difficult days. 

Offline
Since
Wed, 4/10/13
Posts: 158
BJU is God's Place for You

Ryan,

The only time I've ever interacted with BJIII was when I walked across the FMA stage to get my diploma so I can't speak from personal experience like you and Dave.  However, I can speak from personal experiences with the other students and alumni, hearing BJIII speak in chapel and the general over-all attitude of the students, faculty and alumni.

I went to two different colleges including BJU.  The other college was by far a kinder, gentler place in terms of the attitude of the college administration and alumni.  It is no accident that BJU's slogan/tag-line Pedimus Credimus is often sarcastically translated "We're right, you are wrong."  BJU is/was all about making sure BJU looked good.  The old version of BJU was Tiger Woods/Michael Jordan-like in controlling its image.  I don't know if you would historically put the words "BJU" & "Grace" in the same sentence unless it also included the word "Lacking."

Which brings me back to this present time and BJU's conflict with GRACE.  I am happy to hear of the changes going on during Stephen Jones' tenure.  He really seems to "get it" about what it means to lead with grace and humility.  Yes, I would say more so than his Dad.

As many here have said, time will tell, but it seems BJU could be caught between the new and old versions BJU.  The old version would've never, ever, ever considered opening its doors for an independent ombudsman review.

dcbii's picture
Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 951
Agreed

Ryan,

I pretty much agree with everything you said here, except for the fact that my wife and I were in our 20's when this happened (though that certainly means we were still quite young), and we were also gracious in explaining our issues, and wanted to handle it properly.  That's why we made the appointment with him, rather than "bad-mouthing" the university, starting a protest group, or writing an "open letter."  But that's long in the past now, and I don't hold it against the school, or against Dr. Bob for that matter.

If you take what I wrote as not being thankful for his (and the school's) influence in my life, you'd be wrong.  I also thank God for what the university has done for me, and I have two children there now, so you can see I still support them, not only in word, but with my money.  Like you, I find that many of the things said about BJU are "unnecessarily derogatory" as you put it, and as you can see from my posts, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.  I will continue to take a "wait and see" approach to the accusations being made now.  I'm naïve enough to believe that the truth will eventually come out.

However, I'm still very glad that the current administration has made some really good changes compared to the way certain things were done in the past.  As I said before, that doesn't take away from Dr. Bob III being a godly and gracious man, but fundamentalism has changed, in many ways for the better, and I'm glad to see some of the new leaders taking responsibility for the things done wrong in the past, and working to change them.  Stephen is among those men, and I'm personally sorry that the school is losing him.  I hope the new leader continues in his vein, and I'm also praying for them as the anti-Christian climate gets worse and worse.

Dave Barnhart

Offline
Since
Wed, 5/6/09
Posts: 3505
Mind Blown

I pretty much agree with everything you said here, except for the fact that my wife and I were in our 20's when this happened (though that certainly means we were still quite young), and we were also gracious in explaining our issues, and wanted to handle it properly.  That's why we made the appointment with him, rather than "bad-mouthing" the university, starting a protest group, or writing an "open letter."  But that's long in the past now, and I don't hold it against the school, or against Dr. Bob for that matter.

I'm just amazed that the President and Chancellor of the school took time out of his busy schedule to meet with two students who were concerned about an issue they'd seen at the school.  The Administration of NIU would do that when I was there (hey, sometimes they even ate with the students at lunch!), but I never would have expected that at BJU.  Kudos to Dr. Jones III for doing this, even if it did go poorly. 

Does anyone know if that the kind of thing that happens there with any degree of frequency these days?  I know Stephen has had his share of health problems, so I can understand if he didn't.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Offline
Since
Tue, 6/2/09
Posts: 29
Dave

Dave, I apologize if my comments toward you seemed negative or judgmental, I was just trying to look at the situation objectively without much of the facts (ironically that was what originally drew me into this conversation... ah to be consistent). I am glad that you were able to look past/forgive that episode. I realize that for many, their experience at Bob Jones University was not one that could be characterized by grace or joy. I imagine for many of these they perhaps brought that on themselves, but I also know that some through no fault of their own had a negative experience of the school and that has shaped their view of the school to this day. I just felt inclined to jump in because I did see many from the administration and faculty on down to some roommates who were amazing pictures of God's mercy and grace. Though I wasn't a "preacher boy" for long, or ever a hall leader/R.A., I wasn't a "boj" (however you spell that one), but God did use the school in great ways in my life. In hind sight I imagine that this was due in large part to the prayers of my parents - prayers for godly roommates, prayers for gracious teachers, for a godly wife, etc. 

I suppose the other irony (in my eyes at least) is that so many on the internet who are faulting the school for its lack of grace seem to be showing so little of it themselves. The "I'm glad BJ is getting what they deserve" mentality is ... uh...lacking in grace. Sure this situation seems troubling, but in my sort-of-humble opinion the eagerness of so many to rip the school without all the facts, and the willingness to judge motives (doesn't Paul say something about that?), all rubs me as something less than godly or gracious. Few of us have all the facts, so I imagine the body of Christ would at this point at least be better served by our humble prayers for all sides of this to do the right thing.

Offline
Since
Fri, 1/8/10
Posts: 406
The Good, the Bad, and the Hum-drum

Like anyone who has had a long association with BJU, I have experienced disappointments, and I have experienced extraordinary examples of Christ-like dedication.  No Christian is perfect, nor is any Christian institution.  Like others, I have stories I could tell.  Buried somewhere in my files is a letter I received from BJ III that almost burned my hands it was so hot.  But it was good for me.  I needed the rebuke, and I grew in grace because of it.  I, too, have seen examples of BJU being more concerned for self advancement than truth.  But I wonder how many times I may have done the same.  For all its flaws, BJU has been, and continues to be, in my opinion, a solid Christian institution.  At times, I have wished they would be more content to let another praise them than to trumpet their own achievements.  Perhaps God is presently humbling them for their good and His glory.  There seems to be a new, gentler spirit, for which I give God thanks. It seems that for some reason, those who have had contact with BJU either give it unqualified endorsement, or unrelenting criticism.  Perhaps we all need to grow up a bit.  May God help us to criticize humbly without rancor, and express gratitude without undue adulation.  No one but God knows the whole truth, and eternity will reveal all.  That applies to BJU, and it equally applies to me.

G. N. Barkman

Offline
Since
Thu, 1/10/13
Posts: 165
Marc Monte...

Typical of the training received by BJU "Preacher Boys" back in the 1970's & 1980's.

http://bjunews.com/2014/02/19/remember-this-bju-grad-who-said-that-only-...