BJU: Can’t Beat the Real Thing

A relatively unknown Greenville pastor, Joshua Crockett, recently ascended to what would have been, in the latter half of the twentieth century, one of the most prominent positions in Fundamentalism—the presidency of Bob Jones University. Thankfully, with the exception of a few on the fringes, most seem to be satisfied with his choice, or at least they are willing to give him a chance.

As he begins his presidency, Crockett should ask himself two questions. First, what can I learn from my predecessor? Second, how can I “strengthen the things which remain”?¹

The second question is easy: Bring back the Chancellor! No one has done more for BJU than Bob Jones, III—his whole life has been spent serving and promoting the school. Crockett should give “honor to whom honor” is due.²

Why has Jones’ picture not appeared in recent yearbooks? Why has he not been featured more in chapel and at Bible Conferences? As BJU approaches its 100^th year, the new President would do well to embrace the people and philosophies which created “the world’s most unusual university.”

Thankfully, Jones intervened as the school began drifting from its historic principles. To his credit, he expressed concerns about the university—unlike his counterparts at Tennessee Temple University and Northland International University who refused to raise the flag when their schools were drifting towards oblivion. Hopefully, Crockett will utilize the Chancellor as an advisor and not treat him like an inconvenient icon of BJU’s past.

What one word do you associate with Bob Jones University? Most who attended BJU between 1960 and 2000 would respond: “Separation.” A faithful alumnus could then divide this word into two categories: ecclesiastical and personal separation. This is BJU’s brand. The only way to get rid of this reputation would be to change the school’s name.

One of the greatest marketing failures of the 1980s was New Coke. One critic of New Coke said: “If you’re trying to make your product more like Pepsi, then I’ll just drink Pepsi.” This was the essential downfall of the Steve Pettit presidency at BJU. If BJU emulates places like The Masters University or Cedarville University, people will still reject BJU either because of its stigma of separation or because it has lost its trademark of separation.

No one should attribute ill motives to Pettit. There is no doubt that he has a heart for discipleship, expositional preaching, apologetics, and godly manliness—all good things for BJU. However, in his implementation of these, he chose at times to ignore the BJU way.

Pettit changed the formula at BJU by broadening its ecclesiastical associations. For instance, he complemented John MacArthur on Twitter³ and made peace with Billy Graham on Facebook.⁴ Under Pettit, BJU participated in Samaritan’s Purse’s Operation Christmas Child—Franklin Graham’s ministry.⁵ The approved church list for BJU students was expanded under Pettit to include denominations that had been off-limits for years.

These moves on Pettit’s part did not escape the notice of BJU’s traditional supporters, especially when former BJU Professor David Beale updated his magnum opus In Pursuit of Purity. Originally published by BJU’s Unusual Publications, Beale’s book was the BJU-approved history of Fundamentalism and a required textbook at BJU. In his 2021 edition, retitled Christian Fundamentalism in America: The Story of the Rest from 1857 to 2020, a single sentence sent shockwaves through BJU’s universe: “After being the premier fundamentalist academic institution for eighty-seven years, BJU elected Dr. Steve Pettit in 2014, as the president who steered the University out of separatist Fundamentalism into the inclusive, Broad Evangelical movement.”⁶ As the scholar who literally wrote the book on Fundamentalism, his assessment carried much weight.

Criticisms against Pettit spiked when a fashion show at BJU appeared online with a young man strutting down a hallowed hall converted into a catwalk.⁷ His dress resembled drag. He wore a crown of thorns. Pettit hesitated to deal with the situation. Critics demanded to know who had approved it. The show led to a wider scrutiny of the Fine Arts Department for featuring Broadway and Disney shows/styles in its Artist Series productions. Such controversies likely led to the recent dismissal of BJU’s long-time Fine Arts Department Chair.

The fashion show and pictures of BJU students (especially athletes) wearing less modest clothing than in the past⁸ led many to conclude that Pettit was tearing down BJU’s wall of personal separation as well as ecclesiastical separation.

These concerns found their voice in a letter never meant for public consumption. The Foundations Baptist Fellowship International, historically one of BJU’s strongest supporters, wrote a critical letter to the BJU Board of Trustees. It was leaked to the public by Pettit backers, but this backfired on them in at least four ways. First, it is never positive to be known as a leaker. Second, the FBFI was able to broadcast its concerns while noting that its letter was never meant for the general public. Third, the letter rallied others to the cause of “righting the ship” at BJU. Fourth, the most prominent endorsee of this letter was the Chancellor. Largely silent up to this point, it was now clear that Jones disagreed with Pettit’s leadership. A stock email that Jones sent to people confirmed his qualms with the new direction of BJU.⁹

Separation is not the only word that described old-school BJU. Another is soul-winning. In times past, Jones regularly reminded students in chapel: “The most sobering reality in the world today is that people are dying and going to hell today.” Back then, Stratton Hall was brimming with “Preacher Boys” vociferously singing: “‘Souls for Jesus’ is our battle cry, ‘Souls for Jesus,’ we’ll fight until we die! We never will give in, while souls are lost in sin! ‘Souls for Jesus’ is our battle cry!”

Crockett checks all of the boxes as a member of mainstream Fundamentalism.¹⁰ Those who have recently felt estranged from the university should give BJU another try. BJU’s future depends upon a return to its roots, not a rebranding. Like Coke, if a “New BJU” emerges, it will not be BJU at all.