An Open Letter from Dr. Matt Olson of Northland International University

[juitdeflesch] Jim Peet said:

2.The conference features music that is “worldly”…

Unproven to me: points # 1 and # 2

…

2.The conference features music that is not my preferred style (I don’t personally like it and I wouldn’t incorporate that style in my church)

“Worldly” has various meanings for various people. However, each person can draw their own conclusions by clicking this link:

http://www.worshipmatters.com/2010/07/02/resolved-music-and-enfield-and…

I consider a backbeat with drums etc. to be worldly. Its country music with the words of a hymn!

Thanks for pointing me to that site. I really like the Jesus Shall Reign song!

[juitdeflesch] I consider a backbeat with drums etc. to be worldly. Its country music with the words of a hymn!

While the style of music may not be my preference, I am not willing to concede that it i worldly!

Doing my part to not let this thread die.

[juitdeflesch] Jim Peet said:

2.The conference features music that is “worldly”…

Unproven to me: points # 1 and # 2

…

2.The conference features music that is not my preferred style (I don’t personally like it and I wouldn’t incorporate that style in my church)

“Worldly” has various meanings for various people. However, each person can draw their own conclusions by clicking this link:

http://www.worshipmatters.com/2010/07/02/resolved-music-and-enfield-and…

I consider a backbeat with drums etc. to be worldly. Its country music with the words of a hymn!

Ouch! Anything but country! I love their version of “Lead On O King Eternal”…great stuff!

[WilliamD] I wonder that if schools like Northland get to cozy with Southern Baptist and Non-Denominational colleges - will they lose students to those schools and end up dying due to lack of enough of a fundamentalist distinction? This is what I think some might fear who disagree with Northland on this.

I wonder how badly Northland International University will miss those students who choose not to come because of NIU’s “lack of fundamentalist distinction”. I believe that there are many potential students who have been waiting for a school like NIU to stop pandering to the non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism and start functioning independently of their manipulative influences. So if a student would choose not to come because of this lack of distinction, I can’t imagine that they will be missed much.

[JeremyO] I wonder how badly Northland International University will miss those students who choose not to come because of NIU’s “lack of fundamentalist distinction”. I believe that there are many potential students who have been waiting for a school like NIU to stop pandering to the non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism and start functioning independently of their manipulative influences. So if a student would choose not to come because of this lack of distinction, I can’t imagine that they will be missed much.

Do you think there aren’t plenty of choices already available to those students interested in a Christian education that doesn’t pander to the “non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism”? What is so special about Northland that such students wouldn’t already be thinking of and choosing an option like Masters College?

And do you think that Northland has been pandering to the “non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism” heretofore? Is that what you are saying?

Perhaps it would be healthy for just about everyone with a strong opinion on this particular thread to go back and reread Romans 14 again and meditate specifically on vs. 9-12.

About 2 years ago I preached through Romans 14 and it was very helpful to me personally to realize that many of the opinions that I readily shared with others was just my attempt at the mastery over others. Since Dr. Olsen will answer to the Master and not to me, I suppose it would be better to take a wait and see approach.

I rather doubt that any of his decisions, even the ones I disagree with, are actually harming the gospel. For those of you who know me at all…please refrain from the “you’ve matured” responses. :)

Matt

[Don Johnson]

[JeremyO] I wonder how badly Northland International University will miss those students who choose not to come because of NIU’s “lack of fundamentalist distinction”. I believe that there are many potential students who have been waiting for a school like NIU to stop pandering to the non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism and start functioning independently of their manipulative influences. So if a student would choose not to come because of this lack of distinction, I can’t imagine that they will be missed much.

Do you think there aren’t plenty of choices already available to those students interested in a Christian education that doesn’t pander to the “non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism”? What is so special about Northland that such students wouldn’t already be thinking of and choosing an option like Masters College?

And do you think that Northland has been pandering to the “non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism” heretofore? Is that what you are saying?

Let me start by conceding the point that, yes, there ARE plenty of schools out there that a student who would be considering NIU might also consider. I was not intending to set NIU up as the end all be all of christian colleges. There are very few schools, however, that have the history of patience and defference to those inside fundamentalism who choose to, out of willful ignorance and deviciveness, pursue thier political, not biblical, agendas. That is one area that, in my estimation, sets NIU apart from the other institutions(question 2 of your response) who said, “see ya later” to the extreme fundamentalists long ago. Finally, in answer to your third question, ‘And do you think that Northland has been pandering to the “non and extra-biblical wings of fundamentalism” heretofore?’, yes, I believe NIU, out of humility and defference, pandered to them. And I chose the word pandered carefully as it seems that NIU’s leadership finally decided to openly distance themselves from the extra-biblical,political agendas of those who have replaced convictions with crusades.

Hey - this is the 212th post of this thread!

Happy Day! “Rejoice with they who rejoice.”

Straight Ahead!

jt

[JeremyO] Let me start by conceding the point that, yes, there ARE plenty of schools out there that a student who would be considering NIU might also consider. I was not intending to set NIU up as the end all be all of christian colleges. There are very few schools, however, that have the history of patience and defference to those inside fundamentalism who choose to, out of willful ignorance and deviciveness, pursue thier political, not biblical, agendas. That is one area that, in my estimation, sets NIU apart from the other institutions(question 2 of your response) who said, “see ya later” to the extreme fundamentalists long ago.

Jeremy,

There may be some on the ‘left fringe’ of Fundamentalism who will be attracted to Northland over this change, no doubt. But do you think this will even show up on the Conservative Evangelical radar screen? Why should they consider Northland? What could their motivation possibly be when they have their own schools already?

And given the change, do you think those who on the more right wing side of fundamentalism (I don’t mean the KJO radicals, I mean people like me) will be all that enthusiastic about sending young people there? If there is some kind of middle ground between my point of view and the ‘left-ward fringe’, what will their response be?

Personally, I think that over the long term, Northland will be hurt by these decisions. Time will tell, of course, but I don’t think most fundamentalists are clamouring for this kind of change.

If I may respectfully disagree with both Jeremy and Don, these decisions should not be made on the basis of potential increases or decreases in enrollment, but on whether they fit with what the institution perceives to be its purpose and understanding of biblical principles. Whether you agree or disagree with the decisions should be on the same basis. Introducing conjectures about what it will do to increase or decrease enrollment is speculation, some of which tends toward speculation about motives. Although it is quickly assumed that all decisions at educational institutions are based on enrollment issues, I am not sure there is a lot of hard data to back that up. In fact, I think a decent case could be made that institutions sometimes (and biblically centered ones often) do what is not in their best interest simply because they believe what they are doing is the right thing to do.

What seems more common these days is for folks who despise, in principle, the marketing of ministry to very quickly cast issues in marketing terms (this will adversely affect their niche…). IOW, it may be that the problem is in the eye of the beholder, not the institution. Some of this understandable—institutions have caved to constituencies in the past or shifted course to gain a new one—but some of it is also tiresome in that even the smallest of issues gets tarred with a presumption of guilt regarding the reasons behind it. I can still recall the insinuations of evil motive that were whispered when BJU changed from “The World’s Most Unusual Place” to “The Opportunity Place”! For some, this was the certain sign that the militancy of the former days had been left behind in order to become more user-friendly. Whatever.

What’s more interesting to me is how many students the most vocal detractors actually “send” to the places that they say they can no longer recommend. My experience has been that it is usually next to nobody. Clouds without rain.

[Dave Doran] If I may respectfully disagree with both Jeremy and Don, these decisions should not be made on the basis of potential increases or decreases in enrollment, but on whether they fit with what the institution perceives to be its purpose and understanding of biblical principles. Whether you agree or disagree with the decisions should be on the same basis. Introducing conjectures about what it will do to increase or decrease enrollment is speculation, some of which tends toward speculation about motives….

What seems more common these days is for folks who despise, in principle, the marketing of ministry to very quickly cast issues in marketing terms (this will adversely affect their niche…).

Hi Dave

Far be it from me to despise marketing. I am all for it.

For the record, I think that the recent Northland decisions have been taken out of integrity, not with an eye to enrollment at all. If I am right in my speculations, their decisions are clearly not done with an eye to enrollment.

Regardless, there is such a thing as integrity and empty buildings.

[Dave Doran] What’s more interesting to me is how many students the most vocal detractors actually “send” to the places that they say they can no longer recommend. My experience has been that it is usually next to nobody. Clouds without rain.

Point taken. The few young people who have gone on to college from our ministry have all gone to BJU. (My own kids had no choice in the matter.) Nevertheless, we have been glad to have Northland teams in our church and have been enthusiastic supporters heretofore. We have had one express an interest in Northland, but so far nothing has come of it.

However, if these trends continue, I am not of a mind to continue my support. I don’t think I am alone in that respect.

Thankful for Matt Walker’s words.

There are major winds of change on the Christian landscape here in America. In this time, godly men are making decisions that raise a lot of questions. In the Bible, when there were issues like this, godly church leaders gathered in councils and provided real leadership for the people of God. In church history, you see the same thing.

What if Matt Olson were to host a council which included godly leaders from a number of segements of bible-believing Christianity? What if these godly leaders from the different segments of the Bible-believing church were to come with the fruit of the Spirit to the table to discuss events, reflect on decisions that have been made, and provide some guidance to the people of God regarding these winds of change taking place in our world, and making these decisions on the foundational doctrine of fundamentalism - the inspiration and authority of the Word, not the fears and threats of their constituencies?

While I am thankful that blogs like SI provide forums for many of us to talk, they can never replace a Bible-based council.

If we are unable to see a council of men together, doesn’t that speak poorly of the condition of the church in America today?

[Don Johnson]

[JeremyO] Let me start by conceding the point that, yes, there ARE plenty of schools out there that a student who would be considering NIU might also consider. I was not intending to set NIU up as the end all be all of christian colleges. There are very few schools, however, that have the history of patience and defference to those inside fundamentalism who choose to, out of willful ignorance and deviciveness, pursue thier political, not biblical, agendas. That is one area that, in my estimation, sets NIU apart from the other institutions(question 2 of your response) who said, “see ya later” to the extreme fundamentalists long ago.

Jeremy,

There may be some on the ‘left fringe’ of Fundamentalism who will be attracted to Northland over this change, no doubt. But do you think this will even show up on the Conservative Evangelical radar screen? Why should they consider Northland? What could their motivation possibly be when they have their own schools already?

And given the change, do you think those who on the more right wing side of fundamentalism (I don’t mean the KJO radicals, I mean people like me) will be all that enthusiastic about sending young people there? If there is some kind of middle ground between my point of view and the ‘left-ward fringe’, what will their response be?

Personally, I think that over the long term, Northland will be hurt by these decisions. Time will tell, of course, but I don’t think most fundamentalists are clamouring for this kind of change.

In response to your first Question concerning the “Conservative Evangelical radar screen” I would first have to say that I dont think the leaders at NIU have ever cared whose radar screens they turn up on. Secondly, Who cares if a student chooses NIU or not? God will either bring students or he won’t. Everyone keeps saying that NIU is changing direction. I think that is a ridiculous statement. It seems to me that they want to continue in the same direction, but in a manner that is more biblical.

Third, it doesnt matter what “side” of fundamentalism NIU appeals to they will always take heat, which is why I applaud them for establishing their positions based on the Bible alone. Keeps it simple. Plus, trying to please ANYONE inside fundamentalism is a colossal waste of time because as a whole “fundamentalists” have earned the reputation of being fickle and difficult to please.

I agree with you that “most fundamentalists aren’t “clamouring for this kind of change”, but then again, I don’t think that “most fundamentalists” have really “clamoured” for anything beyond the defense of their own little kingdoms for quite some time.

I appreciate your opinion on the potentially negative, long term implications of NIU’s decisions, but maybe, just maybe, God might choose to honor humble, Godly men who are striving to be biblical in the administration of their institution.

[Pastor Joe Roof] a council which included godly leaders from a number of segements of bible-believing Christianity

While I love the idea, I’m cynical enough to say that it just won’t happen. Independence has been so ingrained in churches throughout America (let’s be honest: we’re America; no one does “independent” like we do) that a council wouldn’t make much difference. The churches who claim independence as a Biblical distinctive wouldn’t abide by any ecumenical council’s determinations in the first place - if for no other reason than the council wasn’t made up of fundamentalists who are just as fundamental as me - and the rest of evangelical Christianity in America has been doing “councils” for a while now. Non-independent organizations like the SBC and denominations like the PCA have teeth to enforce their rulings - if you don’t like it, you can leave the denomination and maybe someone will pick you up, or else we hope you have marketable job skills. Independent Fundamental churches just don’t have the infrastructure to comply with that kind of a council. If they did the FBFI would actually get stuff done in Fundamentalism, rather than holding mutual back-slapping sessions every year.

On “time for a council” and the primacy of the local church

I personally don’t think “a council” would be valuable or is needed:

• The local church has all the resources to decide on issues of separation and cooperation
• NIU has no authority over the local church - it’s a parachurch ministry / business
• Any such council would be pre-stacked with participants from one point of view anyway - so waste of time
  

Other thoughts:

• This whole Holland / Ware thing is but a very minor kerfuffle. With regard to Holland … he is going to speak in chapel. What is that … an hour?! Ware … limited to a D Min course (that looks excellent by the way!)
• I doubt parents who pay for and send young adults to a school care one whit about this. Pastors … man up to the fact that you don’t send kids to college. You never have (except your own) and you never will! Sure churches (youth pastors) influence a decision. Other things like quality of education, philosophy of spiritual formation, distance from home, academic options, and overall cost factor in very heavily on the choice of a school. Holland in chapel … nada!
• To Doran’s “clouds without water” quote above. That was instructive. With all due respect to Don (who raised some good points in my view!), he didn’t send any kids to NIU. Plus none from his church.
• A reminder that “the schools” aren’t the movement. (I’m not even sure there is a movement!). I look around my church and there are plenty of people that never went to one of “the schools”. I personally never went to “a school” and many regard me as a leader of sorts in my own church.
• When it comes to outreach …. you know that thing we ought to be concerned about …. reaching our own Jerusalems! …. we don’t first filter disciples through “a school”. We seek to evangelize the lost and incorporate them into our own churches.
• It’s a little kerfuffle that’s it!
  
  • It bothers Don … OK … it bothers Don
  • Others see a slippery slope …. well there was a good comment way back (on this thread) about that old time Fundy canard
  • I doubt one parent at my church who sends a kid to NIU cares about this
    

Some comment earlier (on this thread?) about L.A.B.C. and being “taken over” by the “Masters College”

I remember that fairly well (I was a GARBC Pastor at the time)

Here’s the sum of that:

L.A.B.C. was a foundering school struggling with enrollment and finances. Had John MacArthur not “taken it over” (which he did not do! The L.A.B.C. board voted to cede control!), it would have collapsed. Just like Pillsbury and Spurgeon Baptist Bible College (Mulberry Florida).

John MacArthur rescued L.A.B.C.

[Jim Peet] Had John MacArthur not “taken it over” (which he did not do! The L.A.B.C. board voted to cede control!), it would have collapsed. Just like Pillsbury and Spurgeon Baptist Bible College (Mulberry Florida).

Props to my alma mater!

As I sit here in my Lawn 6000! (Yes I finally up-graded!) all of this reminds me of the early thoughts some of us had with Standpoint.

The Standpoint Conference (even the first one that met at Lighthouse Bible Church in Simi Valley, back in 05’ or 06’) was started in part to help with the type of discussion you men are talking about here. We would love to see some of the larger ministries take up the cause and run with it. The “big guys” while being our friends and offering their personal encouragment, have been hesitant to join us officially….so far. That being the case, It would be great to see them combine their resources and do something here.

However, if they continue to be hesitant to do what Matt has done in speaking out, I would encourage groups to do as much of this as you feel is helpful. I really appreciate Jim’s thoughts about not giving to much influence to the schools. They really have no legitimate authority over the actions and wisdom of the local church. Pastors, not educators, ought to be leading the efforts and saying what needs to be said without worrying or waiting about what “such-in-such seminary or college” have to say about the matter. We have too many spineless men whose character, actions and heart is held captive by the opinions and pleasures of men. Even when those men are good men - at some level, this has to be a form of idolatry (This is kind of a separate point that could be a separate thread). About 5 years ago before I published some of my first thoughts on Type A and B fundamentalism, I determined that we needed to stop waiting for the leadeship of the larger ministries to address the issues at hand. So a few of us with fear and trembling (talk about misguided worry!) began to talk openly. Some of that was here at SI.

Perhaps with some of the more well-known leaders in more well-known ministries demonstrating a degree of increased open-ness to certain bread of militant and anti-eccuminical evangelical leaders, maybe now would be the time they would be open to such a gathering.

All of that being said, I would love to see Matt, Northland and others bring together this kind of a meeting. In the early days, the Leadership Conference in Lansdale had this kind of a feel. I remember the first several of those were “electric”….at least to me. My guess is the Lansdale Conference in 2011 will be a return to that atmosphere. Furthermore, it looks as if the meeting at Troy in January of 2011 will cover some of this, btw - the leaders leading the Troy conference while having very much by way of “content”, probably have very little by way of the “variety” - at least the kind of variety that some of you may be looking for with such a council. Of course that may be part of the point - I’ll find out by listening to the discussion….hopefully in person this time. Yes….I’m going to try and be at the Troy conference because it looks outstanding - and the guys talking have sharp minds and it’s been a while sense I’ve heard those guys talk together in public.

I’m hoping for a group hug at the end of the conference! :)

Standpoint initially tried to bring together a group of significant leaders from what I call the Type A, B and C worlds to discuss the issues at hand. None of them at the time were willing to go there. Perhaps with different people leading and different people hosting, we’ll be able to see such a gathering take place. That would be a thrill. These kinds of things have to have the unseen hand of God to make them work.

That’s a fact & there is a cause!

Straight Ahead!

jt

Matt Olson made a decision. As a result he didn’t get swallowed by a whale (or a large fish) but he is being nibbled at by minnows. 0:)

[Jim Peet] On “time for a council” and the primacy of the local church

I basically agree with you on this point. There is no weight of authority that any such gathering would possess. It would be nice, however, if we could get some open discussion from acknowledged leaders and come to some conclusions for the rest of us to follow, one way or another. I could even be happy if such a gathering led to a parting of ways with some heading one direction and some another.

[Jim Peet] Pastors … man up to the fact that you don’t send kids to college. You never have (except your own) and you never will! Sure churches (youth pastors) influence a decision.

Jim, I don’t agree with you in this sense: Pastors have a large influence over what schools are seen to be on the ‘approved’ list for a church. This is done by the literature you promote, the music/drama groups you might have in, the college reps, etc. Obviously each family makes their own decisions, but don’t discount the influence of pastoral ministry.

[Jim Peet] To Doran’s “clouds without water” quote above. That was instructive. With all due respect to Don (who raised some good points in my view!), he didn’t send any kids to NIU. Plus none from his church.

Your point here seems to contradict your earlier point. But I don’t think it entirely washes. We have had a total of 7 young people head off to college from our church, if I am counting right. Four of them are my own kids. I am partial to my alma mater, so it stands to reason that I tend to support it most. However, we have had no problems with Northland up till now and have had two ministry teams from Northland in and a man who was VP at the time to come in and speak. I have never had a BJU team (they haven’t asked). So I think the point is somewhat moot. To whatever extent we have promoted any school, we have certainly promoted Northland and haven’t been averse to recommending it up till now.

I would say that is probably true of most of the men I have seen taking Northland to task on this issue.

[Jim Peet] A reminder that “the schools” aren’t the movement. (I’m not even sure there is a movement!).

Here I really differ with you. In particular, Fundamentalism, for better or for worse, has been defined by its schools. Most of the dividing lines you see in Fundamentalism are around schools. There is, of course, some crossover, especially in the BJU/Maranatha/Detroit/Central/Northland orbit (up till now), but there are still “school led” loyalties, even in this group. I think there is a good reason for this, but it is the subject of a blog post I have been thinking about for awhile. Maybe it will see the light of day soon.

[Jim Peet] I doubt one parent at my church who sends a kid to NIU cares about this

Maybe not. I know of one parent who is very concerned about it. (Not in my church.)

~~~

Finally, I think we have beaten this subject to death and are probably coming to the end of the thread… although I can’t stop this compulsion to reply whenever someone touches on something I’ve said… It’s “SI Compulsion Disorder” … SICD…

[Don Johnson] There may be some on the ‘left fringe’ of Fundamentalism who will be attracted to Northland over this change, no doubt. But do you think this will even show up on the Conservative Evangelical radar screen? Why should they consider Northland? What could their motivation possibly be when they have their own schools already?

Raises the interesting point that fundamentalists and their schools have a potential interest in maintaining certain distinctions from the rest of Christianity that has nothing to do with whether those distinctions are warranted by Scripture.

Furthermore, Don’s comments about a council as proposed perhaps giving conclusions we can act upon, together with his statement about institutions setting the direction for fundamentalism really highlight, for me at least, how much some of us seem to need a “movement”.

[Pastor Joe Roof]

While I am thankful that blogs like SI provide forums for many of us to talk, they can never replace a Bible-based council.

If we are unable to see a council of men together, doesn’t that speak poorly of the condition of the church in America today?

Who would be on the council?

Please re-read Hiscox’ New Directory’s chapter on church councils as they pertain to Baptists.

This blogroll has become so long that I’m wondering if I can get grad credits for having read through it… :)

Seriously, I wonder if there are not some regional aspects to the comments being made. I don’t know where everyone is from but I know that Dr. Olsen is not surrounded by SBC churches up in Northland. Some of the other higher profile posts have come from people who are from the North.

Here in the chilly South (25 today), I am surrounded by the SBC. One of their key seminaries is in town—SEBTS. Because of that, many outsiders tend to think that we are SBC. Some of our church family used to attend SBC churches. Moreover, the SBC down here is varied with conservative (sometimes very conservative) churches all the way to very liberal. In showing the distinction between ourselves and the SBC there has been tension with some of our members who were formerly associated with the denomination. Remember, they have no thought out doctrine of separation…none at all.

I’m wondering if pastors who are more affected by the SBC are also more passionate about what Northland and others are doing in regards to the inclusion of SBC leaders at “fundamentalists” schools and churches. It seems to make sense that it would matter more to us than to someone who doesn’t deal with the SBC very often.

Matt

@Matt- Rick Holland and GCC are not SBC. Not sure how that fits in one way or the other (or what your SBC idea is supposed to mean- are southern pastors more affirming of Northland’s choices, or more opposed?). And in the end, whether your are in favor of the SBC or not, the issue with this letter as I see it is not so much decisions made on who comes in- it is how it is being represented. The choice of words (“we did not see,” “knowing now”) is the issue. Is this indicative of the direction they intend to pursue? We still don’t have a clear idea or that one way or another. Olson’s letter does little to clarify, and actually raises more questions.

@DMD and “clouds without water”- I had a currently-enrolled Northland freshman whose family we have known since we ministered in Iowa contact me yesterday as she tried to make sense of the matter. She is feeling rather unsettled in regards to these events, and is considering if this should affect her current enrollment there. I am treading carefully on how I handle that, but I am not at all skeptical that this is ultimately a non-issue for everyone.

[Louise Dan] This IS a change. But sadly, it’s a change without acknowledgment of or repentance over the legitimate problems they are addressing. Which means it won’t be Biblical change. There is no humble heart of repentance. Apart from that, it’s just changing the externals.

Humble heart of repentance? If I may be so bold as to ask, repentance for what exactly?

[JeremyO]

[Louise Dan] This IS a change. But sadly, it’s a change without acknowledgment of or repentance over the legitimate problems they are addressing. Which means it won’t be Biblical change. There is no humble heart of repentance. Apart from that, it’s just changing the externals.

Humble heart of repentance? If I may be so bold as to ask, repentance for what exactly?

but I think what Louise may have been talking about is … say a student was disciplined and even expelled for listening to … I don’t know- Casting Crowns. And now the rules have changed, let’s say Casting Crowns is perfectly acceptable. What is the school’s responsibility to students who were penalized for behavior that is now allowed? After all, damage was done to a student’s life and reputation. Do they offer an apology? A refund? A really nice Hallmark sympathy card?

Personally, the student knew the rules and made a decision to disobey the rules, and was disciplined accordingly. But I’ve seen the root of bitterness spring up when the rules change and leadership acts very nonchalant about it. It isn’t the change so much as refusing to acknowledge the confusion caused by these kinds of policy reversals. At least that’s how I’m perceiving it.

Which comes back to Bro. Linscott’s point- it isn’t the change so much as the manner in which they are being presented.

I don’t know if NIU operates (operated?) similarly to BJU but at BJU no one ever got kick out for listening to “If We Are The Body.” Demerits, yes, under the old system, and those will build up, but only in 5- or 10-demerit increments, and it takes 150 to get the boot. If you’ve got 140 and Michael W. Smith happens to pop out of your computer at just the wrong time, then yes, you may end up on the next flight home, but you can’t seriously claim that you were kicked out because you listened to one MWS song. You got kicked out because you broke a lot of small rules, or you broke a few very big rules, and maybe a small rule was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Now, if NIU was saying, “Hey, we’re going to start allowing kissing and snuggling in our designated dating areas,” where those were one major, one-strike-and-you’re-out penalties, then sure, they might have a problem. But I can’t see any change in music requiring a universal pardon to past students who got in trouble for it. In fact, I don’t think any of the “changes” (and I still dispute that they’re honest changes, moving away from established beliefs) are major enough that they would require any repentance. There’s nothing earth-shattering on there like BJU’s reversal on inter-racial dating. That was wrong, and it hurt a lot of people, and the right and Biblical course of action for them is (was? I can’t remember if they did or not) to repent of their former position. There’s nothing like that in Olson’s letter.

Bro. Mount- I can’t imagine getting expelled over music either, but I was just trying to get across the point I think Louise was trying to make- that if a student was disciplined for actions that are now allowed, shouldn’t the college admin ‘repent’?

I agree that there is nothing to indicate at this point that the changes Bro. Olson is suggesting means that they are painting the walls of the chapel black and installing disco balls, fog machines, and drum sets on stage. Right now it’s more of a “Bob likes macaroni and I like Bob so therefore I like macaroni”- ‘guilt’ by association with Holland.

Greg,

A few quick thoughts in reply:

(1) My point was not that some people would be influenced by the happenings and conversation regarding the happenings, it was that more often than not, it has been my observation that pastors who say things like “I’ll not be recommending XYZ place anymore” usually haven’t had a whole lot of students from their churches attending there anyway. I’ll speak for myself, it is basically window dressing to my argument if I, after explaining my concerns about, say West Coast, then say, so I won’t be recommending it to our students. My non-recommendation will have zero effect on their enrollment. We will have no less students going there then we currently do.

(2) I am not surprised that anybody reading this thread would now have doubts about NIU! What would be interesting to know is whether they got them from Matt’s letter or from the public insinuations of naivete or disingenuousness. Perhaps it was the public expression of suspicions about hidden reasons for staff changes. Maybe it is one of the cowbells people tried to tie around Matt/NIU based on the actions and beliefs of people once or twice removed. I’ll concede that Matt set himself up for this by sending out an open letter, but I’ll cast my vote with those who think the nature of this conversation is a significant piece of evidence regarding the ill-health of separatism in our day.

(3) As a parent who has a son at NIU, I can say without hesitation that: (a) having Bruce Ware teach a block class for pastors does not concern me; (b) that the music that is used in chapel and around campus is consistent with what I believe is conservative Christian music; and (c) the the new system of discipleship/discipline is not providing any evidence to me of relaxing standards, etc. As to who speaks in chapel, this has always been my biggest beef with all of the schools, so I’ve got no new problem here (but maybe I am a grouch about this and it might be better to ignore me—the schools do!).

Just to preempt any scuffle some of what I have said might produce, I’m logging out right after I post this. I’ll leave the last word to others.

[Susan R] Bro. Mount- I can’t imagine getting expelled over music either, but I was just trying to get across the point I think Louise was trying to make- that if a student was disciplined for actions that are now allowed, shouldn’t the college admin ‘repent’?

Fair enough. I think the principle there is that it depends on the rule. Rule changes happen all the time, and let’s face it, 90% of rules at a Christian college are functional, not moral. “Don’t chew gum in the classrooms” is not a moral rule; that is, it isn’t aimed at curbing immoral or sinful behavior as there is nothing inherently sinful about chewing gum in a classroom. Nor is it an unjust rule, because there is nothing inherently praiseworthy, nor are any foundational rights as a human being infringed upon, when someone is chewing gum in a classroom. So when someone breaks that rule and is punished, and later on that rule is dropped, there’s no harm done. In the case of, say, inter-racial dating, that *did* infringe on human rights and dignity in the name of scriptural teaching, so people were wronged by the execution of that rule, and therefore they must be approached with repentance on the part of the institution that created the damaging rule.

So in any of these cases of alleged change, should the school be writing letters to formerly-disciplined students? Matt laid out three areas where they are refocusing their efforts:

1. The way of Discipleship - I read this as, “We’re not changing the rules of conduct but we are changing how we handle students who break those rules.” If the rules aren’t changing, then there’s no cause for repentance.
2. Our Music Philosophy - This area, to me, is the one area where you might could argue for a call for repentance, but again, if there are to be rule changes about what bands are or aren’t allowed, they’re functional changes only. Human decency is not violated because I can’t listen to MercyMe on-campus. It was just a rule, and Susan, as you pointed out quite correctly, students know that going in. If someone did have “music violations” in their litany of demerit offenses, it’s very likely there was a host of other, unrelated, rules that were broken, and that speaks more to their own attitude towards rules than anything else. NIU can’t repent of enforcing the rules on a student intent on breaking them all.
3. Our Guest Speakers - repentance to students doesn’t really apply here because students weren’t involved in selecting and inviting chapel speakers.
   So if that truly was Louise’s question (Should the administration be repenting to students?), then my response is no, they don’t have any reason to repent in this case because they did not wrong anyone.

I agree- many if not most rules are just logistics. I think the rules that most people have a problem with are dress codes and policies that limit media choices (no pants, no CCM, no movie theaters) because these are often linked to spirituality and sometimes aren’t just functional. So when those policies are relaxed or even eliminated, students who were disciplined for offenses in these areas feel… I don’t know… cheated maybe?

But then you still have the fact that students know where the land lies, and if they trespass, the responsibility is unavoidably on them anyway.

Susan, Louise, etc, in my 5 years at Northland, I could maybe think of 1/2 dozen students who got expelled…maybe. And of those that got expelled, I think I could say with 99% certainty they were expelled for very serious issues that had nothing to do with reaching the demerit max. (one pulled a practical joke which I believe resulted in a felony) This is the reason it is hard for an outsider to understand N’s old demerit system and the new way of discipleship. N was never (at least while I was there) in the business of expulsion, but rather in the business of correcting behavior. So, if you hit 100 demerits (which I think was when you were supposed to get expelled) or more, you got called into meetings to discuss why and how to correct.

The problem with this way of correction and discipleship is 1) some students find it very easy to break the rules but not get caught and 2) some students find it easy to follow rules yet have a heart of stone. So, if I understand their new way of discipleship, it will allow them the ability to discipleship every student (it almost seems as if it included faculty/staff as well) regardless of whether they broke any rules.

I have no objections whatsoever to the proposed changes in the discipline system. As someone who graduated with 99 demerits in a school where 100 was automatic expulsion, and about 1/3 of those demerits were for actually breaking the rules, and I was never, ever approached as to why my demerit count was so high, nor were demerits for things like untied shoes revoked, I am ALL FOR chunking a demerit system- even if NIU’s use of the demerit system was mature and thoughtful. I was obviously traumatized. I’m calling Oprah. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php] http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-sad021.gif

That last part was sarcasm, btw.

[Susan R]

[JeremyO]

[Louise Dan] This IS a change. But sadly, it’s a change without acknowledgment of or repentance over the legitimate problems they are addressing. Which means it won’t be Biblical change. There is no humble heart of repentance. Apart from that, it’s just changing the externals.

Humble heart of repentance? If I may be so bold as to ask, repentance for what exactly?

but I think what Louise may have been talking about is … say a student was disciplined and even expelled for listening to … I don’t know- Casting Crowns. And now the rules have changed, let’s say Casting Crowns is perfectly acceptable. What is the school’s responsibility to students who were penalized for behavior that is now allowed? After all, damage was done to a student’s life and reputation. Do they offer an apology? A refund? A really nice Hallmark sympathy card?

Personally, the student knew the rules and made a decision to disobey the rules, and was disciplined accordingly. But I’ve seen the root of bitterness spring up when the rules change and leadership acts very nonchalant about it. It isn’t the change so much as refusing to acknowledge the confusion caused by these kinds of policy reversals. At least that’s how I’m perceiving it.

Which comes back to Bro. Linscott’s point- it isn’t the change so much as the manner in which they are being presented.

1. You must have NIU confused with another school if you think that a student would be expelled for listening to Casting Crowns, so I’m not even sure how to respond to that. Disciplined is more accurate, and yes, as the rules formerly stated, there were demerits assigned or the student would have to meet with the dean of men(probably a worse fate than being expelled) as a result of listening to such vile “worldly” music.

2. The rules were, in fact, the rules so the “root of bitterness springing up” is the sin and ultimately the responsibility of the individual, not NIU, so no “Hallmark card” necessary.

3. To call this a policy “reversal” is simple ignorance. It’s not a reversal. It is the long overdue abandonment of a biblically indefensable position (Read either of Dan Lucarini’s books if you want a lesson in the clumsy treatment of the Bible on the topic of music).

4. How are the leaders of NIU being non chalant?

[JeremyO]

1. You must have NIU confused with another school if you think that a student would be expelled for listening to Casting Crowns, so I’m not even sure how to respond to that. Disciplined is more accurate, and yes, as the rules formerly stated, there were demerits assigned or the student would have to meet with the dean of men(probably a worse fate than being expelled) as a result of listening to such vile “worldly” music.

2. The rules were, in fact, the rules so the “root of bitterness springing up” is the sin and ultimately the responsibility of the individual, not NIU, so no “Hallmark card” necessary.

3. To call this a policy “reversal” is simple ignorance. It’s not a reversal. It is the long overdue abandonment of a biblically indefensable position (Read either of Dan Lucarini’s books if you want a lesson in the clumsy treatment of the Bible on the topic of music).

4. How are the leaders of NIU being non chalant?

The answer to all of your questions is that I was giving a hypothetical situation to explain where I thought Louise might have been going with her comments.

The next time I have the impulse to explain someone else’s post, would someone please belt me over the head with a nine iron? Thanks.

My point was that pastors who have to contend with the issue of the SBC are bound to be somewhat more skeptical than those who do not. I am also assuming that pastors who live in the south rub shoulders more with the SBC than those who don’t. Greg: how many SBC churches are in your town? There are, literally, hundreds in our area.

I’m guessing that there aren’t that many SBC churches in Pembine or Iron Mountain. I’ll even bet that there are more SBC churches withing 35 miles of me than are in the whole state of Wisconsin. If Dr. Olsen has a teacher from Louisville come to teach in one of his classes, I’m guessing that it will mean less to those who know less of the SBC and deal with them less often than I do.

I spoke with him briefly about this and one thing I truly appreciate is his personable, approachable attitude. I also came away from our conversation thankful for Dr. Olsen’s sincere commitment to doing things Biblically. All those who are criticizing him on this forum might disagree with him but I’d be careful to question his desire to please the Lord. I’m not saying anyone has directly done that…but some of the comments have been pretty close.

Matt

[Dave Doran]

(2) I am not surprised that anybody reading this thread would now have doubts about NIU! What would be interesting to know is whether they got them from Matt’s letter or from the public insinuations of naivete or disingenuousness. Perhaps it was the public expression of suspicions about hidden reasons for staff changes. Maybe it is one of the cowbells people tried to tie around Matt/NIU based on the actions and beliefs of people once or twice removed. I’ll concede that Matt set himself up for this by sending out an open letter, but I’ll cast my vote with those who think the nature of this conversation is a significant piece of evidence regarding the ill-health of separatism in our day.

Yup. Nailed that right on the head, Dr. Doran.

[Louise Dan] Susan portrayed my concern accurately. I’ll take over so you can beat me up instead of her. People HAVE been impacted by NIU’s former music standards and former demerit system. I’m glad that they weren’t kicking people out over it, but I personally know people who have been negatively impacted by standards and systems that Olson is now saying are no longer needed. Students and staff were judged/disciplined/counseled/pressured on issues that Olson is calling a non-issue now. It may seem small to someone who WASN’T ever called into someone’s office to be confronted over Casting Crowns, but whether you were kicked out or just shamed in a teacher’s office, it was wrong.

It is a direct parallel to Dr. Bob’s discussion on Larry King about dropping the interracial ban. To him, it was no big deal. But he was oblivious to the many who had been terribly hurt by it. I was oblivious too, because I personally had not been hurt by it. At some point, you have to recognize that when you have disciplined someone for a BAD RULE, you can’t just claim, “Well, at least they were learning to obey authority.” The Bible sets limits on authorities and holds them to a higher standard. And when authorities make mistakes in the control they exercise, they have a responsibility to own up to the mistake and its impact.

Two things:

1. Comparing BJU’s open racism to NIU’s present situation is completely irrational.

2. There is a big difference between being oblivious, as you call it, and refusing to give an issue more attention than it deserves.

The bottom line here is that NIU’s leadership didn’t need to explain anything to anyone. The letter was clearly written to NIU’s ministry friends. The “haters”, to use a colloquial expression, were not the target audience here so I think that the letter was courteous, appropriate, and served the purpose of communicating what was going on “from the horse’s mouth” before the blogaholics turned it into something it wasn’t. Well, at least he tried. So I must say a quick thank you to the “fighting fundies” who have reminded me that being a “fundamentalist” these days has nothing to do with the fundamentals anymore, but is instead a silly scout badge to let everyone know whose side of the line you pitch your tent on, whether that line is biblically based or not.

Thank you Matt Walker for bringing Romans 14 into the discussion. I have been thinking about that passage because of events in my own church, and now with this situation, I am thinking more about the chapter.

Is it possible that those at NIU have not changed, but in light of Romans 14, there were things they did not do for the sake of not causing those around them to stumble? Now, thinking that people in the churches who support them are thinking more in line with what they were thinking, they thought they could do things in line with what they have been teaching for quite some time? So there is not as much change, but simply catching the practice up with the philosophy and teaching? I don’t know this is the case, but is this not a more charitable understanding of Dr. Olson’s letter?

Hey…..just two more for 250!

Straight Ahead People!

jt

[Joel Tetreau] Hey…..just two more for 250!

Straight Ahead People!

jt

Are we still going to page 20 before they close the thread? (My computer says we’re only on page 3.)

Does anyone know how NIU plans to implement their new discipline policies? Will they be doing fines for breaking rules, or simply calling people in for counseling sessions? Just curious how it “looks”. Does anyone who actually knows read here?

:)

HT: http://thehidalgograincompany.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/demerit-slip-bob…

That IS old! What year was that taken from?

Never mind…I saw the original source…1988.

I understand the reason for at least some of the discussion surrounding the speakers. However, I cannot understand how anyone can stand up publicly and denounce NIU’s music. Folks, it is all unwarrented, and unbiblical I might add, speculation. No one has told us yet WHAT exactly is changing about the music. Nobody has documented any actual changes yet. All the eyewitness accounts have verified that the music presently sounds exactly the same as it did a month ago, or a decade ago. When it actually becomes different, or when someone who actually knows something comes out and talks about the specifics of the change, then we will have facts to analyze. Until then, this part of the ongoing accusation against NIU is WRONG!

People have had their lives ruined (at least in their perception) because, while involved at Northland, their music standards changed before Northland’s did

I wonder if you might enlarge on this. How were their lives “ruined (at least in their perception) because … their music standards changed before Northland’s did”?

And BTW, how have NIU’s changed? Do you know?

Would be nice to end the thread on a positive note…. but maybe not possible. There’s a new letter out from Dr. Olila at NIU. When it posts, we’ll be closing this thread.

FWIW, I do not believe there is no room in fundamentalist for honest speech from its leaders. But the internal politics of what remains of the movement does make the business of communication challenging.

But this is not unique to fundamentalism. All movements have constituencies and those constituencies react to perceived changes—as well as real ones. And institutions feel the tension of wanting to go directions they think they need to go while anticipating (or being surprised by…whichever, or both) reactions.

Anyway, all that to say I think it’s harder than it looks from the armchair.