Bruce McAllister Elected as the New BJU President

Is he the "campus pastor" as he had hoped?

This is not clear. It appears he was not, but he has been put back up on the administration page. So we will see.

I like McAllister. He was the first pastor of the church I grew up in in Forest City NC (A BJU church plant that was taken over, more or less, by Ambassador Baptist College). McAllister even filled in there a handful of times a few years ago. He's a good choice, on the one hand, but Pettit had things going in the right direction. If the point of choosing McAllister as President is to roll the clock back and bring back BJU of the 70's, 80's, and 90's, I don't think the school will make it very far at all. It seems the FBFI wing of the BJU camp insists on having their way, and do not care at what they have to tear down to get it. Part of me wonders if it's deliberate, in order to funnel more students into other schools like MBU or BCM.

My last child just graduated a couple weeks ago, so I have less of a stake in the direction of BJU now, other than wanting a good training ground for future young people in general.

I just happened to talk to Dr. McAllister at this year's baccalaureate service. He's a good man and his acceptance talk really encouraged me. I think he will bring stability to the school. Hopefully he will be able to fill out his executive team with high quality individuals.

I've heard lots of people concerned about going back to the 50's or even the 80's. I'm wondering what those people think is going to happen? Girls will have to wear hats on Sunday, or have to wear dresses/skirts to class? That guys will have to wear suits to dinner to ties to chapel? That students will have to check out to leave campus? That they will reinstitute vespers?

Andy, you are mostly listing the incidental changes. Here’s what I think should not come back from those older times:

• Close ties with the Hyles/easy-believeism brand of “Christianity”
• Along those lines, promotion of big-name men in fundamentalism
• Instant suspicion of anything from outside specific fundamental circles
• Interracial dating regulations and preaching about justification for it
• Treating legitimate questions from upperclassmen as subversive or rebellious (I experienced that one myself)
• The culture of “turning people in” and being suspect yourself if you did not do so
• Certain topics being off-limits as too controversial in the School of Religion (this was something one of my former pastors noted)
• And, while I did enjoy the seriousness and formality of Sunday morning on-campus services, changing to having the students attend local churches and get involved was a huge improvement — campus “church” should not return

Those are the big ones I can think of. And I don’t expect the leadership of BJU to go back there, no matter what any old-time board members think, but I do think it would be bad for the university if they did bring such things back. Like you, my kids are long graduated from university, so I’m less invested than before, but I still want BJU to continue being able to help raise up wise Christian men and women for the future.

Regarding the incidental items, I also would not want students to go back to always having to wear a tie off-campus to everything, except for specific, university approved functions. I’m one of the few men I know who still regularly wears a coat and tie to church, but I wouldn’t want to have to do so at an all-you-can-eat pizza dinner…

I don't think any one is pressing for any of that to come back.

"The culture of “turning people in” and being suspect yourself if you did not do so"

Interesting on this one....my daughter was an RA this past year. It was her job (among other things) to give demerits for things like not doing room jobs, dress code infractions, etc. The culture there right now made it very difficult for her to even give out legit demerits. There is extreme pressure to just let things slide...not necessarily from the school but from the students. It is very hard right now to enforce the current rule book. I'm hoping that changes, without swinging back to what you are talking about.

I don't see the school "going back". First if it was to go back to the standards of the 90's, it would be the only school in the country like that. PCC has relaxed their standards considerably since the 90's. Besides, Dr. McCalister was part of the Executive team as these rules were made, even over the last year. I don't want to see them move away from local church involvement. I don't think they will do that. From all of the students that I have talked to, this has been an important aspect of their attendance. I don't have an issue of the students going to an SBC, just because it is SBC. There are a lot of SBC churches that are more fundamentalist than some independent fundamentalist churches. I would like to see the school reinvest in Arts and Ministry. I would like to see a stronger focus on chapel and on discipleship. I have actually been a bit concerned with the reduction in focus on chapel and the reduced focus on discipleship. Key for Dr. McCallister will be on the executive team. Some of the detractors have said well, Dr. Bob did it on his own in the past. But that isn't true. Dr. Bob Wood brought a tremendous amount of depth to the Executive team as well as many others. Those people carried a lot of weight and made the school successful.

Any concerns that he's already 70? Sometimes that can mean great experience, and at other times, it can mean that the board wants someone to push around. (granted, Steve Pettit is also 70, but he started at BJU at age 59 or so)

On Andy's side note, though I have a fair number of places where I disagree with BJU's rules, it is a matter of concern if RAs and such cannot enforce rules. It suggests that there is a quiet rebellion of many students against the board--one that might be understandable in light of how Pettit appears to have been treated, but one that is still profoundly unhealthy.

I just had more of a front row seat to the issue this past year.

I doubt most students think about the board at all. My daughter didn't even know who the chairman was when I pointed him out at the Baccalaureate service.

Andy, I agree that those with actual authority (even with a delegated, limited amount like RAs have) should be able to enforce rules, and it’s not a good thing if they can’t do so. I was referring more to what was common in the early 80’s where average students not in those positions were expected to anonymously report rule infractions they noticed.

I can’t say I enjoyed receiving demerits for room jobs forgotten or not done well-enough, but I expected those to come from the hall monitor (RAs now), just not from joe students. The same for any other noticed infractions on campus. Not being in authority, I steadfastly refused to worry about such things and turn someone in. That even felt wrong to me, but my wife, being from Germany, and lectured by her parents about the culture of people who turned in the Jews in WWII, was radically opposed to anything that even looked similar. She told me her Mom told her it was far better to get kicked out for not reporting something than to ever turn someone in, no matter what it was for.

Still, there has to be a middle between no one enforcing the rules, and all students expected to be snitches. The latter should not be encouraged or come back under the new president. I don’t think BJU will (or should) go back there, even if some really old timers miss those days.

As to dress regulations, well, times have changed. Modesty hasn’t, but I don’t envy those who have to come up with new regulations that meet biblical standards while recognizing that students today won’t look like what looked normal to us back then, and they don’t have to. They’ll get shot at from all sides…