Bob Jones Administrator Suspended For Soliciting A Prostitute In 1991

Rule of thumb for churches and Christian organizations (or any organization for that matter):

Don’t allow your detractors to determine your agenda or methodology!

My opinion, and my opinion only—BJU, in an effort to pacify their perceived detractors, has allowed them to determine their methodology in handling this situation. I think that is true here and in some previous situations, and I think it is the common response in many situations, particularly moral ones, in churches and organizations in general.

The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. The main thing is to determine what is the right thing to do, and then do it. Let chips fall where they may after that. It’s called faith for a reason, and God likes it.

[Greg Linscott] I think it was legitimate for BJU to take the suspension/termination action they did. With that being said, why did they have to reveal the level of information they did, even if only in house?

Michael,

Thank you. Your answer makes perfect sense, and justifies BJU’s response. Assuming it is all true (and I have no reason to doubt you), they certainly seem to have no other recourse than to say what they said.

The Disaffected and Do Right Crowd used this as an example of a sex crime with a victim which it is not.

I wrote about it briefly here. but a few things I wanted to point out here for those who expected BJU to have found this man’s history if he didn’t report it.
The “world wide web” was not implemented until 1989 and the first website in 1990. Yes there was ARCANET or something like that but it was not readily available to the public as the internet is now.

It’s easy for anyone to pull up a history on someone NOW, but in 1991 any agency, let alone BJU would have had a difficult time pulling up his history if he did not disclose it. When I worked at my first law firm in 1995, Windows just came out, and most of our legal research was done at either the office with books or at the local law library. Access to background checks involved mailing inquiries to the local court house or sheriff’s department, and took days and sometimes weeks to get (especially if the inquiry was mailed out of state as appears would be the case here).

Plus, some applications ask “have you been convicted of a FELONY within that last 3, 5, 7 years” and if he had only been convicted of a misdemeanor, he could have legally and honestly answered ‘no’. If the application would have asked “have you ever been convicted of A CRIME” that is a much more open ended question where he would be held responsible for failing to disclose the misdemeanor. I don’t know what BJU’s applications were like so I can’t speak on what their application included as far as questions about disclosure.