John Vaughn (FBFI President/CEO): "one thing is clear: this video ends the fiction that 'Northland has not changed.'”

Piling on

That’s all — just get over it already. With all the real challenges facing the cause of Christ, THIS is a “controversy” that justifies the attention of the FBFI et al.? Good grief. And some wonder why fundamentalism is rapidly dwindling?

Is fundamentalism really falling to pieces as badly as we say? I think evangelicalism is fracturing. You have evangelicals who deny parts of the Bible and don’t list inerrancy as a fundamental docrine, etc. Don’t see that in our movement. I don’t think a fundamentalist who held those views would last long!!!

[dmyers] And some wonder why fundamentalism is rapidly dwindling?

[TylerR] Is fundamentalism really falling to pieces as badly as we say?

A fundamentalism that thinks musical styles is worth fighting over is rapidly dwindling.

Now, if by fundamentalism Tyler means something else (like, historical fundamentalism) then maybe not.

jcoleman:

Historic fundamentalism was cross-denominational, which left plenty of room for disagreement on secondary issues. There are always going to be folks with whom we disagree. Fundamentalism, as a larger movement, is a big-tent party (within orthodox boundaries, of course!). I know we all recognize there are different circles of fellowship we all have, which are wider or narrower depending on the nature of the fellowship - personal, ecclesiastical, educational, etc. That is just fine, but we must all recognize that historic fundamentalism was not restricted to a particular denomination or theological persuasion, and all the other issues these entail!

I don’t think Dr. Vaughn is piling on. He’s been quiet on the matter and made a short observation. P&D has as much right to publish articles and statements on this as IDOTG or SI or remonstrans.net or whomever. Especially since each of those venues, as well as the many others that may take it up, have their own slant on things, concurrent conversations are entirely appropriate. IMHO.

Without wading into the music issue, maybe the real problem with Fundamentalism at it’s very core is the inability or desire to “change” at all. The direction of the Christian life is sanctification. That means we all must change to some degree. We need to see refinement and repentance in our lives. Meaning that we don’t have everything figured out upon graduating from Seminary at 20 something years old. Sometimes Fundamentalists seem to be the slowest to recognize this.

At least NIU is seeing that there is a problem, and they are giving it their best shot to fix it.

Now what constitutes a good change? That will be debated in the next 100 plus comments that I’m sure will follow this one.

Bill:

I appreciate your post. However, I must ask what you believe is the problem driving NIU to change?

Please don’t read anything snide into these comments, but here are my observations (completely apart from theology or separation):

1. They are in the middle of nowhere

2. They only have TRACS accreditation. There is nothing wrong with TRACS, but why go to the middle of nowhere to get a TRACS accreditated education?

3. Their musical change is making them more like the conservative evangelical institutions. Why shouldn’t a student just go to Wheaton instead, where they have regional accreditation?

Wheaton is a days drive away. Trinity is closer. Their shift is making them lose their identity. Students looking for an evangelical school will likely go elsewhere to a regionally accredited institution. Fundamentalists will likely go elsewhere, where they feel the “old paths” are still being trod faithfully (e.g. Maranatha and others).

If they want to switch camps, no problem, just do it and say it. Fence straddling will help nobody and harm many, their own institution included.

Regardless of where you stand on the NIU “controversy,” I think Dr. Vaughn’s comment about ending the fiction that Northland “has not changed” is both measured and obvious. Does new music mean that Northland has changed on fundamentals? No. But clearly, their musical standards have. I don’t see how you can really call this “piling on.”

And as regards being “fundamental,” there are probably plenty of us who stay with that designation, in spite of the problems of the movement in recent years, because as Tyler notes and should be obvious to those who are regular SI readers, the problems of greater evangelicalism are worse, and many of us side with Dr. Bauder who believes that there is a “fundamentalism worth saving.”

Does that “fundamentalism worth saving” include the musical ideas of years past? That is a different question. But if those ideas become different, that is still change.

Of course, there is always the option to jettison the idea of any movement, and simply keep one’s identity with the local church. Now that we have the internet and other methods to be able to stay current and in fellowship with those who are of the same mind, maybe the need for those larger movements has simply gone away.

Tyler,

Great questions…I was really trying to paint a broad stroke. I will attempt to make a more narrow one.

But first let me tell you where I sit, first before I tell you where I stand.

I believe the brick and mortar schools as we know them today in Christian circles will pretty much be irrelevant in about 20 years or so. I hope that education(I like to call it discipleship) will become more local and attached to the church and family for Christians. It will be replaced mainly by mentorship and apprenticeships. There will still be educational institutions for more technical fields, but for the most part, 85% of the fields that our children go away to school for, can be and should be, brought “in house” to the local community of Christians(including and especially theology and seminary.) I know this is a big task and a big vision, but I believe we have a foundation and a template in the homeschooling movement. Again, my opinion.

I know that last paragraph could be a debate all it’s own, and is full of controversy and different ideas. I just wanted you to know where I am coming from in my comments and what I advocate in this arena. And I’d be glad to answer questions about it in a different post or context.

What I applaud NIU for doing is to recognize that we have pretty much failed in reaching and keeping our young people in the faith. Barna rightly pointed out that 80% of our children are leaving the faith. I know that was pretty much a picture of the Southern Baptist Movement, but we would be deceiving ourselves to think that we are very much different at the end of the day.

I think a lot of it has to do with our theology, but I will leave that one alone. Except to point out one small annecdote. About 20 years ago after a major melt down with the Senior Class at a local Christian School where a good portion of the kids in our youth group attended, I sat down in the Youth Pastor’s office in my church where Matt Olson was a pastor in CO to talk about it. I talked with him about “success” in the Youth Group. He(the Youth Pastor, not Matt) mentioned to me that if 10% of the kids who came through his youth group went on to “really serve the Lord,” then we would be doing pretty well. When I told him that those numbers seemed “pretty bleak,” his response was, “Remember, we are in the last days.” I know that he was probably discouraged on that day and may have gotten his percentages wrong, but I knew then that we thought differently about these things, but I didn’t know what to call it at the time. Just so no one misunderstands me, I loved Matt and the Youth Pastor then, and still do today. We were just on a different theological journey.

So back to your question… :)

I’m sensing(and I could be wrong) that NIU is realizing that there is a problem with the discipleship of our children in the faith-a problem of getting them to think about discipleship, to live discipleship, and to teach discipleship. I think they are attempting to go outside of “the box” to reach a goal that they so very much desire. I sensed this when I sat done with Matt a few years ago in his office and chatted about these things. I knew he was fervently trying to “figure it out.” Maybe since they needed help they thought someone else had the answers. Thus the journey outside the norm(this time in realm of music.) My gut feeling on this one is that they like the “relational” aspect of the music. But I would submit that this journey started with our crowd not really putting heart and soul into our worship. Another subject, another day. Or as they say, that’s a whole different beer(or coke.)

For the record…knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t take some of these paths, but quite honestly it may be one that will make them realize more quickly what really needs to be changed. And I am in favor of someone attempting change to figure out what needs to happen, because what we have right now “ain’t working.” I know that’s dangerous, but I think it’s better than smugly thinking that everything is well and nothing needs to change. I also applaud BJU and their “rethinking” things.

So I guess you can put me in the category of hoping that this walk down the block will result in them getting on a different street that they were on before, and a different one that they are walking on now. Streets have a way of connecting, but they must be walked. I also admit that the danger is that there are also different streets out there that are worse than what we started on. It takes lots of faith to walk. But at least they are attempting to walk away from the problem.

I apologize if I totally went a different way than you were asking. It’s hard to do this in the written form. I’m much more relational than this format allows for. Not condemning it, just pointing it out.

Bill:

Your post was very informative. Thanks a lot.

Bill I think you’re spot on about the brick and mortar schools. Several Christian colleges are starting to do the on-line degree programs. Piedmont has even gone as far to have each modular a different “internship” emphasis, but that is worked out between the local church and the student. Cost for the student is greatly reduced and the home church/local fellowship has the opportunity to continue to influence their students positively rather than have their students go off and come home looking completely different philosophically and some times doctrinally.

I’ve done my BA and MA completely online. Cost is reduced and overhead for the school is much less. Better for everybody all around. I did my AA in a brick and mortar college and I like online much better.

I did my BA at a brick and mortar school, though I did live at home. I did my M.Ed in block classes during summer modules, still brick and mortar but formatted differently. I am currently doing my Ed.D online (3 modules have to be taken on campus). I have personally found the same costs. I agree the trend is online. However, as an educator, I don’t see any comparison between the classroom education and the online one. Perhaps at the lower levels, but not in my doctoral work. The professors are there to grade my work; they do no teaching. I am presented with reading/viewing and assignments and am teaching myself (and paying substantially for the privilege). I don’t think we can buck the trend (online is definitely more convenient for the students and cheaper for the schools to run), but I only see it as another phase of dumbing down American education,

Is local church discipleship and training important? Absolutely! There is no subsitute for it. The local church is the pillar and ground of the truth and it should be primary.

If we have resources that supplement and sharpen men and women for ministry, even if they are at colleges and seminaries, should we use them? Absolutely!

The “brick and mortar” also provides the fellowship and togetherness of the college experience. You can say it’s overrated, but it is important. We do need to give God more of an opportunity to work, and the exposure of a school environment can provide that. We don need to give young people in particular a chance to help decide what they believe and give them room to sort things out for themselves. Christian college and seminary can be a laboratory for that.

I don’t think it’s an either/or proposition.