Les Ollila in conference at Colonial Hills Baptist Church: "Our schedule also includes what will no doubt be a very interesting Q&A. "

I am not sure to whom Dr. Doran is referring, but I really appreciate what he has said. The type of behavior by leaders that he speaks against, happens again and again, and has for decades (probably centuries, but I am not that old). I am glad when someone gives the admonition: “No hidden agenda when you sign the contract.” And please, I have reference to no one in particular with this statement. I have observed the hidden agenda method to happen repeatedly, particularly in churches.

Thank you Dave Doran!

I appreciate Dave Doran’s comments. I think he is probably referring obliquely to the NIU situation.

I would suggest that his comments on servant leadership are reflective of most people involved at Northland.
Both Les Oilila and Matt Olson have demonstrated a humble spirit in their dealings. I believe that the resigning board members and Dan Patz have also exercised humility in the way in which they made their decisions.

Now, I suppose that someone could choose to act differently and make this comment irrelevant….but to my knowledge, that has not happened yet.

He is probably referring to NIU, but his message does apply to all.

There have been lots of historical instances of congregations, parachurch organizations, etc. “hijacked” by a leader and his viewpoint which is contrary to the governing doctrines and documents of that institution.

If you don’t agree with the stand of the organization, don’t volunteer to lead it. It’s like the spouse that marries and hopes to change their mate once they marry!

[Steve Newman]

He is probably referring to NIU, but his message does apply to all.

There have been lots of historical instances of congregations, parachurch organizations, etc. “hijacked” by a leader and his viewpoint which is contrary to the governing doctrines and documents of that institution.

If you don’t agree with the stand of the organization, don’t volunteer to lead it. It’s like the spouse that marries and hopes to change their mate once they marry!

While I agree that someone should not join an organization with the idea of completely going against what it stands for, there would, for example, likely be no possibility of ever calling a new pastor to a church if he had to agree on every single point beyond a very basic doctrinal statement or creed. I think both the organization and the person coming to lead it should expect some change.

However, I do agree with being open and honest about the points of disagreement and attempting to work them out in plain view rather than trying to “sneak” in change behind the scenes.

What does a leader do when the fundamentalism practiced in the church pews and chapel seats is different than the fundamentalism described on paper? The last time a fundamentalist survey was done, it revealed that a host of young fundamentalists embrace the fundamental doctrines of fundamentalism but differ greatly over applications of separation.

Doran is gifted and is almost always not only right but brilliant in his analysis. This time is no different. I think his comments are especially right for his context because his institution is tied to a local church. One of the challenges of institutions not directly accountable to a local assembly is this - “who is the congregation” in a non-church based institution? What is it - a church or a business? So while certain aspects of Doran’s thoughts are applicable to a situation like Northland……all things here are not equal.

So what is equal? Much of this has already been stated but in my own thoughts - I would think the following items in a church or a para-church ministry would need to be present before a leader takes a ministry through a change.

1. A clear distinction between those “differences” that are personal vs. those that will effect the ministry. If it’s personal and frankly doesn’t need to be aired than everyone can live with it and move on. If it potentially can become an issue - transparency and at least a review by the “board” should be the rule.

2. If you as a a leader are convinced that a “sharpened-pencil” approach to this or that aspect of our mission is needed - the leader must make sure that the board and key leaders are on board. It seems to me that if they are not and if the “deal” is large enough - you move on. However it also seems to me that if the all or most of the key leadership of the change are on board - you clarify it, review it, pray over it, communicate the change, explain what will not change, plan the implementation of the change, implement the change, chart the effects of the change, make whatever after-course corrections you need to make and move forward.

3. In honesty if you are in a significant position in a ministry and the majority of the leadership and the main “ethos” of those involved in the ministry want to head further in a direction you personally are uncomfortable with - it is the high road to move on quietly instead of making a stink. In some cases if the change is not that big enough, those that are with you will want you to stay even though they know you aren’t entirely on board with everything that’s changed.

4. If you look to be involved with a ministry that will believe just like you do - you will end up on some island wiht just you and your wife…….and she’ll be suspect.

A few thoughts from while in Alaska - away from the heat and the cacti of Arizona.

Straight Ahead!

jt

I would agree that what Dr. Doran is talking about is more in line with a church ministry than a stand alone institution like NIU. I agree that it is a stewardship, but it acts more like a corporate organization than a church ministry. At the end of the day, either the board was aware, or the board was remiss in it’s duties. Dr. Olsen did not do this in a vacuum, and most outside of the organization was aware that big changes were being made. How much more were the board, who Dr. Olsen reports to, was aware of the changes. I think you have a lot of pastors who sit on these type of boards, or frequent this forum, who real that this needs to be run like a church and that is not the case. Boards are rarely 100% behind everything or even direction changes for an organization in the corporate world. There is always a lot of jostling and work going on behind the scenes. I see no reason why Dr. Olsen needs to follow an organizations vision or strategy. It is up to him to set this with board approval. These are often changed all the time. There is no congregation that needs to review these things.

[dgszweda]

I see no reason why Dr. Olsen needs to follow an organizations vision or strategy. It is up to him to set this with board approval. These are often changed all the time. There is no congregation that needs to review these things.

David, the integrity issue are the NIU constitution and bylaws and statement of faith. If you can’t abide by them, it is unethical to operate in contradiction to them. DMD doesn’t name who he is talking about, but his comments can be applied directly to the NIU situation. The integrity issue is bigger to me than the doctrinal/cultural disagreements I have had with Matt and NIU.

[Don Johnson] David, the integrity issue are the NIU constitution and bylaws and statement of faith. If you can’t abide by them, it is unethical to operate in contradiction to them. DMD doesn’t name who he is talking about, but his comments can be applied directly to the NIU situation. The integrity issue is bigger to me than the doctrinal/cultural disagreements I have had with Matt and NIU.

I’m sorry, Don - I wasn’t aware that standards of music were in NIU’s constitution and bylaws. I must have missed that. Could you point that statement out for me?

And since you’re on this thread, why don’t you take a crack at the question in my first post?

I’m on the mailing list of a fundamentalist paper. Their recent edition featured an article on NIU in which they drew heavily from Lou Martuneac. Here’s their conclusion: (Notice the first sentence.)

…….The drift began back in 2009 in spite of Dr. Les Ollila’s protestations to the contrary and now we see the result. They were not truthful then and they are only now admitting to their changes.

My friends, this is the Devil’s work, not God’s work! There is no teaching of the difference between the holy and the profane now at Northland International University. An egalitarian approach to holiness and error is now the standard. They can co-exist, holiness and the profane, because we say they can. This is an affront to the authority of the Word of God.

In my opinion, Northland is beyond hope now. I would encourage every fundamental pastor to get their young people out of Northland before the walls of Jericho fall. We will now watch as Northland slides into destitution and failure, for the Word of God is now but a prop in a play, not the main actor. How utterly sad and needless.

__________________

We have documented and discussed the integrity issues at length here. Perhaps some of you missed it, but Jay was involved in the discussion. It is quite disappointing to see him act like my comments are a surprise.

[Ron Bean]

I’m on the mailing list of a fundamentalist paper. Their recent edition featured an article on NIU in which they drew heavily from Lou Martuneac. Here’s their conclusion: (Notice the first sentence.)

…….The drift began back in 2009 in spite of Dr. Les Ollila’s protestations to the contrary and now we see the result. They were not truthful then and they are only now admitting to their changes.

My friends, this is the Devil’s work, not God’s work! There is no teaching of the difference between the holy and the profane now at Northland International University. An egalitarian approach to holiness and error is now the standard. They can co-exist, holiness and the profane, because we say they can. This is an affront to the authority of the Word of God.

In my opinion, Northland is beyond hope now. I would encourage every fundamental pastor to get their young people out of Northland before the walls of Jericho fall. We will now watch as Northland slides into destitution and failure, for the Word of God is now but a prop in a play, not the main actor. How utterly sad and needless.

__________________

Aye, there’s the rub, for Lou Martuneac’s opinion of Northland does not matter at all to me.

[Todd Bowditch]

[Ron Bean]

I’m on the mailing list of a fundamentalist paper. Their recent edition featured an article on NIU in which they drew heavily from Lou Martuneac. Here’s their conclusion: (Notice the first sentence.)

…….The drift began back in 2009 in spite of Dr. Les Ollila’s protestations to the contrary and now we see the result. They were not truthful then and they are only now admitting to their changes.

My friends, this is the Devil’s work, not God’s work! There is no teaching of the difference between the holy and the profane now at Northland International University. An egalitarian approach to holiness and error is now the standard. They can co-exist, holiness and the profane, because we say they can. This is an affront to the authority of the Word of God.

In my opinion, Northland is beyond hope now. I would encourage every fundamental pastor to get their young people out of Northland before the walls of Jericho fall. We will now watch as Northland slides into destitution and failure, for the Word of God is now but a prop in a play, not the main actor. How utterly sad and needless.

__________________

Aye, there’s the rub, for Lou Martuneac’s opinion of Northland does not matter at all to me.

Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody has one. The opinion I posted and Lou’s are opinions I’ve chosen to ignore. “Jesus I know and Paul I know, but who are they?”

MMartin - they changed their handbook, and they changed their rules. Not sure why that’s a problem. Businesses and schools do that all the time - both Christian and secular. Are you saying they have no right to do so? Are you saying that NIU should not make these changes when they feel it’s the right thing to do? Especially if/when some Board members backed the changes?

While you’re at it, why don’t you take a crack at my question?

[Don Johnson] We have documented and discussed the integrity issues at length here. Perhaps some of you missed it, but Jay was involved in the discussion. It is quite disappointing to see him act like my comments are a surprise.

Don,

I’m pretty clear on your position - especially since you stated that:

Clearly, the whiplash effect is an embarrassment – NI”U” is a sham school. It is hard to see how they have any credibility going forward. Will they have more than 200 students next year? Would you risk your hard earned $$$ to send a student there?

and at one point you specifically told people:

Really, in my opinion, you shouldn’t send your kids to Northland International University. The school and its president have taken a strange turn – this is the latest example. Several of Matt’s friends on Facebook, mutual friends of ours, protested at this link in the comments that followed. You won’t find those protests any longer, they’ve been deleted (after Matt responded to one).

The latest comment, “Have you been hacked, Matt?” Alas, if it were only that simple. I’m afraid all of us who once supported Northland have been hacked.

Don’t send your kids there, you will be very disappointed.

So when you say that they violated their Constitution, Statement of Faith and Bylaws, it ought to be fairly easy to do. While you’re at it, you can take a crack at my question - which is what I actually asked you to do. Stop dodging the question with protestations of NIU’s ‘integrity issues’. ‘Integrity issues’ aren’t in those documents.

As for Lou - I wouldn’t waste my life on his rants, whether blogged or written.