BJU faulted for response to GRACE report

Jay- Thanks for posting parts of the letter. I will take time to go back and read the full letter later when I have more time. This was not there when the article was first posted and when I approached the News earlier this week about claiming it was an “open” letter. I’m glad to see they posted it. It helps me to understand more what these individuals are saying and lend more credibility to what they are saying.

Frankly, I regret asking the question about the letter and the writers’ credibility. Not because the question was wrong, but because so many don’t seem to appreciate the fact that this question needed to be asked and should have been asked by all. Instead, I was attacked. Yes, Bert, even when you try to say you aren’t, but then use personal pronouns directly related to me you are attacking me. And then when I defend myself and try to clarify myself I am further attacked.

When I talk about the media here in Greenville, it is from a life long experience of over negative things about BJU and protecting others from other schools who have done some of the same things. I lived here since I was 9 months old (except for 5 years in my late 20’s), worked in the community, have many friends in and out of the Christian community, and have not worked for BJU since grad school in the early 90’s. I think I understand life in Greenville and with the media.

Yes BJU often is guilty of what they are accused of in the media. The problem is similar to our political reporting - (ie Obama tells a lie and every one covers it up, Bush tells a lie and he’s committed the biggest sin of all time). I have my own set of issues with BJU. In addition, while I have never experience sexual abuse hurts, I have experience extremely deep hurts at the hands of church leaders and fellow church members. Some even life altering. However, I refuse to have a pity party, be bitter, or hold it against anyone. God is too good and life is too short. I learn from my failures and those of others in each situation and move on.

Speaking of, I am once again going to move on. I have continually off and on for several years now moved on from Sharper Iron. This conversation has once again proven to me why.

Eternity will tell the truth about all.

I know that some of you get that reference. If you don’t, Google it for its meaning.

That mindset is something that has long bothered me about fundamentalism. When changes occur (past, present, or future), the accompanying narrative typically amounts to, “Nothing to see here; nothing just happened. Change? What change? Clearly you are imagining things!”

For example, in decades past, blistering attacks emanated from Greenville directed at Christian colleges pursuing accreditation. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly accreditation isn’t such a bad thing after all. (Moreover, whoever said it was?)

[Larry Nelson]

I know that some of you get that reference. If you don’t, Google it for its meaning.

That mindset is something that has long bothered me about fundamentalism. When changes occur (past, present, or future), the accompanying narrative typically amounts to, “Nothing to see here; nothing just happened. Change? What change? Clearly you are imagining things!”

For example, in decades past, blistering attacks emanated from Greenville directed at Christian colleges pursuing accreditation. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly accreditation isn’t such a bad thing after all. (Moreover, whoever said it was?)

Larry,

I think one thing that needs to be learned is that we need to be careful what we attack. Starting with the Billy Sunday era and continuing til today, it was hip for fundamentalist to be on the “Fighting Fundamentalist” side. That meant that we needed to fight all types of practices in society and be very vocal about them. The problem is that society and culture are a shifting sand and the things we fought at one point in time are no longer things we may fight today. Whereas the Gospel never shifts. Unfortunately this is one area that non-fundamentalist areas of conservative evangelicals have gotten right. We criticized them for only focusing on the gospel and ignoring the other areas that were just as important. Yet, we railed on women wearing pants, and now we embrace it. We rail against one political item and now we embrace that, we rail against accreditation and being subservient to the world’s commands and now we embrace it…. We are constantly playing catchup and trying to reconcile our attitudes of the past. We standup so strongly for something that is not really Biblical, we cloak it with Biblical implications when they are really a stretch, so much so that it defines us, and then 30 years later we need to back pedal all the while wondering why the world is constantly hating us.

The fact is that we are constantly apologizing and behind the message. We need to develop a better message.

Is anyone here actually surprised that people at GRACE would be disappointed that BJU did not embrace their recommendations in toto? Seriously?

Let’s be serious here; to quibble over whether the letter was truly “open”, or whether the writers had “credibility”, is simply an evasion and an ad hominem (personal) attack that proves nothing except that the speaker or writer is unwilling or unable to make a real argument. Unfortunately, as Jim and others have demonstrated in comments on this thread, BJU has a history of using this fallacy liberally. As a number of commenters have also demonstrated, to quoque (you did it too!) fallacies are also common by employees and supporters of the university.

And if you think that repeated, unrepented violations of basic rules of logic and civility do not lead prospective students to scratch BJU off their application list, dream on. If BJU wants to be relevant, they’ve got to take this seriously.

I am glad to have SI in order to get so many different points of view. Many views on this issue for sure!

I am a graduate of the school. I am very independent. I still have confidence that God is at work at BJU today.

BJU has responded and is still responding to the Grace report (yep, I read it the day it came out publicly).

My two cents on Berg, and Bob Jones III is this, if God could still use Peter after his denial, and Mark after his abandonment, then Berg and Jones III can still faithfully serve God today. I am glad that BJU did not fire either one of these godly men. Lets stop shooting our wounded.

Here’s a site describing what has gone on with ABWE, for reference. Their response to what appears to be the actions of one missionary, Donn Ketcham, who was immediately dismissed when his crimes/sins became known appears to include some firings and overall appears more comprehensive than the BJU response, despite the fact that ABWE’s investigation is not yet complete. Here’s ABWE’s explanation of why GRACE was fired.

Joeb, I’m not saying that it’s going to be the response to the GRACE report alone. Their response to that report is actually a reasonable first step—they need to take a deeper look at the counseling methods, and maybe Berg and Jones being there, and hopefully that will come with time. We’ll see.

What I’m saying, rather, is that there is a long history of circling the wagons, intemperate ad hominem attacks, and the like, and that unless BJU eliminates that kind of thing from their culture, good luck poaching students from good, fundamental institutions like Cedarville and Liberty, especially since Cedarville is rated highly as a regional college.

Hopefully things are changing, but all in all, I’m reminded of nothing so much as the “Detroit 3” response to Toyota and Datsun in the 1970s—didn’t take things seriously until market share started to plunge.

Honestly, until BJU changes its name, I will never believe that they ‘get it’. The school is built on a personality cult and that may well be what finally kills it off.

I’ve no doubt that Berg and BJIII in the past have done a great deal for the cause of Christ. I also have no doubt that they are genuinely sorry for their mistakes. But if they truly understood the importance of Jesus increasing, then the best thing they could do for the cause of Christ is to get out of the way. And if Dr. Steve Pettit is a true leader, then he will remove them if they refuse to stand aside.

[Jay]

It looks like the Greenville News has published a copy of the letter that was reported on at their website. Here’s the link, and some of the salient text:

How do you post that without at least a cursory examination? Sections were even highlighted for emphasis without any investigation into the world that some of us call reality. Here’s what I mean.

“What we see in your response to a substantive two-year investigative report is, instead, shallow words backed largely by inaction.” Inaction? What are they talking about? 19/25 of GRACE’s recommendations acted on affirmatively.

“The Report powerfully documented our stories and ultimately wove together a tapestry of our lives displaying not only our greatest heartaches, but also our greatest hope: The hope that, through our stories, healing and change would be achieved. That hope was shattered by BJU’s official response.” Change has been achieved! Great change! But not the change that’s truly desired. Stop believing that the Scriptures can and do address every area of our lives, even issues of great hurt and pain and get rid of the people that believe that. Healing is something that BJU has no control over at this point.

“We are angered that the official response was an attack and blatant disregard of the Report’s recommendations. We are saddened that, despite days of meetings and impassioned conversations, our voices were not heard.” More false narrative. More lies. BJU’s and Dr. Pettit’s response: “Over the years, we have had a number of students come to BJU who had experienced sexual abuse prior to their association with BJU. Many of these victims reached out to our faculty and staff for help and were lovingly served and comforted. However, there were some who came to us and did not experience the loving and comforting environment they deserved in their time of need. I was personally grieved in my communication with one of the victims who had suffered immeasurably at the hands of her perpetrator. I was also grieved to learn that when she came to us for comfort and guidance she left disappointed, deeply hurt, and confused. In her case we did not understand the depths of her trauma. Sadly I have come to realize that some others had a similar experience. So, for just a minute let me address all who suffered. We want you to know that we are deeply sorry that you were hurt and that we did not help you by our response. This was wrong and unacceptable! Please forgive us. We don’t want this to happen again. We pledge to you, that by God’s grace, we will use the things we have learned to further improve what we are doing to help sexual abuse and sexual assault victims. Thank you for your courage to speak out on behalf of those who will attend BJU in the future.” Does this “official response” sound like an attack and blatant disregard to anyone? Combine with 19/25 affirmed recommendations…

“Although we have little hope of seeing lasting, deep-rooted change at the university, we must communicate truth that is being ignored and omitted.” 19/25 recommendations positively acted on. You see? By repeating the mantra over and over again, they hope to usher in an alternate reality, sadly which some of you have already bought.

“The university has not provided a humble, transparent confession of wrongdoing.” See BJU’s response above. What are you going to believe?

“While some statements from the university sound good to the general public, they are couched within blame-shifting phrases like, “those who felt or perceived” which puts the onus back on the
victim.” Here’s BJU’s response that Dr. Pettit read in chapel. See if you find that mindset. Post it when you find it.
“Your counseling, those who counseled, and the system that enabled it are flawed and have had devastating effects on many lives. We ask you to pause your counseling program and learn from the ones whose lives have been negatively impacted by it – the survivors.” This statement completely ignores what the GRACE report acknowledges, that changes have been made within the counseling program, that people responsible for it admitted mistakes and learned more and more as the issue of abuse/sexual assault became much more visible in the public eye.

“We feel your statement that BJU has not broken any laws was, at best, disingenuous.” It’s a statement of fact. One of the areas being looked into now by Greenville authorities is if there were any crimes of non-reporting committed. The “truth-seekers” have become the Greenville PD’s outreach arm, attempting to drum up business for them.
“We wish our university leaders were being the hands and feet of Jesus, but we are grieved, seeing this as another moment when BJU is turning away from abuse victims.” From BJU’s response: “Let me also say to those former students who participated in the review—we want to hear your story. You matter to us. You can help us change and improve. We want the opportunity to have a connection with you. If you will contact my office, we will do all we can to make that connection happen. You will be our welcomed guest. We would like to meet with you and better understand your personal experience and how we could have done better.”

Do I believe that the University is perfect? No. Of course not. Has its leaders made stupid statements in the past? Of course. Does the University need to make a public example of these statements and make reparations? I dunno. Have you publicly made boneheaded statements over the course of your ministry? Maybe even 35 years ago? Do you need to dredge those up and constantly be in apology mode? Will one confessional statement do it? I guarantee for some that it won’t - are they justified? Does the US Government need to make apologies and financial reparations to native Americans? Do I think that BJU has changed wholesale its response to sexual abuse/assault victims? Absolutely. Anyone who tells you they haven’t is selling you something.

[Jim Welch]

I am glad to have SI in order to get so many different points of view. Many views on this issue for sure!

I am a graduate of the school. I am very independent. I still have confidence that God is at work at BJU today.

BJU has responded and is still responding to the Grace report (yep, I read it the day it came out publicly).

My two cents on Berg, and Bob Jones III is this, if God could still use Peter after his denial, and Mark after his abandonment, then Berg and Jones III can still faithfully serve God today. I am glad that BJU did not fire either one of these godly men. Lets stop shooting our wounded.

Jim,

I am not saying the college needs to fire Berg or BJIII. That is something the college needs to decide. But the fact that God can still use someone, doesn’t infer that this individual can remain in the exact same position they have always been in. We need to differentiate those two, and sometimes pastors/christian teachers have trouble with that. We also have to all remember that BJU is not a church it is a parachurch organization. It has entirely different priorities than a church does. I think that a lot of people feel that the college (whether for real or implied) needs to follow along the same lines of a church. They are a business, and because of that, they need to operate under guidelines that preserve a business (much different than a church). That means they may need to make decisions that a lot of church members may or may not agree with because these members have blurred the lines between a church and a college. A church is providentially blessed by God and can operate with 2-3 members with or without income. A college is not providentially blessed by God (not that it cannot receive blessings), but it must receive income, and create a profit in order to operate. They need to be responsible to their board and shareholders (if that is the case). For some reason, I think we have blurred the lines and in many cases this hampers the operation of a college. We have taken Scripture and blurred it to operate a corporation. I see no where in Scripture that a corporation needs to follow church discipline processes. Yet many parachurch organizations operate that way and end up keeping people/processes in place that continue to hamper the organization.

[KD Merrill]

It looks like the Greenville News has published a copy of the letter that was reported on at their website. Here’s the link, and some of the salient text:

How do you post that without at least a cursory examination? Sections were even highlighted for emphasis without any investigation into the world that some of us call reality. Here’s what I mean.

KD-

All I did was point out that the letter has gone public and was available for everyone to read. I didn’t write this letter. Furthermore, what ‘some of us call reality’ may be distorted; there’s a reason why many people refer to ‘the Greenville bubble’. And even if it isn’t “reality”, does that mean that you can just ignore it or write their comments away as unimportant?

Friend, I’d think a lot harder about your position. Do you really want to line up with people who gave the kind of spiritual counsel I cited in the GRACE report above? An alumnus like myself can be loyal and faithful to the school while pushing them to make necessary changes. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend”, last I checked.

I find it amazing that so many are rushing out of the woodwork to defend BJU in this instance by attacking the messenger and blindly defending the school against all comers even against allegations of failed spiritual counsel that left people suicidal. People that do that are a part of the problem - they don’t see the issue, they don’t feel as though the school needs to change, and they would militate against the school for implementing the changes that the school may want to make to remedy this issue.

Joeb, keep in mind that BJU is also accused in the GRACE report of telling victims not to report crimes including rape to authorities, and that on multiple counts. We can put this many offenders on this side of the scale vs. that many offenders with a different set of crimes on the other, but really, comparing these sets of sins is at its heart a tu quoque argument—which is a big part of the problem.

And so I’d like to invite all to approach the real issue; for BJU (or ABWE, or whoever), is it more important that BJU (whoever) implemented a great portion of the recommendations, or is the big issue the six (or however many) recommendations that were not implemented? The big issue along these lines is the counseling materials. Do they allow counselors to blame victims for their abuse, or to they not? If indeed they tell women “ladies, please don’t lead men astray with your clothing choices” or some such thing, the answer is “yes”.

Moreover, BJU’s pointer to another review misses the point; what is needed is not an overall review that might have some quibbles, but rather a line by line review that gets at the specific claims of the GRACE report. And when that is completed—hopefully they are on it—that is the time for personnel action, and if it’s warranted, it probably ought to go much further than just two people. The trick is that personnel action ought to be taken when it is clear that the people involved are not up to the job—materials were hopelessly unBiblical in some points—and that would imply that other counselors (a) knew this and (b) did not take action. So if Berg goes, it’s probably a bunch of others, too.

[Jay]

Friend, I’d think a lot harder about your position. Do you really want to line up with people who gave the kind of spiritual counsel I cited in the GRACE report above? An alumnus like myself can be loyal and faithful to the school while pushing them to make necessary changes. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend”, last I checked.

I find it amazing that so many are rushing out of the woodwork to defend BJU in this instance by attacking the messenger and blindly defending the school against all comers even against allegations of failed spiritual counsel that left people suicidal. People that do that are a part of the problem - they don’t see the issue, they don’t feel as though the school needs to change, and they would militate against the school for implementing the changes that the school may want to make to remedy this issue.

Jay, while there will probably always be those who rush to defend *any* decision of BJU, no matter how poor, that’s not what is happening in this thread. I would say that the majority of defenders in this discussion are *agreeing* that there were many and large failures in the past, and that those will have to be acknowledged, and that there will be consequences that are not just going to go away. Those who truly express biblical love for the university want it to do what is right, and we do no blindly accept everything that was done as being in line with scripture. Honestly, I don’t think you will find anyone here that thinks BJU could do no wrong, and that anyone making accusations is therefore either lying or misled. Even though I’ve been a defender of their response to the GRACE report (so far), I certainly can fault many things that were said from the pulpit, even in the recent past, and things like their position on races and interracial marriage, etc. Some of those things I even saw as wrong when I was a student in the 80’s, and they make me absolutely cringe now. Clearly, the GRACE report indicates a number of things that would fall in this category.

However, at the same time, we are trying to point out that where this “open letter” makes claims that the victims have received no apologies, no compassion, no recognition that there were failures, and no assurances that there will be changes made to avoid these same problems in the future, that that is completely untrue. It may be true that, as KD pointed out, that the changes are not what is wanted, but that is not the same thing at all. However, this “open letter” simply makes assertions that the victims are not being heard, and nothing could be further from the truth. It is not an attack on the messengers to take issue with falsehoods in the message.

Have you read everything that was published by BJU, including the FAQ sections, on what is being done? Some of it is indeed vague, but it is very clear that big changes are being made with respect to how counseling is handled. Also, while there may indeed have been many mistakes made in individual counseling situations, BJU is affirming that they are committed to a biblical counseling method. In other words, while the implementation and even some of the approach might have been flawed, they want to fix what was wrong, but stick with their overall mission to do things according to the Bible. While the authors of the “open letter” might not agree, this can indeed be done without outsourcing all counseling. In fact, outsourcing all counseling might make it much harder to ensure that it is done biblically.

In short, BJU may still make some mistakes in how they handle the response to the GRACE report, but to make the claim that NOTHING has changed is clearly completely false, and that is why you are seeing the reaction you are.

A better word to describe my problem with this article is that the news coverage here is “lopsided.” A month or so ago, two public school teachers were accused of actual child abuse and pornography. When it was reported on, no background info was given and it was a one-two coverage at most and nothing more. However, BJU is accused of some flawed counseling, not of abuse, and it is still a major news issue and the only ones ever interviewed are the accusers. They don’t go to others in the area that sat under these same people to see what their perspective is. More illustration of the lopsided reporting is that back when BJU did a lay off, it made major news here, meanwhile many others had been laid off from their companies and just a small statement if any was said. Its as though people who say they are hurt by BJU should have any hurt whatsoever, but those of us damaged by some other company/organization are fine. Its not about the accused responses, but about the fact that the accusers are the ones being given the platform. BTW, this isn’t just a phenomenon in Greenville with BJU, but with the police and conservatives nationwide. I hope this clarifies my reason for asking for more details about this letter and its writers before just assuming that everything they say is valid.

Oh and for those interested, BJIII was not at last night’s alumni reception. His absence is rare. Nor was Dr. Berg. Steve Pettit was there.

Jay, as someone who is located 1200 miles from Greenville, I have no vested interest in BJU other than my children attend there and have benefited from their attendance. If there were no more BJU, I’d feel badly that a once faithful, yet imperfect tool no longer existed, but by no means does my happiness hinge on its existence. Having said that, I appreciate the school, its current and past leaders and its standing firm for the faith. Perfect? No.

Several sections of the letter are highlighted - was it like that when you posted it or did you take the opportunity to do that yourself? I ask, because when one follows the link to the letter file, it’s in plain type. Obviously, someone thought those sections were worthy of calling out. Why? Many of those sections have been addressed and they are demonstrably false accusations.
As far as the letter is concerned, I have no issues where they state that they’re hurt and disillusioned because BJU evaluated the GRACE recommendations regarding the approach to counseling, the people responsible for it and their materials and decided to go a different direction. I disagree with them, but that’s their prerogative. I have no issues where they state they’d like to see the school pick up the tab for any additional counseling. Anywhere there’s honest disagreement with the school’s response, I respect that. What I don’t respect - and neither should anyone else, including you - is when they, along with some other very vocal critics of the school attempt to peddle the false narrative that the school isn’t changing a thing, that it has acted one way, when it in fact acted completely opposite…unless hanging out with false accusers and propagating a false message is now cool on the SI boards.

“I find it amazing that so many are rushing out of the woodwork to defend BJU in this instance by attacking the messenger and blindly defending the school against all comers even against allegations of failed spiritual counsel that left people suicidal.”

Where? Who? Do you see anyone on this thread doing that? Is pointing out lies and untruths now classified as “attacking the messenger”? Is it “blindly defending the school”? Maybe because I’m outside the Greenville bubble I don’t hear/see people clamoring for poor counseling techniques and non-reporting of abuse/assault issues. Is that what you’re hearing?

Constructive criticism is one thing, but false accusations are another. I’m reminded of the saying, “With friends like this, who needs enemies?” I’ll gladly associate with those making constructive criticism, but not with those making false accusations. How about you?