Southern Seminary Changes Mind on Northland
- 29 views
It’s shocking when it goes down but not a surprise
[Jim]It’s shocking when it goes down but not a surprise
The Wind Has Such A Rainy Sound
The wind has such a rainy sound
Moaning through the town,
The sea has such a windy sound, -
Will the ships go down?
The apples in the orchard
Tumble from their tree. -
Oh will the ships go down, go down,
In the windy sea?
-Christina Georgina Rossetti
Guys, no worries, this is Northland, next week Southern will be back on board.
[Jonathan Charles]One would think that a top-notch institution like Southern, with financial professionals on staff and on the board, would have done thorough due diligence before they ever agreed to accept Northland.
This is an assumption that may not be reality at Southern. Having had a friend or two who were familiar with how Southern’s administration runs the seminary and college, I can tell you that Mohler runs the show, and what he and his top men want they get regardless if it makes good financial / business sense. It’s very frustrating to many on faculty and staff to see money spent on various unprofitable projects / conferences while professors and staff often get the shaft.
This whole process has been agonizing to watch. Taking teens to camp in the early 90s, attending Family Camp with 25-30 families from our church in Wisconsin in the late 90s - early 2000s, graduating from there with my D. Min., knowing and loving the Ollilas, Olsons and many faculty, having children and church members who worked at camp there, etc., etc. etc. - my life, family, and ministry have been woven together with Northland for many years. My only consolation is that Northland is not the church. Jesus said He would build the church, and He is. Parachurch ministries come and, sadly, go.
I hope there is a way forward for Northland that will fulfill not only its mission but God’s purpose. But, while I have a special place in my heart for Northland and its people, it is not the church. The church will live and thrive until Jesus comes.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
An analogy would be the breakup on the Comcast | Time Warner merger announced today.
The cooler financial minds from the Southern board did not see a compelling business case to go forward. To pour good resources after bad would have hurt Southern / Boyce. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to protect their own ministry. Because the deal was to close August 1st they were within their rights to pull out.
I was no fan of the change in direction and philosophy by NIU; however, the way SBTS & Mohler handled this entire affair was wrong.
Regarding Mohler’s statement/non-apology today and Southern’s acceptance & rejection of NIU, I was thinking it’s like having no date to the Prom, but then Cindy Crawford agrees to be your date. You are excited about it, but when you go to pick her up she says she didn’t realize your face was full of zits so now she’s not going because “It’s the right decision for her and she wasn’t sure about it all along anyway.” However, to try to smooth things over she did get Suzie Plainface to be your date for the evening.
What does this from Mohler mean?
“Second, in conversation with accrediting agencies and in accordance with our own commitments to academic strength and quality, we came to the conclusion that we could not accept students into a program of studies that we did not believe had an adequate chance of thriving and continuing over the course of their studies.”
Sounds like he’s saying that the students accepted at Northland could not academically survive at Boyce.
[Jonathan Charles]What does this from Mohler mean?
“Second, in conversation with accrediting agencies and in accordance with our own commitments to academic strength and quality, we came to the conclusion that we could not accept students into a program of studies that we did not believe had an adequate chance of thriving and continuing over the course of their studies.”
Sounds like he’s saying that the students accepted at Northland could not academically survive at Boyce.
No it means that they did not think it could last four years in a viable financial state, and so they would have felt bad bringing in freshman, when they knew there was a high probability that they might not graduate because it might not work.
Shuttering is inevitable
Mohler’s statement was concise and brutally honest
[mmartin]I was no fan of the change in direction and philosophy by NIU; however, the way SBTS & Mohler handled this entire affair was wrong.
Regarding Mohler’s statement/non-apology today and Southern’s acceptance & rejection of NIU, I was thinking it’s like having no date to the Prom, but then Cindy Crawford agrees to be your date. You are excited about it, but when you go to pick her up she says she didn’t realize your face was full of zits so now she’s not going because “It’s the right decision for her and she wasn’t sure about it all along anyway.” However, to try to smooth things over she did get Suzie Plainface to be your date for the evening.
Someone questioned earlier whether SBTS had done enough “due diligence” before entering into this endeavor. I have no doubt that with hindsight they themselves could find some things they would have done differently. However, I think a healthy measure of grace is warranted in evaluating SBTS’s role and actions here. I have had at least some minor experience helping create financial models in the business world—not enough to be considered an expert by any measure, but enough at least to appreciate the predictive limitations of “due diligence” in a decision as complex as this one.
As those who have been involved in overseeing or managing the budgets of Christian educational institutions know well, the main driver of operational viability—the one that dwarfs all others unless there is relatively large income stream from an endowment—is enrollment levels. At institutions that have had a long history of stability, enrollment is not especially difficult to extrapolate reasonably (at least on a year-to-year basis). However, the situation at Northland was different. Not only had there been recent instability and upheaval, but there were many other complicating factors. If I imagine myself in the place of someone being asked to do “due diligence” during the exploratory phase prior to this decision last fall, here are some questions I would have been considering:
- Under the auspices of Boyce College, Northland will now be able to target the much larger constituency within the SBC (over 15 million strong). What assumptions should we make in order to estimate what percentage of that new constituency Northland will be able to attract?
- How will Northland’s remote northern location affect their ability to draw from their constituency—especially given the fact that SBC churches are concentrated in the south?
- Will the net effect of the existence of a new Boyce campus be primarily to draw students that otherwise would attend the Louisville campus, thus having the net effect of spreading Boyce’s resources thin (in terms of both faculty and money)? How much of a distraction will this be to the leadership at the main campus?
There are many other questions that could be asked, but even if one assumed (for sake of illustration) that those were the only unknowns, any credible model that one came up with would need to have a very wide range between the “reasonably likely best case” and the “reasonably likely worse case.” If I were doing it, I’d have created a preliminary model, then set up a plan to adjust the model once new data points were available. And the main data point I would focus on—the one that would have the most predictive value for assessing the financial viability of the endeavor—would be the enrollment number for the next school year. Also, given the fact that there was a deadline for closure of the contract, I would have picked a target date with a target enrollment number that had to be reached in order to have assurance that the decision to move forward was a wise one. That target date would be chosen balancing two factors: on the one hand, waiting as late as possible in order to allow recruitment efforts to yield the best possible enrollment number we could get and, on the other hand, making the decision early enough to allow those affected by any “no go” decision to adjust and adapt. From what I’ve read, that seems to be almost exactly what SBTS did. So, did they do the proper due diligence? My view is that something like the whole process they went through was required in order to perform proper “due diligence” and that, because of their “due diligence,” they avoided moving forward on a decision that they determined would not be the wisest course.
I strongly disagree that “the way SBTS & Mohler handled this affair was wrong.” The primary responsibility of Dr. Mohler and the board is be good stewards of the ministry that God has Providentially entrusted to their oversight: SBTS and Boyce College. It is easy to see how the gifting of Northland to SBTS could potentially have been a means of great blessing and growth to both Boyce and Northland—which is what made the long “due diligence” process a worthy endeavor. However, it’s also easy to see that there were many complications and pitfalls that added significant risk—which is what made the long “due diligence” process a necessary endeavor. My opinion, considering the complexity of it all, is that it would have been very difficult, if not impossible, to come to a firm conclusion about the viability of the transaction without a lot of work—and the kind of work that requires taking the route they took. SBTS graciously spent time and money pursuing a course that would help both Northland and SBTS. From my perspective, they went about it with about as much wisdom as anyone could reasonable expect given the situation. Contrary to what some seem to believe, I don’t believe SBTS had any moral obligation to accept the gift. In fact, I would go further: Once SBTS determined that accepting the Northland campus would likely create long-term, unwise financial drain on SBTS and Boyce (or a distraction or anything else that would hurt the overall effectiveness of the ministry or put it at unnecessary risk) they would have been wrong to go forward with the transaction.
I know personally, people who have been placed in great difficulty by this situation and I am very, very sorry for their pain. However, based on what I’ve read, I don’t place any blame on SBTS for the failure of Northland. If anything, SBTS probably just delayed what was already practically inevitable. I believe Mohler and SBTS acted wisely in this situation—in a way that is best for SBTS, which is their primary responsibility, and which ultimately will be best for the Body of Christ.
Disclaimer: Other than knowing some former Northland staff & grads and being an admirer of the college since its early days, I have no relationship to Northland. I’ve never even visited the campus.
Philip Knight
To be honest, for a campus in Dunbar to work, what needs to happen is for God to bless the evangelical and fundamental churches to grow immensely, beyond the ability of Faith & Maranatha to handle their students. Hard to write that into a business plan, though I’d be delighted if it happened.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I should have included in my disclaimer that I also have no relationship or ties with SBTS or Boyce College—in fact, even less than with Northland since I’ve never been part of the SBC “orbit.”
Philip Knight
[Larry Nelson]This is still on NIU’s website as of today, so I’m assuming it’s still a go. Mohler is the keynote speaker:
http://northlandcamp.org/camps-and-events/leadership-summit
I imagine it might be a bit awkward or bittersweet now…..
Starts tomorrow: Mohler is no longer on the speaking schedule:
Discussion