Bob Jones University Enters a New Era

I said I have seen the changes, and I am disappointed in the failure to enforce the rules that are on the books. That only breeds disrespect for authority and is hypocritical. Better not to have the rules at all.

Don, BJU can’t police the entire student body all the time. Just because there are some (many?) that are breaking the rules doesn’t mean that BJU doesn’t enforce the rules at all. You have no idea what is going on with the student body as you walk through the campus, unless you’re on good terms with the DoM/DoW, who should, by the way, know better than to talk about individual student discipline situations.

As for this:

But, you make the statement that “I wonder where the preachers for fundamentalist churches are going to come from in the future”, but at the same time, in the paragraph above you state, “we wouldn’t send our kids to BJU today”. I think that you answered your question. People want to see rules that meet their convictions and they want those rules in place to drive behavior. If it doesn’t they will withdraw from that school, and therefore no longer influence it anymore and it continue to goes a certain direction. I think part of this is a separatist instilled behavior. If all of the people who favor a more conservative modesty approach, pull out and abandon BJU, than don’t be surprised if the more lenient crowd controls the direction.

Kind of like what happened to Northla–

Where’s all the angry posts from our brothers that are tracking BJU’s various and sundry evidences of compromise/apostacy?

I appreciate a lot of what you wrote. I think we actually agree on many issues. I hope there are people in leadership positions at every Christian university who have different perspectives on these issues, so they can strike a good balance and make good policies. Echo chambers are bad for everybody.

There are clearly at least three perspectives represented on this thread:

1. People who are first-generation Christians who don’t see the need for the Christian university “bubble” so many other Christians grew up in, and are anxious to perpetuate. This is my position. I did without this “bubble” during my childhood years, and joined the military at 18, so the idea that 21 year olds get demerits for their hair, or have to endure cleavage checks, is laughable and juvenile to me. I was married at 18, running a police shift at 19, and had responded to many incidents involving dead people by the time I was 21. This entire discussion about cleavage, hair-length and the need to “help young people mature” seems to be from another world to me. There are many, many, many, many young Christians who do just fine without this bubble.
2. People who grew up as Christians, who changed their position on the model BJU (and other schools) has used in the past, and prefer a looser model.
3. People who grew up as Christians, and are anxious to continue a certain fundamentalist sub-culture that is genuinely important to them, and that they believe is Biblical. I assume this is where Wally and Don are.

There is room for all of these perspectives, and there are pros and cons with each position. Of course, I think my position is best! :)

[dgszweda]

I do agree with you Don, if there is a rule than enforce it.

Glad for some agreement, at least. Interestingly, I woke up to getting cursed out (literally) on FB messenger by someone who took the time to look me up and spew vulgarities. I suspect he was one of the “adults” Tyler has so much confidence in.

But, you make the statement that “I wonder where the preachers for fundamentalist churches are going to come from in the future”, but at the same time, in the paragraph above you state, “we wouldn’t send our kids to BJU today”. I think that you answered your question. People want to see rules that meet their convictions and they want those rules in place to drive behavior. If it doesn’t they will withdraw from that school, and therefore no longer influence it anymore and it continue to goes a certain direction. I think part of this is a separatist instilled behavior. If all of the people who favor a more conservative modesty approach, pull out and abandon BJU, than don’t be surprised if the more lenient crowd controls the direction.

to be clear, it isn’t just rule changes that turn me off. Some of the rule changes were needed. When I was in school, there were too many rules, it did seem that a somewhat bureaucratic mindset was part of the mix where every problem was addressed by more rules (besides the direct discipline that might be administered.

Nevertheless, a lot of the changes today reflect a changing, more worldly philosophy, which is reflected in the loosening of standards of dress and other areas. It used to be refreshing to come to a place where the student body gave an appearance of respectfulness and professionalism by their dress and (generally) behaviour. I am under no illusions that dress standards = spirituality, but there is value in the training and in the discipline. Nowadays it’s little different than going to the mall.

I don’t want to get sidetracked on the dress issue, however. It is only a symptom and not a cause. There are many other problems with the philosophy and culture at BJU that I find myself less and less able to support. This thread is about changes at BJ, most of the comments are congratulatory, I am registering a contrary point of view.

No one has said that rules produce Christlikeness. That’s a position no one in this discussion has stated. It’s a false (straw man) argument designed to criticize rules. Every school, even secular, has rules.

Wrong. Both Don and Adam Blumer have said things very much like this, and I’m not saying this to take shots at them.
Adam said:

God can also use rules and enforcement at a Christian school to help the young person become more Christlike and learn how to serve those in authority and treat others kindly. This probably happens in most homes, and it for many years worked at BJU. Room leaders and others worked with those in the rooms and used even room responsibilities for discipleship opportunities. And because students signed a statement agreeing to keep the guidelines while there, rules certainly became opportunities to encourage each student in his or her sanctification. Perhaps since you weren’t a student in this type of situation, you didn’t see it modeled. I’m sure even today BJU uses dorm expectations as discipleship opportunities, and those directly impact one’s sanctification. This is one way in which places like BJU are so much different from state schools. The whole environment is a microcosm for growing in sanctification

Don said:

We wouldn’t send our kids to BJU today, in spite of many friends on faculty/administration and alumni. It is not that some rules didn’t need to be changed, change is always necessary as culture constantly changes around us. The school no longer cultivates the kind of spiritual atmosphere I loved as a student and hoped for when my children began attending. I don’t think I would be enthusiastic about sending anyone there anymore. I think the Bible faculty still teaches a fundamentalist worldview, but I don’t think that’s the overall atmosphere.

Now Don says that he’s being misunderstood. Fine. What exactly is BJU doing now that means that “they are no longer cultivating the kind of spiritual atmosphere he loved?” The only thing we’ve talked about has been rule changes. He says they need to change and it’s necessary, and then immediately starts talking about the spirituality there.

Not sure where the competing with Liberty/Wheaton comes from. Many high school grads from our church are looking into Maranatha, International Baptist, and BJU. Liberty and Wheaton are not even up for consideration. Can not speak for others; but that is our situation.

I have a great sense of humor. I could have been a comedian. But the post was unneccesary.

[Jay]

I said I have seen the changes, and I am disappointed in the failure to enforce the rules that are on the books. That only breeds disrespect for authority and is hypocritical. Better not to have the rules at all.

Don, BJU can’t police the entire student body all the time. Just because there are some (many?) that are breaking the rules doesn’t mean that BJU doesn’t enforce the rules at all. You have no idea what is going on with the student body as you walk through the campus, unless you’re on good terms with the DoM/DoW, who should, by the way, know better than to talk about individual student discipline situations.

As for this:

But, you make the statement that “I wonder where the preachers for fundamentalist churches are going to come from in the future”, but at the same time, in the paragraph above you state, “we wouldn’t send our kids to BJU today”. I think that you answered your question. People want to see rules that meet their convictions and they want those rules in place to drive behavior. If it doesn’t they will withdraw from that school, and therefore no longer influence it anymore and it continue to goes a certain direction. I think part of this is a separatist instilled behavior. If all of the people who favor a more conservative modesty approach, pull out and abandon BJU, than don’t be surprised if the more lenient crowd controls the direction.

Kind of like what happened to Northla–

Where’s all the angry posts from our brothers that are tracking BJU’s various and sundry evidences of compromise/apostacy?

Jay, quoting your whole post because I am on my iPad and editing is laborious.

much of what I would say in reply I’ve already said to dgszweda above. I’d like to comment here on your points about enforcement of rules.

1. I am not saying perfect enforcement is possible. I’m not sure that needs to be said, but in case some of the adults have general comprehension difficulties, I want that to be clear.

2. Over the last decade and more, I have been on campus many times. My kids lived there on a daily basis and occupied various positions of spiritual leadership. They tell me what they have seen. Michelle reported above her observations regarding the dress standards. The fact is that whatever effort is being made towards enforcing the current dress rules, much that contravenes the current standard slides by. Surely enforcement could be better than it is.

3. You said: “Just because there are some (many?) that are breaking the rules doesn’t mean that BJU doesn’t enforce the rules at all.”

I didn’t say that. I said that if you fail to enforce existing rules on a consistent basis, you breed disrespect for the rules and authority structure as a whole. Yes, certainly some rules are enforced, but from my observation the enforcement is selective (only certain rules) and/or inconsistent. Those in charge need the courage to follow through on their stated policies.

The range of responses to my article is interesting, albeit not unexpected. I’ve received pushback from those whom I’ve titled “new legalists” upset because I portrayed BJU as “kinder and gentler.” They believe that any positive mention of BJU should be met with denunciation, and so they trot out well-worn and debunked anti-BJU talking points. I appreciate them insofar as they unwittingly help me promote my article.

The response here at SI has been fascinating for me, though. From my perspective, the conversation here is really the continuing of the convergent discussion from a few months ago. Those who realize that old-school, moderate fundamentalism is shrinking at a rate that precludes extinction are not happy with the changes at BJU. While I don’t agree with them, I empathize, I think. The other side, those who either consider themselves CE’s or who think that ministerial cooperation with CE’s is desired, like the changes. While agreeing with them, I find myself cringing from time to time at how they speak to the other side.

The most common comment about fundamentalists that I hear from CE’s is how they’re thankful for the focus on personal holiness within fundamentalism. Take that for what it’s worth.

However, and sadly, the actual audience for my article (those who only know BJU through rumor) have collectively yawned at my article.

Anyway, thank you to those who read my article. Without SI, my article would’ve died on the vine, so to speak. You all breathed enough life into it to make me think that outside of a paycheck it wasn’t a complete waste of my time writing it. Such is the life of a writer. If I’m not writing about Donald Trump, War Room, Joel Osteen, Hillsong, or Andy Stanley, it ain’t going viral.

From the BJU website:

“Mission

Within the cultural and academic soil of liberal arts higher education (emphais mine), Bob Jones University exists to grow Christlike character that is scripturally disciplined, others-serving, God-loving, Christ-proclaiming and focused above.

As a Christian liberal arts higher education institution we:

educate regenerate men and women of varying educational backgrounds and proficiencies from across the nation and around the world.
educate the whole person through a biblically integrated liberal arts curriculum.
equip individuals with a biblical worldview and with the ability to defend that worldview.
offer programs leading to undergraduate and graduate degrees in a range of disciplines in a residential environment supplemented by distance learning and professional development opportunities.
foster spiritual, intellectual, social and physical development and cultural expansion of the individual.
are committed to excellence in teaching by a godly, competent and professional faculty who are dedicated to furthering the University’s mission.

As a Christian higher education institution committed to helping Christian students grow in Christlikeness we:

emphasize excellence and hold students accountable to pursue it for the purpose of developing character.
teach individuals to apply the Scriptures to practical Christian living.
seek to develop individuals who are committed to Jesus Christ as Lord, who are engaged in service and leadership in a biblically faithful local church, and who have a compelling concern for reaching the unconverted with the Gospel.
are steadfastly committed to remaining faithful to the biblical doctrine and principles in our founding charter.
develop a constituency of regenerated students who have adequate preparation to profit from a Christian college education.”

For those of you worried about the seminary and its influence, please realize that BJU is a liberal art university that happens to offer Bible as a major and happens to have a seminary.

BJU was its own worst enemy in the 60’s through 80’s by developing an alumni base who tried to “out-perfect” each other. Teaching that no other school could possibly do it as well as BJU raised up a generation of graduates who now don’t think the current BJU does it as well as “their” BJU. Mr. Johnson’s statements seem to testify to this.

Concerning ejohansen’s comments about the Seminary:

The Biblical basis & influence at BJU was historically the core of its purpose. While the degrees and courses BJU now offers has much expanded from its inception, the basis & purpose was the Bible and educating people to serve Jesus Christ in whatever career/place the Lord placed them. BJU doesn’t just “happen” to have a seminary. The teaching and influence of the Bible faculty was historically immense. One of my points is that their influence seems to have diminished.

You wrote:

The teaching and influence of the Bible faculty was historically immense. One of my points is that their influence seems to have diminished.

That’s the difference between a bible college and an accreddited university. The two have very different goals. That’s the direction BJU chose to take, especially in light of its regional accreditation. So did MBU (a long time ago - heh :) ). I think they made the right decision. There is a distinction between a Bible College and a University.

“The Biblical basis & influence at BJU was historically the core of its purpose. While the degrees and courses BJU now offers has much expanded from its inception, the basis & purpose was the Bible and educating people to serve Jesus Christ in whatever career/place the Lord placed them.”

And I agree with that. And it goes to my point. Just because the seminary and “preacher-boys” may be shrinking (or losing influence) doesn’t mean that the LORD cannot and does not raise up Christian businessmen, doctors, lawyers, teachers, nurses, etc. While I use my degree from BJU as CFO of a bank and not an ordained Baptist minister does not make me less useful to the Kingdom. I would venture that there are more laymen with various degrees from BJU serving the LORD every day around the world, than there are pastors and evangelists.

I apologize that I am not as eloquent as some of you. For years after I left BJU (1982) I really wanted nothing to do with the school. Not that I abandoned my faith, just the school itself. Only recently and with the positive changes brought about by Steven Jones and Steve Pettit have I felt better about my alma mater.

I didn’t say rules produce Christlikeness. Go back and reread what I wrote if you’re confused. I wrote, “God can also use rules and enforcement at a Christian school to help the young person become more Christlike and learn how to serve those in authority and treat others kindly.” Then read the rest. That’s not the same thing. God can use anything in our lives to make us more like him and use other believers in the process too; that doesn’t mean the thing itself makes us Christlike. It’s the process of God using it that does. If I disobey a traffic rule and get a ticket, the ticket doesn’t make me Christlike, but God can use the situation to make me more Christlike. Even the accountability of others can factor in. Do you see what I’m saying?

With regards to the first paragraph of Wally’s point, it’s worth noting that economics great Walter Williams routinely notes that nothing wakes college administrators like the sound of donor pocketbooks snapping shut. Per that axiom, I would guess that a certain portion of the donor base actually may be leading the administration in this direction, and if not, a certain other portion of the donor base can nudge them in another direction by snapping their pocketbooks shut and suggesting something else.

Regarding rules, I’m not against them, and it’s worth noting that as an MP, Tyler not only got to obey rules, but also to enforce them. And if you do the student handbook right, those rules CAN add to Godliness simply because the students understand what is, Biblically and otherwise, at stake. I’m fine with universities acting in loco parentis to some degree, and going back to Tyler, the Marines he’d work with very often say that the Corps served as the father they never had as well.

The big question, in my view, is whether that student handbook is well done, Biblically speaking. If the Biblical authority, logic, and rhetorical skills are lacking, then the rules will tend to work against discipleship, rebellious heart in a tea length skirt and all. If they’re done well, it will help.

Still would love to hear from Don on his position, and maybe a word picture of the spirituality he says was there. Side note; sorry to hear about the “love” that was shared with you on FB, Don.