BJU Papers: number 06

Q. “Who will the leadership listen to so that changes can be made promptly?”-Pastor Taigen Joos (Vice Chairman, FBFI)

A.“I wonder the answer to that myself. They will listen to the board.  Sometimes, I wonder if they really understand that there is a problem.  I’m not sure that Pettit realizes the severity of the concerns, and the implications of the concerns.” -Dr. Bob Jones III (Chancellor, Executive Board Member, FBFI)

[From the FBFI Board Meeting on February 15, 2022, regarding BJU]

The top four earthquakes on the ocean floor at BJU in late 2021 into early 2022, which caused the tsunami during the Fall of ‘22 when the BOT was seeking to terminate Dr. Pettit were:

1) A Midsummer Night’s Dream

2) the fashion show

3) the FBFI letter, and

4) The Trevor Lawrence cancellation.

There were some additional, dishonorable mentions. The FBFI and BJU BOT (It has become increasingly difficult to know where one board ends and the other begins.) had additional grievances, including:

• Participation in Operation Christmas Child in cooperation with Rev. Franklin Graham and Samaritan’s Purse in the Fall of ‘21.

  
  

• Sports photos of Bruins’ athletes from competition in Kansas City used as promotion on BJU social media.

  
  

• Music issues: The Steve Pettit team was playing Blue Grass music in churches, modern hymnody was being used in some chapels, the President’s music team was using Pop and Country stylings, hand clapping was allowed after special music, and hand-raising during singing in chapel by some was not being discouraged.

  
  

• Dress: WOMEN- The women were wearing outfits that “showed midriff” and “undergarments at ballgames and artist series.” They were also wearing “tight pants” and “short skirts.” The Bruins’ Women were “wearing short shorts for sports uniforms.” A “nose stud” had been permitted, and tattoos had been spotted.

  
  

  [One BJU Board member went so far as to take photos of Bruin women athletes to prove via a slide show that they were wearing “short shorts.” These pictures were compared/contrasted to women athletes from Maranatha Baptist University and Faith Baptist Bible College to show how these other Christian institutions’ women athletes were wearing “more modest attire.” [This was a Title IX violation.]

  
  

• Dress: MEN-The BJU BOT also had issues with the hair length of the BJU men, and in the opinion of the BOT, the men were also wearing “tight pants” as well as “short shorts” for Bruins’ athletics. Tattoos had also been spotted on some of the men.

Of all of the “issues” that the BJU Board of Trustees had with the Pettit Administration, it was the FBFI letter that both summarized all the issues best and demonstrated the enormous influence the FBFI had/has over the BJU Board of Trustees.

The FBFI Meeting Prior to the Commissioning of the Letter: Monday, February 15, 2022

The FBFI Executive Board Members convened on Monday, February 15, 2022, in Phoenix, AZ, for their winter board meeting. They met for nearly two hours discussing their present concerns with Bob Jones University, and particularly with the current President, Dr. Steve Pettit’s leadership and direction. During the meeting, the two men closest associated with BJU and who represented the largest conflict of interest, Dr. Bob Jones III and Dr. Mike Harding, spoke the most. The FBFI Board was originally pushing to make the letter public, as an “open letter” to the BJU Board of Trustees. From sources at the meeting, Dr. Bob Jones III and Dr. Mike Harding persuaded them that an “open letter” was not wise, and they settled on sending the letter directly to the BJU BOT. Below are some of the comments that were recorded:

Dr. Kevin Schaal: “We did not invite Pettit, because he is not on the board; this is a board discussion…The fashion show was a homosexual world combined with the cross....I believe some personnel need to be fired.”

Dr. Mike Harding: “I flew down with the Executive Committee after the fashion show. We had a very candid discussion. We brought in Darren Lawson via Zoom, and discussion about the art department. The fashion incident was coached…the problem was bigger than the fashion show. I suggested that the teacher, the art department heads, and Lawson be fired, and the fashion department eliminated.

I hold Lawson responsible for this… the art department has become the book of Judges…There are other problems, like the dress standards have changed the atmosphere on campus. When the dress for ladies changed on the front campus, it changed things. When you loosen things, it’s like pulling teeth to get them back. It had a radical change. ‘Slacks’ are supposed to be ‘slack’…I believe there should be leadership changes. We need at the helm a very, very strong leader. We need someone like a hardened Bob Wood who would take care of things. The good things at school are because of Pettit. The school needs assistants who know the history and keep it true. The left hates BJU, and the right has no confidence in BJU. I encourage you all to send letters, make calls, and contact the admin. We don’t want to lose this school. We could lose this school. We’re going to have to work at this.”

Dr. Bob Jones III: “The future of BJU is going to be based on who Pettit chooses to work with him. Harding’s suggestion about having someone like Bob Wood is right on.  When I asked Bob to join me, I said, ‘I need to know what’s going on while I’m preaching around the country.  You’re my eyes and ears. Don’t leave me in the dark about anything.’ Wood and I were brothers for 30+ years.  Pettit needs someone with loyalty, strength of character, strength of determination, etc.  The greatest danger to BJU is when the faculty pass off the scene and those who didn’t know and embrace in their DNA the philosophy of the school.  We’re not looking for diversity, but we’re looking for continuation. As the church continues to move left, the young people who moved more left, those young people wouldn’t serve well as a BJU staff member.  There will be a dangerous day when we’re hiring people from backgrounds who do not embrace the true philosophy.  Where are we going to get the future ones?… Big mistakes have been made in the last few months that are egregious.”

Dr. Mike Harding: “BJU is still allowing some attractional speakers.- the youth pastor had a 'Jesus Freak' poster on the door. That church is now allowed.  The University needs a “No Go” list.  It’s good to have parental permission, but they also need pastoral permission.  Southern Baptist churches need to be trying over time to pull out of the convention; many SBC churches are in the woke movement.  The biggest problems with BJU ecclesiastically are that they bring a speaker in who is too broad: the church plant conference had a guy who is a fusion of James McDonald from Harvest.  The one bad guy is going to undo the good guys. It’s one of the most serious problems.”

Dr. Mark Minnick: “I’ve cried about this many, many times. None of us wants to be rabble-rousing.  Pettit and Horn know my heart. This isn’t just Pettit; there is a trajectory here.  I do not have confidence in the university. It’s not just the students, it’s the faculty and staff that the students are around.  Why would the Bible faculty choose those people?  We have a problem on the lower level.  I don’t know what the fix is other than God. I don’t understand why Pettit goes to an SBC church in Easley with the bluegrass band.  

Kent Rammler-“I love the university.  But now on the AACS, I’m having to run interference.  AACS is reconsidering BJU.”

Dr. Chuck Phelps: “I’ve made contact with Pettit about all of this.  I’ve made a list that is black and white, and Paul was willing to call out Peter to his face.  I think we are there. We have a faculty member at an SBC church. Horn is at Master’s. They have partnered with Tim Tebow and Franklin Graham. BJU participated with the Pregnancy Center in Greenville with a RCC speaker promoting. Andy Nasalli is coming. There is the bluegrass music and the Getty conference. Beach volleyball, modesty issues, fashion show, inexcusable…The FBFI is not supportive of SBC in any way. We have holiness in Christian education and importance in music, calling out pseudo-fundamentalism. We need to say something.”

The FBFI Letter: Monday, February 15, 2022

The FBFI letter states three major concerns: ecclesiastical separation, modesty, and music/fine arts. After listing these issues, the FBFI Executive Board charges BJU with departing from historical fundamentalism. They say that the dress on campus has made BJU “look increasingly like the world.”

The letter states that it was “approved unanimously with one abstention by the FBFI Board at the 2022 Winter Board meeting.”

The Response to the Letter: March 2, 2022

The Chairman of the BJU Board of Trustees responded to the FBFI letter on March 2nd.

Executive Board

Foundations Baptist Fellowship International

2801 Wade Hampton Blvd # 115-165

Taylors, SC 29687

Dear Executive Board of the Foundations Baptist Fellowship International:

Thank you for your letter dated February 15, 2022, in which you expressed a number of your concerns with Bob Jones University (BJU). I have provided a copy of your letter to each Trustee on BJU’s Board. We very much appreciate the spirit with which your letter was written and strongly desire to regain your trust, confidence, and support.

To be very clear, BJU’s Trustees share many of the concerns documented in your letter. We, too, consider these matters to be serious and are handling them as such. We also empathize with the conundrum you face by having been defenders of BJU while not agreeing with some of the choices being made at the university. We regret the damage this may have caused you personally. Please be assured that our Board’s executive committee has been working very closely with President Pettit to seek resolutions and ensure that needed corrections are instituted effectively, expediently, and with ongoing accountability.

Regarding your concern about ecclesiastical associations of BJU and speakers who have been invited to campus, we have no tolerance for allowing chapel and Bible Conference speakers to come for the sole reason that they have a broader appeal. If speakers are not aligned with BJU’s historical and current biblical fundamentalism, separatist position, those speakers should not be invited. An exception is one you listed: as an accredited liberal arts institution, we may invite educators who demonstrate proficiency in a specific academic discipline to speak in order to ensure a quality learning experience for our students; this practice has been utilized successfully at BJU for decades.

Under Steve Pettit’s leadership, the Center for Biblical Worldview (CBW) has been established at BJU. CBW’s director has begun work with our faculty and leadership in the theater department and the fashion and design department of the School of Fine Arts and Communication. We expect this work to continue throughout all departments and at all levels, including students and student leadership, to ensure that BJU’s biblical worldview and Christian philosophy are pervasive and consistent. With rigor and biblical discernment, we are also re-addressing practices and policies regarding areas such as music, fine arts presentations, enforcement of dress standards, and church attendance.

It is our sincerest desire that God will bless our efforts to “right the ship” as needed at BJU. We ask for your continued prayer support for our board and the university’s leadership as we seek to please him while fulfilling BJU’s mission to train the young people that God has entrusted to us “to grow Christlike character that is scripturally disciplined, others-serving, God-loving, Christ-proclaiming, and focused above.”

May God be glorified.

Sincerely yours,

Chair,

Board of Trustees

The Undue Influence of the Letter:

SACSCOC Manual

4.2.f The governing board protects the institution from undue influence by external persons or bodies. (External influence)

"Undue" influence does not mean "no" influence. Elected officials, corporate offices, alumni associations, and religious denominational bodies are examples of persons or bodies that appropriately have interests in the activities of related colleges and universities. However, the governing board of the institution has been vested with the authority to make decisions regarding the institution, and no outside person, board, or religious or legislative body should be in a position to interfere with the governing board's ultimate authority to fulfill its responsibilities or to interfere in the operations of the institution.

Dr. Mike Harding, while not officially speaking on behalf of the Board, let the chairman know that he would be speaking at the FBFI winter meeting about the FBFI’s concerns regarding BJU. Based on the comments that Dr. Mike Harding made at the meeting, he violated the BJU Trustee expectations that say trustees are to:

To maintain strict confidentiality of board and committee meetings and of all information proprietary to Bob Jones University;

All matters discussed in board meetings are to be kept in the strictest confidence by each board member.

I. Through the FBF Winter Board Meeting

The BJU Board Chairman received a report from Dr. Mike Harding, Dr. Bob Jones III, and Dr. Mark Minnick after the meeting.

A member of the BJU Board of Trustees’ Executive Committee (Dr. Mike Harding) went and spoke to the FBFI about BJU, listened to the FBFI board members’ responses, and then brought back those concerns to the BJU BOT Chairman. Furthermore, the Chairman spoke with and received reports from Dr. Mike Harding, the Chancellor, and Dr. Mark Minnick. This level of communication between boards was influential.

In addition, Dr. Minnick received permission, following the FBFI meeting, from the BJU Chairman to speak with Dr. Jean Saito, BJU Board Member. Dr. Mark Minnick spoke with Dr. Saito for two hours. Dr. Minnick recommended that directional changes had to be made at the university. When Dr. Saito responded by asking, “Who would you replace the current president with based on the assumption that a directional change would mean a change in the presidency?” Dr. Minnick responded, “Bruce McAllister, perhaps even as an interim.”

II. Through the FBFI Letter

The intention of the FBFI letter, dated February 15th, 2022, was to influence the BJU Board of Trustees to bring about changes at BJU.

“At the Winter Board meeting of the FBFI, the board as a whole has wished to express our great concern to the BJU Board about the change in direction over the past several years.

We want to go on record from our board to yours regarding how serious we believe this matter is.

The FBFI, as a fellowship over the years, staunchly defended BJU from attacks from groups both inside and outside of professing Christianity. We now find ourselves in the very difficult position of not agreeing with the choices of the University while also being perceived as defenders of the University. This change of direction has damaged us significantly.

We appeal to you…to stop the present movement and begin to make corrections. We understand completely that the type of corrections necessary will be extremely painful and costly. We would love to support you as you make the right decisions moving forward.”

This was written to influence the BJU BOT to change direction.

This was not new. The FBFI has been trying to influence BJU to change direction for some time. Before and after Dr. Steve Pettit became President of BJU, he preached for the FBFI national meetings many times. Dr. Pettit went to multiple national conventions as an attendee. But he never became a board member of the organization.

Dr. Pettit had two conversations with the former president of the FBFI, Dr. John Vaughn, during his first and second years as BJU President. In the first year, he asked Dr. Pettit to join the FBFI. Dr. Pettit told him at his initial request that he did not join the FBFI in the past because it was not a Great Commission organization. Also, Dr. Pettit felt that, being the president of BJU, it was important not to be affiliated with one organization. The second year, he made the same request. This time, he added more of a threat to Dr. Pettit not joining with the FBFI. Dr. Pettit candidly told John that this was not right and he could not do this anymore. He backed off, and they went their separate ways.

And then there were the most recent negative interactions:

▪ Dr. Pettit attended a meeting chaired by Tom Farrell where he met in Charlotte and did a Q&A with pastors. Many of the men were in the FBFI-not an official meeting – in 2017.

▪ Dr. Pettit met with members of the FBFI in Denver, CO, at the request of their president, to answer questions in June of 2019.

▪ Dr. Pettit invited the leaders of the FBFI to come and meet with them to address concerns they may have in October 2019. They gave them all our policies - Affirmations, Church Policy, position statements, music policy, associations grid. They commended Pettit for them.

▪ The letter from the FBFI Executive Board in February of 2022.

There has been undue influence.

 III. Through the Chairman’s response to the FBFI’s letter on March 2nd, 2022.

"We very much appreciate the spirit with which your letter was written and strongly desire to regain your trust, confidence, and support."

This was a powerful response to one organization. Would the BJU BOT show this kind of response to any other religious organization? In this response, the FBFI was given a priority of importance. The Chairman’s response to the FBFI assured them that the BJU BOT would make the changes that were necessary “to regain their trust, confidence, and support.”

By committing to regaining the FBFI’s confidence and trust, they put the independent BJU BOT, the governing body of BJU, in a place of submission to the influence of an external body, the FBFI. The FBFI said in their letter that the changes they were calling for “will be extremely painful and costly.” Is this undue influence? Undue influence means influence that is unwarranted or inappropriate because it is excessive or disproportionate.

Effective governing boards adhere to the laws and regulations that underpin the institution's legitimacy while championing its right to operate without unreasonable intrusions by governmental and nongovernmental agencies and entities. This applies to any governing board, whether public, private, not-for-profit, or private for-profit. The board protects and preserves the institution's independence from outside pressures.

Who Authored the FBFI Letter?

The FBFI letter had 41 names listed. Normally, a listing of names attached to a formal letter from one Board to another would indicate that those names listed are signers and endorsers of the said letter. That turns out not to be the case with the FBFI letter.

Once the letter was made public in the Fall of 2022, there were a few of the men whose names were listed on the letter who said they were either not in attendance at the February 15, 2022 FBFI meeting or worse. Aaron Young’s name was listed and he had left the meeting early in objection to the FBFI letter. After discovering his name was included without his permission, he formally left the FBFI.

The letter was composed at least in draft form before the two-hour meeting with the executive board of the FBFI. So, who wrote the letter? Those in the room and those close to Dr. Bruce McAllister say that Dr. McAllister, the seventh president of BJU, wrote the original draft of the FBFI letter dated February 15, 2022. This question has been posed to Dr. McAllister before, with no answer to date.

When Dr. Pettit is confronted by the BOT in the Fall of 2022, will he be held accountable for the same issues found in the FBFI letter? And if so, can a direct FBFI line of undue influence be traced from the ousting of one president of BJU to the election of another? If so, this is evil corruption in the name of ecclesiastical separation.

Next on BJU Papers: Dr. Pettit is nearly fired, the beginning of Positive BJU, and the tale of a coup, stolen papers, and board overreach.