Closure of Calvary Baptist Seminary: Predictable and Repeatable
In October 2012 I published, What Does Pillsbury, Tennessee Temple and Northland International University Have in Common?
“Tennessee Temple and its leadership pursued a path of ‘relevance.’ accommodated carnality, and today even secular media can’t help but notice that there is a parallel between the institution’s decline and its accommodation of the world at the sacrifice of Biblical, Christian distinctives. Let those pastors, churches and institutions who abandon their fundamental heritage, have disdain for those who have gone before, and pursue a path towards ‘Conservative Evangelicalism’ be forewarned…their end is tragically predictable.”
Last week, Calvary Baptist Seminary (CBS) in Lansdale, PA announced that it would be
closing its doors at the conclusion of the current academic year. At the pseudo-fundamentalist Sharper Iron (SI)* I have read how the members there
lament the news of CBS closing. What we
read, however, is primarily what I see as a blame shift. They seem to think
that not keeping up with the times in Internet offerings killed off the school.
While having an aggressive Internet program for off-site learning may have been
helpful, there is IMO a more reasonable explanation for the closing of CBS.
A reason for the
closure of CBS that is not being discussed by the new wave of new evangelicals at SI is that CBS drifted far from its foundational
roots. Tim Jordan and Sam Harbin charted
a course far from the school’s fundamental, Baptistic, separatist heritage.
What Calvary
Baptist Seminary once was under the leadership of Tim Jordan’s father, “Chief” Jordan, will be missed. What CBS
became under Tim Jordan and Sam Harbin will not.
Northland and
Central will not survive having abandoned their fundamental heritage, disdain
for those who have gone before, and pursuing a path toward “conservative” evangelicalism.
LM
Update: June 15, 2014
For an important continuation on the closure of Calvary Baptist Seminary please refer to, “They are Accountable for Failure and Won’t Own Up to It.”
Update: June 15, 2014
For an important continuation on the closure of Calvary Baptist Seminary please refer to, “They are Accountable for Failure and Won’t Own Up to It.”
Related Reading:
Dr. Ernest Pickering: The Separatist Cause is Not Advanced by Featuring Non-Separatists
There is quite a difference in the path that Tennessee Temple went and the path that Northland and CBS have gone. At least Northland and CBS stayed conservative. TTU has lost its moorings and is running away from their past. I don't see NIU and CBS doing exactly that. There are some pretty serious differences.
ReplyDeleteGod Bless,
Jay Edwards
Thanks for your input. I think I need your definition of "conservative" in what way. Doctrine, music...? Feel free to give a brief example.
ReplyDeleteIMO, there is very little of what I'd call conservative left at Northland. There are many examples I can offer, but see,
NIU RAPS to “Jesus Loves Me”
The Real “Unchanged” NIU Comes Forward
Is NIU Opposed to the “Modern Charismatic Movement?”
Central won’t survive in part because of Kevin Bauder’s presidency. As president he did (and still does), castigate fundamentalism and heap “lavish praise” on the so-called “conservative” evangelicals. Furthermore, Central is contending for students with a number of seminaries. Piper's for example that is essentially just around the corner from Central.
The closing of CBS has taken most by surprise in the sense of closing far sooner than one might have expected. The main point of my thinking is that CBS, NIU and Central have drifted far from their original moorings. IMO, NIU and Central will close.
As I closed the article above, “Northland and Central will not survive having abandoned their fundamental heritage, disdain for those who have gone before, and pursuing a path toward ‘conservative’ evangelicalism.”
Kind regards,
LM
I guess our differences lie in what we discern as conservative. IMO, modern music and a Calvinistic leaning is not what makes one liberal leaning. It just seems we (fundamentalists) look for places to separate more quickly than we look for common belief and unity. You may see that as avoiding the question, but that's what I see. To me, because conservative evangelicals are basically fundamental doctrinally and have many sound preachers, it causes fundamentalists to be fearful. To be honest, if not for the preaching of our conservative evangelical brothers, I would have run away from Fundamentalism. Yet, because of it, I have remained in it. I'm not mad at Fundamentalists at all, I just don't understand their utter dislike of conservative evangelicals. We Fundamentalists have much to learn from them.
DeleteI'm sorry you feel that way, Lou. When I look squarely at what is today Fundamentalism and what we've labeled conservative evangelicalism, I find myself looking at Fundamentalism and wishing it's heart was like conservative evangelicalism. The danger I see is Fundamentalists use fear to keep people from listening to the preaching of Piper, Dever, Platt, Chandler, DeYoung, etc. I say that because, if you listen to those men, you cannot help but be helped. So, instead of being informed listeners, many Fundamental pastors NEVER listen to these men preach and read blogs like this and hear other Fundamentalist sources call these men out ignorantly before their people so that all people do is hear a name of one of those men and say,"Ohhh, they're bad." It really is that simple in how it works. My biggest frustration was when I began to listen and found I was being told things that weren't straight up. That's a problem....to me.
DeleteGod Bless,
Jay Edwards
Brother, we'll agree to disagree charitably. There are many godly men in fundamental circles who are fine expositors of the Word of God. Evangelists, pastors and teachers who unlike the evangelicals do not knowingly disobey the Word of God to enter into cooperative efforts with unbelievers and/or disobedient brethren. Personally I do not care what else they have to say when in doctrine and/or practice they are not an ensample that we should be heaping lavish praise on or seek to emulate.
Delete“Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample,” (Phil. 3:17).
“In Philippians 3:17 the word ‘mark’ appears, but in an entirely different context [than Rom. 16:17]. In the Philippians passage Paul instructs believers to be ‘followers’ of those who set the proper example. Paul instructs the believers to “mark” those who by their life demonstrate what biblical Christianity is and then to imitate those persons. In this usage of the word ‘mark,’ believers are to scrutinize spiritual men and women and imitate them. This is the positive side of marking for the purpose of identifying and imitating the pattern of godly men and women. Paul could set the kind of example to imitate, not many can today. In Philippians 3:17 Paul refers to more than just himself. From other passages we might conclude that Paul had in mind Timothy and Epaphroditus who also set that pattern to be imitated.” (IDOTG: Biblical Answers to Lordship Salvation, pp. 235-236.)
The doctrinal aberrations and acts of ecumenical compromise of Mohler, Dever, Piper, MacArthur, Duncan, et.al., are not minor things, being done by novices in the ministry. These are grievous errors being committed by men who are highly trained in the Word of God. For their on-going practice of, and unrepentant hearts, over teaching false doctrine and ecumenical compromise they must be “withdrawn from,” (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15) “marked and avoided” (Rom. 16:17-18).
Finally, as I noted to another in the thread above: These men you name are all advocates of the false interpretation of the gospel known as Lordship Salvation. On that alone we cannot cooperate with or encourage others to sit under their teaching ministry. That goes for any man, in any circle of fellowship, who believes, preaches and defends Lordship Salvation.
Kind regards,
LM
Brother Jay: The following was my first reply to you, had to edit an error with a Scripture link. Sorry for the now reverse order.
DeleteI appreciate that you’ve shared your perspective, but I have to disagree with much of it. There are sharp differences between what I will call balanced Fundamentalists and those I refer to as, so-called “conservative” evangelicals. The difference is primarily doctrinal. It essentially boils down to, as it has with new Evangelicals from previous generations, how a man will apply the God-given mandates for separation.
Now, before I leave doctrine I want to add that the Lordship Salvation (LS) interpretation of the gospel is the one great divide. LS is a false gospel! LS corrupts the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3) and frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21). There can be NO fellowship with men who differ on the gospel. And to a man the evangelicals believe, preach and defend LS’s false message. This, for many of us in Fundamental circles, necessitates separation and overrides every other consideration for fellowship.
Those things said, you closed with, “We Fundamentalists have much to learn from them.” Maybe, but at what cost? Have you read the article immediately preceding this one? Al Mohler has now joined John Piper in recognizing and embracing the ministry of Rick warren. Prior to that we saw Al Mohler sign the Manhattan Declaration (which he has never repented of) and he sat as chair for the Louisville Billy Graham crusade. Al Mohler is just one among many of the evangelicals who have serious issues like his in their ministries. The problem is exacerbated because men like Kevin Bauder and Dave Doran heap their lavish praise on those men who little or no warning about the obvious issues with Piper, Mohler, Dever, Duncan.... Because of that our next generation is falling into an ecumenical trap. And they won’t stop with being what is called “conservative,” some will and have already gone further and become fully new evangelical.
Thanks again for your input.
LM
Lou, Unfortunately, this is going on in Christian schools throughout as well. Pastors and Christian school leadership think if they lower the standards of excellence (dress, music, respect to authority, etc.) it will draw more students to their school. Matt Olson and others like him believe we shouldn't enforce our "preferences of standards" on these kids but allow the Holy Spirit to teach them "what is right in their own eyes." It's proving to be a recipe for disaster.
ReplyDeleteWe do recognize the trend, and the results have been sad, but not unpredictable. I am not against some flexibility, but lines need to be drawn somewhere, with an accountability especially for the young because without they will always go way too far.
DeleteThanks for the input.
LM
It is sad to see schools such as these fall and disappear. However, if they chose to leave their foundation stones, fail to train men to Preach the Word, refuse to have a passion for souls, embrace compromise and reject truth..It is THE BEST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN! I personally am, with tears, praying that places like Calvary and the compromisers who follow them will either get right or close down. Either way, it would glorify God and put everyone out of their misery! Dwight Smith, Evangelist
ReplyDeleteDwight: I am not saddened to see a school close down that has gone the way of new evangelical like compromise. There are enough NE schools as it is. One less, especially one that was never founded to be what it had become, will not be missed.
DeleteLou
I see an analogy in all of this when comparing the closing of CBS to that of the Republican Party (GOP). They are becoming increasingly irrelevant in American culture and politics because they have alienated their conservative base. The same thing happened to CBS, and is happening to Central and NIU. When will these institutions learn that they cannot poke their fingers in the eyes of their Fundamentalist base and then expect us to stand there and keep letting them do it to us. Eventually, we get the point of the poking: they don't want us around anymore, so we move on.
ReplyDeleteLou, I concur with your article completely. You nailed it!!
A good analogy. I have had enough of the RINO segment of the Republican party as well.
DeleteLou
To make the argument that Lansdale closed its doors because of their "neo-evangelical slide" ignores so many obvious facts that it's hard to be taken seriously. I'm sure it'll get the water cooler talk going "Did you hear Lansdale closed?" "Yea, it was that neo slide that did them in." etc
ReplyDeleteThe reality is that economics just caught up with them. Many smaller schools (particularly local church based) are really struggling finanically. This goes from high schools all the way to seminaries. The costs are going up, the competition is going up (BJU, Marantha, Pensacola, BBC, Faith, etc all have their own seminaries now), and the fundamentalist pool is shrinking. Many students from these schools are exploring other evangelical options, and those with established families are looking increasingly to the internet for education. Lansdale (like Northland) has for years relied on donations to fill in the shortfall.
I'm not saying that Lansdale didn't shift course on some things, but I am saying that to claim that Lansdale closed BECAUSE they shifted course is just not supported with any facts. If they would've grown in numbers, you would've said "it's because they shifted and are catering to the wolves."
I'm not a big commentor on blogs, but found this article comment worthy.
While there are other factors for Calvary Baptist Seminary (CBS) closing (financial, more competition) CBS is closing largely because it slid into the new evangelical orbit. Calvary was involved in starting churches like “The Gathering Place” in Clearwater, Florida. Also, Calvary was less militant on their doctrine than other seminaries and they were less militant on their practice.
DeleteThere is a no way former Calvary alumnus and past supporters of the once fundamental, separatist school would recommend CBS to a prospective student. There is no way they’d send financial support to CBS. There is no way CBS could compete with the long time well-established new evangelical schools like Gordon-Conwell (GC), which btw way Lansdale hosted Haddon Robison and Mark Dever from. That was so foolish. Invite highly recognized faculty from the very kind of seminary you’re trying to become and put them in front of your own student body. Talking about a recruiting op not to be missed by GC.
Another factor is that MBBC started their seminary a few years ago and like BJU they are holding on to many of their grads from college, some of whom would have enrolled in other schools.
Finally, there was no chance that Calvary was going to grow. Calvary had no better chance than Pillsbury, or TTU to have grown. No better chance than Northland will survive its radical shift, which is as far as TTU had gone. Central (MN) will close. All of these have or are about to suffer the same fate.
That’s just how I see it because that is the historic pattern for the once fundamental, Baptistic separatist schools that abandons their base and core founding principles.
LM
Sad to report that BJU Seminary enrollment is under 200 this year. In my final year (1975), we had 1,100. For whatever reason, the glory has departed.
DeleteLou,
ReplyDeleteAppreciate the article and the postings. I am tired of hearing the whining of some who say that we should take the "good" that the evangelicals have without any disclaimers about the bad that comes along. My ministry is not the weaker or lacking because I've not kept up with the latest greatest book, conference, etc. put on by Piper, Mohler, Platt, Lawson, JMac, or any other evangelical. Doesn't matter whether the decade is the 80's or now in the second decade of the 21st century, the evangelical doesn't really have anything to offer the Fundamentalists that he doesn't already have.
Brian:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, “I am tired of hearing the whining of some who say that we should take the "good" that the evangelicals have without any disclaimers about the bad that comes along.”
Agreed!
From what I have observed over the last few years all that the so-called “conservative” evangelicals have to offer (in addition to aberrant theology and worldliness) is a bridge to New Evangelicalism. And sadly some of our men have or are going there because certain men who still like to circulate in fundamental circles have showed younger men the way to the evangelicals with little or no warning about the obvious pitfalls.
Lou
Lou,
ReplyDeleteThe basic problem with conservative evangelicals is that they love worldliness and hate Biblical separation. That may seem simplistic to some but when you look at what many of them embrace....New Calvinism, tolerance toward unbiblical behavior, Hollywood,CCM,Christian Rock, worldly dress, etc., their chronic whining about "fundamentalists", their mixing of the authority of the Bible with their endless pontificating that "everyone's opinion has equal value", and finally their total mocking of separation in favor of "consensus" tells their story.
You are absolutely right that more closures of former fundamentalist schools are forthcoming. Northland, TTU, Clearwater lead the list. We do not rejoice at their demise, but if they compromise with the world having rejected Biblical separation where is their distinctiveness? They are no different than Moody, Liberty, or Wheaton.
"They are no different than Moody, Liberty, or Wheaton."
DeleteAmen! And the church of Jesus Christ does need any more of that kind of counterfeit.
LM
Lou,
ReplyDeleteYour argument is spot on. I believe we'll see this "predictable and repeatable" cycle only speed up over the next five to ten years. I'm very sorry to say that it looks like my own school, Bob Jones University, is already on the same path as some of these others. When it comes to trying to gauge the "mood" of the university and its leadership, it feels eerily like Northland just a few years ago: A lot of people excited about "change," but no one really sure what this "change" is supposed to represent and--more importantly--where it's going to lead the institution.
Predictable. Repeatable. It all comes back to those two words.
My 2 children just graduated BJU recently. What you say is true, John. Both my husband and I went there many years ago, and it is nothing like the way it was. My son contends that it is already new evangelical. I have been shocked of reports of what has been happening there-in part a reaction, I believe, to past mistakes.
DeleteWould you please explain why your son "contends that [BJU] is already new evangelical"? From my post below you can see that I've heard concerns in the past but I've not heard anything specific as to why these concerns are being expressed. I'm not just trying to dig up dirt. I graduated from BJ with a M.Div. more than 20 years ago and thoroughly loved my time there and my professors. In a few years my wife and I will be looking at how to direct our children regarding further education. I know that the Lord can direct our steps in ignorance and protect us from the unknown but generally making decisions with as much knowledge as possible is better. I'm not interested in rumors. Your first hand experience is the only reason I'd solicit your view point. I appreciate your desire to remain anonymous and you may be hesitant to post anything public. Lou can give you my email address if you'd prefer.
DeleteBTW, Lou, I did receive a private email response to my post below. I'm not at liberty to share it but it was helpful.
Dan Sehested
Fwiw, I do not have a person's email address unless they make it available here or share it by other means.
DeleteLM
Gentlemen: Without getting too bogged down in details or really minute differences, what Bible Colleges/Seminaries out do you recommend to your young people, whether they are going into vocational ministry or whether you want them to get a year or two of a strong Bible College foundation before they pursue other professional training? (This is NOT a "trick" or "sarcastic" question.)In other words, I would be interested to hear what schools you believe "get it" with healthy doctrine AND reasonable, wholesome standards in conduct, music, and general deportment.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
Dana Everson
I too am very interested in hearing some thoughts on this question. Earlier in the summer I asked a brother whose ministry involves extensive contact with teens what colleges he could recommend. He had a very difficult time. He named one place and when I expressed a concern he confessed that he wouldn't send his kids there either. He named BJU as still being strong in the classroom but expressed concern about the influence in the dorms. Apparently there are young people from so many different "persuasions" that he recommended you find a good strong mentor for your teen who can look after and counteract such influences. Several years ago a well known pastor told me, in the context of talking about the direction of NIU and others, that he thinks it may be time for local churches to totally under take the training of young people (the context was also for ministry training, not secular vocations). I appreciate Brother Everson's sincerity in asking this question and suspect that there are many who would appreciate some serious thoughts. We all know that a perfect place doesn't exist so I'm not expecting an absolute answer. But some guidelines would be helpful. Thanks.
DeleteYes Brother Dan!
Delete"...it may be time for local churches to totally under take the training of young people (the context was also for ministry training, not secular vocations)."
I have heard similar comments. A church or a group of like-minded churches forming a Bible institute specifically designed to train people for ministry is a reality in a couple of situations that I have become aware of. Are they able to have all the "big name" guest speakers come? No. Are they able to provide huge library, dormitory, or other kinds of facilities that an established 500+ student college might be able to provide? No. Are they able to provide traveling sports teams, produce music CD's, or claim graduates all over the world? No, not likely. Will a small work have some of the same challenges as the bigger college? Of course.
BUT...will the smaller group or even single church have more direct control over what is taught doctrinally and practically...? YES. Can problems be dealt with more directly and immediately? YES. Is it easier to steer a small boat than a big ship? Yes, usually.
What IS a shame is the investment made by many people into schools that later left their original direction, leaving wonderful facilities, properties, and programs for the compromisers to take over. What a waste. I guess each student/parent/pastor needs to review the question: "Is it worth it for a young person to get all the technology and exposure to a broad cross section of Christianity, yet risk the watering down or even loss of their faith and practice which was instilled in them by their parents/church family?"
There must be some schools that (though not perfect) have A) solid Bible doctrine B) promote conservative and appropriate standards of modesty, worship, music, and character, AND
C) have a true heart for Christian service in missions, evangelism, discipleship, and just loving people to the Lord.
Is the Bible college movement dying out? Is it going the same way as much of the Christian day school movement? How will we prepare the next generation of leaders who will preach, teach, and reach? What are the thoughts of the theologians and thinkers out there? Any comments?
Dana Everson
Lou,
ReplyDeleteIt's been more than two full weeks since Dana Everson posted his request and there has been no response. This is what I expected would happen, though I hoped not. I suppose that there may be several reasons for this lack of response but I fear that one of two reasons may be in the forefront. One, that there just aren't any schools that "get it", or two, that there is such a critical atmosphere that even if someone has a school in mind that they support, they know that to say something in a public forum would bring a response that they don't want to deal with.
It is true that bloggers tend to have a bad reputation. Sometimes it is well deserved. On one blog a couple of years ago people like me were characterized as "inbred, [and therefore] retarded Pharisees". While I have not always agreed with everything I've read here, I have felt that you've tried to maintain a level of brotherly respect.
The truth is that there are no perfect schools. The question remains, are there any schools to which churches can send their young people with a reasonable expectation that those who graduate will return to their home churches stronger in the faith and knowledge of Jesus Christ, having not been led into standards and practices that contradict or compromise the positions of their home church? I know that that is a tall order because fundamental Baptists are a very diverse group. Maybe the thinking of the "well known pastor" that I mentioned in the previous post is the direction that we need to move towards.
Dan Sehested
Hello Dan:
DeleteYou made some very salient points in your notes above. As you noted the mention of a certain school might bring down unwanted and unwarranted criticism that isn't worth dealing with. I appreciate you noting that I attempt to maintain a "brotherly respect" here. Truth is, most of the time that means I have to NOT allow certain men and/or anonymous comments to appear here. Every week I have to delete some comments submitted here because I am not going to allow for personal attacks, harsh rhetoric or grand-standing for a pet position and more.
The Sharper Iron site has been, from its inception, notorious for vilifying people like you and me while claiming to be for and about fundamentalism. I opened a second blog because of what was and still does go on at SI. See, Sharper Iron: In the Iron Skillet
"No perfect schools" is right because there are no perfect people. You wrote, "The question remains, are there any schools to which churches can send their young people with a reasonable expectation that those who graduate will return to their home churches stronger in the faith and knowledge of Jesus Christ, having not been led into standards and practices that contradict or compromise the positions of their home church?"
That has been one of the chief concerns these past 10 years or more. I will also say that it doesn't take as long as graduation for a young person's doctrine, standards and practices to be altered (contradicted/compromised) from what he/she learned in the home and home church. It can and I have seen it done in just one semester.
IMO, the radical and until recent years deception/hidden/unspoken, changes that Matt Olson enacted at Northland International University raised what I think is a good awareness. I mean that we need to be tuned into the schools we support and/or send our young people to. The schools need to be open, and transparent with parents, pastors and the students.
Thanks for your input, much appreciated.
Lou
Eric:
ReplyDeleteWe appreciate your input. Fwiw, the "fundamentalism of Jack Hyles" was/is an aberration of the worst sort in its particular direction.
Kind regards,
LM
Mr. Martuneac,
ReplyDeleteI am also late to this conversion, but feel I must contribute. I graduated from Calvary, and have to say that your analysis suffers from the classic error, "Post hoc ergo propter hoc." You have offered evidence to support your claim that Calvary has moved to a more conservative evangelical position. I would agree with your analysis. I disagree with your belief that this is contrary to clear biblical teaching, but we can graciously agree to disagree.
However, your article provides no proof that the closure of Calvary has anything to do with its doctrinal positions. You have completely disregarded other cause and effect explanations. Your explanation fits the outcome you clearly desire, so in your mind it must be true. Since you state that it is your opinion, I guess that is your intention.
I would ask one question: If this is your standard analysis and decision making model, how many other conclusions have you come to that are flawed?
I am still grieving over the closure of Calvary. It is no small thing for those who have seen the good work the seminary has done. It is hurtful when someone so casually, and with an attitude of, "I told you so," chimes in.
Glenn Hager
Glenn:
DeleteI appreciate your concern on the closing of Calvary. It is, however, irrefutable that Calvary is closing in part, and imo large part, for having abandoned its biblical roots in regard to authentic “militant” biblical separation. The co-called “conservative evangelicalism you mention is far more in the New evangelical sphere, which is becoming increasingly clear as the weeks and months go by. Look at the way “conservative” evangelical Al Mohler has gone. He joins hands with Rick Warren; he has joined hands with the Mormon Church. Having Mark Dever and then Haddon Robinson on the platform made it indelibly clear that Calvary decided to join hands with the New evangelical camp.
I am aware of the “business” issue(s), such as Internet offering issue that contributed to the decision to close, but it is undeniable the Calvary has betrayed its alumni by betraying the biblical commands to “withdraw from,” (2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15) “mark and avoid” (Rom. 16:17). Once the alumni are betrayed, once an institution's foundational roots are cut out from under it, it is just a matter of time before you are through.
It is tragic that Calvary is closing, but with its leadership having become bent on supporting New Evangelicalism, it is best and fitting that the school close for sake of the church of Jesus Christ.
LM
I saw the transformation of Calvary seminary firsthand and this article is spot on. Unfortunately the leadership you mention seemed to be more interested in being validated by some of the mainstream evangelicals than sticking with the principles they were trained under and passing them on to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. I was there when Sam was taking a class with Haddon Robinson and he was star struck like he had just met Elvis. A culture began to spread that we all needed to go to Westminster or another "accredited" seminary to learn what the "experts" were doing. I remember thinking "If I wanted that why would I be here?". Regardless, the desire to get the validation of the brightest and the best of the mainstream thinkers seemed to begin to drive the decisions of the seminary and even the church. My opinion is that these men fell prey to the desire to be somebody and became very focused on their own motivations and what they wanted out of life. Unfortunately they've gotten the outcome of what happens when you do things that way. Its obvious they are upset about the failure and they have tried to put the best face forward on the closure by calling it a success or celebration. The reality is that they are accountable for the failure of the seminary and just won't own up to it. Instead they in effect blame God by saying that He has other plans. They also say that Dr. E.R. Jordan would have been on board but there is no way Chief would have ever agreed to bring on a Calvinist professor and this desperate move right before closing for good just shows how off the focus has been and the disregard for what Calvary has always been. There was even a letter that was sent to Alumni when that decision was made stating that Calvary "had always leaned more towards Calvinism" and that this wasn't a bad thing. Regardless of your views on the subject this was an outright lie and misrepresentation of the historic position of the seminary and insulting the alumni and the memory of Chief. In the end I believe a lot of these men, especially Harbin and McLain, whether they realized it or not saw the seminary as serving them instead of the other way around. They remade it in their image and the outcome was a small group of relatives and yes men organized in a mutual admiration society. No one will pay good money to be trained under that system- where insiders get preferred treatment and outsiders get shunned or made to feel inferior. This is a tragedy and a direct result of losing focus on what the seminary was supposed to be. Chief, with all of his eccentricities, loved people and was passionate about training young men for the ministry and about leading people to Christ. Unfortunately the men who followed him thought they were smarter and could do it better but clearly they were wrong.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment, I have posted it to the main page of my blog. See, Calvary Baptist Seminary: “They are Accountable for Failure and Won’t Own Up to It”
DeleteLM