Online Petition Seeks Resolution of BJU's Interracial Dating Scam

Years ago, in 1983, Charles Underwood, first director of Church Planting at BJU, penned an Open Letter to Bob Jones III. At the end of the letter was a form, a petition of sorts, that readers could sign and send to BJU to express their disapproval for the actions of the Joneses and their management of BJU.

I considered Underwood's letter to Bob Jones III to be so insightful - and so up to date in its observations - that I engaged a transcriptionist to type the body of the letter so that I could include it in BJU Exposed. There is a direct link to the Open Letter on this page.

I don't know how widely Underwood's letter was circulated or how many people signed and sent in petitions as a result of his letter. I do know that anyone associated with such a letter of reproof and rebuke directed toward the Joneses/BJU could be sure they would be blackballed. BJU was able to limit the impact of such letters because there was not a mechanism to circulate the information widely.

Enter the WorldWideWeb! The landscape has changed and anyone with a computer can have access to everyone else who is connected to the web. BJU can no longer control information or access to their constituency.

Pleasereconcile.blogspot has set up a link to a petition that can be "signed" online. The letter, apparently a draft, reads as follows:

Dear Stephen Jones, Bob Jones University Board of Trustees, and Administration:
.
.
We are Bob Jones University alumni and students who care deeply about our alma mater. We recognize that God has used the university in our lives for good, and we pray that God preserves the university and uses it in the lives of those who come after us. We value our time there, the many wonderful faculty and staff members who taught us and touched our lives, the godly friends we met, and the school's fearless stand for Jesus Christ.
.
.
We are troubled, though, by certain aspects of the school’s reputation regarding its attitude toward race. The school is widely known as segregationist, bigoted, and racist. Some of us were not aware of this reputation while we attended the university and were baffled when we encountered negative perceptions from others after we graduated. Our ignorance may be to the University’s credit, since it suggests that the actual practices of the University have improved beyond the older perceptions that persist in the world at large.
.
.
Nevertheless, the reputation remains. We see it in people's faces and hear it in their comments and reactions upon learning where we went to school. Sometimes we encounter it in job interviews--troubling times to be confronted about racial prejudice. For some of us, employees suspect our motives as employers. Those of us who are ministers and spiritual leaders must explain our association with the university to minority congregants. All of us are charged to present the gospel, but must now do so in the context of this stigma. After a period of objective discussion and research, we begin to understand the origin of these negative impressions.
.
.
The University's historical position on race is deeply troubling, and some of that history is disturbingly recent. Stories of its founding leaders having connections to notoriously bigoted characters and organizations. Married black students were not admitted until 1971, and unmarried black students were not admitted until 1975. Even then a ban on interracial relationships lasted into the twenty-first century. Records from those years include vicious and embarrassing statements from people representing the University in an official capacity. The individuals on the receiving end of this treatment recounted those experiences to their tight-knit communities, and their stories provided a public record of the University's attitude toward minorities. Finally, many of us have personally seen actions or heard statements from current members of the University community which seem to indicate that sensitivity toward this issue is not a priority of its administration or representatives.
.
.
We realize that other institutions have made mistakes as well. We do not excuse their mistakes, but neither are we concerned with them. They are responsible for what they have done, and many of them have issued public statements of regret and apology and have taken dramatic steps to demonstrate their commitment to change. Bob Jones University, to our knowledge, has never done so. We can find no record of a statement that admits that the university’s historical position on race, while sincere, was mistaken, and God has granted a better perspective. We are writing to request that such a statement be made, backed up by concrete actions that demonstrate its seriousness.
.
.
We hope and believe that such a statement would be sincere and accurate. We recognize that it may be difficult to make and realize that it may attract criticism from other corners. That is why we want you to know that should such a statement be made, we will support it completely and joyfully. We hope that you will choose to address this issue because of your own conviction that all people, regardless of their skin color or ethnicity, are made in the image of God and that God desires unity in His Church. We request this not just to remove stumbling blocks in our dealings with others, or to improve appraisals of our resumes (though we believe it will do both). We pray that you will do this, most of all, because it will be doing right, and showing forth a true demonstration of the love and humility that God desires from His people.
.
.
Sincerely yours,

First, those who drafted this petition are to be commended. Finally, someone is taking some initiative! It is thoughtfully composed and it has been well-received by some within the University family.

I think the petition glosses over the issue of Bob Jones III's involvement in this controversy. It would have been better, more biblical after the Pauline example in correcting Peter in Galatians 2, to have included Bob Jones III as a specific recipient. As such, it should have forthrightly addressed Bob Jones III's duplicity and deceit in his handling of the interracial dating ban scam.

I also have reservations about the statement: "We can find no record of a statement that admits that the university’s historical position on race, while sincere, was mistaken, and God has granted a better perspective."

Based upon my review of the Joneses'/BJU's historical position on race, I did not detect a "sincere" element to their position or the way they prosecuted their position. Any "mistake" the Joneses made regarding this issue seemed to be pre-meditated, calculated, and deliberate.

At any rate, if you think the Joneses/BJU are past the interracial dating rule controversy, take a look at the sign-in sheet and the comments left by the signers.

Pleaserconcile includes a copy of particularly scathing correspondence from Bob Jones Jr. to a black preacher, Reverend Banks.

Pleasereconcile's petition drive has been discussed on the Sharperiron debate forum here. I found the discussions very interesting as they revealed current attitudes of graduates toward this issue. Unfortunately, the thread has been closed because it reached a 20 page-limit.

Mark

Comments

[Bill Lamb]

Mark,

I think the author of the petition showed wisdom in addressing the letter to Steve Jones and leaving Dr. Jones III out of it. Any changes that come about very likely will occur AFTER Dr. Bob Jones III is off the scene at BJU. A contentious petition would probably result in offending Steve Jones and drive a wedge that may be impossible to remove. I think the gracious petition as written will not do so.

Bill Lamb

Editor comments: I disagree on a number of levels.

First, the author[s] of the petition are to be commended. This petition recognizes the 10,000 lb. elephant that has been in BJU's parlor for decades. It hasn't been resolved and it will not be resolved by simply ignoring it. I hope those who direct the affairs of BJU will view this petition as an opportunity rather than as a threat to their image.

I disagree with your premise that a forthright approach confronting Bob Jones III would ipso facto constitute a "contentious petition".

Further, Jones III is the chairman of the board; he is not "out of it" and, in fact, he will be calling the shots for the next 10 to 20 years. He is very much involved and has been very much involved since the '60's.

Third, like the apostle Peter in Galatians 2, Jones III has caused great confusion within fundamentalism in this area. He has caused divisions where God did not. The facts are quite clear: Jones III has repeatedly invoked God's Word, the Name of Jesus Christ, and heaven to support his bigotry. Under Bob III's leadership, and behind the cloak of the Gospel of Christ, people have been fired, students have been expelled (and have had such censures entered into their transcripts), ostracized, etc.

Bob Jones III has endeavored to deceive the University family and the public about the nature and history of his interracial dating ban for years, most dramatically on Larry King Live.

Bob Jones III assumed the mantle of statesman/prophet. He has a paid staff of religious wisemen. He exerts authority over others. In that capacity, he stated that God's Word supported his position. He fought to maintain that position all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. When he lost, he cursed the Supreme Court as enemies of Jesus Christ, God's Word, and Heaven. He publicly stated he would hold to his policy and stated his was a "Bible policy". Without admitting that his policy was wrong, begging forgiveness from those harmed by his policy, he tried to characterize his position as "meaningless" and "insignificant". When a religious leader acts in such a way, his credibility is effectively destroyed in the eyes of everyone who trusted him.

After Bob Jones III's approach to the interracial dating controversy, who in their right mind would trust Bob Jones III to speak on "Bible policy" as it relates to other controversies such as Bible translations, secondary separation, soteriology, prophecy, Masonry, Calvinism/Armenianism, etc.?

Certainly, he wouldn't have been selected for leadership with the likes of Stephen in Acts 6 based up his established reputation. Were he the CEO of a secular corporation, he would have been fired or forced to resign in disgrace.

Old Testament prophets who falsely invoked the name of God ("thus saith the Lord") were put to death. Highly-religious people like Jones III hate the light lest their deeds be made manifest. If we do not confront wrongdoing, could the argument not be made that our silence makes us tacit partakers in his evil deeds by not rebuking him? I believe we have a responsibility to demonstrate to an onlooking world that fundamentalist Christians, who are quick to point out the world's faults, also have the integrity to correct our own.

In Acts 7, Stephen was unequivocating in his assessment of the Libertines. In Galatians 2, Paul was unequivocating in his forthright treatment of Peter. Peter responded positively. Paul's corrections were not always met with such success. Neither were Christ's. (Matt. 15 and 23)

I hope Bob Jones University responds to this petition positively. We'll see.

(Bill, I re-re-worded my original post as a result of your comments. Perhaps I said it better the second or third time around.)

[Christopher Graves]

Frankly, I do not see anything wrong with the previous policy banning interracial dating. Do you want a mono-cultural world where there is a lack of a clear demarcation among races, ethnicities, and nationalities? I think it is time that we drop the liberal/integrationist approach to race that has been an abysmal failure. Consider the recent study by Robert Putnam showing that racial diversity within a community fosters social isolation.

I propose that we embrace a sort of conservative multi-culturalism such as that advocated by Edmund Burke that values all traditions and races as a God-given gift. Instead of viewing race as a curse, let us each embrace our own racial identity as a bond with a particular people in a particular locale. I would agree that we do need to emphasize the moral equality of all people and the importance of maintaining each race and culture.

[Concerned citizen]

I haave emailed Dr. Putnam regarding this use of his thesis. We shall see if he agrees with Mr. Graves' diagnosis, or if he was cited as authoritas ex machina.

[Concerned citizen, Jonathan Henry]

Dear Mr. Graves,

I received a reply from Dr. Putnam, which includes the follows:

"The reference in the quotation you cite is a misstatement and misuse of my work. You can read my work yourself at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x ."

In other words, the weight that you borrowed from his name to support your thesis should now be seen as working against your thesis. If you are truly dedicated to your cause of segregation, your task is to discredit Dr. Putnam and his research.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Henry, a concerned citizen

Editor: Thanks, Jon. There's nothing like going to the source to find out the truth.

[Wesley Roy]

It is a shame that God's people are more concerned about the skin color of the person that marries their daughter or son than their doctrinal stand and love of the Lord.