http://www.reporternews.com/news/2009/dec/08/acu-prepares-to-welcome-and-interview-finalists/
Not sure if this is the kind of news folks want to read. ACU is interviewing President candidates for the school. Notice this quote from the article “Is that (Church of Christ affiliation) something that should be preserved or do the candidates think it is time to move away from that connection?” Pamplin said he wants to know. “Specifically, should the church of Christ membership requirement for board members and faculty members be maintained or not?”
I believe the school has been going the wrong way for decades. But this is an outright admission that they are officially thinking of dropping the relationship. Yet they also state they want to be the premier Christian University in the nation. That statement tells a great deal.
Kim Pamplin, 
Richard Mansel 8:47 pm on December 9, 2009 Permalink |
Unbelievable. I mean it isn’t surprising from the way they have conducted themselves. But, still, to see it in print in such a blatant repudiation of truth is still staggering. They apparently believe Christians are in denominations, as well. *sigh*
Mike Riley 8:49 pm on December 9, 2009 Permalink |
About 40 years ago, this question would have not even surfaced among faithful followers of Christ. We can now plainly see what two generations of not strictly adhering to the spiritual principles found in the saving gospel of Christ, is doing to the Lord’s church.
It’s obvious to me that the leadership at ACU wants churches of Christ to be like the denominations around about them (cf. 1 Samuel 8:1-7). They may not say it outright, but that’s what they are promoting by this statement in the article: “it is time to move away from that connection.”
Randal Matheny 9:49 pm on December 9, 2009 Permalink |
I emailed Dr. Pamplin and asked him for clarifications about his statements in yesterday’s newspaper report.
Randal Matheny 11:43 pm on December 9, 2009 Permalink |
I already heard back from Dr. Pamplin. I’ve asked him permission to share his clarification in places I haunt on the Internet. Suffice it to say, however, that he does not support the removal of the requirement that board members and faculty be members of the church.
Weylan Deaver 10:20 pm on December 9, 2009 Permalink |
More evidence that a school should die with its founder?
Randal Matheny 12:08 am on December 10, 2009 Permalink |
I’ve often thought about that, Weylan. And other ministries, as well. Mine, for instance.
Kim Pamplin 3:36 pm on December 10, 2009 Permalink |
Here is a question sent to me by Emily Peters, the Abilene Reporter-News writer, together with a portion of the exact text that I emailed to her.
Peters: “What kind of questions might the faculty want to ask incoming presidential finalists?”
Pamplin: “Some of the questions that faculty members will ask relate to how the candidates perceive ACU’s continued relationship with the churches of Christ. Is that something that should be preserved or do the candidates think it is time to move away from that connection? Specifically, should the church of Christ membership requirement for board members and faculty members be maintained or not?”
I and many of my colleagues are not encouraging a move away from CofC. However, we want to know what the candidates’ views are because their opinions will greatly affect the future of the university. I’m sure you agree that we absolutely must ask these questions of these candidates.
mtmcvb: The title of this post, “Must Christian College President be a Christian,” seems to be extended from my comments. However, I believe you will agree that I never made any statement regarding whether or not the current presidential candidates should be members of the church of Christ. In fact, the prospectus for the position is very clear about this requirement.
Your statement, “But this is an outright admission that they are officially thinking of dropping the relationship,” attaches “official” to my words in the interview. I should clarify that the requirements for full-time faculty and board members to be active members of a church of Christ are set by the board, and only they can make that change. At any rate, I can only speak as a faculty leader. I cannot speak officially for the university.
Mr. Riley, I can see how my comments might have been misinterpreted, but I can assure you that I absolutely did not mean to imply that I think “it is time to move away from that connection.” I personally believe that the CofC requirement for faculty and board members should be retained. I think we must ask these questions to candidates, and I’m guessing you would ask these questions also if you believe that the CofC relationship is important to maintain.
Thanks to Mr. Matheny for bringing me into this conversation. I would be happy to continue to discuss my views with you if you like.
Kim Pamplin
Chair Elect of the Faculty Senate
ACU
Richard Mansel 7:34 pm on December 10, 2009 Permalink |
Thank you for your reply Dr. Pamplin, but it fails to solve all of the problems.
You say that you believe that the next President should be a member of the Church of Christ. That is good. But it by no means resolves the problem. The fact that it is under consideration that the next President does not have to be a member of the Lord’s Church is a serious issue. That it is even under consideration may have serious repercussions.
It may create a perception in the minds of their students about how they should view the importance of the church. If you want to be one of the premier Christian universities in America and the President isn’t a Christian, then do you not open yourselves up to saying that people outside of the Church are Christians? How is that Biblical?
There is a much different definition of the Church and of a Christian emerging in the Church and that is very worrisome. This is opening a door that you may not be able to close again.
Kim Pamplin 2:01 pm on December 11, 2009 Permalink
The next president of ACU must be an active member of a church of Christ. This requirement is not under consideration. It is firm. No one has suggested that our next president might not be a member of the Lord’s church.