“I accepted the Lord Jesus as my Lord and Savior at the age of 12,” Starr recalled, noting his father baptized him. “I remained in the Churches of Christ tradition through high school.”

“But beginning at about the age of 18, I began having questions about certain practices, beginning with instrumental music,” which the Churches of Christ do not allow in worship services, he said. “As time wore on, I found myself moving into the larger evangelical world.”

Later on, Starr commented that he liked Baptist distinctives, and Baptists views about baptism. Although, he said nothing about getting baptised in his new Baptist Church that he plans to join. So, he has had a Church of Christ baptism…which is for the washing away of their sins! And, he seemed to be saying that instrumental music was one of the reasons he wondered away from the Campbellite faith. And, his wife? from a Jewish background…what of her baptism?

This just gets more interesting by the minute.

David

I believe no one is either speaking negatively toward or singing the accolades of Mr. Starr. We have merely pointed out that a school that prides itself on being Baptist to the extent they require their president, regardless of his personal beliefs, to become part of a Baptist church.

Blessings,
Tim

From what I understand, Lenin soured big time on religion of any sort after he saw his dad join a Church just to make business contacts. Communism was born out of such disingenuous joining of Churches. Now, I dont Starr, nor his wife; and if they are seriously joining a Baptist Church, because of their convictions…then, amen! But, if they’re joining to “just take the job,” then that’s terrible.

And, yes, Craig, as Baptists, and as Americans, we do have the freedom to do a lot of things that arent right…that arent good… that arent the best. We even have the freedom to things that are sinful, in this land of the free and the brave. Still dont make it right.

And, like Bart is saying, if Baylor doesnt want to Baptist anymore; then fine. Dont be Baptist. Bart thinks that they stopped being a Baptist school a long time ago. If so, then Starr was a great hire. But, they need to quit claiming to be Baptist, and they need to certainly stop requiring their Presidents to belong to a Baptist Church.

DAvid

David

Thanks for the honesty. I honestly cannot say that I agree that self-perpetuating boards is baptist. I believe that I would be standing of more firm ground by saying that self-perpetuating boards are not in our Southern Baptist history, that is, not until Baylor. I know that independent Baptists have always had self-perpetuating boards, but I do not think we can find evidence in Southern Baptist history of BoT choosing their own replacements.

As for Starr’s membership, I believe there is a great Bible church there in Waco that already has faculty attending. I think this would be a good move for the Regents to allow. But, I believe you and I agree on the basic premise, it is disingenuous to make someone join a Baptist church to work at a place.

Blessings,
Tim

Maybe Bart could chime in here. It is my understanding that the BGCT gets 25% representation but the Board has to ultimately approve who the BGCT sends? Is that correct? So, ultimately, it’s not like the BGCT itself via messengers has any meaningful control.

I’m pretty sure that a school can be Baptist and have a self-perpetuating board. the process itself might not be very baptistic but the Baptist distinctiveness can still be recognized in countless other ways. Also, the financial support the BGCT sends Baylor really is an extremely small amount in the context of the entire budget, etc.

I’d like to see Baylor maintain to some degree its Baptist heritage. I hope that heritage will continue to be emphasized through on-campus events, publications, campus ministries. I also would like to see certain parts of Baylor remain in touch with Baptist identity (Religion Department, Truett, etc.) However, it’s pretty clear that Baylor has moved away from his sectarian roots and largely embraced a different identity. Our faculty/staff/student body is increasingly diverse. There is a growing presence of non-Baptist evangelicals and Catholics here on campus. I see that diversity as a good thing. One other thing about diversity, in terms of race/ethnicity, Baylor has really impressed me with its increasing diversity. We did not have that same type of diversity at the University of Georgia.

But that is not my point. My point is that regardless of the reasons one chooses to identify with a Baptist church, whether it be to get a job or because of deep long held conventions, they are still Baptist by virtue of them saying “I want to identify as being a Baptist.” That is called soul freedom,something the SBC used to value.

You serious? I believe BDW would disagree with you.

Brother BDW,

Brother Bart makes and excellent point over at his place. Maybe you could help us understand something. Baylor began choosing their own trustees/regents back in the 90′s with the argument that they did not want it to become a “conservative” school taken over by the nasty ole conservatives in the SBC. Baylor receives support from the BGCT and the BGCT gets to choose 25% of the trustees/regents for that gift. If the BGCT is the one affiliated with Baylor, then why not allow the BGCT choose all of the trustees/regents? Do you realize that Baylor ceased being a traditional Baptist entity when they choose to begin a self-perpetuating Board of Trustees/Regents?

Blessings,
Tim

You Make and excellent point. Have friends that went there. Didn’t sound like a “Baptist” much less a Christian school to me.

Paul