I get to decide, of course!

Seriously, the accoutrements of fine art, clothing, cars, etc are not elitist. They are individual choices. Elitism is an attitude of the heart.

e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism n.

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
2.
1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

e·lit’ist adj. & n.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

The concept of the Christian church is that every member of the body is filled with the Holy Spirit and is entrusted with the decision making process of the local church (while delegating certain individuals with day to day administrative and spiritual leadership responsibilities).

In the 4th essay, Bauder said:

People like to pride themselves upon being able to make their own choices and develop their own opinions. The fact is, though, that not everyone is equally qualified to make every choice or to hold every opinion. When unqualified people are asked to develop opinions and to make choices, they invariably look for leadership—often, the kind of leadership that will lead them to believe that they are acting on their own, while manipulating or stampeding them into doing its will. That kind of demagoguery has come to typify some branches of Fundamentalism.

This paragraph, while not fully developing its ideas, does lend itself to the view that the common people can’t be trusted. It is the key part of the essay which gives rise to questions about elitism and strength of support for congregational rule.

Your examples of consulting experts aren’t necessarily elitist. If your expert explained how to green up your lawn, and you questioned his reasoning or sought clarification of his explanation, and he huffed, “I’m the expert, just trust me” — that would be elitism. An attitude of superiority and condescension…

The reason to support congregational government is because it was the New Testament practice. There is no other reason.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Sorry for lumping you together with Lou regarding the regalia/suit issue. I see that in my post above I did do that inappropriately. You had made it clear that tar baby wasn’t yours.

However, said lumping is the only thing I can see that I did wrong.

You did say, in regards to BJUs cultural practices, “Most of the things you are citing don’t smack of elitism to me.” And, that was really the part of the discussion I was trying to advance — these things don’t smack of elitism to you, but they do to some, so who gets to decide?

Furthermore, you haven’t really even established why elitism should be considered a bad thing. According to The definition you just offered, “The common people can’t be trusted and the elites need to tell you what to believe,” I would oppose elitism, and I bet Bauder would too. Experts are not always right and no one should just passively accept whatever the elites tell them.

However, in a covenantal community where there has been trust established, surely it should not be too difficult to determine that some people are better qualified to serve as wise counsel on some issues. When I need help planning my finances, I don’t go to the guy whose family is in credit card debt over their heads. When I need help with the brown patch in my lawn, I don’t go to the guy who paved over his. So why is it that when I need help understanding the Scriptures or Christian history and practice, all of a sudden everyone is on equal footing?

There are two different reasons for which someone could support democracy and/or congregational church government — (1) because “the common people” are so wise and good, or (2) because no one is wise and good and so there need to be checks and ballances. Of these two reasons, only the second is Christian.

The Bible uses the metaphor of “the body” to speak of the Church. Not everyone has the same role. Is that elitist.

Keith

Yes, I have heard BJU accused of elitism for those things. I said that I don’t find them elitist.

To me, elitist is when you insist that the common people can’t be trusted and the elites need to tell you what to believe. That has nothing to do with what kind of car you drive, whether you where a suit at all times (or any time), or whatever.

Please be serious in this discussion or I’ll quit approving your posts altogether. If you are just going to mock, you don’t advance any discussion. If you are just going to make assumptions or put words in my mouth, you aren’t helping the discussion either.

And as far as the ‘nekkid pictures’, my understanding is that the Art Gallery has deliberately covered over parts of paintings in question. So, please, let’s be accurate when we speak, even on minor details like that.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I am speaking with a less than formal/elitist accent. Nevertheless, I do mean what I say. In fact, when you say, “Most of the things you are citing don’t smack of elitism to me,” you make my point.

You and Lou don’t think that suits are elitist, but plenty of people do find them elitist (who wears a suit at the factory? It ain’t Joe lunchbox). Apparently, Bauder doesn’t think it’s elitist for a seminary president to wear academic regalia, but you do. Who gets to decide in the fundamentalist world? Do you take a vote? Is the majority always right (truth by counting noses)? Is recognition of study, discernment, and wisdom irrelevant?

And seriously, you’ve never heard BJU accused of elitism for all the Shakespeare, Classical Music, Expensive art collection (with nekkid pictures in it), etc? Again, I think those things are commendable. Perhaps they are elitist. If so, then there’s nothing wrong with elitism in my opinion. However, for those with a bone to pick re elitism — you got some ‘splainin to do.

Anyway, enough from me.

Peace,

Keith

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

That goes to a key aspect of my concern. Too often the terms “elitism” or “elitist” are lobbed into a discussion without adequate understanding or explanation. The result can be, in effect, a slur (like other -isms and -ists that we could name). I am not saying that they are always intended as such, and let me be clear, I am not saying that this is what you intended. However, without explanation and justification, how can the result be otherwise?

I do not want to come across as faulting you for having a concern or disagreeing. If you think Dr. Bauder wants to move fundamentalism in the wrong direction, then by all means warn him and other fundamentalists. Understand his terms, interact with his ideas, show where he goes astray, identify where we should all be going instead, and explain why this is so. This all requires careful analysis and explanation, not just conclusory statements.

Brent

But I think you are not speaking seriously.

To Brent

I am not the only one who made a connection between the essay on populism and the idea of congregational government. Perhaps he views things differently, but he certainly seems suspicious of allowing the people to have their say in that essay.

Some of my views of his position are related to past discussions and lectures I have listened to. To find specific citations would be more than I am interested in pursuing.

In any case, I think it is quite clear he wants to change fundamentalism. I agree with him at some points, but in the main I think he wants to move fundamentalism in the wrong direction.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Can you explain your simultaneous aversion to elitism and enthusiastic defence of Bob Jones Jr? Why was his elitism (coulda been a professional shakespearean, bought and displayed a vast collection of baroque art, brought opera into fundamentalism, drove Mercedes, etc.) ok?

Don’t get me wrong. The things I’ve mentioned are, I think, commendable (except for the Mercedes maybe). I’m all for them. But . . . they are elitist.

Keith

Yes elitism is a terrible, terrible thing. It is awful for an academic to have a photo wearing academic regalia. It is unforgivable for an educated man speaking to other educated men to use a large vocabulary.

I mean, some guys write books that they sell on their own webpages and then mention it regularly. Some drop it into comments that they’ve spoken in Bible College chapel services. Some have the temerity to commend a guy like G. Campbel Morgan who wears a clerical collar in his wikipedia photo! And some even go as far as to wear SUITS — like rich business men and famous preachers from history. Such elitism poses a serious threat to the one true stream of historic Independent Baptist Fundamentalism which flows all the way back to the New Testament.

O.K. I’ll put the oxgoad away now.

You guys just crack me up. You aren’t really against elitism, you’re just against any type of elitism different from your own.

For what it’s worth, I think your type dominates fundamentalism (due to the underlying populism of the movement), and I have no idea why a guy like Bauder bothers to try and win the name from you to his type. I’d let you have it and move on to a new name/group.

Oh well, I must just have my own form of elitism that blinds me.

Adios, ouer revoir, auviderzein (using foreign words like this is NOT elitist for two reasons: 1) I doubt I’ve spelled them correctly, and 2) I learned them from Lawrence Welk in my granparents’ working class neighborhood)

Keith

Don, it is not clear how you get from populism to congregational polity, which leads me to wonder how you understand “populism.” Regardless, your apparent inferences that Dr. Bauder does not trust believers in the church to make decisions in the church and that he is weakening on congregational polity do not match what I have personally heard him teach on those exact topics. But you need not take my word for it. Ask him.

More generally, I think that you are reading too much into his writing. Where does he indicate that the rest of us should just “trust the experts,” as if we should just mindlessly fall in line? Now, does he believe that education and expertise are important? Of course. (I expect that you do, too.) But how is that elitism?

Lou, a particular hurdle with the cited article is its clear and definite opening, “Let me talk to all you younger guys out there. I’m on your side—I agree that younger leaders have something to contribute and should be heard. I don’t think that they should have to wait until they’re forty to get people to listen to them.” That does not fit your point.

Further, I am not so much looking for an example, which by itself may be susceptible to multiple interpretations, but rather for an explanation. I want to understand the chain of reasoning from particular statements to the final conclusion, “Therefore, Bauder is an elitist.”

Brent