The hits keep rolling for those who might have hoped that a presidential vacancy would enable their schools to move forward in a broader direction while staying deeply rooted in its past. First Baylor, now Wheaton.
I had numerous opportunities to hear 
Phil preach when we lived in the Philadelphia area in the late ’90s. Very good preacher. And by all accounts, a really nice guy.
But he is also a member of the Board of Trustees that helped Peter Lillback and Carl Truemann stage a kangaroo court to deal with Peter Enns. And that is reflective of not just his theology, but his theological posture. He is not one for theological innovation. Deeply committed to the Reformed Tradition, he often sides in denominational-type disputes with those who seem to think there’s nothing left to say that the Puritans didn’t already take care of.
Maybe breathing the air of a more broadly evangelical place will help move Ryken along? I do hope so, and I pray for a good future for him and for Wheaton.
But for now, I’m saddened that the alumni petition to serious consider a woman and minority was not only to no avail, but shunned in favor of someone who wouldn’t approve of a woman taking a pulpit, or a minority’s voice reshaping our understanding of the Bible’s theology.
Sorry, my wonderfully creative, out-of-the-box Wheaton alumni friends. Maybe next time.
I am not as informed on the academic world as you of course, but having lived in Bucks County and knowing a bit about Ryken, I too thought this was an odd choice for Wheaton. Then when you throw in the Enns fiasco and then the points made in your second last paragraph, then wow, it goes from odd to lame. I like a lot of things about Wheaton, I hope things will work out anyway.
I’m a Wheaton grad and was one of those who had some hopes … but my first reaction was: at least we’ve done better than Baylor! All I know of Ryken is his great reputation on preaching and in ministry, but the little I know of the Enns saga worries me some. I hope this works out well and that we’ll be surprised in a great way.
I was pretty surprised by this.
I had the sense Phil saw his calling as one of preaching and ministry. He also seemed to admire pastors who labored with a single congregation over the long term. Perhaps I misread him on that, or his sense of God’s calling upon his life changed. And that’s fine and perfectly legitimate. It’s just a surprise to me.
And, yes, Phil is a nice guy, a good listener, and careful judge of situations (even when I disagree with his judgment). So, I think there are a lot of assets he would bring to such a position, particularly as an alumnus himself and with regard to the role a college president has in connecting with and motivating various constituencies (alumni, donors, board members, etc.). He’s also had quite a bit of experience on the governance side of academia, both on Wheaton’s board and WTS’s.
As someone who decided a long time ago not pursue academia outside of the evangelical context, I’m not terribly familiar with Wheaton as an institution. So I don’t know how its particular governance structure works. As a faculty member elsewhere, however, I guess I would be somewhat concerned with a president who didn’t have any experience on the faculty side of academia: dealing with teaching loads, navigating departmental and inter-departmental politics, undergoing the rigors of tenure and promotion, etc.
Well, I wish Phil and Wheaton the best.
I would not have imagined Wheaton picking Ryken. I’m sure the “neo-reformed” are thrilled, but I think that’s what worries me about it. I’m down with somebody being “reformed” theologically, but when you think reformed theology is synonymous with the “gospel,” as a title of one of Ryken’s books makes clear, then I don’t listen very long. It’s a dangerous & destructive spirit those guys have. On top of that, anybody involved in getting Enns thrown out for fundamentalist reasons should never be president at a moderately conservative institution. Oh well, just another white middle-class male for president at an evangelical institution. . . what’s new (I say this as a white male)
Oops. That should have said “as someone who decided a long time ago to pursue academia outside of the evangelical context…” My fingers are often slower than my brain (and I’m a terrible proofreader).
I wouldn’t think that Ryken would govern Wheaton the same way he would govern WTS, so I’m not that worried about academic freedom. Wheaton is not confessionally Reformed (not that the Enns thing really had to do with the confessions, but you know what I mean). WTS has a different support base, and was dealing with churches who threatened to stop supporting if Enns was still teaching, whereas Wheaton has a much broader support base.
Since Enns was recognized as an evangelical by WTS as they parted ways, I would like to think that Wheaton under Ryken, as a broadly evangelical institution, would have no problems hiring Enns.
All those so upset about this news, should check out these two blogs…
http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2010/02/phil-ryken-is-guilty.php
and
http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2010/02/a-taxi-driver-speaks.php
Trueman is always so kind and mature (sarcasm). He exacerbates the problem many have addressed about the neo-reformed, not alleviates it. IMO, they should all take lessons from Tim Keller.
Luke you should go and look up the word “irony” in the dictionary. Then Read Trueman again…
Chilled, you just keep proving the point. It’s like searching for the historical Jesus and finding someone that looks just like you do. You miss the irony of Trueman & yourself, and then the ironic thing is that you tell me to look up “irony.” You can’t plan it any better than that.
I’m through playing these childish games.