############################################################
          The Student Voice     Issue 2, No. 2     11.8.1996
############################################################

>>> The Student Voice is not an official policy statement of Pensacola
Christian College, but it should be.
############################################################

          QUOTES OF THE WEEK

"A loud voice cannot compete with a clear voice,
even if it's a whisper."  
          - B.N. Kaufman

"Any limit on the kind of speech a student may engage in will handicap a
university's ability to educate the nation's youth.  It is through
challenging and considering disfavored ideas that a person may develop an
independent mind and the opportunity to achieve social change."
          - Roger Cleary

"The new fundamentalists are very, very dangerous.  To quote a preacher, 'I
had a sneak look at the back of the book' so I know that the good guys will
win in the end.  In the meantime, the bad guys are in control and religion
has become an industry - something that has more in common with MacDonalds
than it does with me."
          - Bono, of U2

". . . PCC policies are reinforced through a demerit system, which we have
found to be a reasonable system."
          - PCC handbook

###########################################################

          TABLE OF CONTENTS

     I.   Voice Announcements
     II.   Have you heard the one about. . . ?
     III.   Some Words From a Pastor
     IV.   Essays
               A.   "Exploitation Theology"   - Leibniz
               B.   "Behold"  - lupos
                      A new Voice project  - lupos                  
     V.   Your Comments

############################################################

          I.     VOICE ANNOUNCEMENTS

>>> Please remember to make copies of The Student Voice and send it to others
on campus.  We would encourage each student who receives The Voice to send a
copy to at least two other students via the Pan Hellenic mail system.

>>> We want to thank you for the comments that you all have sent in, and we
apologize for not being able to include them all in the newsletter.  

>>> If you would like any copies of back issues, please let us know.  All
issues are now re-formatted.  However, we would ask that you limit your
request to 2 issues per request in order for us to be more efficient.  Once
you have received the two issues, then please feel free to request 2 more.
 Here is a list of Voice issues:

          The Student Voice introductory letter
          Issue 1, Nos. 1 - 4
          Issue 2, No. 1

############################################################

         II.     HAVE YOU HEARD THE ONE ABOUT. . . ?

>>> We have received many comments regarding the Discipline Committee
procedures, and it seems that our issue touched a sore spot with the students
- a "sore spot" in that no one, if any, seems to appreciate the procedures. -
eds.

Dear StudentV:
As to the DC procedures (I know this is kind of an "old" topic, but this
also just happened), a male student was pointing at a girl's watch in
one of the many chaperoned areas.  Someone who couldn't see exactly what
happened, but was instantly suspicious, claimed that he was touching her
and wrote them up.  Now to all those who still insist that one can plead
his case and be heard by the Discipline Committee, read the following:
When sent to DC, he was asked what he did and when he continued to insist
that he didn't touch her in any way, he was not only socialed anyway, but
also received 50 extra demerits FOR LYING!  Whoa, so much for the DC
listening and believing students.

>>> Well, it seems we have two issues here.  First, a discipline committee
who takes one person's word over another's arbitrarily, and second, even if
he DID touch a girl's wrist, 2 week's inability to talk to anyone of the
opposite sex PLUS 50 demerits???  Does the word "overkill" mean anything?
 Please refer to the essays below. . . . - eds.

#########################################################

         III.     SOME WORDS FROM A PASTOR

>>> This was sent to us by a pastor who seems to have some of the same
questions we have about the way "discipline" is administered by PCC.

As a concerned parent, Pastor, and Christian educator, I am troubled with the
DC system at PCC. I greatly appreciate the faculty and staff at PCC and their
obvious dedication to the Lord. God has blessed PCC in many ways -
facilities, staff, solid Biblical teaching, strong academic emphasis . . .
 but we must be constantly on guard for the attacks of the enemy to attempt
to destroy what God is building. I appreciate discipline. My children would
agree that I am strict. They also know that I love them and put their
well-being before my own. That balance between love and discipline is crucial
.. . . it is Biblical. It is impossible to truly love without discipline in
the parent/child relationship. Biblical discipline does not take place
without the umbrella of love. "LOVE" - WORKING TOWARD GOD'S BEST FOR ANOTHER
PERSON, EXPECTING NOTHING IN RETURN. Could you imagine growing up under a
demerit system in your home? I attended a Bible college with a demerit
system. They realized the unnecessary pressure it put on both faculty and
students and the unbiblical precedant it set. That took courage and they
charted new waters in developing a working system for discipline, but it's
been effective. Help me understand 1. the Biblical basis for the demerit
system 2. The need for the demerit system. It seems to me that if this is the
only way in which "wild" students can be kept in check, something's wrong
with the admissions policy. 3. Does the Matthew 18 principle apply in DC
situations? 4. Why are students not allowed to face their accusers? (could
there be mistakes made in the system and students wrongly accused without
recourse?) 5. Does the faculty take into consideration how much time it takes
to get a "hearing" even if it's possible?  6. What about the Ephesians 6:4
principle of not provoking a child to wrath? When falsely accused, there is
little if any recourse even if there is time to follow another line of
defense. 7. What about the danger of  giving students authority over other
students? When comments like, "It's a jungle out there" and "It's us vs them"
are made by those in leadership positions, something's gone wrong. I'll
assume these comments were made in jest. When students (adults) are more
concerned about demerits and being campused than their academic preparations,
someone's off course. .  . I also know that students are reluctant to speak
openly for fear of retaliation - something's wrong with that picture too.
There ought to be such an atmosphere on campus that students would be
ENCOURAGED to speak of their concerns at the RIGHT TIME with the RIGHT
ATTITUDE. There must be discipline on campus. There must be a system of
rules.
There must also be love and concern. What would happen if the demerit system
were dumped tomorrow? Chaos? Anarchy? Rebellion? I think not. Give Godly
Christian parents more credit than that. The letters I have gotten from the
deans office have not caused me concern for our student, but for PCC. I know
I am personally struggling with being able to recommend PCC to students
because of a discipline system that seems to be unreasonable and unbiblical.
I don't like being in this position. Help me understand.

>>>  Well, we at The Student Voice think that the questions you posed should
be answered by someone in the PCC administration.  We could give you our
opinion, but we didn't devise the system.  IF ANY ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER WOULD
LIKE TO ADDRESS THESE QUESTIONS, WE HERE AT THE STUDENT VOICE WOULD BE MORE
THAN HAPPY TO PUBLISH YOUR COMMENTS - eds.

###########################################################

         IV.     ESSAYS

"Exploitation Theology"  - By Leibniz

     Exploitation theology. . . .  There is no doubt in our minds that the
effect of these two words, this phrase, this use of the English language to
convey an idea within our particular context has already caused the blood
pressure of many of you to rise a few levels.  Many of you are already on the
defensive, you are already "up in philosophical arms" over this blatant clash
with the value system upon which you have premised your entire set of beliefs
and actions.  Some of you are mad.  Some of you are muttering to yourself
that you should not even read the rest of this article - these blasphemous
and reprobate machinations of Leibniz's mind.  
     But you WILL read it. . . .  You will read it because to start an
article that raises your ire without finishing it is superhuman.  It is
impossible.  And some of you will continue to become angrier the longer you
peruse these thoughts.  Good.  Now we have your attention. . . . .
     It is vital that in addressing this issue, we must simultaneously define
the terms we are using, and for practical purposes we will address these two
terms in the opposite order in which they appear.

     Why "theology"?
     I have heard it said that "everything we do is religious."  Whether or
not this is accurate depends on how one defines "religious," and since this
is a trail down which we do not wish to trod at this point, suffice it to say
that the basic point is obvious.  Every decision we make is based on what we
perceive to be right, best or most productive to our lives.  Since we are
fallible creatures, what is "right, best or most productive" will often times
be convoluted into what most satisfies our desires - i.e., not necessarily
what IS "right," but what FEELS right.  While these decisions do not always
conform to our overt beliefs and "religion," it is still nevertheless a
decision based on a value - that our desire must be satiated.
     Without getting mired in this quicksand, let it simply be pointed out
(which we have done before) that decisions are based upon values.  Values, we
believe, are based upon one's view of God, whether or not one realizes it.
 Whether or not this is true, by virtue of the fact that PCC has claimed to
be "Christian" and a ministry of God, they have explicitly pronounced that
they BELIEVE in God.  Therefore, PCC's decisions and actions are based upon
its values, which are defined by its perception of God and Christianity.
     "Theology" is defined generally as "a rational interpretation of
religious faith, practice, and experience; a theological theory or system. .
.. ."  A practice which is set out in "religious" terms and boundaries can be
properly said to be "theological." When PCC defines its value system in terms
of a set of Christian beliefs, it is therefore saying that "this is our
theology."  It is saying that the rules and policies they set forth for the
good of the students are because they conform to what PCC believes is right,
and what is right is governed by what they believe God commands in Scripture,
and a belief in what God commands is one's "theology."

     Why "Exploitation"?
     It is a fact that PCC is extremely paternalistic.  It is a fact that a
student has much less freedom to make the choices that virtually every other
person of the same age and maturity level is not only permitted, but is
expected, to make for themselves.  It is a fact that relatively speaking, PCC
exercises a lot of control.  These are facts which affect a student's life at
PCC.  These are facts which are factual because PCC has DECIDED that they
will be.  They are facts because PCC has made the decision based on its
values.
     It is our position that these facts, along with others, are exploitative
in nature.  We feel that PCC takes advantage of its "moral" position and
exploits the students by overly restricting their lives PRIMARILY to enhance
the IMAGE OF PCC.  We feel that PCC is so image-conscious and so concerned
with the commercial benefits it receives from maintaining this image that the
effect is exploitation.  We feel that when an authority structure wields its
authority for the benefit of itself instead of the people over which it
exercises this authority, by its very nature, this system becomes tyrannical.
 "Exploitation" is defined as "an unjust or improper use of another person
for one's own profit or advantage. . . ."  We feel that when PCC appeals to a
student's sense of morality and Christian virtue (accepting authority without
question as a student's responsibility) to accept extreme restrictions
("extreme" by virtue of the fact that they exist virtually nowhere else in
the world in a similar context to such an extreme) that this is nothing but
the "theology of exploitation."
     We base this belief on the premise that when one considers all of the
possible rationales for this extreme paternalism, maintaining the "PCC image"
is really the only one that fits.  So, let us explore the possible
rationales.

     1.)  Pure Control.  If this were the purpose behind the rules and
regulations, then we could fairly say that PCC was not only ridiculously
strict, but flat-out barbaric and primitive.  However, we feel that it is
safe to assume that this is not PCC's motive.  Besides, in an enlightened
society, we would hope that if an institution desired pure control, there
would at least be an underlying reason why.

     2.)  Fulfilling Scriptural responsibilities.  This is bogus.  Scripture
knows nothing of imposing numerous rules and regulations in the New Testament
era.  (See the passages on the Pharisees.)  Christ's death on the cross
eliminated the law as a means of obtaining salvation.  Of course, the rules
at PCC are not to obtain salvation, but they are so that there will be a
"clean, God-honoring student body" [taken from the Student Handbook].  Even
the most elementary study of the Bible teaches that what we do on the outside
has little, if anything, to do with whether or not we are "clean."  It is all
a heart condition, and just because we wear the right clothes and say the
right things and restrict ourselves in a certain way has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
to do with whether or not we are "clean."  What this does is insult the
student's ability to worship God as he sees fit.  The banner at PCC is not
"Praise God," but "Praise God (as long as it doesn't violate any of our
ordained rules)."  For some reason, I fail to find this principle anywhere in
Scripture.
     Scriptural principles are just that - principles.  They apply
differently to different people at different times and in different
situations.  No, we are not implying situational ethics.  We are saying that
the Holy Spirit has been sent to us and resides in us, if we are Christians,
to guide us in following the Scriptures.  The Holy Spirit does not reside in
the administrative offices so that the administration can inform everyone
else "What saith the Lord."  Scriptural principles are many times personal
matters, not corporate.
     But the point is that if PCC is basing all of its policies on Scriptural
principles, then it ought to be willing to let the students know what those
principles are.  In looking through the 95/96 Student Handbook, only one
Scripture passage was quoted.  Policies based on Scriptural principles?
 Don't be ridiculous. . . .

     3.)  Training for life.  This is also a bogus argument.  Being trained
for life means, at the very least, experiencing more and more of life.  It is
expansive, not regressive.  Have you ever stopped and wondered why it is that
we live our lives during our elementary, junior-high school and high school
years gaining more and more privileges and responsibilities, yet when a
student arrives at PCC many of these privileges and responsibilities revert
back to a pre-high school level?  Our parents have been continually letting
out the rope, so to speak.  They continue to allow us more freedoms as we get
older.  Why?  Because they are training us for life.
     Training inevitably involves hands-on experience.  Training for life
involves making some of those decisions that make up life.  But PCC in its
infinite wisdom has seen fit to greatly restrict this freedom to make
decisions.  It has turned back the maturity clock - BIG TIME.  Training for
life?  Don't be ridiculous. . . .
     I recall vividly hearing Pastor Schettler talk about the "real world."
 He said essentially that outside the walls of PCC was NOT the "real world,"
but rather, the PCC community was the "real world" because it is about truth,
which is real.  Please don't make me laugh. No, Pastor Schettler, outside the
walls of PCC IS the real world.  In the real world, people are expected to
live their lives without every minute detail being already established for
them.  In the real world, when a person reaches the age of an adult, people
start treating him like an adult.  In the real world, there are no demerits
for not making your bed.  In the real world, diversity of ideas counts.  And
in the real world, exploitation is looked upon with disgust and disdain.
 Artificial insemination of "community" based on sterility and misconceived
notions of Christianity DOES NOT transform PCC into the "real world."  I'm
sorry to burst the proverbial bubble.  Training for life?  Don't be
ridiculous. . . .

     4.)  An extension of parental responsibility.  This, too, is a bogus
argument.  First of all, when a person goes to college, there is little, if
any, parental control anymore.  The student who goes to college is, for the
most part, free to live their life as they see fit.  They are free to make
their own choices about where they will live, what they will do with their
time and everything else that is involved in a college student's life.  The
parents have given them the freedom to be an adult.  PCC does not simply
extend this authority, they restrict it, even though they must know that no
parent imposes such restrictions on their own college-age student.  But maybe
those in the administration do not know this.  Is there anyone who is
responsible for making rules that actually has, or has had, a college-age son
or daughter?  If anyone of them has, then I would like to ask them if they
impose the same sort of restrictions on their own son or daughter that they
impose on all the rest of the PCC community.  
     Second, if PCC simply feels they are extending the parental control,
then why is it that if a student's parents call up and say that it is ok for
Susy to come home for the weekend, PCC says no?  Why not have the parents
read the student handbook before sending their child to PCC?  I mean, if this
is all simply an extension of the parental authority, then the parents would
be in agreement, at least for the most part, with what's written in the
handbook, right?  And if PCC is extending the parental authority, then how
about letting the parents know this?  
     One comment we received this week suggested that when Pastor Schettler
shakes the hands of the parents at the beginning of the semester, this is
somehow a symbolic gesture of the transfer of parental authority.  Why?  What
makes this gesture symbolic of anything?  Who knew it?  And why not just come
right out and say it?  No, the only symbolic gesture I see is when you enter
the PCC gates, you leave a normal life outside.

     5.)  Image.  There is no question that PCC is BIG business.  PCC owns
approximately $43 million in property throughout the Pensacola area.  The
school just completed close to $60 million in building projects, and
according to a Pensacola News Journal report, PCC's 94/95 profits came to
approximately $27 million.  And where does it all seem to go?  Image.  
     Money and image seem to be the top priority at PCC.  Consider this:
which do you get in more trouble for?  Goofing around in prayer group, which
technically speaking is making light of a time when you are speaking to the
God of the universe (we are accepting the "prayer group" practice at face
value for purposes of this article), or disrupting a public gathering, which
certainly is uncalled for?  Making light of God, or making light of the
school's image?  You know the answer. . . .  Think about it.  The most severe
things you can do on campus is to hurt the image that has been established,
an image that helps rake in the dough. 
     Many of you have commented on the school's support of Buzz Ritchie.  Why
would the school support a liberal democrat?  I will tell you why.  Because
when the Florida legislature decided to tax the profits of A Beka Books, PCC
went complaining to the House Appropriations Committee chairman - Buzz
Ritchie.  Mr. Ritchie helped PCC get out of having to pay taxes on their
enormous profits, even though this tax break very well may have violated the
Florida constitution's prohibition against contributions to sectarian
institutions.  
     In all fairness to PCC, they did pay back a portion of the initial tax
break, but not until after hundreds of complaints were sent into the
governor's office.  Not only that, but the school did not pay the entire
amount of the original tax break, only part, which means they still received
a tax break.  
     So, as students you cannot compromise one single thing, but if you are
the all-wise PCC you may support a politician who Dr. Mullenix says switched
parties to get votes, a politician who is opposed to parental choice in
education (imagine PCC supporting someone like that), supports higher taxes,
supports gambling (which is illegal at PCC), who supports new age practices
in schools without the parent's permission and who the Christian Coalition
says has supported abortion!!!!
     Why does PCC impose rule after rule after rule after rule?  So that they
can keep the image which brings in millions of dollars.  Is it all about
image?  You bet it is. . . .

     Conclusion.
     Is PCC an institution of higher learning?  Or is it just one big
info-mercial?  Are the policies for the student's benefit?  Or are they so
that the school can make money and enhance its image?  We feel these
questions cannot simply be ignored by the administration.  We feel as though
the students should be permitted to ask why this is the "theology" of PCC.
 The God I believe in knows nothing of this paternalistic, image-conscious
and overly naive brand of Christianity.  
     How about holding what most colleges have - "town meetings," where
students can ask these types of questions of the administration?  How about
having a question and answer session BEFORE the students are just about to
graduate, and thus have too much invested to venture a critical dialogue with
Dr. Horton?  Where are the answers?  This is all we ask.  

Dr. Horton?  Dr. Mullenix?  Dr. Mutsch?  Dr. Goddard?  Hello. . . ?  Is
anyone listening. . . ?  Does anyone care. . . ?

************************************************************

"Behold"   - lupos

It has been a consistent sentiment that the purveyors of The Student Voice
hate the school and are bitter.  While I resist this, it brings up a
interesting point.  First of all let me say that I don't believe I am
bitter, but maybe the heart is deceitful.  Also, it would seem to me to be
an odd thing to "hate" the college you graduated from, so obviously this
must be an extreme situation.  More to the point, though, is this
"bitterness" question.

I would loosely define bitterness under Christian terms as "unforgiveness
based upon a real or perceived wrong done to you; a grudge which Christ
does not allow you to hold."  This definition could probably be improved
upon, but I assume there will be general agreement that it is something
like that.  To suggest that we are bitter would suggest that we have been
(in our mind) wronged.  For that to be the immediate reaction of so many
"pro" PCC-policy respondants, would suggest that it is NOT uncommon for
students to be wronged, or again, for fairness sake, PERCEIVE they are
wronged.  I would like to illustrate this with anecdotes from one student's
experience at PCC.  The student was not looking for trouble, but it just
seemed to be looking for him.

        Wishing to play tennis with a girl, the student received the
proper instructions from the dean's office on how to go about it: it must
be day, there must be at least three people and two of them must be girls.
The student met two girls at the courts and played for a while. Upon
leaving, the girls went a separate way back to their dorms.  As the
student walked back to his dorm a security guard asked him his name. The
student naively thought he was being (overly) friendly and gave it, then
asked his.  The guard asked if he had just been playing tennis, which
alerted the student that the pretense was only to get his true name
(evidentally the guard suspected the student might lie).  A teacher had
called in from the AC building that the student was playing alone with a
girl.  The student explained there were two girls so he was made to sit
there for five minutes while the guard biked around to find the other two,
which he eventually did.  He returned and allowed the student to go. 
Points: why should a professor in college waste his time spying on
students in plain sight and then bother to find a phone to call it in. 
Why wasn't the word of the student sufficient to appease the guard?

        The student received a "Phil Keaggy" instrumental tape in the
mail, which he open outside the commons on the wall. He showed this tape
to a friend next to him and talked about it "out loud."  A chaperone came
over and told the student that he didn't think Phil Keaggy "passed." The
student informed him that he was quite sure this particular tape did.  Two
days later the student's floorleader came to his room, having been
informed by the chaperone he had a tape that didn't pass.  The student
indignantly took the tape to the dorm supervisor, who agreed it did, in
fact, pass, as the student had plainly said all along.

        Walking from chapel to the AC building, the student called to a
friend ahead of him in a "cartoony" voice.  The friend looked back and
quickly kept walking.  The student thought this was odd, but called out
again "that's right, keep walking" in a playful way.  He was then whistled at
(like a dog) by someone behind him. He turned to see a stern Dr. Goddard
marching toward him.  The Dr. got in his face and asked, "what do you think
you are doing?"  A little intimidated, the student replied, "just goofing
around."  Dr. Goddard then chastised him for the "witness" he was being in
front of the elevator repair men. The student said "I just wasn't
thinking" to deflate the situation and Dr. Goddard nodded and let him go. 
Apparently it is a "bad" witness to have fun with friends, but a "good"
witness to be needlessly harangued by authority for harmless fun.

        The student was sitting with friends at a picnic table by Brent
field. Girls were sitting at a table some 50 yards away.  A security guard
came and informed the men that the area was unchaperoned and they must leave.
The student replied that he was pretty sure the student handbook says that
during daylight hours anyone can use the tables as long as the individual
tables are segregated. The guard leaves, presumably to check this rule,
and returns about 15 minutes later.  He takes the name and ID of all the
men and insisted they leave. Upon checking the handbook, it said exactly
what the student remembered and that they were doing nothing wrong. No
response
was ever made by the school.

        While it was raining one evening, the student stood on the brick
wall outside the commons with a friend. A security guard approached the
student and ordered him to go inside. Not clearly hearing him, the student
asked him if he was telling him he couldn't stand on the wall.  The guard
said again, "go inside." Wanting clarification, the student asked if the
guard was telling him he was not allowed to be out in the rain.  The guard
responded, "do you want to get written up first?"  Bowing to this obvious
abuse of authority, the student complied.

        The student was informed by his floorleader that he had a tape
that didn't pass which was seen by the room-check floorleader that
morning. Apparently, the "Batman" movie soundtrack (completely
instrumental) does not pass, because of the "association." That, however,
was beside the point. The tape was in a stack on a box behind the students
bed at the far end of the room. It was not "hidden" but for the
floorleader to see this, he had to be not just checking to see that all
students were gone, but searching around the nooks and crannies of another
student's room with the only purpose to find things to get him in trouble.
What kind of way is this to treat one another?
 
        Finally, one Saturday afternoon, the student and a friend went out
on the grass to shoot a "water-rocket" toy.  Having done this a few times,
a security guard came, took their names and told them to stop. When asked
if this was against the rules, the guard had no response. Again, no
disciplinary action was taken against the students? If it wasn't an
offense, why did they have to stop?

I write all this to illustrate what goes on in the life of a student on a
DAILY basis, while he is simply trying to live his life. He wasn't
breaking rules, yet still he was completely hassled constantly for NO
REASON. If you say "yeah, but he never got demerits for those things, so
its okay," you are wrong. It is not okay. There's the needless
inconvenience, the frustration, the "burden" of constantly being watched,
and the possibility (God forbid) that a student might acually think this is
what Christianity is like. PCC policy self-righteously acts with complete
autonomy. Never was the student apologized to for the waste of his time or
the hassle. He was never told, "oh wait, you can go to the picnic tables,
our rules say so right here."

So maybe a student has a reason to be bitter. Well, I don't know if I am,
but I do know this: I am hurt.

        Hurt by the treatment we receive from the school and the treatment
in encourages in their students.

        Hurt that the school treats its visitors much better than it
treats the people who pay to be there.

        Hurt that each time I took a test the school questioned me on
whether I was really an honest person.

        Hurt that they turned my graduation into a commercial for how
great PCC is by having grads stop and praise the school. Couldn't we just
have one day?

        Hurt that in a place of Christians I was treated worse than I have
ever been by the world.

And so it goes. Do I expect an apology? No. Is how I deal with this my
responsibility? Yes. Am I trying to get back at the school? No. If this
was all in the past, it would be just that, and we would all move on.  But
the fact is this treatment, tantamount to abuse, is still going on. It is
not isolated and it is not just.

UnderTheMercy.
lupos

*************************************************************

>>> A New Voice Project  - lupos

     Our goal here at The Student Voice is to be constructive whenever
possible.  We feel that one of the things the administration should do itself
is to make sure all rules are written down so that students will have no
question as to what is and what is not prohibited.  Since we do not foresee
the administration doing this anytime soon, we have decided to take on this
project ourselves.
     What we want to do is get every rule, infraction, policy or act which is
prohibited or required and put it into a compilation.  We need your help.
 Here are the things we would like you to send to The Student Voice:
     1.)   Anything that you have received demerits for (and as many if you
can remember),
     2.)   Anything that you or someone you know has been told not to do,
     3.)   Anything that you or someone you know has been told to do,
     4.)   Any chapel announcement, hall meeting announcement, etc. in which
a regulation has been issued.

     We will be putting this together and submitting it to the administration
periodically to request that they include it with the "official" Student
Handbook.
     Thank you for your cooperation.

##########################################################

          V.     YOUR COMMENTS

>>> Comment from S---.

Hey Guys.  I want to start out by saying thanks for taking the time out
of your days to put together this newsletter.  I have been reading for a
couple of months now and I find it to be a breath of fresh air every
week.  I am not the most eloquent writer, but I hope you will find that
what I have to say can be of help.  I'll start at the beginning.  I came
here probably like anyone else; I just wanted a good Christian school to
go to.  What I have found over my year and a half here is that not only
does the school have rules (good and bad), but they have staff members
on their payroll who are there for the sole purpose of catching someone
at the moment they are breaking the most insignificant rule.  This
really got to me when I first found this out.  You see, I am from quite
a large family where the rule is if I were to tell on my siblings I
could expect to be in as much trouble as the sibling I was telling on. 
This rule that my parents set up made us a very close-knit family.  We
were taught that we would get no reward or praise from our parents for
being snitches.   Do you know what has happened to my family because of
this?  Believe it or not we are not all drug pushers now.  My siblings
are the best friends I could ever ask for because we know that the last
thing on each other's mind is how we can get each other in trouble.  The
biggest problem I see at PCC is not so much all the rules (although I
could give you an earful on that issue),  but the "spirit"  that the
school boasts to be the best anywhere.  The "spirit" is not a spirit of
care and friendship, but a spirit of "how can I get my fellow classmates
in trouble?".  Why, when I am just doing a normal thing like walking to a
class, do I have to worry about a stupid thing like whether or  not my
entire shirt tail is tucked in?  We as PCC students worry about these
things because the school "spirit" encourages students to write each
other up so much that the demerit pad just burns a hole in his\her
pocket.  Catch the Spirit?....no thanks.

************************************************************

>>> Comment from a staff member at PCC.

     I cannot speak directly to PCC's motives, but judging by Pastor
Schettler's comment given each semester regarding "shaking hands with parents
under the monumental stairs," PCC believes that each parent is charging the
college with the responsibility to "train up" that young person for as long
as they are a student.  That handshake is a symbolic gesture of transfer of
authority -- the child is placed under the college's authority by order of
the parent.
     Questions of PCC's authority over a given individual should be directed
to the parents of that individual.
     Adam and Eve should have gone right back to God instead of believing a
slick-talking serpent about "being gods" if they would do their own thing and
ignore the rules about what they could and could not eat.  Instead, they
became the original example for all mankind of "the oldest trick in the
book."
     That said, a private forum like The Student Voice is an excellent place
to hash out ideas.  Synergy is achieved when a group of people interact
intelligently.  New levels of understanding can be reached through focused
discussion.  "Serpents" entering the discussion should be rebuked.
 Statements intended to incite others to disobey authority evidence
rebellious intentions (vis a vis, the Garden of Eden).
     Authority is the crux of many issues addressed in The Student Voice.  I
submit to the readers for consideration that PCC derives its authority
through "direct submission" by "adult" students, and through "transfer of
parental authority" by "dependent" students. 
     As "subjects" of the college, each student has a *responsibility* under
God and before his or her fellow man to submit to the various rules and
regulations of the college.
     That said, discussion of rules and policies is not unhealthy.  To
mature, one must begin to understand; to understand, one must be allowed to
reason; to reason, one generally follows the avenues of reading, discussion,
meditation, and prayer.  Intelligent discussion adds insight and encourages
more intelligent discussion.  New perceptions may be formed and new horizons
pioneered; misperceptions and misunderstandings may be corrected.
     A publication with such high ideals as The Student Voice should seek to
encourage intelligent discussion, and discourage blatant attempts to
undermine the very framework the discussion is attempting to reinforce.
     The question is not "Does PCC have legitimate authority" to make any
given rule, but rather, "How can we work together to make PCC a better and
better Christian college?"

Thank you.

*********************************************************************

>>> Comment from another faculty member in response to Issue 1, No. 4.

Dear Student Voice,

     This note is written in response to The Student Voice, which was 
recently e-mailed to me.  This was my first exposure to The Voice, and I 
want to tell you what I think of it, which I would request that you 
read.
     I was suspicious when I saw that nowhere did you give your name.  This 
quickly predisposed me to view The Voice in a negative light.  I saw 
greater reason for being cautious when I saw a quote from Lenin at the 
beginning (not a person I usually look to for inspirational quotes).  
You seem to intend The Student Voice to be a free exchange of ideas 
among adults; why are you afraid to give your name? 
     Young man, if you have a grievance with PCC or with anyone else, please 
take it to them.  Spare me your arguing ad infinitum and rotten 
attitude.  I have no time nor desire to read your complaints and 
arguments with others.  If you had such a problem with the rules at PCC, 
why did you stay?  Were you forced to stay?  If you stayed four years 
and graduated, did you feel that God led you to attend PCC?  Have you 
prayerfully considered why God would send you to get an education at a 
school whose rules caused you so much grief?
     I am proud to be a graduate of PCC; your bad attitude will not change my

mind.  Please remove me from the mailing list of your presumptuously 
named newsletter, since it is certainly not my voice.  Whatever you are 
trying to accomplish, I want to part in it.

Sincerely,

>>> RESPONSE from The Voice

     Thank you for your comments.  We consider it unfortunate that you are
not willing to enter the debate, but to each their own. . . .
     We would like to respond to your comments, and we will probably post
your comments with our response in an upcoming issue of The Student Voice, so
if you would like to receive it, please let us know.
     You write, "I saw greater reason for being cautious when I saw a quote
from Lenin at the beginning (not a person I usually look to for inspirational
quotes)."
     This certainly should have given you reason to be cautious.
 Unfortunately, you missed the whole point.  We don't consider Lenin
"inspirational."  Come on.  If that is what you read from the quote, you need
to take an English 101 course again.  We put the quote there to demonstrate
the similarities between Lenin's ideas and PCC's ideas.  Yes, this should
make you cautious.  Just as Lenin's repression of ideas should make you
shudder, so to should repression of ideas at a place that calls itself
"Christian."
     You write, "You seem to intend The Student Voice to be a free exchange
of ideas 
among adults; why are you afraid to give your name? "
     Yes, we do intend The Voice to be a free exchange of ideas.  We are not
afraid to give our names.  Like we explained in our last newsletter [Issue 1,
No. 4], look around you on campus, or if you are not on campus, look through
some old yearbooks.  There you will find The Student Voice.
     You write, "Young man. . . ."
     Thank you for the compliment. . . .
     You write, "if you have a grievance with PCC or with anyone else, please

take it to them."
     What in the world do you think we are doing???  Are you suggesting that
we go to a one-on-one meeting with some dean or administrator?  Oh yeah, this
will get a lot done. . . .  We are taking it to them, it's just that this
time, it is on the student's terf!
     You write, "Spare me your arguing ad infinitum and rotten attitude."
     Do I even need to comment to this?  All right.  I will stop my "arguing
ad infinitum and rotten attitude."  However, The Voice will continue as
usual.
     You write, "I have no time nor desire to read your complaints and 
arguments with others."
     Of course you don't.  Maybe if you cared a little more about the
students whom you profess to "love with a brotherly love," then maybe you
WOULD make time.  You faculty members boggle my mind when you talk about
wanting nothing to do with the cares of students.  What kind of teachers are
you anyway?
     You ask, "If you had such a problem with the rules at PCC, why did you
stay?"
     The same reason thousands upon thousands of other students stay despite
their disagreement with pettiness - to get an education in four years.
 Unfortunately, once you have committed yourself to a year or more of PCC,
your subsequent options are limited.
     You ask, "If you stayed four years and graduated, did you feel that God
led you to attend PCC?"
     Yes I did, just as I feel God leading me back now with The Student Voice.

     You ask, "Have you prayerfully considered why God would send you to get
an education at a school whose rules caused you so much grief?"
     Yes I have.  Perhaps it is so I could obtain the vision and tools needed
to lead a revolution to see some much needed change.
     You write, "your bad attitude will not change my mind."
     I think you mean "legitimate points and concerns" instead of "bad
attitude."  Anyway, try a little objectivity and a study of the life of
Christ, you might be surprised.
     You write, "Please remove me from the mailing list of your
presumptuously 
named newsletter, since it is certainly not my voice."
     Of course it isn't.  You help make the rules.
     Lastly you write, "Whatever you are trying to accomplish, I want to part
in it."
     That's fine.  If you want to retain and be a part of the old, scorned,
ridiculed and paternalistic environment currently present at PCC, then that
is your right.  
     However, if you are a faculty member, how can you honestly dismiss so
brazenly the concerns and feelings of numerous students?  You may not like to
acknowledge it, but The Voice speaks for more students than probably any
other organization on campus, or at least close to it, and if we don't now,
we will very soon.  How can you ignore that?  How can you look the other way?
     You need to reevaluate the "PCC ideology and methods."  We don't know
for sure, but the chances are high that a student, or several students, who
sit in your classes each week read and enjoy and look forward to receiving
The Voice every week because they know that The Voice cares about their
concerns and will let them share them with others.  
     Get off of the anonymity and attitude.  They are so irrelevant.  Think a
little.  

************************************************************

>>> Comment from an individual who I (Leibniz) had the chance to "talk" to
over the internet.

[He started out with some thoughts on the Tony Pitarese issue. . . . - eds.]
.. . . .  I am also convinced that you are not the bitter, immature person
some people want to think you are.  Although I don't know who you are, we had
the opportunity to talk with each other on AOL a couple weeks ago, and you
never said one bad thing about the college.  You seemed to go out of your way
to give them the benefit of the doubt, and I'll admit that it frustrated me a
bit (that's part of my own problem) while I was doing my small bit of
complaining.

Keep up the good work, and stay humble about it.  I'm sure there are many out
here praying for you.

>>> Thank you very much.  - The Voice

**************************************************************

>>> Comment from a student who calls himself "Ransom"

	I think I am still in a state of shock.
	It has only been a few weeks since I first heard of and read the Student
Voice.  I felt shocked, not by the ideas (which to a large degree I believe
are true) but by the form.  I have heard most of these ideas muttered under
people’s breath or talked about in small groups, but this is the first time I
have seen the potential for all those who believe PCC has rulership problems
to speak together.  We have a voice!  Let me take a moment to express my
opinions on that voice and what we should be saying to best reach our final
goal.
	Yes, I believe PCC has rulership problems.  That shouldn’t be taken as a
personal attack on the administration; I do not know most of them.  They seem
to be very nice, God-fearing people, but they have set up a system or
attitude that will not allow their temporal authority to be challenged, their
opinions to be questioned, or their convictions to be violated.  This is the
heart issue.  From this point everything else that is wrong at the College
begins or is encouraged.  How can an error be addressed until the
administration admits it can be wrong and makes itself accountable?  How can
trust grow until the leaders stop trusting themselves only?  How can people
be free to live the Christian life when the are watched day and night, never
allowed to make responsible decisions on their own?
	In response to this single-minded, unlistening, uncaring attitude we have
found a voice.  Of all the rules at the College there seems to be one that is
almost never broken, and when it is broken the offender is always punished.
 The invariable rule that nothing is publicly spoken against the policies of
the administration.  It is thought but not said.  This is shameful.  Each of
us sees some error, inconsistency, unfairness, or inconsideration, whether it
is intentional or accidental, but outwardly ignore the issues.  We keep
silent.  We live with it.  We justify it.  We grumble about it.  But we never
say or do anything meaningful.
	Part of the shame must fall on the College for creating an environment that
refuses to listen.  Opposition is bad attitude and questioning any policy is
disruption; either one can be cause for dismissal for both staff and
students.  There has never been built a way to petition for change or even to
publicly announce the opposing view.  Even simply discussing the issues in
private can be dangerous.
	But the other shame must fall on the rest of us.  We have allowed these
problems to grow in a large Christian institution whose influence is felt, to
a small degree at least, in many parts of this country.  The views on
authority and elitism taught here will be carried all over by graduates.  We
do nothing about this.  Think of the problems you see in the school - do you
want these spreading to hundreds of other churches and ministries?
	Even beyond that, it is the responsibility of a Christian to deal with the
problems he sees in the world around him the best way he can.  We see
problems at PCC and we must do something to help.  Will you pray?  Will you
voice your opinion?  Will you do what you can to bring this place back to
true Christian ideals?  Or will you allow yourself to live, silent, with the
error?
That is what this Voice can do.  It can help to unite us into a single, much
louder sound.  It can speak to those inside and out who do not know the
problems and the issues, bring these things to their attention, and apply the
pressure to make changes.  It can solve the grumbling by giving us
encouragement and support, showing through Scripture and reason what must be
changed.  That is a tall order, but it is exactly what this Voice should be
striving for.
	I see the possibility of the Voice falling to the wayside in one area.  It
could very naturally become a way to vent frustrations.  That is
understandable (I have some frustrations of my own) but it can do much damage
- possibly more damage than if this paper had never existed.  Please do not
make this a way to yell and rage and verbally spit at the leadership.  Our
single goal for now should be changing school policy:  the lack of checks and
balances on the administration and the missing trust.  If we can accomplish
that we will be able to discuss openly everything else.  Imagine, hearing the
issues discussed between faculty, staff, students, and administration!
 Imagine being allowed to have another opinion without hiding it!  These are
things to aim for.
	The most powerful thing on earth is an idea, because ideas have the ability
to motivate people to action.  Let us make sure that before God the ideas we
set forth in the Student Voice are true and good, and then let us pray that
He will help us see them through.  I am excited, God can work!  If this place
is still His there is still a chance to correct the problems we see.  May
each one reading this become part of the solution, using all the voices they
have to cry out for change.

************************************************************

>>> Comment from a student regarding the school's policy towards elections.

Dear Student V, 
	I am writing in response to the elections.  I realize that this
may not be the best time to write, due to the fact that by the time this
is read, the elections will be over, but it needs to be said.  For the past
two months, we as students have been bombarded with the message to
vote, preferably here in Escambia county.  Supposedly, it is the
school's position not to endorse specific candidates or positions.  Why
then has someone told us, from the pulpit of the Dale Horton Auditorium
just this week, to "vote for the Dole of our choice"?  If the school
does not tell us how to vote, why then have lists been posted on many
bulletin boards around campus giving "suggested" voting tips for Amendment
voting.  On each list the amendment number is given, then it is
followed by either, "yes", or "no" (the choice that PCC supports).  
	If the school really wished to help, yet not tell us how to vote,
then why couldn't they list the possible amendments?  Do not insult our
intelligence by insinuating that the students cannot understand
amendment wording.  We are college students.

>>> Let's think about this for a second. . . .  If the school tells you what
time to go to bed, what clothes to wear, how to wear your hair, what
elevators to use, when to pray, what to think, what to accept as truth -
would it surprise you to think that they would also tell you how to vote??

It seems that we may also have a legal problem here.  I don't know the law in
this area, but I don't think a tax exempt organization can support any
particular candidate.  I would also agree with you that by the time you are
in college, if the college is doing its job correctly, there would be no need
to explain each amendment as if you were a child.  But, hey, it's PCC. . . .
- The Voice

############################################################

Your comments and opinions are welcome.  The Student Voice
can be reached at   studentv@aol.com
                         
############################################################

     THE STUDENT VOICE, PCC's alternative newsletter