#############################################################
The Student Voice Issue 6, Number 2 3.28.1997
#############################################################
410+ Readers - some agree, some disagree, others don't care
#############################################################
Is what we say true, or is it not true?
#############################################################
Who We Are:
The Student Voice is a bi-weekly, on-line commentary and editorial page about
the problems that are prevalent at Pensacola Christian College. As an
institution that considers itself at the pinnacle of true Christianity, PCC
ought to be willing to defend its practices with Scripture and common sense,
but unfortunately, when one compares the "system" and the "spirit" of PCC
with true Christianity, PCC falls far short. Our purpose is three-fold:
(1) To provide public exposure regarding the practices at PCC;
(2) To compare PCC dogma with Scriptural principle, generally accepted
societal behavior, and the law of reason;
(3) By bringing about this exposure, to see PCC make some positive changes in
the areas of discipline, communication with parents and students, church
practice, ethical behavior, and educational philosophy.
Acts 17:11 "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they
received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures
daily, whether those things were so."
#############################################################
QUOTES OF THE WEEK
"Delusion is insanity where one persistently believes supposed facts which
have no real existence except in his perverted imagination, and against all
evidence and probability, and conducts himself, however logically, upon the
assumption of their existence."
- Justice Gray, in Matter of Will of White
"The response of liberalism was not to turn to religion, which modernity had
seemingly made irrelevant, but to abandon reason. Hence, there have appeared
philosophies claiming that words can carry no definite meaning or that there
is no reality other than one that is 'socially constructed.' A reality so
constructed, it is thought, can be decisively altered by social or cultural
edict, which is a prescription for coercion."
- Robert Bork, from SLOUCHING TOWARDS GOMORRAH
"For this is the true strength of guilty kings,
When they corrupt the souls of those they rule."
- Matthew Arnold, from MEROPE
"You need to learn to do what people tell you to do."
- Dr. Greg Mutsch, PCC Chapel
#############################################################
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 1.
I. Voice Announcements
II. Request For Additional Voice Writers
III. "Holier Than God" by, Rev. Andrew Sandlin
IV. Essays
A. "Trying to Figure Out the Much Ballyhooed 'Spirit' " by, Paul
S. Perdue
B. "ISOLATIONISM: The Gospel of the Fundamentalist Movement" by,
Nolan H. Bobbitt
Page 2.
V. Some Food For Thought
V!. Your Comments
VII. Some Words From Oliver Wendel Holmes
#############################################################
I. VOICE ANNOUNCEMENTS
>>> If you have not received or responded to the Voice survey, we would ask
for your participation in this matter. Contact us for further information.
>>> We want to extend an invitation to anyone who wants to write an essay in
opposition to anything The Voice has written, and if anyone is interested in
a "point/counterpoint" type of debate with The Voice, contact us for more
information.
>>> If you would like any copies of back issues, please check out our web
page at
The Student Voice
or
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/7706
If you have trouble accessing this page, please let us know, and we will send
you any information you need.
>>> If you do not wish to receive The Student Voice, please drop us an e-mail
and let us know. If you know of someone else who would be interested in
receiving The Student Voice, let us know.
#############################################################
II. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL VOICE WRITERS
The Student Voice is looking to expand its "editorial staff" by adding
TWO additional writers to contribute relevant articles and editorials on a
regular monthly basis for The Voice. These positions, however, are very
issue-specific. Here is what we are looking for:
1.) Someone inside the PCC community to write general articles of
student/alumni interest regarding life on campus. This person will cover the
events and issues that occur inside the walls of PCC from an insider's
perspective. PLEASE NOTE that ANY perspective is welcome.
2.) Someone possessing a Bible/theology degree to write about general
theological issues relevant to PCC AND fundamentalism in general. This
person will write editorials relating to general issues of theology as they
relate to modern Christianity and their relation to PCC and modern
fundamentalist thinking.
Anyone interested please contact us here at for more
information. Unfortunately, we can only compensate you with a friendly smile
and a hearty slap on the back. We do not discriminate on the basis of race,
gender, looks, financial status, GPA or collegian membership, but we DO
discriminate heavily on ideological position. Thank you.
#############################################################
III. "Holier Than God"
"Holier Than God"
By: Rev. Andrew Sandlin, from the Chalcedon Report, No. 380, March 1997, p. 3
The young mother, a "pillar of the church," to whom other wives and
mothers looked for guidance, lamented that the sight of her shirtless pastor
playing basketball at an all-men's game at the local YMCA reduced her to
"tears." To her, his lack of "spirituality" was evident (to her way of
thinking, male shirtlessness was an instance of "carnality"). When soon this
same mother had abandoned the church and her husband, and had begun
copulating with high-school boys, more than a few associates recognized the
irony.
A woman wrote Chalcedon that she appreciated our favorable review of Jim
West's Drinking With Calvin and Luther, agreeing with the evident premise
that the Bible does not forbid the consumption of all alcoholic beverages.
She chided us, however, for refusing to recognize that God "holds his people
to a higher standard [than the Bible (!)]."
A Pharisaic church member spoke condescendingly of the pastor, who
showed his children the movie The Lion King, and refused to make ladies'
attire in the congregation a hobby horse.
An anabaptist pamphleteer was scandalized that a Christian
Reconstructionist author had noted God's blessings bestowed on those who
deceived the wicked to advance God's cause (Ex. 1:16-20; Jos. 2:1-4; 6:17),
as well as God's deception of the wicked himself (2 Chr. 18:20, 21:2 Thes.
2:6-12). This Pharisee embraced what Reventlow identified as the left-wing
reformers' dedication to "autonomous morality. . . the binding character of
which lies in the fact that it is natural and therefore clear to all"
(Henning Graf Reventlow, The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the
Modern World, Philadelphia, 1985, p. 71); that is, it was a denial of
theocentric Biblical authority. This pamphleteer, who claims to believe the
Bible "from cover to cover," was dedicated to the secular humanist notion of
a morality to which both god and man must bow down. It is no surprise that
the man is an Arminian, who (ironically?) has difficulty telling the truth
about others.
These are common episodes among the modern antinomian Pharisees, who
abominate divorce while excusing adultery, who abhor alcohol but overlook
slander, and who excoriate movies but denounce tithing.
Because man cannot exist without law, Pharisees never abandon law
altogether, but rather replace Biblical law with their own extra-Biblical
humanistic version of law, usually suffocating and sometimes totalitarian.
Nor is the sin limited to the Roman Catholics and the fundamentalists, who
are often accused (and often rightly) of such humanism. This sin pervades
all sectors of the modern church, including Reformed.
These Pharisees, almost always fanatical enemies of the Old Testament
(the New Testament furnishes a "higher, spiritual" morality), erect in their
minds an arbitrary standard, their fellows, and one which even God must
reverence. The ulimate moral and ethical standard derives from their own
depraved and guilt-ridden mind rather than from the objective, infallible
word of God.
They often reek of the neo-Platonic contempt for things physical: as one
noted Pharisaic Bible lecturer contended, it is evil for a husband to see his
wife nude! (He himself, incidentally, was never married.)
For these Pharisees, salvation is largely defined in terms of escape -
escape from the body, from the world, from godly obedience and
responsibility. Escape is always easier than obedience, and they much prefer
the lazy route.
By contrast, the obedient, world-conquering Christian perceives the Holy
Bible as the only infallible ethical standard to which he can be held or to
which he can hold others. The lust for "holiness" above and apart from the
Bible is the lust of the apostate man. The judgment on all such is the
judgment of the Pharisees: "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye
escape the damnation of hell?" (Mt. 23:33).
#############################################################
IV. ESSAYS
"Trying to Figure Out the Much Ballyhooed 'Spirit' "
By: Paul S. Perdue
[It must be noted at the outset of this discussion that this discussion
itself will make little, if any, sense to those not substantially familiar
with the environment, practices and regulations governing the community at
PCC. Although the term "spirit" is a widely diverse term, its use at PCC is
quite peculiar and should be recognized as such. The following discussion
presumes this requisite fundamental understanding.]
INTRODUCTION
"Catch the Spirit!" can be seen on each issue of the PCC Update. . . .
Some of the first words printed in the college catalogue are "[T]he College
may insist on the withdrawal of a student at any time that [he or she] does
not conform to the SPIRIT OF THE MINISTRY." (emphasis added.) With all of
PCC's talk of "spirit" and its constant maneuvering to make it a relevant
factor in everyday life on campus, one could almost assume that paranormal
activity is an essential tenet of fundamentalism. Of course, this is being a
bit facetious, but consider how pervasive the spirit idea is, and how often a
student must be cognizant of it.
The idea of "spirit" is used in three different and distinct contexts at
PCC, and in each context a student must understand the nuances involved and
how they play into his or her responsibility on campus. First, there is the
encouragement to "catch the spirit;" second, there is the command to "conform
to the spirit;" and third is the interplay of the Holy Spirit, which is
always a relevant factor within any Christian environment. (This essay will
only be dealing with the first two contexts.)
The basic, yet serious problem is that while both of these spirit
contexts are extremely important for a student to understand and to apply to
their lives on campus, neither of them is clearly defined, and no one, I
propose, truly knows what they mean, or more accurately, what PCC holds to be
their meaning and application.. In other words, while a student is REQUIRED
to know what "spirit" means in both contexts, he is at the same time
explicitly PROHIBITED by the administration from knowing what they mean.
This, I submit to you, is completely unacceptable. It is unacceptable for
two reasons: first, PCC can use this, and DOES use this, to jerk around
students unmercifully and unjustly. Let me illustrate it with the following
colloquy:
PCC: "Since you, [student], have not complied with the spirit of this
ministry, you are hereby sanctioned with [insert your favorite sanction
here]."
Student: "Well, I would like to know how I can ‘conform to the spirit of the
ministry'."
PCC: "We refuse to tell you how you can ‘conform to the spirit,' but you,
[student], must suffer the adverse consequences anyway."
Second, the risk to the student in not understanding the "spirit" is
very serious - i.e., expulsion - while the burden on the administration to
remedy this problem - i.e., simply define what "spirit" means is extremely
small.
Again, for either reason, this practice, assuming it exists, is totally
unacceptable. Now, let us explore each "spirit" context.
CATCHING THE SPIRIT
Everyone has at one time or another seen this phrase in some PCC
commercial. All students are encouraged to "catch the spirit," yet this begs
two very important questions - what is this "spirit" that a student is to
catch, and how does a student "catch" it? Before you dismiss this as an
irrelevant meandering down some winding rabbit trail of semantics, understand
that students are constantly encouraged to do this. If students are
continually encouraged to do this, then it is obviously important to the
administration. If it is important to the administration, then it should
certainly be important to the student.
So, what is this "spirit"? For all intents and practical purposes, the
"spirit" would seem to be that which would make a student happy and content
on campus, whatever it is. Since we would not be able to find a definition
of the "spirit" anywhere, at least in this particular context, and since we
would all agree that an assumed and intended result of "catching the spirit"
is that the student who does "catch" it would be happy and content, we must
ask ourselves what makes a student happy and content at PCC? We could then
presume that this, at least in part, makes up the "spirit." Here are some
possibilities:
1.) Following all of the rules without question.
2.) Following PCC's version of spirituality without question.
3.) Accepting PCC's policies without question.
Well, the common theme is obvious: as long as a student "goes with the
flow" and does not exercise his natural inclination to ask or to question
anything, the "spirit" will be caught. A student can get involved, be
productive as a student and do everything he or she is supposed to do, but it
that student questions anything, he or she will be at odds with the "spirit"
of PCC; and if this same student never gets involved but follows along
without questioning, he or she will be treated well by the administration.
In other words, it seems quite clear that the "spirit" equals lack of
independent thought.
For a college to maintain as a fundamental element of its educational
philosophy an encouragement, at least, NOT to exercise that mind which is
supposed to be the entity exercised in an educational setting is an
impermissible use of authority. I will concede that PCC technically has the
right, but I cannot see how this is a permissible use of that right. I will
also concede that I am making assumptions and drawing conclusions from them,
but this is because PCC refuses to answer the questions directly.
CONFORMING TO THE SPIRIT
This is by far the more egregious violation of basic ethical practices,
and although it has been touched on at times by The Voice in piecemeal
fashion, I want to deal with it here in a more straightforward manner. [
"Attendance at (PCC) is a privilege and not a right. Students forfeit this
privilege if they do not conform to the standards and ideals of work and life
of the College, and the College may insist on the withdrawal of a student at
any time that the student, in the opinion of the College, does not conform to
the spirit of the ministry."] Again, this phrase begs two questions: what is
this "spirit," and how does a student "conform" to it?
The very serious ramifications of this can be established factually. It
is a FACT that this is a "rule" to be followed. It is also a FACT that
nowhere are the terms "spirit" or "conform" defined for the help of those
students who may not be so in tune with PCC thinking [sic] that it is
automatically an inherent part of their being. It is a FACT that students
have been expelled, SOLELY ON THE BASIS that they did not "conform to the
spirit." It is a FACT as well that the administration refuses to answer
students who ask what they have to do to "conform to the spirit." And it is
also a FACT that a student may invest years of his or her life at PCC and
thousands of dollars to support this ministry and yet PCC will still expel
that student on nothing tangible, but rather on the mere whim of some unknown
committee.
I challenge any person alive to justify this practice. And I challenge
any person alive to tell this forum how this issue is irrelevant, or should
be left alone, or should not be mine or anyone else's business. And I
challenge anyone to tell us how it can possibly be justified Scripturally,
logically, or on any other legitimate basis you wish to use that a school who
takes a student's time and money can tell a student to abide by a rule which
they blatantly REFUSE both to define and to tell that student how he is to
abide by it, and then expel that student for not abiding by it!! Call The
Voice crazy, but there does not appear to be any basis for this blatant abuse
of authority.
Now, I imagine that some of you are thinking that hey, PCC can
legitimately expel or keep whoever they want for whatever reason they want
to. While I do not agree that this is necessarily true, I will concede it
for the sake of this argument. Even if this is true, there is a world of
difference between expelling a student simply because PCC wants to (even
though the student has invested time and money) and expelling a student for
not "conforming to the spirit" of PCC. One is premised upon PCC's inherent
right to control the population on its campus, and the other is quite
different in that it is premised upon the student's failure to abide by a
rule. In a way, I fear even raising this distinction for fear that PCC could
start expelling students simply because they have the right to, thus avoiding
the overt ethical problem. Lord help the students if they do. . . .
So, what is this "spirit"? Or probably more accurately, can this
question even be answered? The first question that should naturally arise in
one's mind is whether the "spirit" in the first context is the same "spirit"
that is used here? Note that in the first place the student is "encouraged"
to "catch" the spirit, while in this case the student is "commanded" to
"conform" to the spirit. This would indicate that even if they are one and
the same, they have different meanings and thus different requirements. But
I do not think that they are one and the same. I do not think that they are
one and the same because if the spirit in this instance means lack of
independent thought, then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out
that this is an untenable position for an institution of higher learning to
overtly state in its own catalogue. Therefore, I will assume it is different
(although the whole problem is that I DO have to make an assumption).
It also most likely does not mean simply a failure to abide by the
rules, for if this is the case, there would be no reason to expel a student
for something that no one knows its meaning when they can expel them for
something relatively much more concrete. If a student violates a "major"
rule, then he will be expelled for that. If a student violates a "minor"
rule, then there is nothing of significance to warrant any expulsion at all.
And if a student violates a number of "minor" rules, there are adequate
provisions to deal with this without having to resort to the "spirit"
sanction.
Therefore, the "spirit" in this case means neither a restraint of
independent thought nor simply abiding by the established rules.
There are numerous other variations which we could explore - causing a
general disruption of the established order, maintaining an "improper look,"
etc. - but each of these has their own independent sanctions and would not
require resort to the "spirit" sanction.
What about "attitude"? Could it be that not "conforming to the spirit"
could simply mean "maintaining an improper attitude"? If no, then we are
obviously still left with the original question unanswered. If yes, then we
are STILL left with the original question unanswered, for "maintaining the
proper attitude" would mean the exact same thing as "conforming to the
spirit." The unanswered question would simply change to what is the
"attitude" to be maintained, and how does a student "maintain" it?
The best and only conclusion that seems capable of being drawn is that
"spirit" means whatever the PCC administration wants it to mean, which in
turn means that it really means nothing at all. There is no other conclusion
that can be drawn according to any textual reference. There is no other
conclusion that can be drawn by asking the PCC administration, and there is
no other conclusion that can be drawn logically. Therefore, the second
question of "how" a student may conform to this "spirit" cannot be answered
other than to say that if the administration decides that a student is not
conforming, there isn't a thing that student can do TO conform.
CONCLUSION
"A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the
law of the God. And unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the
moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is
a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that
uplifts human personality is just. Andy law that degrades human personality
is unjust. . . ." [Martin Luther King, from LETTER FROM THE BIRMINGHAM JAIL]
For those of you who think that PCC can do no wrong or who want to
ignore the wrong PCC does engage in, you are sanctioning these two practices:
encouraging students not to exercise independent and original thought at the
collegiate level, and requiring students to abide by a rule which the
administration refuses to tell the students how they can do this. Perhaps
you would like to rethink your position?
------------------------------
"ISOLATIONALISM: The Gospel of the Fundamentalist Movement"
By: Nolan H. Bobbitt
PCC Graduate, 1992 (BA), 1994 (MA)
The Student Voice first came to my attention in the Fall of 1996 when I
started to hear rumors drift from Pensacola to my home in Memphis, Tennessee.
I have been a regular reader of the Voice since January, and in the past two
weeks, I have decided to break my silence concerning my views on both the Voic
e and Pensacola Christian College. I have requested my name to be published
with this article because I am man enough to stand behind my views, unlike
many cowards who have chosen to cover themselves with the veil of anonymity.
I am a Minister to Students in the greatest church in America. It has
been the experiences through this church that have given me the desire to
write my views. America is in a warzone. We see strife between people of
color on a daily basis here in Memphis. We hear of conflicts between the Jew
and the Arab all the time. We read of the raging conflicts between
conservatives and liberals everytime we open a copy of our local newspaper.
None of these battles matches the magnitude of the war that I wish to
discuss. I have fought on both sides of this war. I believe that the Lord
used the experiences of my fighting to help me realize an issue of truth
which seems to escape most people. The war is the battle that takes place as
many churches take a position to choose to fight for what they call the
“fundamentals of the faith” rather than uplifting and worshipping the Father
of their faith. Many churches and Christian organizations across America
have chosen to make Standards their god, rather than making God their
standard.
When will we quit holding our thoughts and standards above what the
Scripture says is truth? What is truth? Is truth formed from the opinions
of the heart of man? Is truth agreed upon by an elite group behind closed
doors and passed on swiftly to blind followers who will never dare question
the motives of the judgment? Is truth so tangible that we can really know
the difference between what is right and wrong? I believe it is! How then
can a Christian arrive at the point of truth? It is only through comparing
ideas that we believe to be truth to the Word of God that we know to be the
ultimate truth that we come to the point of truth.
It is incumbent upon us who name the name of Christ to search His Word
and know the truth. The truth is that Jesus fought against standards all of
His earthly ministry. The scribes and Pharisees had developed an intricate
system of rules that went along with the Ten Commandments. They said that if
things were not done their way, that a person will miss Heaven. Jesus spent
His time with prostitutes, publicans, and the poor. He spent His time with
those who needed a Savior. He took a gospel of love to those who needed it
the most--the unloved. It is sad to see that although the Pharisees of
Jesus’ day are dead, that their gospel continues to live, breathe, and run
rampantly in independent churches and organizations across America.
The apostle Paul gives us some insights that I believe all Christians
need to face in Philippians 1:15-18. “Some indeed preach Christ even of envy
and strife; and some also of good will: The one preach Christ of contention,
not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: but the other of
love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. What then?
notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is
preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.” (KJV)
I will be the first one to tell you that I do not agree with the
charismatics. I do not believe in the dogma of their religion and I question
their methods, but if they preach that Christ is the only way that a man can
go to Heaven, I can and will fellowship with that brother. I have been
shunned by many friends and dear brothers in Christ because I am a Southern
Baptist. I am proud of my denomination and I will probably be a Southern
Baptist the rest of my life! I realize that I have friends who will never
invite me to preach in their pulpit because of that little word “southern” in
front of my denominational title. I preach a virgin-born, impeccable Jesus
who died on the Cross for our sins, who rose on the third day, and is coming
for His children. My convictions about the Scriptures would line up with
most PCC grads, but my standards are different. Why are we basing Christian
fellowship on our standards rather than our true convictions?
With a world dying around us, desperately seeking a Savior, why are so
many content to spend their time in a “mud-slinging” contest that cannot
possibly be won? I have a hard time understanding why brothers in Christ
will drag my name through the mud just because of my denominational
preference. When are people going to quit believing the things that they
hear and start holding those things up in light of the Word of God?
How long will Christians wait for someone else to tell them what to do?
When will Christians learn to think for themselves in the light of the Word
of God? It frightens me when I look at many in the “model” preacher-boy mode
that have graduated from the ranks of PCC. It is so sad to think that many
of these young men have gone out of school with great intentions to bombard
the world with the message of Jesus and have ship-wrecked their lives due to
immorality. These young men were taught to isolate themselves from those
with different standards.
The reason that we have problems is that we want to live in our
“protective bubble” of Christianity and have all our rules set for us.. We
can protect ourselves by living with rules that are set up for us. That’s a
great thing when you are a child, but there comes a time when children must
grow up. I am a 27 year old man who sets his own boundaries according to
what I believe God’s Word tells me to do. We must learn to function within
the world without being part of that world.
I am not saying that you should throw out your standards. I am saying
that you should not be so narrow minded as to believe that God works through
one denomination, one college, or even one newsletter.
James 3:10 admonishes us that we should not allow blessings and cursings
to come from the same mouth. I refuse to drag PCC through the mud. I refuse
to drag the Student Voice through the mud. I would like to encourage both
organizations to take a glance at the big picture. Learn to see past the
denominationalism, isolationalism, and legalism, and behold a world that is
desperately in need of a Savior.
I am going to preach Jesus until the day that I am taken home by the
Lord. I am excited that I have friends who believe that the point of truth
starts at the point of God’s great grace. I am a proud Christian who will
continue to knock down denominational walls in order to impact people with
the Gospel of Christ. My Lord is radically at work in my life daily and I
can say that the greatest time that I have is when I am serving Him.
Pensacola Christian College is not my enemy. The Student Voice is not
my enemy. My enemy is Satan and I can only defeat him through the power of
the Holy Spirit. I will continue to fight Satan. I will not be side-tracked
by those who continue to fight among themselves, trying to convince the world
that they are right. I am going to do what is in my power to reach the world
for Jesus Christ! I know that many will criticize me for not attempting to
conform people to an image. I don’t care. The only image I want to be
conformed to is that of Jesus Christ (Romans 8:29) and that is a process that
only He can complete in me (Philippians 1:6).
I know that the war between the Voice and PCC will continue to rage. I
do not agree with either group totally. My challenge is that we move beyond
a gospel of isolationalism into a realm where the gospel of Jesus Christ is
lifted up. How is this war drawing others to the foot of the Cross?
I would like to make one personal remark before I close. Many of you
will disagree with my viewpoint. If you would like to refute what I have
written, be man enough to sign your name and send your remarks to IBC
StuMin@aol.com. I’ll be man enough to face you.
#############################################################
V. FOOD FOR THOUGHT
[From regulations for journalists issued last October by China's Central
Propaganda Department. The rules appeared in the December 1996 issue of China
Focus, a newsletter published in Princeton, New Jersey.]
--------------------
"In order to guarantee unity of thinking and to avoid a negative impact on
political stability, all sensitive issues are not to be covered."
"All cases that have a significant impact or involve government officials
should not be reported."
"When reporting on issues concerning Hong Kong, the media must act in
accordance with the policy formulated by the party's Central Committee."
"Articles written by dissidents are not to be published."
"Propaganda departments must strengthen censorship of the media; those that
violate the regulations must be dealt with severely."
--------------------
[On second thought, there is one huge difference between the Chinese
Communists and PCC-- the Communists allow newspapers!]
###########################################################
VI. YOUR COMMENTS
The opinions, ideas, and facts stated in this section do not necessarily
represent those of The Student Voice. We make our best efforts to be fair
and to verify factual statements.
--------------------
Dear Voice,
While I was there my friends and I always enjoyed reading the Voice when it
came out. Then after the "Horton Sermon" everyone panicked at being caught,
and reading the Voice was like reading the Bible behind the Iron Curtain.
Actually, during vacation and now while I am in the process of changing
schools, reading the voice from the real angles in which it was written, I
was able to keep up so to speak with what was happening since I have been
gone. It was expensive to call up roommates and friends to hear that PCC had
implemented new rules like girls having to where shirts tucked in, and guys
no longer allowed to wear "Vans type" shoes or other bulky shoes.
As I have been reading the last few issues of the Voice it really stands out
in my mind as I read how opposers to the Voice really have no clue to why it
was created or its intentions. Opposers write in saying the editors of the
Voice are deliberately "trying to destroy what God has established". As I
read remarks like that I just shake my head and think how somethings just
totally go over people's heads. I personally enjoy reading Lupos and [Paul's]
commmentary's about rules and Biblical interpretations being lived out in
today's world. I find myself pointing out to my family (who all take turns
reading the voice) that, "that is exactly the way PCC and most of the
administration interpret things and really think". As I read comments from
the editors about messages or chapel announcements, my eyes are sometimes now
opened to what they were really implying at that time. Anyways, I guess I
just wanted to write and give some encouragement to you. I sometimes feel
depressed for you after reading some of the comments students and teachers
write. I don't know if I could take some of the remarks and guilt trips
readers send you. Keep up the good work and keep pressing towards the
mark..you feel God has called you to-despite what others think.
--------------------
[This was written by a current student at PCC regarding our web page - eds.]
I am aware of this disrespectful and childish effort of rebellion against a
God-honoring, God-blessed institution. I do not find it interesting nor
edifying. By the way, I am a present student of PCC. You can varify this
information by calling the Records Office.
The "StudentVulcher" is a putrid work of nothing and represents its own views
and a puny handful of cry-babies. I can assure you that the vast majority of
students think the "StudentVulcher" is a joke. Many have written-in with
wild stories of useless junk just to see if the "StudentVulcher" would be
gullable enough to gulp it down. [In other words, they deliberately lied -
eds.] Appearantly, the StudentVulcher" will print anything. That should
prove once and for all how uncredible the "StudentVulcher" is and will be.. I
guess the joke is on the "StudentVulcher!"
--------------------
On the philosophical/theological front, where in the world
does PCC get the idea that lots of money, a nice campus,
etc. is clearly indicative of being within the will of God?
I expect Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, et al, had some nice
facilities in their prime as well. They can't be serious
that prosperous = godly; otherwise Hollywood and Wall
Street are overflowing with saints.
--------------------
As a former student of Pensacola Christian High School, Bob Jones
University, and Pensacola Christian College; and now at the age of
40, I find your Student Voice publication to be silly attack on a
conservative institution that you don't like. Get a life.
-------------------
[Voice],
The excerpt from “Academic Freedom” was good. The issue addressed, freedom
and Christian education, is what I find to be one of the central points of
Student Voice discussions. Those who write in opposition to the voice aren't
even concerned with this issue, yet I feel it to be at the foundation. An
education that does not challenge is indoctrination. This is not what our
generation needs and throughout my time at PCC I was concerned with the
cookie cutter mentality at the campus. This paragraph from “Academic
Freedom” said it well.
"The Christian college must provide the opportunity and the atmosphere for an
open discussion of new ideas and significant issues. Hackneyed clichés and
parroted answers smack more of indoctrination than education. Liberty
flourishes under neither totalitarianism nor anarchy, neither legalism nor
license. It thrives under law, but is smothered in an atmosphere of fear and
suspicion. Adolescents need frank discussion and patient guidance rather
than restrictions whose unexplained or inconsistent inflexibility incites
reactions and builds negative temperaments. To repress student freedom of
thought and expression is like brainwashing; they should rather be inspired
to channel their freedom into constructive Christian thought and action."
If our generation does anything but hide and wait for the “rapture”, we
cannot build ourselves personal cities and communities running out
occasionally to “witness”. We need to address intelligently and openly all
issues and not just try to conform the issues to our preconceived world view.
I also felt that your analysis of the second wave was penetrating. I'm glad
that you chose to move on from fighting the anonymity and rebellion issues.
I suppose it would be to much to ask everyone to leave the issue of
bitterness behind as well.
It was hard for me to not choke when I read the letter from S- referring to
your writing the Voice as a need to rescue Phil because he was, "kicked" out.
Then to go on to read the authors weak logic and Cliché filled arguments was
almost more than I could bare.
" Why don't you let it go? Why don't you use your energy and your knowledge
and help the unsaved. Go out on a Bible club. Or go door-to-door witnessing
to people and sharing the Gospel with them."
Do we really need another Christian club?
It also frustrates me to listen to people talk about the "Internet" (and
America Online) as if it were something one person owns or when they speak
about it as if it were a clever game. I feel like I'm returning to
elementary and having playground arguments again. It only proves to me the
mentality of those who never challenge their own beliefs or make an attempt
to understand or get involved in what's going on with our generation. If
"letting go and letting God" has any meaning it should mean letting go of our
religious traditions and clichés and letting God do something new.
-------------------
As a 1993 and 1995 graduate of PCC, I am very familiar with the rules and
regulations of the college. I also want you to note, that I was just on
campus last month for recruitment. Did I see a lot of depressed students
who were forced to be there? No, I saw thousands of students at the college
who had a deep desire to serve God the best that they could.
With that said, do all the rules make absolute sense? No, but then again,
we assume that there is not a reason. After being on staff for two years, I
came to realize that a large majority of the rules were put into effect
after someone did something extremely stupid that the school hadn't really
thought about. In order to avoid a similar situation, they needed to add a
rule to address the situation
You talk about the "spending" of demerits for things like a weekend "cut".
Why does the college give out those demerits? For a very simple reason --
to remain consistent. If you miss a required activity, it is 25 demerits.
Its a simple as that. To make exceptions defeats the rule. Are they happy
about you going? No, but they're at least gracious enough to let you go as
long as you accept the just punishment. Let's face it, before you left you
knew what the result would be. Don't think I know what I'm talking about?
My sophmore year I skipped a crew class so that I could go on a dating
outing. Did I know that I would receive 25 demerits? Yes. Did I receive
them? Yes. Did I deserve them for my violation of school rules? Yes. Was
it necessarily a sin for me to skip that class? No, but I did break the
rule, and I had to accept the consequences.
As someone who married a floorleader, I also have a fairly good grasp on
shadowing. My wife only had to shadow two girls the entire time that she
was a floorleader. Both of the girls that were shadowed were expelled, and
were shadowed for under 24 hours before their departure. But why do they
shadow students? Part of the reason is to cut down on the number or rumors
flying around campus. Part of it is to make sure that an attitude is not
going to infect everyone that that person comes in contact with. It is also
a Biblical principle. Didn't know that? Read I Cornithians chapter 5. The
sinner is removed from fellowship for a time for that person's own good. I
personally know five people that were expelled and later came back to
graduate -- without any hard feelings toward the school. As a teacher at a
Christian high school, we do basically the same thing to students that are
expelled -- they are sent to the office, and there they sit until their
parents come to pick them up. Why? To cut down on the negative influence
that that particular person could exhert on the high school. Do we accept
them back? Yes, but not that school year.
I will freely admit that I made many jokes regarding PCC during my time
there, and even in the years after I graduated. However, that's what they
were, jokes. I still believe the purpose of the college is correct, and I
still strongly support the college. I recently visited Clearwater Christian
College, and I also really like that college. Are they the same? Hardly,
but knowing myself personally, I would not have come out of CCC with as much
character and I graduated from PCC with. Yes, those demerits (even those
for Improper procedure) do build character.
-------------------
Your website is excellent. I am very glad that you took the time and
courage to speak up about these things. Christianity has been severly
perverted over the years by human thought rather than Christ like
thought. I don't think that Christ would have disapproved of hand
holding, nor thought of two sibling spending time together, or even
engaged in innocent physical contact, as evil! It really upsets me that
people have perverted the teachings of Christ by implementing controls
which are not in anyway for the glorification of Him, but rather to
rectify their own perverse paranoia, and for the benefit of the college
institution rather than Christ...which is WHO they were supposed to
glorify in maintaining such an institution! And, it seems a bit
convenient to me that they can gather the tuition and then remove a
student, at will, for any reason at all! Seems pretty PROFITABLE to me!!
(Isn't greed a sin?)
At any rate, keep up the good work. My fiancee attended Pensacola
Christian College....for one year...he got kicked out! :-) He completely
sympathizes! Take care and hang tough!
-------------------
I received my first copy of your newsletter, and I must say, it was quite
similar to what I was expecting. I heard about your newsletter from my
brother (who had to call me because he can't e-mail me any more!) who saw
your bill-board in Pensacola and asked me to investigate. He knows me,
although I am a PCC graduate, to have an open mind :-). Although I was
not a huge fan of many of the policies of PCC during my years there, I
have, since, grown to appreciate some of the discipline that I learned
while I was there.
I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that PCC was the college God wanted
for me to attend. Many times in the past few years I have thanked God
for my experiences there--both bad and good (I had plenty of both)--which
have made me the person I am today. I'm not perfect, but I have the
tools necessary to become more Christ-like.
I teach in an inner-city school in the New York Metro area. I have seen
many teachers, workers, and leaders come and go during this time. As a
teacher, I am better trained in my academic fields, in my teaching
procedures, and in my general classroom management than most of my
colleagues, some of whom have graduated from well-known state
universities and other Christian colleges. I was trained that what I do
is a ministry, not just a job, and that I can only accomplish anything
through God's help--most Christian colleges happen to leave these things
out of their teacher-training curriculum, as well as other incidentals,
such as making bulletin boards,writing good lesson plans, faithfulness
church attendance, etc. PCC-trained teachers have a remarkable
reputation for their excellence in preparation and classroom skills.
However, I am not a spineless non-thinker who absorbs any drivel that is
presented before me. As a female student at PCC, I was continually
reminded of the double standard that existed between male and female
students regarding policies and rules. The more I hear of certain
vice-presidents of the college, the less I am impressed by them. Too
many of my floor-leaders evidenced hypocrisy in their own lives. Some of
the policies regarding PCC's relationship to the town of Pensacola are
questionable from a biblical standpoint. Too many valuable faculty
members have "disappeared" for unknown reasons.
There are many things at PCC that are eyebrow-raising. Yet, one of the
biggest things that I appreciated about PCC was that I could be my own
person while I was there. Yes, I had to wear the "rubber stamp"
sometimes (essay exams in history classes, and by the way, I have yet to
examine a history department in ANY college or university that is as
committed as PCC is to primary sources in their research of their texts
and teaching ), but I learned that no-one was going to preach about
incidentals. I never heard a sermon on women wearing pants, and was
never made to feel unspiritual because I chose to wear them at my home.
I never heard a sermon on dating standards--only general guidelines were
presented before we left each semester. I heard one sermon on attending
movies, which, for me, clarified the school's position, but Dr. Baer
(where is he, by the way) left the choice up to us in our study of God's
Word. I understand that things have changed (KJV-only position, etc.),
but I saw even items like this as guidelines for our stay at the school.
We were taught to look at the "present dominant association" in order to
govern our lives during breaks and after graduation. Some universities
openly declare they want carbon copies of their administration as their
alumni--PCC never did. It's a good thing, too, because I definitely am
not one.
The greatest difference I notice of PCC and A Beka Books (which, by the
way, makes PCC quite affordable) is the fact that they never publicly
criticize other institutions or organizations. I have been to several
other Christian educational institutions which do not have the same
integrity--I never appreciated this until I went places where criticism
is the norm, rather than the exception.
I expected, as I mentioned earlier, your newsletter something like a
cheezy Rush Limbaugh on the Internet. And I see many of those qualities
in your criticism of others. As a professional writer,I see that your
writing style is condescending, flippant, and illogical. As a student of
debate, I observe that your arguments are frequently immature,
irrelevant, and insignificant. However, there seems also to be
intelligence and genuine concern in your work.
Something to consider: I went to PCC knowing that I was going to follow
many rules that I did not like. I also knew that I have (still) a
tendency for finding trouble, so I took as many classes and participated
in as many activities as I possibly could while I was there so I would
stay out of trouble.. Yet, because we do live in a free market society,
I, at any time, had the right to terminate my relationship with the
college. Because I knew that God wanted me to stay there, I followed the
rules with the proper attitude (attempted, anyway), and learned many
lessons. Some things God wanted me to learn I refused to cooperate
for--He keeps sending me these things until I have to deal with them. I
tried breaking the rules regularly (I could have been shipped more than
once if anyone knew . . .), but I got tired of looking over my shoulder
all the time (Rulers are not a terror to those who do good). I did find
that when I was open about certain misbehaviors that I instigated, the
administration was compassionate and concerned--usually. Not everyone I
knew was so fortunate. We have/had a right to criticize what went/goes
on at PCC--I don't question that. My greatest concern for this
newsletter is this--what kind of a testimony is this presenting to an
unsaved person who sees your web page? Is this how you wish to present
Christianity to someone who accidentally or unwittingly investigates it?
Scripture declares that when we have a problem with someone, we seek them
privately, go again with a witness, and ultimately cut them off from
fellowship. Never does it command that an open forum be displayed;
never does it command that we take as many dissenters with us . We are
displaying our greatest testimony to the unsaved world around us when we
show love for our Christian brothers--even when we don't agree. I have
learned from being in the "real world" that it takes more effort to
tolerate someone with higher standards than lower, that it is harder to
maintain a Christian testimony in a Christian work place than in a
secular one, and that those who sit around and complain aren't the ones
doing the real work.
Although I don't mind if you use portions of my letter, please keep my
name anonymous--I do have to respect family members who would disagree
with me and don't want, by association, to face repercussions.
-------------------
[This is in reference to the Voice-dissenter quips in Issue 6, No. 2 - eds.]
Paul. those quotes are very funny. maybe we should have a vote on the top 5
or
something. the one on anonymity making you unreal, blah blah reality, always
makes me laugh. It really is an embarassment that these people will have the
same degree we do.
Also, concerning the quotes, do you notice how many of them are quotes or
paraphrases of things they hear at PCC: pillow your head, "humanistic
philosophy" (one of schettler's favs- whoever wrote that didn't even know
what
he was saying), that passage on things the lord hates...haughty eyes, etc was
the same passage horton used. These people truly can't think for themselves.
frightening.
-------------------
If you and others who think like you about PCC want to do what is
right in your own eyes, then there are plenty of secular universities
and even plenty of "Christian" colleges (Wheaton College comes to
mind) for you to attend. At the University of Wisconsin - Madison
where I graduated 20 years ago, you could smoke dope, take a shower
with the opposite sex in the dorm showers, get drunk every night, and
wear what you please. Wheaton College, while not that free, does not
have the Biblical standards that PCC has so again you could mostly do
what was right in your own eyes there also.
It is too bad that certain young people have to chaff against
Christian standards and try to ruin an institution. I suggest that
godly young people have no problems with the standards of PCC. I have
seen young people of both types and thank God our sons have it in
their hearts to do what is right in the eyes of God and have even
more strict standards for themselves than PCC.
--------------------
A response to the counter-response.
This letter is in response to pg. two of the most recent newsletter [Issue 5,
No. 3] write-in by an obviously devout PCC grad. I don't really understand
what all the fuss is about. PCC and the editor of the Voice have both gotten
a little wacky. I don't like it that everything stated in the newsletter,
either by Mr. Perdue, Lupos, or the others that write in, is always
"backed-up" by Biblical principles. I agree with almost all of what the
Voice stands for. I also think that PCC stands strong in its principles. I
just cannot understand why those of you opposed to the Voice are so offended.
They are at least trying to state why they believe what they believe. Those
of you who do not agree with them cannot seem to defend PCC, but simply
attack the founders of our newsletter. Why not shed a little light on the
subject? If you can dispute the "issues" not the persons, then please
continue writing in. However, I have not seen any thing of this sort. In
every issue I have ever read, all the "defending" done by those in
disagreement is some form of personal attack against the editor or
questioning his reasons and motives for the newsletter. It doesn't much
matter what his personal reasons are for writing, but it does seem quite
evident that he is not alone in what he believes. So PLEASE, if you must
make attacks, make them at his stand, not why he has this stand.
I was kicked out of PCC for riding home from work with a girl. I worked down
on government street at MRI. I didn't have a car at college, so I had to
ride with whoever could take me. One night all the guys from PCC left before
I did. I had to make the decision to either be late for 11:00 curfue or take
a chance on riding with a girl. I had been a moderately good student until
this point. I had never been shadowed, campused, socialed, or any of those
other things unique to life at PCC. I was called to the dean's offices AFTER
my last exam. They couldn't kick me out. It wouldn't have done any good.
So they broke their own rules. Instead of kicking me out at 150 demerits as
the handbook states, they cancelled my reservation for the next semester. It
really hurt me. I haven't seen my roommates for more than a couple of days
in the past year and one half. I also lost all credit for my classes and a
couple thousand dollars to boot. I tried to re-enroll twice, but was denied.
I don't know who turned me in, who decided to cancel my reservation, or who
wouldn't let me back in to school. I do however know that PCC was the worst
thing that has ever happened to me. I'm not asking for an apology from the
administration, simply an explantion.
I think Paul and Arlin should go one-on-one in an open forum at a neutral
place. We could invite all students, current and former. I know that Dr.
Horton wouldn't do it. But I would just like to hear him defend himself so
there would be no confusion.
I heard that he wasn't even a real person, merely animitronics with a voice
box controlled by a secret society of Legalists!!
###########################################################
VII. SOME WORDS FROM OLIVER WENDEL HOLMES
[From Abrams v. United States (1919)]
Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If
you have no doubt of your premises or your power and want a certain result
with all your heart you naturally express your wishes in law and sweep away
all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you
think the speech impotent, as when a man says that he has squared the circle,
or that you do not care whole-heartedly for the result, or that you doubt
either your power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has
upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they
believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good
desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of
truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition
of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes
safely can be carried out.
###########################################################
The Student Voice is:
Paul S. Perdue: Newsletter Editor
lupos: Web Page Editor
The Brain Trust: 8 advisors to the editors
Web Page
Please feel free to voice your thoughts, stories, and opinions.
Thank you for reading The Voice!
###########################################################
THE STUDENT VOICE, PCC's alternative newsletter