################################################################
     The Student Voice     Issue 7, Number 1     4.11.1997
################################################################
     421+ Readers - some agree, some disagree, others don't care
################################################################

     The Voice - An attempt to improve, not to destroy.

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

     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."

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

     Correction

   It has been brought to our attention by a PCC faculty member that PCC
faculty and staff ARE permitted to read The Student Voice, and if we said or
implied otherwise, we apologize for the mistake.  The STUDENTS, however, are
NOT permitted to read this newsletter.

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

     QUOTES OF THE WEEK

"We only know what is on our mind, rarely what is in our mind."
     - Robert E. Ornstein

"Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ
from the prejudices of their social enviroment, most people are even
incapable of forming such opinions."  
     - Albert Einstein

"Thou waitest for the spark from heaven! and we,
Light half-believers in our casual creeds. . .
Who hesitate and falter life away,
And lose to-morrow the ground won to-day ---
   Ah, do not we, Wanderer, await it too?"
     - Matthew Arnold, from THE SCHOLAR-GIPSY

"I thought God was bigger than Dr. Horton."
		-- Jim Schettler, Pastor of The Campus Church in a Senior Class Meeting

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

     TABLE OF CONTENTS

   Page 1.
   I.   Voice Announcements
   II.   Request For An Additional Voice Writer
   III.  Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due
   IV.  Survey Results
   V.   Essays
          A.  "Is Dr. Mutsch Playing With Fire?"  by Paul S. Perdue

   Page 2.
          B.  "Another Look At PCC and Its Philosophy"  Guest essay by Peter
Gage (96)
   VI.   Your Comments   
   V!I.   Does This Remind You of Someplace You Know Of? 

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

     I.     VOICE ANNOUNCEMENTS

>>> 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 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 AN ADDITIONAL VOICE WRITER

     The Student Voice is looking to expand its "editorial staff" by adding
ONE additional writer to contribute relevant articles and editorials on a
regular monthly basis for The Voice.   Here is what we are looking for:

     >>>   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.

     Anyone interested please contact us here at <studentv@aol.com> 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.     GIVING CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE

   The Student Voice would like to give a deserving hand to the PCC
administration for their recent effort to support the local community.  The
Pensacola News Journal  printed a letter in its April 1 edition by Eugene E.
Roberts, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Northwest Florida Blood Center
regarding PCC's campus-wide blood drive.
   On March 3, PCC organized its own blood drive to help those in desperate
need of donations.  "Pensacola Christian College, in its effort to support
the community, chose a blood drive as the vehicle by which it could reach
those in need," said Mr. Roberts.
   We just thought it would be appropriate to not only thank PCC for doing
what Christians should be doing, but to acknowledge our support for them in
this effort to help their own local community.  Our hats are off.

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

     IV.     SURVEY RESULTS

   We want to thank all of you who responded to our survey.  Although not as
many people answered as we would have liked, many did, and the results are
interesting.
   Please keep in mind that this was NOT a formal survey with all of the
procedural checks, but rather it was an informal questionnare to help us get
a better idea of the pulse of those of you who read The Voice.
   Many of you also included comments with your answers to certain questions,
and we have inserted many of those as well.
   These results are from just over 60% of the readers polled responding.
-----------------------------

Question 1.

My relation to PCC is:
     a.   I graduated with a degree (any degree will suffice)
     b.   I attended, but did not graduate
     c.   I never attended, but have immediate relatives who attend or have
attended
     d.   I never attended

A.  57.5%
B.  25
C.  12.5
D.  5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 2.

Of the 21 issues, 1 transcript and 1 Introductory letter, I have read:
     a.   Most or all of The Voice publications (20-23)
     b.   Over half, but not most (12-19)
     c.   Less than half, but quite a bit (5-11)
     d.   Very few (0-4)

A.  65%
B.  15
C.  15
D.  5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 3.

I agree with the SUBSTANCE of The Voice (do not factor in your opinion of the
METHOD, just the substance):
     a.   All or most of the time
     b.   Some of the time
     c.   Very little or none of the time

A.  77.5%
B.  15
C.  5
No response.  2.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 4.

I agree with the METHOD of The Voice (by "method," we mean an on-line
newsletter that aggressively addresses certain controversial issues):
     a.   Very much
     b.   Yes, but only because there are no other methods
     c.   Not at all
     d.   No, but only because I think there are other methods

A.  40%
B.  47.5
C.  5
D.  5
No response.  2.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 5.

     a.   I DO think there needs to be a significant change of policy at PCC
     b.   I DO NOT think there needs to be a significant change of policy at
PCC

A.  92%
B.  5
No response.  2.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 6.

     a.   I AM willing, upon adequate persuasion, to change my views about
the issues discussed
     b.   I AM NOT willing to change my views about the issues discussed
under any circumstances

A.  97.5%
B.  2.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 7.

     a.   I DO think the current students should be permitted to read The
Voice
     b.   I DO NOT think the current students should be permitted to read The
Voice

A.  92.5%
B.  7.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 8.

     a.   I WOULD be willing to put my name on a list stating that PCC is in
need of some significant change (this would be neutral of, and would indicate
niether support nor non-support for, The Voice)
     b.   I WOULD NOT be willing to put my name on such a list

A.  62.5%
B.  32.5
No response.  5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 9.

     a.   I HAVE seen the official Voice web page
     b.   I HAVE NOT seen the official Voice web page

A.  77.5%
B.  22.5
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 10.

I think the following groups should have a significant voice into the way
policy is made on campus (check all that apply):
     a.   PCC alumni
     b.   Current PCC students
     c.   Parents of current students
     d.   Bible-believing churches (including The Campus Church)
     e.   None (it is Dr. Horton's school, he should be able to do what he
wants)

A.  57.5%
B.  70
C.  77.5
D.  62.5
E.  15
No response.  2.5
******************************

"All stake-holders should have input.  Anything contrary is no way to run a
business."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 11.

PCC should be accountable to (check all that apply):
     a.   God
     b.   Alumni
     c.   Current students
     d.   Churches
     e.   Parents of students
     f.    No one

A.  97.5%
B.  65
C.  82.5
D.  55
E.  87.5
F.  0
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 12.

I think that:

     a.   PCC SHOULD become accredited
     b.   PCC SHOULD NOT become accredited
     c.   Don't care either way

A.  57.5%
B.  10
C.  32.5
******************************

"Not applicable--PCC is already accredited with the Florida Association of
Christian Colleges;  they should not seek to be accredited with a secular
organizaion until it becomes necessary."
******************************

"But i doubt if their policies would survive the accredidation process.  I
can't imagine any national accreditation board approving of such
dictator-like behavior.  Any degree worth getting should be accredited."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 13.

The best method for executing The Voice editors would be:
     a.   Guillotine
     b.   The rack
     c.   Fed to an angry pack of anteaters
     d.   Made to sit and watch the videos of every Vespers since the
beginning of PCC

A.  2.5%
B.  5
C.  2.5
D.  32.5  (You are a very cruel readership. . . - eds.)
No response.  25  (Except for this 25%. . . - eds.)
******************************

"[how about] making them take a course on critical thinking skills at PCC,
followed by a course on creatively reaching the lost in the 21st century at
BJU?"
******************************

"D.  (I take it back.  Nobody deserves that kind of punishment!)"
******************************

"(Note:  I don't know for sure, but I think response d. would be the most
painful.  Unless, of course, you do what we usually did and fall asleep in
the middle of it.)
******************************

"Keep exercising the 1st amendment right for those who can't"
******************************

"All of the above ;-)"
******************************

"None of the above, Mr. Chip-on-my-Shoulder"
******************************

"Do not appreciate this question."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Questions 14 and 15 do not require a response; they are food for thought..]

Question 14.

On a typical Sunday, Pastor Schettler stands before the Campus Church and
informs the congregation that God has told him and the rest of the
Administration that all PCC students, faculty, and staff are to drink a
purple Kool-Aid-like liquid (a la Jim Jones).  What percentage actually
drink, going right to their deaths?   

AVERAGE:  50.54%
******************************

"probably more than we would like to think"
******************************

"(A very small percentage less than 1%- in my experience most people
understand the problems of the school and just don't talk about it.  If you
get them in your confidence and talk about it - they will tell what they
really think.) "
******************************

"Dr Horton would get 20+%"
******************************

"In response to 14 and 15.  I think there are a percentage of students there
who will believe anything the administration tells them.  Judging from when I
was there (76-80) 10-25%.  I guess that is not really a small percentage, is
it?  I had many friends who knew that they did have a brain that was useful
occasionally to make judgements of their own even if they were contrary to
the PCC gods.  Many of my friends transferred and some were shipped.  Many of
us did endure and are actually capable of surviving in the "real world".
 When I got there, I was pretty much committed to graduating and that meant
biting my tongue on many occasions and learning to be very careful about in
whom I put my trust."
******************************

"depending on his presentation (rarely would he claim "God told him to"--
perhaps he could find a scripture to fit into his persuasion, which he often
does anyway..)  the percentage would start out small, say 10 - 15%, then, the
good ol' pcc-pressure would spread its cancerous influence, and soon you've
got a DH full of corpses.  --end result: 87% participation.  (note, the
purple kool-aid liquid would be the easiest sell when observing communion..)"
******************************

"Depends on if they lied about what was in the drink.. knowing the truth 40%,
 not knowing the contents of the purple Kool-Aid: 100%"
******************************

"Don't be ridiculous."
******************************

"None.  There is no way that would happen on a typical Sunday.  Pastor
Shettler would never do that.  PCC has always stated that we should follow
God rather than man."
******************************

"Don't appreciate this question."
******************************

"A comparable percentage to those who would eventually go on staff."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Question 15.

In a typical Monday chapel service, Dr. Mutsch stands before the college
community and reports that God has told the Administration that it is against
God's will to seek modern medical attention.  How many of the students go
along with this?

AVERAGE:  40%
******************************

"probably none since the wording "modern medical attention" would obviously
not restrict their use of the Health Center"
******************************

"Only those who believe the Health Center should be contacted PRIOR to
receiving necessary medical attention."
******************************

"Not too many -- no one listens to Dr. Mutsch"
******************************

"again, his argument would fail were it based on the claim that "God told
them".  i do not doubt, however, that he could probably stretch that
conclusion from an OT figure.. like, say Korah, for instance...    of the
students, i'd speculate and agreeing percentage of close to 60%."
******************************

End of Survey.
################################################################

     V.   ESSAYS


"Is Dr. Mutsch Playing With Fire?"
By: Paul S. Perdue

I.   INTRODUCTION

Let me warn you that you may find the following statement shocking - It
appears as though the editor of The Student Voice has been recently dropped
from the PCC Update mailing list. . . .  (I can just sense your collective
sigh of grief and pity at this terrible predicament I have been subjected to.
.. . .)  I am no longer capable of gleaning the immense wisdom expounded in
the published articles, and I can no longer send my rsum for teaching
positions since I have no alternative means (at least I have not
independently chosen to exercise any other means) of learning about open
faculty positions.  (Yes, I am being sarcastic, and for those of you who are
offended, I apologize. . . but lighten up.)

Despite all of these predicaments, however, I did recently come into
possession of the latest Update (Spring 1997 edition), and frankly, I am
embarrassed.  I am ashamed to admit that my undergraduate degree is from the
same institution that published this Update, and I am humiliated that
thousands and thousands of people have read this issue and will be reasonably
capable of drawing the conclusion that the thought process involved in the
topics discussed is typical of PCC students/faculty/alumni, etc.

I am referring primarily to the short article titled, "What About Cremation,"
written by Dr. Mutsch, PCC's Vice President for Administration.  Before I
address the article itself, understand that this is not an issue of PCC rules
(to which most people incorrectly pigeonhole every idea of The Voice).  It is
not an issue of internal PCC policy, but it is an issue regarding a public
statement of morality and Scriptural doctrine.  This article was written by a
PCC administrator in a PCC publication to the general public (or at least a
specifically targeted segment of the general public), and as such, the public
has a reasonable expectation to be able to comment on it, and as Christians
who are part of the same family and who are engaged in a joint effort of
demonstrating truth to the world, we have not only a reasonable expectation
to comment, but a RESPONSIBILITY to check the erroneous conclusions of our
brothers and sisters in Christ (Matt. 5:13; Gal. 2:14).

The essence of Dr. Mutsch's article is that it is unbiblical and thereby
sinful for a Christian to utilize cremation as a means to dispose of his or
her body after death.  This is based upon three propositions:

   (1)   Fire frequently symbolizes judgment, and so it is therefore
"inconsistent" for us to utilize this symbol of judgment to dispose of our
bodies after death;
   (2)   The New Testament pattern is burial, therefore burial is the only
appropriate means of bodily disposal;
   (3)   Ground burial is the only method that honors the body, God's temple.

II.   SOME ADDITIONAL HISTORY

Cremation is neither an unusual practice, nor is it a new one.  It has been
used by virtually all civilizations in every recorded era of human history.
 Some literature records the first cremations to have been conducted by the
Slavic tribes of the Dniester and Dnieper River valleys in modern day Russia.
 There is also extensive evidence to show that cremations took place during
the Neolithic Era, as pottery vessels containing the remains of cremated
bodies have been discovered in Neolithic graves in Bohemia, Moravia, central
Germany, Hungary and Great Britain.

Despite Dr. Mutsch's assertion that cremation is a practice with "pagan
roots," experts seem to agree that no one knows for sure what reasons
inspired this practice, or what "roots" it really does have.  Some believe
that it was to provide warmth for the deceased in the afterlife.  Other
archeologists and anthropologists believe it was originally used because the
ancients understood that fire was a purifying agent, thereby reducing
sanitary problems.  Cremation was also used, say some experts, to alleviate
the problem of bodies being dug up by beasts or by enemies.

In fact, the Greeks began using cremation around the year 1000 B.C. to
protect their war dead.  Their enemies were known to dig up the remains of
dead warriors and to ceremoniously desecrate them.  The Greeks, after wising
up to their enemies' tactics, began cremating the dead soldiers and then
bringing them back to Greece to be entombed with great ceremony and honor.

In many cultures cremation was only reserved for the wealthy and famous.  The
grave furniture found associated with cremations have almost always been much
more elaborate than those connected with ground burials.  This seems to have
been true with the Romans as well, for Ovid states that both Remus, one of
the mythological founders of Rome, as well as Julius Caesar were cremated.

>From the invasion of the Danes in 787 A.D. to Harold the Saxon's defeat by
William the Conqueror in the Battle of Hastings in 1066 A.D., cremation was
the primary means of bodily disposal in England, after which the practice
faded until the middle of the 19th century.  People began to be concerned
with the rapid urbanization of their society, and this spawned a renewed
interest in the practice of cremation.  Sir Henry Thompson formed the
Cremation Society of England in 1874 and led the way to convincing the
English Parliament to officially legalize cremation shortly after the turn of
the century.  Today cremation is the most popular means of disposing of the
dead in England (as well as Japan).

>From the third century's rapid spread of Christianity until the late 18th
century, their was a strong opposition to cremation by the Roman Catholic and
Greek Orthodox Churches, and while Dr. Mutsch would lead us to believe that
this opposition was due to the reasons stated in his article, the opposition
was actually due simply to the Churches' belief in the doctrine of the
resurrection of the body.  (They no longer hold to this position.)

Cremation is simply another form of final disposition.  It merely "speeds the
time from when a person dies until he or she returns to the earth in a
natural state."  In fact, the word "funeral" (a ceremony with pagan roots?)
comes originally from a Sanskrit word of northern India which means "smoke."

To characterize cremation as being primarily a pagan practice or having pagan
roots is to ignore the historical facts.  Do not confuse an activity that was
used by pagans (as even burials were and are) with that which has pagan
roots.

III.   SOME COMMENTS

A.   Context
The first question I would ask, although not directly related to the
substance of the article is, why is cremation even a topic in a PCC Update?
 It can be conceded that this is not an entirely uninteresting issue, but is
it at all relevant?  Understand the context - this is a topic about death and
how to dispose of one's body sent to people who are primarily college or
pre-college age.  Is this something they think about often?  It is doubtful.
 Is it something they think is important to their lives?  Also doubtful.  Are
there not numerous other issues which are much more appropriate to discuss
with the targeted audience than a process of bodily disposal after death?  Of
course.  Or perhaps this is a serious issue confronting today's Church?  I
don't think so.  To put it another way, of all the issues, struggles and
burdens that teenagers and college-age students are dealing with in the 90's,
and the questions they have in trying to decide on a college and a career,
cremation is not one of them.  This clearly demonstrates just how out of
touch the PCC administration really is.

B.   Fire as a symbol of judgment
It will certainly be conceded that fire was often used in the Bible as a
symbol of judgment.  However, this in no way states a principle that fire may
not be used for other purposes, such as cremation by us as Christians.  There
are at least two faults with Dr. Mutsch's proposition.  First, while fire
symbolizes judgment, it both symbolizes and is used in the Bible for many
other purposes.  It was used to cook meals (Ex. 12:8).  To be a guiding light
and a symbol to follow (Ex. 13 & 14, Ex. 40:38, Ps. 78:14).  To symbolize
God's Holiness (Ex. 19:18, Is. 31:9), and His Glory (Ex. 24:17, Deut. 4:11,12)
..  To offer sacrifices (Lev. 1 & 6, Gen. 22, I Chr. 21:26).  To glorify God (I
s. 24:15). As something we need (Prov. 26:20).  As a sign or a message from
God (Ez. 1:4, Acts 2:3, Jer. 6:1). As the protection of God (Zech. 2:5).  As
a purifier (Mal. 3:2, I Cor. 3:13).  For warmth (Acts 28:2, Mark 14:54).  Of
beauty (Rev. 9:17).  You see, although fire is often used to symbolize
judgment, this does not state a principle that we may not use fire to dispose
of our bodies after death.  If this is the case, then what else may we not
use fire for?  Shall we ignore sanitary considerations, a shortage of land,
convenience, or a host of other reasons to use fire to dispose of our bodies
simply because fire was used as a symbol of judgment in Scripture?  What is
missing here, because it does not exist, is the element which links the
premise to the conclusion.

Second, Dr. Mutsch states that "It is INCONSISTENT for Bible believers who
have been saved from the judgment of fire to use this method to dispose of
their bodies at death." (Emphasis added).  "Inconsistent" with what?  To use
fire for something other than judgment?  Is it also "inconsistent" to use
fire to dispose of our trash?  Where is the inconsistency?  There are two
concepts here, judgment and disposing of one's body after death.  According
to Dr. Mutsch, there is some principle which makes the two acts
"inconsistent" with each other, yet he never states what it is.  The
Scripture is silent on this point, and so the only inconsistency is something
that Dr. Mutsch has made up himself.  It would be as if I were to say that
because a door is often used to symbolize Christ's means of salvation (a
means for us to enter), it would then be "inconsistent," and thereby sinful,
for me to prop a door on two saw horses in my garage and use it for a working
table.  

C.   New Testament pattern teaches burial as opposed to cremation
The premise here is that since the New Testament does not teach cremation as
an appropriate means of disposing of one's body, the conclusion may be drawn
that cremation is wrong.  Dr. Mutsch states that this is because (a) Christ
was buried and we should follow His example, and (b) there are five recorded
examples of burial recorded in the New Testament.  There are at least four
problems with this reasoning and interpretation.

First, if it is true that because Christ was buried, we should be buried,
then the inverse of this would also be true - since Christ was crucified, we
should also be crucified.  Since He was a "full time minister," we should
forsake all "secular" occupations as well.  In other words, we are not free
to deviate from the literal actions that Christ engaged in.  This simply
cannot be supported by Scripture.

Christ's life gave us a pattern to live by, and none of us would deny that,
but to draw the conclusion that Dr. Mutsch does ignores reality and
substitutes his own interpretation of Scripture for one that simply cannot be
maintained.

Second, not only does Dr. Mutsch give you five irrelevant examples to support
his position (John the Baptist, Lazarus, the rich man, and Ananias and
Sapphira), but he also fails to include examples which contradict his own
assertions.  In I Samuel 31, the Old Testament records the death of Saul and
his sons.  Do you know how the Israelites disposed of these bodies?  That's
right, they burned them.  (See verses 11-13).  Also, in II Samuel 5 it is
recorded that David, after slaying the Philistines who came up to war with
the new King, burned the bodies of the dead at Baal-perazim. See also II
Kings 23:20.

Third, the whole question of cremation is one of personal decision (at least
this is the way Dr. Mutsch characterizes the issue).  In other words, the
issue is not cremation itself, but the decision to cremate.  Therefore, for
Dr. Mutsch's proposition to stand, it must be presupposed that the examples
cited in the New Testament involved a personal decision to be buried.  Other
than the example of Christ, there is not one scintilla of evidence to suggest
that the individuals cited made a decision to be buried.  Perhaps they did,
but most likely they did not.  Either way, we do not know, and we cannot base
a doctrine on what we do not know and upon something with no basis in
Scripture.

Fourth, there is an obvious causal relationship problem.  Dr. Mutsch states
that since Scripture does not explicitly condone cremation, it is therefore
wrong.  Do you think he would therefore agree with the proposition that since
the New Testament did not specifically permit Christian colleges, PCC is a
Scriptural violation?  This is precisely the argument that was incorrectly
used by Dr. Horton to disavow the article on authority in Issue 1, No. 1 of Th
e Student Voice, and it is the typical intellectual quagmire PCC doesn't even
realize it is often in.

D.   Ground burial as pattern to be followed
There are at least two basic problems with this assertion.  First, Dr. Mutsch
contradicts himself when he states, "Since we do not own our bodies, we do
not have the right to do as we choose" (the "Christians-have-no-rights"
doctrine?).  But yet his whole point is that we DO have the right to choose -
we have not only the right to choose, but we have a responsibility to choose
burial.  To say that we do not have the right to choose burial presupposes
that the choice has been made for us already, yet there is nothing to
indicate that this is the case.  So, do we have the right to choose, or do we
not?

Second, there is again the causal relationship problem.  In other words,
since burial is the only method of disposal mentioned in the New Testament
(even though it is not the only one mentioned in the Old Testament), it is
therefore the only permissible method to dispose of one's body after death.
 Do you suppose that Dr. Mutsch would also hold to the proposition that since
the New Testament knows nothing of catching fish with anything but nets, it
is therefore unscriptural to catch fish with a rod and reel?

E.   Other Considerations
There is at least one other problem with accepting Dr. Mutsch's conclusions
as stated in his article.  As Christians, we know that "to be absent from the
body [is] to be present with the Lord" (II Corinthians 5:8).  We also know
that our bodies are simply "temples" for our spirit (I Corinthians 6:19).
 Therefore, once we die, our bodies become only empty carcasses that once
held a person.  They are simply dust and ashes (Genesis 18:27, Job 13:12),
and whether we dispose of them by burial or by cremation, they will
ultimately settle back into the earth.  Do our bodies retain some sort of
moral relevance once our spirits exit them?  Perhaps they do, perhaps they
don't, but either way, there is no support for jumping from this premise to
the conclusion that burial is the only way to dispose of an empty shell.

IV.   CONCLUSION

This is a classic example, again, of PCC and fundamentalist thinking - since
I think X should be a doctrine, and even though Scripture and history do not
support X, I will still maintain X as a Scriptural doctrine and TEACH IT TO
OTHERS AS GOD-ORDAINED.

The frightening conclusion that can be drawn, and against that which The
Student Voice is, for the most part, attempting to provide exposure, is that
THIS is the "standard" by which PCC teaches its students "truth."  When PCC
advertises to you and your children that it has the standards needed for you
or your child to "be able to pillow their heads at night with a clear
conscience," this is what they are referring to.  The problem is that there
is no identifiable standard by which PCC operates other than its own wisdom
and whims.  In the real world, this is called "secular humanism."  And as
Christians we should be fighting to our last breath any organization which
calls itself Christian yet operates upon this philosophy.  It's none of our
business?  Think again.

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

"Another Look At PCC and Its Philosophy"
Guest essay by Peter Gage

Reading the dialogue and hearing many of the stories revolving around PCC and
the Student Voice never fails to draw a mental response or provoke some
memory of my time at PCC. At the risk of alienating myself from my Alma
mater, I feel the following essay of enough value to submit it for the
readers of the Student Voice

One constant sentiment of those who oppose the Voice is that it is wasting
valuable time which could be spent on visitation or writing tracts or
dressing as a clown and telling children about hell. They think this
(enormous) talent could be better spent on proselytizing the masses, and
true, we are called to be witnesses, but part of the great commission was to
disciple the nations. No, not get them "saved," but to build mature Believers
who understand the scriptures, the heart of God, and what true holiness is. A
huge part of discipling is to confront our brothers when they are in sin. To
date, no one besides the Voice has been willing to do this in regard to the
things which go on at PCC. So, it's true, I'm writing this instead of
attending a tent meeting, but think of all that time the PCC professors waste
teaching classes, and some of them aren't even on the Bible! 

I propose that if the Student Voice is pointing out error within the body of
Christ it is doing a valuable work. It also should be obvious that if the
administrators had hearts which were at all sensitive to correction,
regardless of the source, such measures would never be necessary, but as has
been explained, they answer to no one.  It is frightening that that doesn't
concern so many of you.

Consider the last time you saw anyone in the administration go forward at the
end of a church service. I was there two years and never saw it. Are you
telling me that none of the messages Schettler ever preached touched on an
area of weakness in any of their lives? Our leaders should lead on their
knees, modeling repentance. Only pride would tell you there is shame in
admitting your faults and accepting forgiveness. 

Two oft abused terms that keep popping up are "biblical standards" and
"legalism"; perhaps it is simply a problem of semantics and the definitions
of our Christian buzzwords. 

I recall the chapel in which one of the administrators clearly explained that
PCC was not legalistic, and gave the following reason: they believed in
salvation through faith. Under THEIR definition of legalism they certainly
are not; however, the rest of Christendom, or at least a large part, holds a
completely different meaning for legalism. Roughly, it is the practice of
attaching a list of "do's" and "don'ts" which aren't found in the Bible as a
means of achieving God's favor, or remaining in His good standing, and an
individual's adherence to these "standards" as the measurement of his
spirituality. It is NOT a salvation issue.

My guess is that even under this definition PCC would claim to not be
legalistic, but I think actions speak louder than words, and PCC has dozens
of standards which they think are necessary for Christian living.

It would be one thing for a school to have regulations just as the Army, but
this school is also a church (in name) and teach these legalistic beliefs
along with salvation by faith. Colossians 2 has some important words about
legalism. Paul says starting in verse 20:

"Wherefore if you be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why,
as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (touch not; taste
not; handle not; which are all to perish with the using); after the
commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a show of wisdom
in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour
to the satisfying of the flesh."

The New American version states verse 23 much clearer: "these matters have,
to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement
and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly
indulgence,"

"Standards" are so strongly held at PCC, but simply are not scriptural. They
are the additions of men. Sure, not going to movies looks more spiritual, (to
some), but a truer picture would be what movies do you go to, or why you go?
That is Freedom in Christ. Let us not confuse standards with what is actually
immoral according to scripture. PCC does its followers a disservice by not
clearly distinguishing the two. Now to clarify, as that seems to be eternally
necessary, I am not talking about bed times or scanning out, or the like, but
I am talking their stand on music, dress and appearance, art, free thinking,
and numerous other issues. 

PCC so confuses their standards with biblical standards that they insure we
miss the true Spirit which we are to catch. Take for instance their stand on
no touching between the sexes. I Corinthians 7:1 says, "it is good for a man
not to touch a woman." Now, without getting into an extensive commentary on
this verse, I hope we can all agree it is not saying literally for men and
women never to touch. It can be interpreted to mean something akin to "don't
kindle the fire" or loosely, don't turn her (or him) on. There is an
incredibly important spiritual principle for how God wants his children to
act toward each other which is COMPLETELY LOST within the awkward,
impractical, and counter-productive PCC policy of no physical touching
whatsoever among the sexes. This policy, which is a PCC standard, not a
biblical one, drowns out the Bible and puts the students under man's law, not
God's. Anyone who has been under these unnatural stipulations knows that the
policy only serves to artificially heighten one's preoccupation with the
slightest touch. To use the "don't kindle the fire" analogy, you are
essentially drying the wood so it will burn easier, a result completely
opposite of what is intended, but which is to be expected when man imposes
his own clumsy laws. PCC thinks that our time is better spent learning to
obey draconian rules and being berated for imagined evils in segregated
chapels, rather than to instill in their charges an appreciation for romance
as God sees it and how we can honor Him and our friends, as well as build the
deepest relationships if we follow the spiritual truths He has created. The
fact is this isn't a college's job, but if they are going to take it upon
themselves, they might as well do it right. If PCC wanted to see how
superficial their rules are, perhaps they might ask the student body if they
can give any reason for not holding a girl's hand beyond the fact that they
will get in trouble for it. Most students will not be able to give a reason,
which shows the complete bankruptcy of these standards in instilling any form
of heart change or true learning. This is but one example of the dozens of
extra-biblical morals they enforce. 

Schettler sums up their philosophy in the statement, "we would rather have a
fence at the top of the hill rather than an ambulance at the bottom." Lest
you think this a purely figurative statement, you will all note that the
barbed wire on the fence surrounding the college points INWARD, designed to
keep people in, not out. Their practice is not to care for the fallen
(sinners), but to somehow keep everyone from sinning in the first place.
Remarkable that God didn't just roll out the chain link around the Tree in
the Garden of Eden. Would've saved everybody some trouble, but evidently He
saw value in allowing for mistakes. Even if this fence of rules was
effective, which it is not, it is completely temporary (a few years of
college); so, if it was the only thing keeping us from disaster, our fall is
inevitable. Perhaps PCC's true concern is that it simply not happen while
we're under their watch, which points toward there ultimately self-centered
concerns of image, a point made quite clear in the Voice previously. I cannot
imagine that anyone could develop the system in place at PCC while keeping in
mind the example of the way Christ taught His disciples.

Would that PCC knew the gentle power of the Holy Spirit to perform His good
work in molding all of us so that they could let go of their vise grip which
is crushing the very ones they wish to build up.

Can anyone name a modern institution, which in the name of God, has caused
more heartache, anger, pain, tears, disillusionment, and sadness for the
people who have been associated with it than PCC? When Ohman kicks out a
student this week, he effectively washes his hands of the student. He is no
longer their concern unless he should happen back on campus, and then he's an
"enemy of PCC." What madness is this? If PCC is going to set themselves up as
the spiritual authority, the church, and teacher, then they have the
responsibility to restore that student, if not to the school, at least to the
church, if the student is repentant (of course, outside of the school, most
of the things which will get you kicked out aren't even sin.) The argument is
constantly made, "but PCC was the happiest time of my life, or PCC does a lot
of good, or all places have their problems." To use another PCC favorite
term, this is complete secular humanism. The good outweighs the bad: where is
that in the Bible as some form of justification? If even the minutest error
is pointed out it should cause PCC to stop and change if it was at all in
tune with the Holy Spirit. Let me also add that Dr. Horton's philosophy of
rejecting any anonymous criticism effectively limits the ways in which God
could ever speak to him, and is a dangerous, if not simply an unthinking
thing to do. And for students and faculty to turn a blind eye to the problems
they see suggests that either they think the ends justify the means (secular
humanism) or they fear man more than God (secular humanism). Easy for me to
say, writing with impunity (except I may make it on the PCC "enemies" list),
but I strongly encourage staff and faculty to be honest with yourselves about
what you are supporting with your presence and participation. If nothing else
consider that you are forced to go to a church which will excommunicate you
the second you make the slightest mistake (to say nothing of losing your
job).

If you think for one second that part of Christianity is keeping people in
fear of losing their jobs or college education for speaking up about godly
concerns then you are following the wrong god, to say nothing of the people
who are responsible for actually implementing and enforcing this nonsense.

Regarding the myriad of logistical rules (e.g. bedtimes, phone rules, "off
limits," etc.), it has been suggested that many of them are based upon
someone, sometime, doing something stupid, and thus a new rule is created. I
completely agree: most of these nuisance rules are completely reactionary,
and only serve to restrict the masses because of the excesses of the few, and
serve no purpose in teaching maturity. The idea that giving a student
hundreds of rules is the best way to teach him responsibility is ridiculous.
When those rules are gone what has he learned? My last year I attended a
Junior Sunday School class where the boys in the back were snickering and
joking throughout. Is this how PCC's upperclassmen behave when
"unchaperoned." Evidently, and if immature activity is common I suggest
creating a rule only deals with the symptom, rather than the root. Don't you
teach responsibility by giving it? We would hardly advocate eliminating
firearm ownership from private citizens because criminals use them
unlawfully, yet this parallels the PCC rational. To impose any sort of law on
another person should be done with extreme care, and at least should entail a
consideration of the necessity and the overall ramifications. I fear the
administration has become too comfortable with control, as well intentioned
as it may be. As Benjamin Franklin said, let's not exchange liberty for
security.

In writing this, it is discouraging to know that the men whom I feel in most
need of reading it are either unwilling to take the time, or at worst, unable
to even open their mind's to this rationale. I have seen many lemming-like
responses in support of PCC and would admonish anyone who is or aspires to be
a thinking person to try to look objectively at the method and the results of
PCC, regardless of what the STATED method and results are, as they are in no
way the same.  Again, I can think of no other institution, Christian or not,
which has left such a swathe of hurt, anger, pain, and disillusionment, in
their pious wake as PCC. Hundreds of people entrust themselves or their
children to this college each year and for far too many it turns into an
emotional and mental nightmare, trying to reconcile what they know of
Christianity with the treatment they receive there. 

Is the Student Voice trying to "tear down" the school? It seems to me its
only point is to make the truth known; let the chips fall where they may. For
myself, I transferred to PCC with no preconceptions, but was stunned by the
unnecessary treatment received by myself and my friends, disappointed by the
lack of serious discussion and learning, and offended by the constant
self-serving Bible teaching, aimed only at manufacturing a mindless Christian
in the image of PCC. 

I don't believe these are the sentiments of an embittered, rebellious man. I
hope they come across as rational, thought out, and as far as I have
observed, completely truthful. It is not difficult for me to become animated
or even angry when discussing what goes on at PCC, and if that is something
that God wants out of my life, so be it, but for now, I hope this essay will
be of use in articulating the unspoken feelings of many and facilitating
useful dialogue and change among the administration.


Peter Gage
Class of '96
##############################################################

     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.
--------------------

To whom it may concern:

It sounds like whoever wrote about the school is bitter and may have been a
student who got kicked out or something like that. I am a Christian and have
no problem with a school setting up the rules. The rules are set up and each
student is expected to abide by them. I have been and seen many Christian
schools and colleges and it is the student who is usually the one who bucks
the rules and causes the problems. All you have to do is leave the school if
you do not agree. I think you are an intelligent individual who usually
always has a cause to fight against and thinks things should be the way you
see it. Not all things are going to be your way. You seek to create rebellion
and discension and I see no good to what you are doing. You sure have a lot
of bitterness. I think you ought to put your energies into telling the Gospel
of Jesus Christ to those who are lost and dying in their sins and help others
instead of trying to tear down people and institutions which you may not
agree with. Again, it sounds like you went to this school or live close to
this school or have some close ties to it. You problably do not even know
anyone who goes to this school. Who knows. You sure have spent a lot of time
and energy in what you are trying to do. I think you would do better at
working and doing something more constructive. 

See you later, from Kentucky

B---
--------------------

I found your site accurate and most likely in the heart of many students
past and present. At the end of Dr. H's Diatribe, he once again instills
the "Thou shalt narc on thy neighbor" in reference to your pages (which
seem to only reflect typical rules and announcements).

Your site has been bookmarked!

Thank God for the First Amendment and the freedom of accessibility to the
Internet!

I---
--------------------

Are you bringing glory to Jesus when you drag out the small, and sometimes,
significant transgressions at PCC? You have fostered a questioning mindset
with your converts, and those at PCC, the alumni, and prospective students
that you influence.

PCC is not perfect, including its leaders.  I do not agree with all of their
rules, and standards. I am not going to make a crusade against these small
differences.  The time at PCC was the most influential years in my life, and
God richly
blessed, and developed me.

Jesus did tell us to be the salt of the earth towards the world, and not put
out total effort towards other Christian ministries.  Prayer for God to
direct, and change the leadership at PCC would be best because God would make
the changes which would be real.

Let us all remember that God is the judge of our hearts and its intents.  I
struggle with this problem of doing God' s job
which allows the devil to win the war even though I feel my battle is right,
and important.

Satan caused Adam and Eve to question authority, the God Almighty, in the
Garden of Eden.  The world has never been the same because of his motive to
undermine God, take his place, and add many followers to his cause.  He makes
it look good to us. Satan will distract us by judging other christians,
ministries, and he has victory because you and I forget the lost, and those
who need to know the Saviour that we trust, and need.

M---
---------------------

StudentVoice,

I would like to take a moment to respond to a former student who commented on
PCC's discipline methods -shadowing, in particular, and TRIED to make them
relevant using Scripture.

I think that the writer of this statement clearly represents the main tenet
of the "justice system" at PCC in StudentV Issue 6, Page 2:

<<< 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. >>>

Let's examine this for a moment.

1.) " The sinner is removed from fellowship for a time for that person's own
good."

This is a very accurate description of how a student is treated during the
"disciplinary process."  Yes, we are sinners, but this is a clear reference
to the "sinner" as the one having committed the crime.  Pensacola Christian
College makes a big deal about truth, but they do little to verify it in the
disciplinary process.  As a student for almost 3-1/2 years, I visited the
dean's offices many times.  Each time, I was given the same treatment.  I was
treated as a GUILTY PARTY who had to somehow prove my innocence.  I had to do
this by refuting false reports of violations I had allegedly
committed.  At no time was the accuser required to verify his or her
statements about my conduct in my presence.  I have many friends who were
"asked not to return" to PCC (that's a fancy way of saying that the
administration waited until the end of the semester [in their boundless
mercy] to kick the students out because they had no hard evidence and wanted
no incident to arise around the occasion [bad PR]).  These students never
learned of why they had been removed from PCC.  I guess justice leaves her
victims blind.  Oh wait!!  Is that right?  Hmmmm.

2.) "It is also a Biblical principle.  Didn't know that?  Read I Corinthians
chapter 5."

I guess this writer is referring to the incestual relations going on at PCC.
 Boy, I hadn't heard about this, but I guess it could've happened.

Let's get serious.  If this writer wants to deal with PCC students using
church discipline, first of all, that's NOT scriptural, and second, please
don't try to tell me that this is the method PCC uses.  Granted, if they
followed the methods of church discipline outlined in the Bible, their
disciplinary system would be a lot more effective.  As I recall--and as this
reader would realize if he DID read his Bible more thoroughly--the church
discipline outlined in the Bible places a tremendous amount of emphasis on
restoration.  I guess PCC missed the boat on that one, too.  

3.) "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."

Well, your wife is batting .1000, I guess.  Congrats.  It is very true that
most students who are shadowed are kicked out.  This is good?  I forget.

Please don't misunderstand me.  I am not saying that PCC is NEVER justified
in expelling a student.  But I've been through the system.  I have friends
who've been through the system.  For many of you, that statement alone is my
discreditor.  You assume that since I was expelled [asked to
leave...whatever--it's all semantics], I am automatically in the wrong.  This
is what I was talking about earlier.  

The "main tenet of PCC's system" which I referred to earlier, is that all
students accused are guilty until they are able to convince the
administration that they are innocent.  I am glad that our national justice
system is based on the opposite premise: "Innocent until proven guilty."  It
makes it a lot easier for me to live a peaceable life knowing that I
won't be arrested if someone has a whim to turn me in on the basis of some
erroneous charge.  

Many of you who respond to the StudentV say things like, "PCC has rules, and
their rules are their business."  

I guess none of you have the right to complain about abortion laws, or any
other laws for that matter.  The rules are there, and the rules are none of
your business.  "That's ridiculous!" you're quick to say--and rightly so.
 Why?  Because you live here.  You have the right to express your opinions
because you pay your Congressman to represent you.  

Would PCC be a school without students?  That's a no-brainer.  Would the
United States be a nation without citizens?  Another easy one.  

To put it simply, PCC's rules ARE NOT just THEIR BUSINESS.  When a policy
affects the students, guess what....it just became the students' business.
 It's the same with government, and it's the same with any legitimate
business.  You don't just pack up all your belongings and catch the next ship
to some other continent if you don't like what's going on in government.  If
you're a good citizen, you become involved, and you try to change what is
wrong.  THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDENT VOICE.  And for those of you who
write, saying that Paul and lupos should get on with their lives, maybe you
should consider the fact that a my of Paul's essays were written while he was
a student at PCC, but there was no forum which would allow him to make those
opinions public (unless you want to call martyrdom
a forum).  He has a lot of lost time to make up for.  :-)

I know.  You have an answer for this, too.  "If they don't like it, they can
leave." 

That's a great solution.  I did just that, and it's not unlike immigrating
from a third world country to the United States.  You leave oppression
behind, but you have to start fresh with next to nothing.  It's not easy
finding a school who will accept credits for transfer from ANY non-accredited
college.  Somehow, despite all of the rhetoric that I heard at PCC, there
were not hundreds of schools begging me to let them accept PCC's credits.
 This meant two extra years of school for me.

And, of course, you have one last thing to say.  I know....I've talked to
hundreds like you.  "Get a life."

I'd love to stay and listen to more of your "logic", but the last time I
pulled that string sticking out of your back, it broke.

Jeremy Piontek

destin414@earthlink.net 
---------------------

FOR:  Mr. Perdue, Student V and any other rebels involved in defaming PCC.

You are rebels with the wrong cause.  Please understand the following:

     1.  The leaders of educational institutions make and enforce the rules.

     2.  The students follow and adhere to the rules.

If Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior, then you need to plead HIS blood,
repent of your wicked ways and serve HIM.  If you are not saved, you need to
immediately acknowledge that you are a sinner and trust Christ as your
savior.   In either case, you can begin with a clean slate and with the Holy
Spirit in charge, your thinking will become Christ-like.  THEN GO SOUL
WINNING!  That should be your cause.

Lest Judgment should fall, I urge you bring this nonsense to an end
immediately.  You are playing into Satan's field and wasting huge amounts of
time of godly people who want to do God's will not listen to the cry of the
rebel.
---------------------

Dear Student Voice,
     
I have visited two Christian Colleges in searching for a new college to
transfer to and as I have been on the campuses a many things stand out that I
noticed, but I just wanted to mention a few.  It was definately different
being on the other side of the fence (as a college days visitor-that is),
when I was used to having the guests in my room at PCC. One of the major
things I noticed was how happy and carefree the students were.  I am not
saying PCC students are not happy people, but these students were definately
glowing with Christian fellowship.  I asked the student I was staying with
what really the student body was like and he commented, " students here just
really love Jesus.."  These students I noticed didn't have to dress to stand
out to show by their demeanor something "different" about them.  

The other thing I noticed was that students were more involved in Christian
activities.  The students wanted to make a difference without necessarily
being told that they should.  It was shocking at first almost at the amount
of freedom that the students were given, but then I realized it was that I
was used to the restrictions of PCC. I noticed that despite the fact that the
college's gate closed curfew was 2am that the vast majority of the students
were on campus by their own choice.  Students had the freedom to go where
they wanted, socialize in mixed couples off campus if they preferred, but yet
their behavior was not comprimisable. The point I am trying to make is that
even though there were a few exceptions, students when given the opportunity
to make decions or actions on their own made the right ones.  At PCC, that is
not an option because the administration stated that "because of a few in the
past now this rule has been 
established.." and also stated, "Frankly, we don't trust you..".  Yet
students were always looking for loopholes in the "security" system of rules
at PCC. The more the administration pulled back on the Palm tree, the harder
it would snap back.
---------------------

I'm getting kicked out cause of you. remove me from your list!
---------------------

[This comment is in response to the Voice survey. - eds.]

I have wanted to respond to your garbage many times, but there were too many
things that needed to be said.  Thank you for narrowing the topic for me.  I
realize that nothing I say will have any effect on you.  You say this is all
about truth, but you continually bear false witness against the
administration, about the faculty/staff body, about situations that I have
personal knowledge regarding, etc.  You say that PCC has set itself up as a
pinnacle of Christianity.  You say you encourage an open dialogue concerning
issues.  Over and over, though, your message betrays you.  You are not
interested in truth.  Whenever anyone dares to offer an opposing opinion, you
attack not only what they say with sarcastic remarks, but also attack the
person.  I notice that when "your followers" write, you don't draw attention
to their faulty logic, or their horrendous spelling and grammar, but if
someone who differs with you makes an error, you are quick to point it out.
 (I notice that your own writings are full of faulty logic and horrendous
spelling/grammar.) ("Spelchekurs ar cheep.")  
---------------------

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

     VII.     DOES THIS REMIND YOU OF SOMEPLACE YOU KNOW OF?

     "If I am owned by an ideology, I am going to favor its defense as if I we
re being defended, because that's what will be happening.  The free mind can
open its fingers and let fall ill-favored fruit.  Other ideas are always
welcome.
     "Ken Saro-Wiwa commented on his country's condition but referred to us
all: 'The men who ordain and supervise this show of shame, this tragic
charade, are frightened by the word, the power of ideas, the power of the
pen; by the demands of social justice and the rights of man.'
     "In short, the question is: Do I own my beliefs, or do they own me? If
they own me, then the institutions that formulate and guard and sanctify
these notions own me.
     "Because so many dogmas are obvious fictions, they can be maintained
only by means of patient and repeated indoctrination, through promises of
punishment and prompt retaliation for any lapse.  One can identify falsehoods
by finding the facts that tattle on them, but an equally good signal is the
security that surrounds their insecurity: the walls and towers and radio
stations, the pulsing pulpits, the political pronouncements, historical
myths, martyred heroes, infallibles, and invincibilities upon whose shields
the enemy's missiles must harmlessly ring and clatter to a holy ground."
     --William Gass

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

     The Student Voice is:

Paul S. Perdue:  Newsletter Editor     <studentv@aol.com>
lupos:  Web Page Editor   <lupos@usa.net>
The Brain Trust:  8 advisors to the editors
Web Page   <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/7706>

Please feel free to voice your thoughts, stories, and opinions.  
Thank you for reading The Voice!
##############################################################
THE STUDENT VOICE, PCC's alternative newsletter



