quote:Strange kind of prison where the punishment for disobeying the rules is freedom.
Exactly. It's not meant to be a prison. I think some people find freedom in concrete expectations.
Considering all the rules against romance, clearly the focus is supposed to be on other things. It is perfectly fine if people wish to focus on things other than the opposite sex during their education.
This isn't the way I would choose to go to school, but I'm uncomfortable with expressing horror at someone choosing an ascetic lifestyle.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The (strong) impression I get from the article is that Bob Jones and the other very conservative Christian colleges consider Pensacola a bit of a black sheep. Its not that they disagree with many of the overall rules or the theological positions, but several quotations in the article as much as say they think the university creates an un-Christian, distrusting, back-stabbing atmosphere. This isn't even bringing up the deceptions regarding accreditation that have caused many of their students grief.
There's a difference between ascetism and witch hunts.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said, I wouldn't go there. However, if I did choose to go there, I am sure it would not be in order to gain the approval of Bob Jones University. If that was the goal, then I'd go to Bob Jones.
Oddly enough, you calling it names doesn't change my opinion of whether or not I think the school is presenting what they believe is an ascetic lifestyle.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
It should also be mentioned that the other conservative Christian colleges are in competition with this one and might have a few un-Christian attitudes of their own when it comes to market share.
I can also see how accreditation would be a sore point with the other schools since they paid money and went through the hoops of getting some form of it -- although I also know that their accreditations are often looked down upon if they didn't go with mainstream academic ones, but went the Christian accreditation route.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course the school is presenting what they think of as an ascetic lifestyle. That there's a wealth of evidence (the site has several other articles on the college worth reading, btw) they intentionally mislead students about their lack of accreditation and the effects thereof is still extraordinarily problematic. That their notion of ascetism relies on students turning each other in for possibly looking at each other too long (and there's apparently no appeal, even if there's only one supposed witness) is also extraordinarily problematic. Students getting preferential treatment by the number of classmates they turn in is also extraordinarily problematic.
I don't think they should be forced out of business because it is a culture of consent, but being a culture of consent does not stop it from being unhealthy. I merely don't intend to go to schools like Bob Jones with overall considerable similarities. Pensacola makes me sad for the students who go there.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
katharina, I like the way you put it. Everybody is "right" from their own point of view. The problem arises when people cannot "put themselves in the shoes of others" and don’t even try to accept that there are other possible premises than their own.
We already know that everybody can’t actually be right at the same time, while sustaining contradictory views.
So the “solution” is not imposing ONE point of view to all, but accepting that all have their own right and responsibility for their own choices.
I might see “the horror stories from PCC”, and the next person might see them as the fulfilment of an ideal society. That is not a valid point for dispute. The dispute could arise if someone who made an informed choice to go to PCC, then “complained” about (some of) the rules. That is not “right” by any “rule”. As more than once was said here, those who don’t like it, should act on their right to go away form it (before vilifying what they don't agree to).
posted
Schools like this are just one example of how we Christians tend to isolate ourselves form society. The modern church has gotten really good at creating a nice little subculture to protect itself. But Christ never did that, He actually went out of his way to engage society.
I also don’t think they work. What message are they really sending at this school? By creating all of these rules to follow it is a way to create for people to feel like they are some how better than others, or gives them the appearance of being good. You can obey all of the rules and still be in total rebellion in your heart. The heart is what Christ was really concerned with, not the appearance of righteousness. Don’t get me wrong I am sure there are some students who are doing this for good reasons, maybe they see it as the only way to prevent themselves from leading a sinful lifestyle and keep their hearts in the right place.
I have a lot of problems with what this school is teaching, reminds me of the Pharisees in Christ time, but I have no problem with its existence. If a bunch of adults want to put themselves through it, it's their right as an Americans to do it. There are a lot of private organizations that I don’t understand or have any desire to join.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Considering all the rules against romance, clearly the focus is supposed to be on other things.
In my experience, when there are a lot of rules against something, usually that's EXACTLY where the focus is.
If something's unimportant to you, you don't need to ban it.
This is actually one of my problems with a lot of moral strictures; they tend to create obsessions with behaviors that would normally never be problematic. Consider the idea of "eye sex;" would that even exist as a problem worthy of discipline if they weren't doing everything they can to eliminate all romantic expression?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:And Belle, I'll be a couple of levels below you. Send cookies!
I hope you like them with the bottoms burned.
quote:This is actually one of my problems with a lot of moral strictures; they tend to create obsessions with behaviors that would normally never be problematic. Consider the idea of "eye sex;" would that even exist as a problem worthy of discipline if they weren't doing everything they can to eliminate all romantic expression?
Excellent point.
quote:Schools like this are just one example of how we Christians tend to isolate ourselves form society. The modern church has gotten really good at creating a nice little subculture to protect itself. But Christ never did that, He actually went out of his way to engage society.
'Nother excellent point. I've never been a fan of this isolationist tendency either. It's one of the reasons I am against homeschooling strictly for religious reasons. There are some good reasons to homeschool but having the sole one be "I don't want my precious child to be influenced by the evil public schools" is not one I agree with. Because your precious child is going to have to live in the world someday, and not only that, if your child is Christian then your're denying them an opportunity to be a witness in the school. We're supposed to be cities on the hill - lights in the world - we can't do that if we're all shut up in our own little insulated closets hiding from the world.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: 'Nother excellent point. I've never been a fan of this isolationist tendency either. It's one of the reasons I am against homeschooling strictly for religious reasons. There are some good reasons to homeschool but having the sole one be "I don't want my precious child to be influenced by the evil public schools" is not one I agree with. Because your precious child is going to have to live in the world someday, and not only that, if your child is Christian then your're denying them an opportunity to be a witness in the school. We're supposed to be cities on the hill - lights in the world - we can't do that if we're all shut up in our own little insulated closets hiding from the world.
quote:Meh. I did pretty much the same thing for two years. It wasn't a horror.
I can't hold back my curiosity about this any longer, mph. In what way were your experiences analogous to PCC students'? Were you allowed to read your own books and watch movies and TV? How would you have been punished if you didn't live up to the rules?
Feel free not to answer if it's too personal.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
For two years, I was a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
We could not read our own books -- only the scriptures and a few other church books. We could not watch movies. We could not watch TV. The only music we could listen to was hymns. We had one day a week "off" where we were supposed to take care of the shopping, laundry, etc.. We could write letters to family and friends. We were never allowed to leave the presence of our missionary companion. Romantic interactions with anybody was prohibited (well, except possibly through letters). Except on our day off, we always wore a white shirt and tie.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You forgot mandatory bed times and rise times.
And I don't know about you, but shower time was definately conducted out of the presence of my companion Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not really, I don't think. I mean, too flagrant a violation (acquiring a girlfriend, never working) might get someone sent home. If someone was blowing off the work that badly, though, I would tend to think that they want to go home.
For things not warranting sending someone home, you'd get called to repentance, but that's not the same as punishment. The other missionaries will mostly likely think you're a crappy missionary, so I suppose that could be considered a punishment, although it wasn't formal.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, like I said before, I have no problem with people exercising their wills to hold themselves to high standards, or what they see as high standards.
What I think is perverse is waiving one's responsibility by basically paying someone else (like PCC) to watch over you day and night. Again, this shouldn't be illegal. But I think it's a mark of weak character.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pH: Heyyyyy, baby. How 'bout some sweet, sweet eye sex?
-pH
I happened to be reading this post when I answered my work phone. I have a long introductory spiel that I have to give when I answer my phone, and I have it on a sticky note on my monitor to help me remember. I very nearly read pH's post instead. All I got out was the "Heyyyy" before I caught myself, but that could have been a pretty funny "how I lost my job" story.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:What I think is perverse is waiving one's responsibility by basically paying someone else (like PCC) to watch over you day and night. Again, this shouldn't be illegal. But I think it's a mark of weak character.
So...all we need to do is agree that there ARE some weak characters out there, and then we could all agree that there's a place in the world for institutions such as this.
I'm not say, btw, that this is really the situation with students at this particular school. But there are people with compulsions that they find hard to break and damaging to their lives. It is (finally) gaining acceptance in this society to treat these problems with drugs and therapy.
Are we going to deny people other possible ways of dealing with such problems?
Seriously, if a person sees themself as so potentially self-destructive and out of control, isn't it in fact better that they recognize that and try to do something about it?
Again, I'm not saying there's even one person like that in this school. But if there is one person who went there out of feelings of self-dread over actions they might take, I personally am glad that PCC is there for them.
That's not to say I think what they are doing there is going to be particularly effective for just anyone with compulsions (specifically sexual compulsions) that they are fretting about. But sometimes people do have to fail a few times before they find somethign that will help them. I'd rather someone "fail" in a place like that, then in a place where they're going to go off, have sex with their cousin, get pregnant and move to Kentucky.
I'm just sayin'.
And for some people the only way to arrive at a "healthy" attitude about sex is to live the opposite way and reject it...
Hey, I can think of dozens of reasons why a place like this might be just the ticket for some people I've known.
Again, I'd probably become a raging psychopath after a week there, but then, it wasn't built for me, was it?
Really, this earns a big "meh" from me.
I'll just add, if a child of mine wanted to attend this place of their own free will, I'd feel like a total failure as a parent.
I don't see much about it that is "Christlike" to be honest. But then, it certainly appears that is only a secondary consideration for the people who are running this place. Discipline, and especially sexual "control" appear to be at the head of the agenda. In front of Christ and in front of academics.
I'd love to see a psych workup on the founders of this place, and the current heads of it (if different people). Let's just say I have my suspicions about minds who can think up things like this code of behavior in the first place.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd love to see a psych workup on the founders of this place, and the current heads of it (if different people). Let's just say I have my suspicions about minds who can think up things like this code of behavior in the first place.
Heck, I'd like to meet someone from there. Can they honestly function in normal society? Where do they live/work after that experience? Would I traumatize them with my clothes, music, friendliness?
Posts: 3636 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: For two years, I was a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
We could not read our own books -- only the scriptures and a few other church books. We could not watch movies. We could not watch TV. The only music we could listen to was hymns. We had one day a week "off" where we were supposed to take care of the shopping, laundry, etc.. We could write letters to family and friends. We were never allowed to leave the presence of our missionary companion. Romantic interactions with anybody was prohibited (well, except possibly through letters). Except on our day off, we always wore a white shirt and tie.
You ought to note that there are slight changes and stipulations to some of those rules. These changes are entirely up to the Area Presidence and the Mission President.
On My Mission: We could watch select movies that were deemed OK. I.E. Harry Potter, Star Wars, Disney Movies, etc. We could listen to classical music, and orchestrated music. We could listen to Broadway Musicals, and Church Music. This was later ammended because some stupid Missionary decided that rock music was ok.
You also forgot situations where you could leave your companion for interviews or if you had a suitable male member of the church accompanying you
I personally got to go home twice on my mission for visa reasons and was without a companion once I passed the first security checkpoint until I reached my parents at the arrival hall. The lack of companion after having one so constantly was nothing short of strange.
I guess one might compare missionaries to the kids in these schools, all I can say is my brother called me just the other day to tell me he hated his private American school in Japan because he was walking behind a cleaning lady who opened the door to a broom closet and there were 2 kids inside engaging in oral sex. Its been argued that people should be safe from the appearence of religion if they go to a public school, I am incidentally more interested in not having school be a living porn experience.
Also it should be noted missionaries only have such strict rules because they are official representatives of the church, trying their best to represent Jesus. Even a casual reading of the New Testament shows that Jesus probably did not spend much time making "eye babies."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Broadway musicals were OK? All musicals, or just some? Because there are a lot out there that I would not consider mission approriate.
Posts: 364 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Any of the deep, lengthy looks religious films are frequently happy to have Jesus do would, if at a woman, qualify as making eye babies under the standard expressed in the article.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Even a casual reading of a biology textbook on reproduction would show that no one ever has.
Possibly; then again, those biology textbooks include evilution, so that shows how much they are worth.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are huge differences, as far as I can tell, between the PURPOSE of PCC and the PURPOSE of a mission.
I'm not sure I agree.
I agree with Tom not being sure of his agreement.
There are, of course, many purposes in serving a mission. Some of them probably have areas of overlap with the purposes of PCC. However, the main purpose of a mission, it's stated goal & focus, is to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ. It's main goal is not to pursue higher education with a extra helping of morality on the side. I would have to agree with pH on this one.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, the main purpose of a mission, it's stated goal & focus
I do not consider a "main purpose" and a "stated goal" to always be the same thing.
I don't either, but I think it applies in this case. If you think that the main goal is to produce future church leaders, strongly instill moral values, or push official church doctrine you're welcome to your opinion. I just think that these are secondary effects and purposes(although definately intended) to the stated goal and main purpose.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Yes, but you do spend something like 6 months getting ready for that mission, don't you? Are the rules in place during that time?
These people (some of them anyway) likely think that they are preparing for a lifetime mission.
Well, technically 3 weeks, unless learning a foreign language (that adds another 6 weeks or so). You live by the same handbook of rules in the training facility as you do in the field. I'm not saying that you can't look at it the way you and Tom do. It's not black and white with a right and wrong answer. I just happen to think they are more different in purpose than the same.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is your idea of a horror story? I was thinking of fraternity razings, climbing rape rates, crooked Campus security, or murder in the name of Jesus Christ... Instead I find an extremely conservative college that <Gasp> Expells students for disobeying rules set forth by said college before the students ever actually get accepted.
Wow are you uptight!
I remember going to a co-ed camp where it was unaccpetable to even ask a girl to talk with you if you were a guy... You had to run into each other coincidentally. It was a pain, and for that reason alone, I wouldn't go to PCC. I don't enjoy the Pensecola worship music or teaching ministry either, so I don't buy their tapes.
What's the horror in wanted the students to refrain from patting each others butts?
What's the horror in wanted the students to devote all of their time to their study in this college, by refraining to watch TV?
It's a christian college. I believe that it is counter-productive to keep the students out of contact (They don't let you look at each other because if you 'look at a woman in lust' you might as well have done it, according to Jesus. That's why you can't make 'eye babies'. They want to keep you out of temptation), because as soon as the students are in the real world, they will be in contact with each other, and others that are quite in to sex and drugs and that Rockin' Phantom of the Opera CD. So what good are you doing by postponing the inevitable? They will be tempted at some point.
Anyway, I have yet to see any horror stories. If somebody bursts out crying because they are afraid they'll get expelled, they need to move on and leave the college. God! (Uh oh, I used the Lord's name in vain.)
If students are under pressure from their parents, they also need to grow up and get over it. I come from a Christian family, and have always been taught to Honor my mother and father, but good grief! Okay, so you get kicked out of the house for picking a differant college... If your under the age of 18, it's illegal, and you're probably going to be living on campus anyway. Besides, how are over-bearing parents the college's fault?
Really people, this is hardly horror.
Horror would be the the telekinetic girl who went to Pensecola and killed everybody after they poured blood on her at the prom... Oh wait... Horrors, there is no prom! Alas, she just killed everybody for no reason. All eight of the graduating students were killed.
And dating. Like your going to 'miss it'. Your going to miss the person destined for you (By God, since this is a Christian College, after all) because you couldn't date without your parents approval.
And backstabbing! Disturbing in a chirstian college, but can anybody say that you had an ideal social setting in college, and that there was never the jerk who looked for opportunities to get even with you for some kind of way you wrongged her/him? The only difference in this college, is that they've labled this petty behavior under 'Keeping one another accountable' which is extremely hypocritical... Hypocritical, but certainly not horrific. Legalistic and religious (Ou, I'm throughing Heagan words around, straight from the Word of Faith), but not horrific.
And as much as I hate the structure of a pompous, over-critical, nit-picking, judgemental and legalistic church setting, I hate even more the church that accepts all views, is perfectly altruistic, and that is politically correct all the time... where tolerence is prized above being like Christ.
There's a balence to these things, and every time we look at either extreme, we're seeing what humans have made of it. Not what God did, but what humans did.
And that is one of the problems with the school.
And Jesus never made eye babies... He said himself, if you look at a woman in lust, you might as well have done her. (Love the modern interpretation, don't you)
This is far from horrific.
And, If I may share one more pet peeve... I hate being the hard-headed conservative guy, who thinks that you need to have done something in order to have an opinion... But how many of you are Christians... Just a question. Or, not even christian, How many of you have even bothered yourselves to familiarize yourselves with the Pensecola ministry, from which this school was formed? Not that you can't have an opinion, but I dare say that you should at least have glossed over more than one article on PCC, shoudn't you?
Surely this one article is not the only basis for your opinion of the school? If everybody out here has done this, then I'm the ass. I'll bray next post just to make up for it.
Anyway, if I may switch to a theological point of view, regarding works versus faith, my biggest problem with this school.
Often, in christianity, going to church, reading chirstian books, you will hear the phrase 'Let there be less of me, so there can be more of you'... Where the 'me' is the person, and the 'you' is God.
Okay, I think this is completely backwards. This, and policies that stem from this kind of thinking will lead to nothing but frustration!
God said that we are earthen vessels... He also said we're sheep, salt, and a light on a hill, but for this paragraph, we're Earthen vessels. Cups, wine-glasses, whatever. We hold stuff.
Imagine a glass full of soy-sauce (Soy-sauce being the sin). Now, how is this glass supposed to pour itself out, so that there will be 'less and less of me'. It can't. Okay, now, there's a pitcher (This is deep, isn't it. ) and this pitcher is full of water. The pitcher is God (the benevelont being in charge of the entire planet) and God can pour all of himself into this tiny glass... As the glass overflows, the soy-sauce spills out and is dilluded in the glass... This is redemtion in my opinion.
This is not to say that we don't have a part in resisting temptation and stuff, but for the most part I give credit to God... And the blame if I suck as an Earthen vessel.
This college seems to be 'beating the flesh' into submission (Another Christian term) Which I believe is not needed, and, as I said before, counter-productive.
But (Everybody together now) It is certainly not horrific!Posts: 438 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um... sorry about what seems to have been a controversial word choice.
My point was just that the place seems extremely unpleasant and I can't understand why any students would want to go there.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:He said himself, if you look at a woman in lust, you might as well have done her.
Hm. Out of interest, do you believe that being homosexual is a sin, or merely engaging in homosexual behavior? Can people who are born homosexual lead relatively sinless lives by refraining from engaging in homosexual sex, or are they damned the instant they find someone attractive?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't apologize... Your use of the word 'horror' gave me a nice lead in, and exit, of the post. It was a hook... It tied all of what I said together. Thank you. LOL
Posts: 438 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, it matters about what you think of sin. I believe that Jesus saves you from your sin, the moment you accept him... Not to get into 'once-saved, always saved' deal.
So, if homosexuality is a sin, I don't know why you would go to hell anymore than any other sexual sin.
But yes, Homosexuality is a sin, according to the bible.
As opposed to attraction, which happens all the time. It's not a sin to be attracted to someone, it's when you dwell on that attraction that it becomes 'looking'. 'Looking' and 'seeing' are two different things.
I've heard it explained that your going to notice good looking people... It's the second look though, the one where you know they're good looking and that's the entire reason you're looking again, that is a sin.
Am I making sense?
How about this... It's okay to be attracted to them, just don't jack off to the person's looks. (I'm being fescetious, of course)
Posts: 438 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:They don't let you look at each other because if you 'look at a woman in lust' you might as well have done it, according to Jesus. That's why you can't make 'eye babies'. They want to keep you out of temptation
My translation of the Bible actually refers to married people.
And honestly, the backstabbing IS a big deal. Yeah, people backstab one another in college, but it's not like we ratted each other out to the administration all the time. That's what gets me. There are always petty, backstabbing people, but they generally keep the school authorities out of it. I mean, if I'd reported my floormates every time one of them had a guy over after curfew...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
