PAGE 2 THE PILOT MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1970 GARDNER-WEBB COLLEGE
Editor and Staff
Editor Wanda Suddreth
Staff Jeff Cranford, Joe Jenkins, Toby
Lutz. Bill Neely, Alice Pike, Gabe
Santanella, Dan Synder. Carolj-n Thomas,
Larry Thomas, Donna Turner. Sandy Webster
Advisor Bill Boyd
Photography Ed Brown and Ed Rumfelt
Letters to the Pilot
Disturbed By Chapel Speaker
Dear Editor:
Those of us who heard Dr. George Schweitzer in Chapel on
February 24th would agree that he is a dynamic, informative
speaker, and a man who has many fine human qualities. This
letter, therefore, is not meant to criticize Dr. Schweitzer as a
speaker, man, or scholar, but merely to point out some dis
turbing aspects of his Chapel talk itself.
In the first place, it seemed oriented towards a pantheistic
rather than a theistic outlook. Neither I nor any listener can
presume to say what Dr. Schweitzer’s personal feelings are
about basic Christian dogma, but the entire text of the speech
itself leaves one in sincere doubt as to whether the speaker
believes in a personal, omnipotent God. Please note that I am
not saying that Dr. Schweitzer does not believe in a personal,
omnipotent God — only that from the content of the Chapel
speech itself this is left in doubt.
A second and more disturbing point is this: after listening
very carefully to the speech In its entirety, I cannot be sure that
the speaker accepts a basic Christian truth: namely, that Jesus
was both true God and true man, that He was the Divine Son
of God. The speech lauds Jesus as the greatest man who ever
walked the earth, but not once did it refer to Him as the Son
erf God, as our Creator and Savior.
This is not meant to be an attack on Dr. Schweitzer. So the
writer would welcome any clarification the learned scholar may
give us on this matter.
Name Withheld By Request
Complaint Expressed, Letter Answered
CC: THE PILOT
President, Student Government Association
Gardner-Webb College
Dear President,
On behalf of the Lander Student Government Association, I
extend my congratulations to your student body on your team’s
victory tonight, February 23, 1970. I must commend your ex
cellent ball club. This group of young men exemplified the type
of students of which you would be proud.
We were very pleased to have a large number of your students
at the game, but the conduct of this select few was most unbe
coming to your student body. I realize, however, that this group
did not represent your entire student body and that to judge all by
a minority would be unfair. Yet, I find it necessary to inform you
of some of the actions of this group.
Upon arriving at the game, I found your Pep Club already
seated in the gymnasium. Since non-Lander students must pay,
I asked one of our students to kindly secure the tickets from
your students. They told her they did not have any, and your
chaperone asked to see the ticket seller Otne). I informed her
that any one not directly affiliated with the Athletic Department
would have to pay for admission to the game. (I assumed your
Pep Club understood they had to pay for admission as this is a
cranmon practice with most schools and we had to pay at Gard-
ner-Webb.)
Your chaperone assured me the students would come promptly
to purchase their tickets, yet only six came. (The game had not
begun when all of this occurred.) I also asked one of your cheer
leaders and another chaperone to ask the students to come buy
their tickets.
At halftime Mrs. Finis Horne, professor of English, and Miss
Julie Snead, Assistant Business Manager of the Athletic Depart
ment, and I went to sell tickets to those who still had not pur
chased them. I can assure you that we treated them with every
courtesy until they began using abusive language in addressing
Mrs. Horne, Miss Snead, and me. It finally became necessary to
ask the police to come over and aid us in selling tickets. The
chief wanted to charge one young lady with disorderly conduct
because of her language. Others of your number did not want to
pay because it was halftime, yet, they failed to remember they
were there for the full first half.
Although! most paid for their tickets, a few did not. However,
the money for the tickets does not disturb me as much as their
attitude. When our students visit other campuses we try to respect
the rules of that college and respect the authority within the col
lege. As I recall upon visiting Gardner-Webb on February 7, 1970,
the Lander group purchased tickets for $1.00 each and many
bought programs at 25 cents each without the assistance of the
police.
The actions of this minority most assuredly brought reproach
upon your school. Many comments were made concerning their
behavior not only' by Lander students but also by Greenwood citi
zens and scouts from other colleges.
If you have any questions or comments concerning this inci
dent, I would be happy to discuss them with you.
Dan Snyder (left) and Jeff Cranford (right) will edit next year’s PILOT.
PILOT Editor And
Associate Named
Newly-named PILOT editor
for next year is Jeff Cranford.
Dan Snyder will serve As
sociate Editor. Majoring in
Religious Education, Jeff is
a rising junior from Charlotte,
N. C. Dan is a rising senior
from Hickory, N. C., and he
is also a Religious Education
major. The two students were
chosen after being interviewed
along with other applicants
concerning their journalism
experience and their philo
sophy of a college newspaper.
Dear Miss Dennis:
Regarding your letter of February 24, 1970, I feel that the
statement s you have made concerning our students are quite out
of proportion.
I offer my apolc^y, on behalf of the students, if you feel this
is necessary.
Some of our students informed n
remarks were made to them in th(
sonnel.
We had considered the matter closed when the games were
After we returned from the game that night our adult spon
sors commented to me about the good behavior of our students.
I felt their behavior was quite satisfactory.
I trust this will clear the matter.
Thomas C. Poston
ONE LITTLE CANDLE
Receives Plaudits
By C. ROBERT JONES
In an age when the arts enjoy only a skin-deep commitment
from most Americans, it is especially noteworthy that, from
this tendency towards cultural darkness, ONE LITTLE CAN
DLE has come along to offer its own quality of light. The fall
issue of Gardner-Webb’s literary “anthole^y”, now in its second
season of publication, is presented in an expanded and attrac
tive format. For the first time, the magazine is printed and the
photography and art work by Ed Rumfelt, Carolyn Bridges, and
Peggy Ringer is excellent.
With the exception of Jerry Keller’s SOUNDS, the issue is
made up entirely of poetry, and contributors include both stu
dents and faculty, as well as several poems from members of
the community. It would be impossible to single out one entry
or poet since the enjoyment of poetry is a highly personal or
individual thing. Editor Stephan Stojanovic obviously has sought
to balance his anthology with works that reflect life in many
different moods. He has succeeded, in great measure.
Now that senior college status for Gardner-Webb is assured,
it is heartening to know that the college will be represented by
a literary magazine of which it can be proud. Hopefully, future
issues will include other forms of creative endeavor. Surely
there are some budding short-story writers, dramatists, essay
ists, etc. who will want to contribute works. In any case, Editor
Stojanovic, and his staff, faculty advisor Fred Wilkie, and Eng
lish Department Head Betty S. Cox (whose fine efforts pioneered
the project and who secured partial financial backing) deserve
long and loud kudos for a significant achievement. May that
ONE LITTLE CANDLE bum for many years to come.
Letters to the Pilot
Why Must We Pay To Reapply?
Dear Editor:
Gardner-Webb is once again after the students’ money. We
realize the cost of “the Webb” is higher than state-supported
schools, because it is privately owned by the Baptist Conven
tion. But why should we have to pay fifteen dollars simply to
reapply each year?
To many students these “little” extra charges are ridicu
lous. One day we who are students at “the Webb” will hope
fully be alumni. I, for one, will remember these extra charges
when I receive a letter from Gardner-Webb College asking for
donations and will reply that “I donated plenty while I was a
student at Gardner-Webb.”
Tommy Moore
Dear Editor:
This letter is to offer an explanation about the $15 applica
tion fee required of all students seeking readmission to Gard
ner-Webb this falL
It has been a long-standing policy of the trustees and ad
ministration of the college to collect an application fee for
each academic year a student attends Gardner-Webb. This
fee is a processing fee and helps defray the expenses of hand
ling the application, making room assignments, classifying the
aj3)lications according to classes and groups, and handling the
many details involved in serving the students.
Please let us point out that the application fee does not cover
the complete cost of processing the application, just as the
tuition, room and board charges, and other fees do not cover
the actual cost of any student’s stay here. The additional cost
is provided by the North CaroUna Baptist State Convention, by
endowment, by foundations and friends of the college, and by
other sources of revenue.
We very much wish that we did not have to chaise a fee for
readmission, but we do not see how it can be avoided at this
time.
Our Problem
Of Air
Pollution
By TOBY LUTZ
Every year more Americans
tfearn what it means to live
with dirty air, so much so
that the term “air pollution”
has become a common house
hold word. But just what really
is air pollution and how serious
is it in America? Ask an in
dustrialist and he wil 1 play
down the effects of air pollu
tion and assure you that there
is really nothing to worry a-
bout. Ask a politician who is
trying to get elected and you
can expect to have your blood
frozen by a doomsday prophet
who will tell you that the End
is here if we do not get busy
and clear up the pollution pro
blem. The truth lies some
where between the two ex
tremes. The industrialist is
right in that there is plenty
of hope and time enough to
clear up the pollution. The
politician is right in that we
had better get busy now or
else his prophecy may very
well be made realized in our
children’s lifetime.
We are all aware of many
of the prime causes of air
pollution. Most wastes get into
the air from burning, man’s
basic method of producing
power. The refuse of a com
munity’s way of life is tossed
into the air by many modem
burners; the engines of trucks,
trains, buses, and family cars;
incincerators and home fur
naces; steel mills and power
plants; oil refineries and soap
factories. What they spew Into
the air mixes with wastes and
gases from many other sources.
Some are acted upon by sun
light. Some interact with one
another to form different pol
luting compounds.
How serious is air pollu
tion? It is obvious that air
pollution, and not just air
pollution alone but all forms
of pollution, impair the health
of people, destroy natural re
sources, and upset the balance
of nature. But this does not
occur evenly across the coun
try. It depends on the area
(how mountains trap air pol
lution creates a more serious
threat than does, say, an open
plain area where the pollution
can be carried away by the
wind); the weather condition
(the weather can trap polluted
air - on a windless day a heavy
mass of air can hang around a
city soaking up waste. Above,
where it is usually cool, there
may be instead a layer of warm
air, warmer than the air close
to the earth. The cooler air
cannot rise, so the warm, high
air sits upon the cooler ground
air like a lid. It boxes in the
unclean mass where it stands.);
the amount of prime causes of
air pollution in the area (if
one lives in a heavily indus
trialized area, then he can ex
pect to have a more serious
air pollution problem than in
an area with less prime cau-
How do we solve the pro
blem? The obvious answer is
to “stop polluting the air.”
“Let’s get down on these in
dustries and other causes of
air jwllution and lay down the
law. Either stop polluting or
stop functioning . . ,” This is
the attitude which most people
wiU adopt. But this is emo
tionalism. For one example,
the prime cause of air pollu
tion is the automobile. So, if
one follows the emotional ap
proach to solving the problem,
everyone should stop driving
cars. As far as we know, all
those people who take the emo
tional approach are still driv
ing their cars. Emotionalism
is not the way to solve air
pollution. The problem of pol
lution cannot be solved over
night, but it can be solved.
The first requirement for do
ing anything about the problem
is to leam as much as one can
about the problem and what is
being done now. Then one can
participate in an organized ef
fort to help solve the problem.