i
n
—^ /“ \
/ \
^ ,
P
\
u
Published by the students of Fontreat-Anderson College
Monday, 28 September 1970
t 1 ik I K staff
Fraiik Austin, Mditor-in-Chief'
j Pichard T.ahce, Assistant Mditor
Gene Hines, Montreat Hditor
A. len Ceitner, Hational/lnternational
Hditor
Fatri'cia Butler, Business Manager
,Jan,nt Ctdne, Facu.l.tv Adviser
A CHUCIAL YF.AR ''
Reality—the tormented j^et -strangely ex
hilarating reality of the campuses'of" the
■',960's—is coming to Montreat^^Anderson Col
lege. Me have already beg’on to enact on of
th-a c.la.ssic confrontations of the leot^
decade--the conflict bot-w'-en a^^ministiratlor;
povre r and st ude nt r i ght s.
This editcripj .could be devot.ed to' up-
■hdl ding' 'the cohton$7 on that "made. ..picture
lidu'or'.--ad;v‘ertisement's, and ' symbois-'probably
more political o^' faddish than racist neip
ther violate th# spirit of Christianity nOr
automatically produce sex criminals, alco-^.,
holies, or racial' bigot s. It'xvill not be, '
Such a contention, although. supportable, is
not the is-sue at hand.
.The issue is Yrhether a college adminis
tration, having rented its dormitorjr prop
erty, has,■the right to any further control
over that property, exclusive of cases of-,
plu.’-sical dama.ge and violations of civil law
The issue ig vrhether a col lege. admi.nls- ■
tration,. no matter ho-w Christian its. in
tentions or tim great its politicaMr^bvrer'
relative to student s,-has the moral or^le-'-
gal right to control the fnou^hts of ilio-se
students, as .indirectly expressed in „th^e
;iecor of theiryn^oms. ^'
The issue is-whether a college adminis--
tretion, no ma'tter"how,’- expert or wrell--
meaning its menbers mav 'be, any. 1 ongep..,ha,s
the ri.cht to exercise d-ireot■■focial'J^'l-tr.bl
over a part of the most -mature and ih-Pi--
ligent generation of co''lege studentAf-b-ver.
seen in the United States. %
The administration of l.»ntreat-4nderson
College feels, deeply and sincerely,'*that -A-, ib the responsibility and maturity of
it sh'ould have the three '-Vights of cont'rol'lthose students. The foundst.).'on of its
seated above* This position ,is ba'ged.^ ;%e
believe, on the adirdnistr^t ■■-■pn’ s vie-vv'of
its function a.s ,jan agent of the Churchy
on its desire to’-maintain a special ^fmo's-
phore' at Montreat—an atmosphere in w|^>i
The’-’-Q-p'^ypn's presented here represent only
The vie-wb- of the cohtributor.s, and not
neae s,sar iiy.-the view;-s of the College or
the ,Stu'dent-:.G.qvernment /-ssociation*
Itt, given presdaf-..conditions, hov; can a
FIontreat-f-Anderson- graduate be fully ed-
,/ucated, ,'so long as it is the practice of
the administra'tion to exclude certain
^"distasteful" elements from 'nis exp^ience?
Finally,', ve see the administration's
position as'^'damaging to -tvhat must be the
essence of any college, its sense of com
munity. is granted that the Student
.lovsrhment Association has the po-wer to
revie-w a decision of the administration,
after it h^s ^econie working policy of the
3clle£_e.
Hci-:ever, -what real po-wer do stuis
■(tents havg ,.in. the planning stages cf
policy-making; Specifically, h'ow many
- st-jdsnts were consulted -t;hile the admin-
is-^rat.-^.on's position's position on room
-decorations I'Cs being formulated? .And, if
such student participation -was minimal,
is montreat-Anderson a true cc-rmunity,
or-.is it a collection of stedents and
faculty under the c»ntrol of the colle.ge
administration?
These-may seem, to some, harsh words,
divisive i-jords. They need not be. The
foundation of -this ne-ii:spaper' s belief in
the rights of M.ontreat-j--nderson. students .
belief that something can be do.ne to make
this 3 lietter institution is the open-
r-iiindedness. of its administrators and
their receptivity to chaiige. The .founda
tion of its belief in tnis college is the
the. administration has, in t?ie,, last., analysis tolerance-and essential decency of its
effective oontrol pvar all affairs refiirinK [members,.
he are confronted, as President Davis ,
said in his convoca-tion adoress, by a
"crucial year." If, and only if, we all
•act as the civilized human beings we clain
■ to be, making full use of our responsi
bility, open-mindedness, and decency, to
ward one another—unless, we act we act as
to the operation of't'hefool lege „
Th.is nfe-wspaper cannot, in good consc'is'hcs,
support the administration's posit.'ion. Mcn-
treat-Ander,scn is,' of course, a ChurchUfe-
lated college. But Cn-urch-reldtedness is
.not s>Tionymous -'.'v-itti Christ-relatedpess.-A'-^l] •:
too often, the environment of -the''"Church y.’ ,
college is a restricted one. The environ- M-C^;ristains—can this year be passed
ment of the Christian colfege,. on-'t.he other .successfully*
n-'nd, must be^-thbt of the vv-orl-d, not the ,‘.u ■ Austin
clois ter. The founders of Christienity
realized that the arena for their activi
ties was the wor.!.d, not some iso''ated, pro^ Longhairs and other corresponding types
tected .part of it... Is it too-much to ask f constitute a substantial portion cf this
that -the .student mejibers of the Montreat ;‘year's ifontreat-Anderson College popula-tiai.
community jbe ^'JM.oaged to experience the This is a good sign; the student body ^nas
more variety, is composed of large groups
of people v'ith marked differences in ap-
- pearance and beliefs*
yua r..i '.uvvyu r,o experience the
v.hole I'/orld, insidfe as -vrell as >utside of
this valley-?
The atterript to .-isolate students from-iheir
larger environment is also educe, tion-'lly
damaging. It is’the' purpose of the colle'geva^ikyl
.0 produce educated, Christian citizens.
'However, conflict sometimes results from
In light 01 this, the goal cf each stu-
d.ent shcald be to consider the dude be-