Covenant College is Dying

While a private college can, essentially, do whatever it wants, a school newspaper should not be utilized as an extension of a school's marketing materials. I mean, it CAN be if it's fantastic, but that should not be its stated purpose.

A school newspaper should be a place where kids are allowed to learn by experience, and a place where they are allowed to make mistakes. Also, letting students write about what they want to write about (with simple guidance) can help build both their chops and their confidence.

It's called a SCHOOL newspaper for a reason.

All I can really say is that there is absolutely no justification for making the Bagpipe, a student publication, serve the interests of the college. If any major university tried to control its student newspaper to make it serve the interests of the university, it would probably get sued and it would most likely lose all its funding. Thats because most of the world recognizes such a thing as ethical standards in journalism. For Covenant to flagrantly deny such standards is a truly sad affair and it goes against the very values that Covenant claims to teach. So Covenant is going to tell its students to go out into culture and to transform it while the institution itself encourages a flat-out abuse of the ethical standards that hold our culture together? Covenant, do you think you are above the demand to protect the integrity of the media? Or do you think your student newspaper just doesnt matter enough to be treated with such respect? Is the newspaper too small and insignificant to warrant the defense of its integrity? Well, then why should Covenant itself even matter seeing that its such a small, irrelevant blip now on the map of Christianity? And it is becoming increasingly irrelevant with every banal move like this that it makes.

Josiah, for all the controversy that surrounds his blog at times, is a teriffic example of the kind of community involvement that Covenant grads are supposed to be exhibiting, one of the best examples I know. And I know for a fact, after working at Covenant, that there are some up there who dont even want to acknowledge that he exists. Their claim that Covenant as an instituion is having any significant, positive effect on the city of Chattatnooga is just blatantly hypocritical at this point. Perhaps this could change if the administration would start teaming up with the many valuable but disgruntled alumni who are living and working in this town. But instead, the administration continues to focus its energies on corrupting an institution that used to value the kind of counter-cultural, progressive mindsight that Covenant now consistently suppresses.

"If I had to choose between government without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the latter."

~Thomas Jefferson

Not that I think anarchy is a good thing, but it's better than micro-management.

Yesterday, I saw a group of Covenant students on Frazier outside of Clumpy's:

I remarked to a friend, "Enjoy North Chatt kiddies. It's the last time you'll come down from the mountain for years."

Todd: Though I agree with the sentiment that the school newspaper isn't supposed to be a propaganda organ, you're incorrect about your assessments of the legal situation. The college pays for the newspaper, ergo the college can do what it wants with the newspaper.

This move is spectacularly ill-advised from a PR and retention standpoint, but they're perfectly within their rights. Other schools, including Notre Dame, run numerous alternative newspapers precisely because the official paper is bland and uninteresting. If the student body at Covenant wants their views expressed, they should start their own damn paper. That would have the added benefit of putting it entirely outside Mr. Anderson's control. Because freedom of the press--for those that have presses--is guaranteed by the Constitution, the only way he could stop it then would be to add a prohibition against participation in unofficial activities to the Contract, which seems a bit BJU even for him. This may well be where he wants to take the school, but I'm pretty sure we have enough of those kinds of places.

Ryan, I do wonder if the College technically owns the paper. The paper is funded by the Student Senate, which receives its monies from a separate line-item fee in tuition payments.

Of course, is Student Senate separate from the College? It should be.

ugh. bad idea.

although my tenure as editor of the bagpipe wasn't particularly notable, it still holds a special place in my heart.

bad, bad idea. very sad.

Ryan, I need to clarify that I never said that what Covenant is doing is illegal. I know full well that Covenant is within its legal rights to take control of the bagpipe. I was merely stating that I think what they are doing is unethical and that most universities out there that i know of acknowledge this. They are numerous stories online of universities being sued for this kind of behavior, although I do confess that I am ingnorant of what the legal boundaries are like when it comes to this kind of thing.

But it is surely unethical of Covenant to force its student newspaper to serve its own institutional interests. And I would guess that you would have no problem agreeing with me on that? Maybe not. Let me know what you think.

Ryan,
I believe the "student led newspaper" thing has been tried, albeit radically, but its been tried. Remember "The Drone"?? Granted, it wasn't exactly flattering or (for the most part) tasteful, but those few months were glorious.

Quintus, you miss the point.
this is THE opportunity!
(Grass roots, off the photocopier,
hand made handouts type newspapers
of two to three sheets passed under
dorm room doors.) got it?

when things get REALLY big? YOU GO SMALl!

you, and think, why? why Joseph?
cuz you got too big too! it's gotta
go biggie smallz.

small.
smalll.

like the mac classic.

Sad, but not surprising. I remember a certain Windbag publication during your tenure, Josiah, that had several articles in particularly bad taste. "Boys of Covenant have Great Season" or something like that? Another one was about the Chalmers Center smuggling drugs (as I recall, that one had me gagging with laughter trying to get through it).

Anyway, Covenant college is in the tricky position of being directly affiliated with the PCA, and whether accurate or not, the Bagpipe is perceived by some to be its mouthpiece. Anderson probably decided the college needed veto power on articles that might bring unfavorable attention.

The big problem with this is that a piece of hard-hitting journalism, such as the one about students being fired for refusing to work on Sundays, probably would be axed before ever getting written. If the drug-related jokes get cut from future Windbag issues that's no big deal. But losing the ability to criticize the college when it screws up takes away one of the few chances that students have to really affect policy.

I feel like I need to start donating money to the college, just so I can threaten to stop donating if they keep doing this sort of thing.

It is both a right and a privilege to have "free" speech, wherever that glorious freedom is found. I do believe the founding Fathers said a few things that were out of line with the predominant thinking of the day, by those that were in control.
We know that it is the balance between responsibility and freedom; the ebb and flow; the give and take that keeps ideas fresh and living. This is what pumps life into the stagnant and what keeps the world from flying off its axis. Both are needed.
However, when the power brokers misuse their authority to strong arm the up and coming to the point of ultimate control...look out! The death of vitality is at hand. Assembly line productivity is on the way and all that is vibrant, alive, unique and truly thoughtful are flushed down the drain.
Then, people are forced to go scooping through the dross for a little sustainance.
Sad, but true.

Taking away the sovereignty of the paper is a clear negative for the Bagpipe, but it probably will make student journalism better. I'd imagine by the end of the semester students will get something underground going. (Please call it the Wagpipe!). It will probably be more creative and passionate than the paper would have been anyway. After all the youth now have a cause. And it will probably be more irreverent an objectionable to official values of the school than any Windbag that we've seen.

Which brings up the underlying issue. What do we get for all these rules? It seems like the main thing is just deniability for the administration when anything "bad" happens. But it seems at highly likely that the backlash to these new rules will be "badder" than any cover story the bagpipe ever ran. Of course Student Development could just send home the perpetrators, but then we've just got a police state. And as Ryan said, we've got enough of those pretending to be liberal arts colleges.

Thanks for spreading the word, Josiah.

I think some letter-writing by the alumni is in order. Perhaps if the current powers that be don't care about or understand free discourse, at least they will see how poorly this plays with those of us who have their diploma on the wall.

I just sent my email.

Hey JD, what would The Integrator do in a situation like this?

Matt, you actually make a really good point. I hope the students do have the inspiration and initiative to publish underground, independent publications if the administration does indeed strong arm the Bagpipe. If they did, I think it would instigate better, more thoughtful writing which would be great. That could be a major upside to all of this. But then again weve all read Harry Potter 5 and so we know what can happen to secret organizations. I only hope the students have the Fred and George variety of vigilance.

Wagpipe is a brilliant name by the way.

And JD, I agree that letter writing seems really in order here. Ive never wanted to do that before, but this is the first time where I really find the administration's decison so offensive, that I would feel really negligent if I didnt at least express my views to the college. I hope others will feel similarly.

The Senate may be a separate line-item, but so is the technology fee. If the people running the budget can de-fund the Senate, and I suspect they can--it isn't meaningfully independent. As such, though they technically fund the paper, it's really the school.

One could theoretically make the Senate a corporately distinct entity with mandatory funding by students, but this seems dicey.

I wrote a letter too JD. I think it's important for this to not just look like a Jeremiad on Josiah's part. Because it isn't. As much as I think Covenant's become less interesting than it was in my time. Mainly due to the administration making more rules and regulations, this is a clear no no on the schools part. You shouldn't get to take freedom of the press away from the school for free.

Where do we send our letters again?

I'd send them to our alumni representative. Marshall Rowe. He can be reached at rowe at covenant dot edu.

Send your letters here. Marshall is just a buffer.

I respect the letter-writing idea guys, and I wish you success. But what I want to see is some indication that the current students at Covenant are upset by this. If there's no groundswell of indignation from them, then it's simply their loss. If there is, then that's when I'll lend my voice to the debate, for whatever it's worth.

I don't suppose the e-door is still functioning? Anyone here able to post to it if it is?

Probably a smart thing to do would be to write Emily Belz, the current student editor of the Bagpipe, and ask her what she thinks alumni might be able to do to help. She is the one who knows from the ground what is going on, and I know that she does not agree with the decision. Her email is ebelz@covenant.edu.

Be Advised: "Bagpipe" is Secret Presbyterian Code for same-sex armpit f*cking...

Ah RTN, always classy! Are you drunk blogging again?

When I want to know what the typical student (the Wallace Youth, perhaps) on Covenant College's campus is thinking, I look no further than right here. Until he's up in arms, I see no reason for concern. In fact, he says that "it’s going to be a crazy awesome year," and I'll bet he's right. Crazy awesome, indeed.

WTF...?...??? Whatever happened to encouraging free and independent thinking? I may not have liked the direction that many students chose to take their freedom, but this is never the direction that I wanted the campus to go.

Exactly what would they do if the students just did what they wanted and published what they wanted and wrote what they wanted anyway? I guess ultimately they could kick the students out, but if there was enough of a protest from a big enough slice of the campus, what are they going to do, kick out the entire student body?

I didn't think it was possible for Covenant College to do something that would make feel strongly about it ever again. But they've managed it.

In the words of Jeff Lebowski: "They finally did it. They killed my f***ing car."

It's not that the Bagpipe was ever an exemplary journalistic effort, in my tenure as editor or in any other era. It was was slapdash, unfocused and occasionally libelous. (That sabbatarian student piece was a riotously bad piece of reportage, actually.) But it was a contrarian voice on campus. Sometimes it was the only contrarian voice. And that position made it an organ of liberal education (in the strict sense of the word) in an atmosphere that was growing downright troglodytic in its illiberality.

So much for that.

With its new position as a de facto mouthpiece of a monolithic system, The Bagpipe no longer can be considered a newspaper at all. Which makes me incredibly sad. Because what Niel Nielson, Wallace Anderson, Brad Voyles and Emily Gossilink are saying with this decision is this: That they've looked at all the energy spent by Dr. Cliff Foreman and generations of editors to keep the paper independent, and they've decided that it doesn't matter. None of it. They've decided that those efforts were a waste of time. They've decided that the countless meetings held between administration officials and earnest, sometimes misguided students were pointless. They've decided that what we learned about journalism, about principles and about education was empty.

So much for them.

I admire Josiah, Todd, Matt and others for having the conviction to express their outrage in letters to the college. But I won't be joining them. It's my opinion that with this decision, Mr. Nielson and his staff have relinquished their entitlement to open discussion. In fact, they've openly rejected any interest in such discussion. Their moral authority is nil. They should not be appealed to.

Here's who should be appealed to: The student body of the college. They are now faced with the responsibility of deciding whether they want to attend a liberal-arts college or an authoritarian summer camp. And fairly or not, the bulk of that decision rest on the shoulders of a student named Emily Belz. She has the option (unenviable, but a little exciting) to shut the system down. She can choose to not publish a farce of a paper. And when the school removes her from her position (which they will) the next editor will have the opportunity to make that same decision.

We should appeal to these students. We should appeal to them not because we want Covenant College to be the school we loved, but because they can make Covenant into a school they can be proud of.

Maybe this is a little pretentious (heck, this entire comment is a lot pretentious), but I'd encourage any current Covenant student who happens to read this: Find a copy of W. H. Auden's poems. Turn to "1 September 1939." And consider the last verse.

Defenceless under the night
Our world in stupor lies;
Yet, dotted everywhere,
Ironic points of light
Flash out wherever the Just
Exchange their messages:
May I, composed like them
Of Eros and of dust,
Beleaguered by the same
Negation and despair,
Show an affirming flame.

I rather think that maybe some of the entrepreneurial spirit and community-oriented culture that Covenant is known for may have stemmed from the administration vs. student mindset that I remember even when we were there:

Remember how Founders had independently constructed its own network linking up most of the guy's halls in the fall of '99, and even worked out a deal with I.T. to allow people on the Founders network access to the Internet through the campus T1? Then some board member got wind of it and--Bang!--no more network.

I assume that five or six years later the college spent thousands of dollars to catch up with the rest of the free world and install campus-wide network access in the dorms (oh the irony--the opportunity be be on the "cutting edge," as a result of student initiative, and to do it for free; all passed up out of fear that the administration didn't have enough control over the project!).

Wow Currie, I haven't thought about that in ages. Randy Smith & Scott Raymond totally went to bat for us on that one. It was then that I first experienced the joy of networked Quake and sharing mp3's.

/end nerdrant

At some point, I'm going to stop admitting I went to school at Covenant. The farther I am removed from the ridiculous joke that the school has become (and really - already was when I was there), the better off I am. Soon, Covenant will just become the presbyterian Bob Jones University and then I'll be forced to remove any mention of it from my resume.

I remember the joy of beating you in the ole networked Quake, Josiah. Ahhh, camping the rocket launchers.

As sad as this move is, I can't say that it surprises me. I wouldn't go the way of Mesh in writing the school off for very high minded reasons, but in the end, I just don't think that my kids will be able to afford Covenant once they get college aged. Some of the best times of my life were spent at Covenant (some of it spent wailing on Josiah in Quake), but moves like this rob the college of the magic that Covenant has that other schools don't. While I think it is a bit much to claim this is the final straw, I think there is definitely a death by pin-pricks going on. I hope that Covenant can turn stuff like this around, though the upward movement of tuition will somewhat make it a moot point for my tots.

Good discussion, Josiah. Way to make noise about stuff that needs attention.

Everyone's probably aware of my opinion during my time at Covenant that the administration let some things go too far, but for whatever disagreements I may have had, I never in my wildest dreams wanted to see Covenant turned into a babysitting service. The reason I chose Covenant instead of following my brother to Liberty was because I loved the idea of a Christian college where students were encouraged to form their own opinions and to think for themselves. It seems like over the last few years all of the reasons that I chose Covenant have been disappearing, and the Bagpipe is the last straw. I'd love to see the students revolt, but I don't have much hope that will happen, it seems like the administration has done a good job of conditioning too large of a percentage of the student body to follow rules without question.

It's sad, it really is.

I just sent an email letting Wallace know that it's his and Gosselink's actions which have convinced me never to contribute to Covenant's funding campaigns. You want to get at these people, you have to hit them where it hurts.

This, my friends, is how the alumni influence what happens at a school: stop giving. I recognize that Covenant's alumni giving has never been huge, but a significant portion of their capital campaigns does come from us. Then, the next time you get a request for money in the mail, just send Wallace another email reminding him of why you aren't giving. If we refuse to give, things will change.

I am throughly saddened by this turn of events. One again, Covenant becomes more insular and less free. Once upon a time, we could do many things, be enterprenurial and enterprising. And all in a safe environment. Now it is the very safe environment that is stifling it all.

i agree, it sucks on one hand. on another, i wonder if earlier grads of covenant were as upset when they created a document students had to sign saying they wouldn't drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. or has that somewhat useless document always been around?

I blame soulforce....

I also am going to ask if my blog can become part of Covenant's media outlet... maybe then i can earn a little money on the side...

Daniel, I believe prohibitions against drinking, smoking, etc. i.e. "Contract" has existed since Covenant began, in one form or another.

Dave, I'm so glad I have your approval! *checks one of his list*

Good point Josiah, but there are some who take action when others will not...do not fear...the drone bee will not disappear...its coming again...

I remember hearing a couple of years ago that these were similar terms Covenant Theological Seminary sought to enact upon several students who wanted to create a student-led newspaper. That is, to final edit the content as to reflect the school's marketing goals. Not to spread rumors, but this memory seems to fit into the PCA template of doing things lately.

"the drone bee will not disappear"
Goody.

This is not a good thing.

Perhaps the website is the cause? More people have access, less control that sort of thing.

Ryan, are you still in London?

L.

Scott c'mon, that posting was hilarious! Damnit, as depressing as this situation is, we can have SOME fun with it!

I agree with Cam that Covenant's strategy as of late reflects some even darker trends in the PCA as a whole. Not trying to stir up another debate, but did anybody follow the PCA General Assembly this year? It basically boiled down to the PCA saying it would rather stop doing Biblical exegesis (because all the best exegesis has already been done for the past 400 years, most of it in the 16th and 17th centuries) and just compare any new doctrines that come our way to the tried and true Westminster Confession of Faith. On the issue of the New Perspectives controversy on Paul, Joe Novenson decided to politely ask the PCA to do a little more exegesis for one more year, before accepting a report on the issue, because it was a complicated matter. Well, I think you can all guess how far he got with that. Its just really ironic to me that a denomination that founds itself upon such mantras as Sola Scriptura has spun completely around to shoot anything down that even remotely challenges its precious Solo Confessiono.

And the denomination, like the college, is looking more and more and like a weird new Presbyterian form of fascism, seemingly emanating from Jackson, MS (anybody ever heard of J. Ligon Duncan?)

So I guess it doesnt suprise me to watch the college follow these trends, and try to control from the top down the diversity of opinions that any honorable academic atmosphere is sure to produce.

Josiah mentioned three people in the administration in his blog post that I wanted to mention: Neil Nielson, the president, Brad Voyles, the dean of students, and Wallace Anderson, the vice president of enrollment. Its not my desire to demonize or excessively criticize these people or the work they do at the college. I frankly know them too well to do that and I also know dont know them enough to do that. But I do want to mention three things that I remember each of these individuals saying that I think reflects why I am frustrated with the college.

Neil Nielson's big quote for the college was "We are not going anywhere," basically saying that the college was at all costs going to stay firmly fixed in whatever ideologies it had chosen for itself and that any danger that the board of trustees might have perceived of the college reforming at all was unwarranted. This is essentially the same thing the PCA said this year at General Assembly. And what kind of attitude is this to have for an academic institution? Were not going anywhere? Isnt that the goal of learning and the goal of the Reformation, always reforming? What kind of mantra is that to establish for Covenant College? What kind academic credibility is that supposed to lend? So Covenant has already decided what it thinks and it cannot be moved. Sure Neilson could just be talking about the essentials of the faith which no one could really fault him for refusing to waver on. But hes talking about so much more. Hes talking about a brand of evangelical conservatism that I once hoped Covenant grads were going to help change. But now I suppose they are just going to protect it and make sure that it doesnt "go anywhere."

Brad Voyles (whom I dont know well at all and so I am only criticizing the quote here and not the man) once said that the most important part of doing student development was being "consistent." And I think that statement reflects the administration's policy on a whole. In their minds, everything from the student paper to the faculty to the RA's to the students themselves, etc. should all reflect and serve the conservative, cultural ideologies that Covenant is supposed to be about. This way, when the upper middle class suburbanite parents come on parents weekend they will all have smiles on their faces for they wont spot any anomolies or flaws in the system. They will see consistency. But when I was at Covenant, the thing I loved most about it was the "diversity," and I think it was a beautiful thing having people on staff and in the faculty, as well as students who were on campus, who couldnt necessarily be labeled as Reformed in the big "R" sense of the word. That was made Covenant beautiful. We were a confessional, conservative college. But we had people from the inside who could question the system and question the beliefs in a safe, intelligent way. And Im talking about staff that I knew who worked there on campus who were eventually shoveled out of that place in one way or another so that the college could be more "consistent."

And finally I remember Wallace Anderson speaking to me about the Bagpipe issue. Ive actually appreciated Wallace in the past for one of his character traits, his honesty and his frankness in telling you what he thinks. And I remember him being very frank with me one time in telling me that he was glad that a parent removed all of the Bagpipes from the Great Hall and hid them so that parents would not have to see the students on the front cover photograph who had performed a cross dressing prank. And it was then I knew that the Bagpipe was in danger and that the administration might begin to seek more editorial control over its content. And Wallace said something to me along the lines that the college has a right to protect its interests, and so the Bagpipe shouldnt be allowed to post photos on the front cover that threaten its interests when parents arrive on campus. And its not that I couldnt complete relate to Wallace's frustration that he had put so much work into having a nice parents weekend, and then students at the school are doing things that make his job harder. That is a frustrating thing.

But the Bagpipe is a newsaper. Its not promotional material. It reports accurately things that happen at the school. Students performed a cross dressing prank. It gained a lot of attention. The Bagpipe wanted to report. After all not a lot of things gain a lot of attention during an average week at Covenant. Even though the Bagpipe is a small an not entirely professional publication, Covenant's academic credibility is threatened it takes away the autonomy of such an important academic exercise as a student newspaper. Students have to learn how to handle the responsibility of the media, because in the real world, the media is not controlled by and forced to serve the interests of the government. So why would we make student journalists at Covenant operate under a different model, in which they are controlled by and forced to serve the interests of their administrators. Its simply wrong. And its just one more thing that seriously threatens Covenants ability to operate as serious academic institution.

The fact is the PCA is in the shape its in, because its academic institutions, the college and the seminary, really are doing very little to shape the academic debates that reach the General Assembly floor. I challenge you to look at the number of seminary and college faculty who had anything to do with the report on New Perspectives, one of the hottest theological topics in Christianity today. I think there might have been one seminary prof and I might even be wrong about that.

But my point is, Covenant College is supposed to be our denominations academic leader in some ways. It is being entrusted with the task of sending out intelligent, thoughtful people into our denomination who can help "reform" it into something better. And yet the current mantra is just more of the same. We arent going anywhere. Which is sad.

Actually Todd, I think Nielson said that "the only way forward is back". I'm not sure he meant that ironically.

You might be right Josiah, which makes it sound even worse.

It's unfortunate that some, in the name of "being nice", will defend the colleges' actions on this matter. I don't buy the whole "America is a Christian Nation" thing, but as rights go, Freedom of the Press is a pretty damn good one. It should be cherished, respected, and persevered at Covenant.

Where's your competitive, entrepreneurial spirit, Josiah? The assimilation by the Organs of the official Covenant College Pravda is perhaps the only thing that will foster the development of a subversive samizdat counterculture to undermine it. It's a one-paper town now anyway, so whether the single paper is or isn't officially owned or controlled by the powers that be is irrelevant - it is whether it thinks it is or not. Real growth will occur when readers have to cognitively choose between the official line and a totally independent alternative voice.

I heart "The Pulse".

I just wonder what all this language concerning "the interests of the college" is about... really, has the Bagpipe ever truly hurt the college's interests? Why place censorship on it now? Did something major happen? When I wrote for the Bagpipe, I felt that the writing and editorial team had the college's best interests in mind - albeit that some were more controversial than others...

Anyone know who the college sees as their target audience? I always assumed the only people who read it were the faculty and the students on its staff... at least that's how I remember things. One year we had a big bonfire with all the extra copies. Good times.

I remember when I was the news editor of the Bagpipe in 2005 and the Windbag came out during Preview Weekend. You should have seen Wallace's face when he found this out. We had to re-issue them with a little caveat saying "this is not real" or something like that. When that happened, I realized it was only a matter of time. AND I think Wallace and the Admissions dept. should have checked their calendars a little more closely.

Also in regards to Ryan's response of not funding I plan on craping in the next "Donate to Covenant" envelop they send me and mailing it back. That'll teach them. Crap in an envelop... works every time. Wonder what the postage will be on it though? Though... maybe UPS is the way to go, "What can brown do for you...." oh that takes on a whole new meaning now.

Also i can't help but think of the movie Iron Eagle at a moment like this, that and its iconic song that is linked to the movie "We're not gonna take it" by twisted sister. I'll see if my brother Pete can lend me a jet from the navy and I'll attack covenant and rescue my father from the terrorists that run Covenant.

Josiah you lead a squad of alumni on the ground and we'll coordinate our assault at 0800 hours. That'll teach them... might makes right...

We're not gonna take it... NO we ain't gonna take it... anymore....

Pull the trigger... run for cover.. hit the dirt I'm takin over!!!!

Man, 60 comments...

Dont mean to steer the debate in the wrong direction, but actually, banning U2 at Covenant would be a major step in the right direction. It would give me hope again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs37NSLy3z4

Still no coverage of this whole Bagpipe thing over on the Cod-Blog, proving once again that this little misunderstanding is really nothing that should concern anyone. If something was wrong, P-Cod would be reporting on it. The guy's like the Fox News of Covenant College...if there's a story, he'll let us know.

They need to ban Billy Joel and Starship... specifically "we built this city on rock and roll..."

take that todd

Has anyone considered gathering monetary support from concerned alumni to establish a paper that is published financially independant of the college? I actually have no idea how much it would run, but it's an interesting idea.

Todd, maybe banning Billy Joel but not U2.

I have fond memories reading the bagpipe/windbag on those trips to the "two holer" and chatting about the "news" with whoever else was in there...Always loved the windbag, do they allow humor up on the hill anymore or is that against the rules now too? you know laughter leading to camaraderie which could possibly lead to pranks.

Rosser you're right! We must ban laughter, it may lead to shenanigans!

Seriousness is the only refuge of the shallow.

I think that an actual letter-writing campaign would be way more effective than email. Sure, it's a little more work, but there's nothing like seeing actual envelopes with signed letters - and no money in them.

I trust Emily Belz to do the right thing. We'll be in touch.

Independent journalism sounds great too - especially if they try to report accurately on affairs and get blocked. So they have to say "Well, we know this and this, and we went to the administration but they were not available for comment." People always think that those who are not available for comment have something to hide.

What a heartbreaking shame this decision is.

Emily B: ask for Student Development funds to start a second, weekly, student-led newspaper.

Cliff: years ago, I learned from you and other CC profs the importance of academic integrity and freedom. Your lessons helped me write my postgraduate work in seminary on freedom of speech, and... conversely... my postgraduate work at a big British university on redemption in Walker Percy.

From you in particular I learned about journalistic integrity and freedom. And heck, about Protest-antism. Now that I make a living in communications and in working closely with NYC and LA editors, I talk unabashedly about the value of digging out and telling the truth (and they print it).

I wish I knew a quick and ready fix for this situation but in truth, if ever there was a way for today's CC students to learn similar lessons about how to move through the world, this is it. It's not theoretical/ hypothetical anymore.

Speaking of Cliff Foreman, this is hearsay coming from me, but I heard hes been very adamant about refusing to adhere in any way to the new Bagpipe policy. Which made me proud, and reminded me that Covenant College still has some great faculty.

A faculty just last night referred to Covenant College to me as "Wally-World." Now isnt that saying something?

And if Billy Joel was the cause of so many Presbyterians having mediocre, unexplored tastes in music then I would agree with you guys. But that role just so happens to go to Bono.

Todd to tell you the truth I don't like U2 either, I just have stronger anti-Billy Joel feelings than Anti-Bono. Maybe its his affinity for Pennsylvania which I just cannot understand having been to both pittsburgh and scranton.

I'm seemingly late to the party, but I'll leave my name up here with the rest of you all.

This is a bad decision: anti-pedagogical, unkind, and unlikely to succeed.

I'm sure that the administration has noticed this comment thread -- bring it to the attention of the board!

This seems to me to be another step away from the things that I valued at Covenant, and toward the things that I (barely) tolerated. I learned from my peers while I was at school, and that atmosphere needs a bit of horseplay and a lot of academic freedom, or it goes away.

I'm going to start off resonating with everyone else's sentiment. This makes me sad. Really, really sad. And why?

Although my experience at Covenant College was by no means perfect, I very quickly realized that one of the beautiful aspects of being educated there was the zero-tolerance for bullshit policy. The tone of this policy, I strongly believe, was very much set by the faculty and staff of Covenant, specifically by it's leadership. I am referring to the President Brocks, Scott Raymonds, and Barb Scheurs of this establishment. This zero-tolerance for bullshit was aimed not just at the students, but internally, amongst and between the leadership and staff of the school. It was a true sign of accountability between not just peers, but between those who set the tone for the whole population of the school.

Somewhere in here is where my "sadness" lies: not only is this zero-tolerance for bullshit gone, but in fact there is now seemingly a factory somewhere in the administration building that is actually producing and pumping the bullshit out. It is pumping it into the ears of the leadership. It is pumping it into their hearts, out of their mouths and into the lives of the unsuspecting students who attend Covenant College in the hopes of having a different experience, a truly Christ centered one. At what point did Jesus ever tell us that Christianity looked like a white kid with a crew cut? But that is the image now. Covenant has always struggled with bringing diversity to the school. Moves like this undermine all of the hard work of the staff and students to not only change the color of Covenant to that which is truly represented of the diversity that the Lord created, but also the speech, mind and heart of the school to reflect this truth in creation. We were created with different voices so that we may truly use them.

I must say, I do have a hard time with the angry and bitter tone that I hear in the voices responding to this recent Covenant College fiasco. But I understand it. I also hope that as was stated above, students go underground and keep the dialogue going. I can't help, though, but feel that at $30,000/year it's not even worth it anymore. I just say, everyone leave Covenant. It's a waste of time and money. Get your education somewhere else, somewhere that doesn't reel you in with plastic images depicting some utopian Christian society only to then be confronted with the intolerable expectations from a false institution.

LANG: BUY A FARM; START YOUR OWN SCHOOL; TEACH HISTORY.

JONATHAN DAVIS: BIOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY DEPARMENT.

JOSIAH: PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT AND HEAD OF FUND-RAISING

NIKI ELLIS & AARON MESH: ENGLISH DEPARTMENT.

BEN WEAVER: COMPUTER SCIENCE

ANDY MONTGOMERY: COMPUTER SCIENCE

BRENT JACKSON: BUSINESS DEPARTMENT

ANDY ROSS: BUSINESS DEPARTMENT

BEN HARPER: HISTORY DEPARMENT/PRE-LAW

TOM OKIE: HISTORY DEPARTMENT

LISA RILEY-FARMER: ART DEPARTMENT

BETHANY WEAVER: CULINARY DEPARTMENT

CHARITY MARTIN: COUNSELING CENTER

[Wouldn't it be beautiful?]

Can I team up with Josiah in Philosophy? And I think Matt Allison should teach early American history, and we can get Rye- Dawg for pre-law.

I think we should make Julian Wierenga Dean of Students

Yes! Now we're talking.

Just to clarify who I am. I am Marshall Rowe and I am the alumni director at Covenant. I have been reading the blog today with great interest and I have come up with a series of questions that I feel need to be asked:
1. How many of you talked to someone in the administration before you posted on this blog? Everyone is responding to the decision of the administration but I am not sure that you have all checked with the administration before talking about them about and their position and the reasons for the change.

2. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out to the public forum with factual errors. I do not.

3. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out to the public forum with grammatical errors. I do not.

4. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out with inappropriate materials. I do not.

The words that Jeff Hall has used are "mentoring oversight." The college is in the business of educating students to develop a Christian World and Life View in every area of life. Journalism is one of those areas and so I have no problem with faculty and staff having mentoring oversight of the Bagpipe. It seems completely appropriate in keeping with the mission of the college.

I will not post on here again but please email me or others on the administration if you have other questions about this issue. Thanks

Thanks for clarifying who you are. Is talking like a douchebag part of a "Christian World And Life View in every area of Life And Views"?

Just want to point a few things out:

First of all, it's worth pointing out that, logistically, the pursuit of "quality control" in terms of grammatical and factual errors seems far-fetched and unrealistic. I helped edit the Bagpipe when it started coming out weekly, and more often than not we threw a lot of things together at the last minute. Additionally, it was the job of both the copy editor and the section editors to check for errors. Of course their work wasn't perfect, but why add more bureaucracy to a task that, realistically, any extra "committee" will not want to spend time and energy undertaking? I predict that this extra oversight will amount to little more than Wallace flipping through each issue searching for "inappropriate material." That's just flat out censorship.

Second, although Bethany's suggestions are wonderful, and I'm all for them, it's not the faculty who need changing, as we all well know. The current faculty and students need to wield what power they have to oppose the decision.

Also want to echo Todd's Harry Potter comparisons. The resemblance is almost embarrassing.

Marshall, I believe the issue is not the editorial quality of the paper, but rather the final editor.

Your points 2-4 are precisely what we would like the students to continue to control.

Hasnt the Bagpipe always had "mentoring oversight"? I was a Bagpipe section editor and I remember getting feedback from my professors on my articles and I remember accepting it. Professors have always been invited and completely welcome to guide student journalism for its betterment. You are acting like that would be a new policy.

All I know is that the new policy that has indeed taken place here is that editorial control has been taken away from the students and that simply should not be the case. When was a student, the student editor made the final decisions on who to hire, what articles to publish, etc. To take that power away from the student editor is something you simply cannot defend no matter what nice name you want to tag it with.

By the way, I did write to somebody in the administration and Im still waiting to hear back from them. I hope to sit down and talk about all of this and get better informed, but I dont think we necessarily need more facts anymore to complain about the college's administration. This is just one of many numerous things that tends to pop up every few months that we as alumni have to deal with. We have a lot of the facts. Weve seen the road the college has been headed down for a few years now, and weve had to continually stomach new, ever more ridiculous policies. The fact is always going to be that students thrive more where there is more academic freedom and more institutional trust. Most of the new student policies I have seen Covenant enact in the past few years have only served to demean those things.

And Marshall, I hope you will post again. You dont have to treat this blog as beneath your dignity. It would only help to improve the conversation if you got more involved I think.

Yep, sure, Marshall. But of course. Sounds like you (and some of the other folks in Covenant's administration) have done your children's science projects for them at their school fairs. Wow! I bet they have brought home some blue-ribbons too!

I'm amazed that my kids, or anybody else's for that matter, ever managed to learn how to reason and write without your "mentoring oversight".

I'm so glad to see that you and Wallace are there in the forefront of the battle for grammatical accuracy and editorial purity. I'm ashamed to admit that I ever read the Bagpipe BEFORE you and your administrative SWAT team came onboard. I wanna be pure too. Guess I'll have to burn all my old copies--smores anyone?

Josiah, you're my hero! (elvis lives)

As much as I love sarcasm, onwards:

Marshall, goals 2-4 could be accomplished without "nationalizing" the Bagpipe and undermining its editorial and journalistic integrity. It's a Freedom of the Press thing, and like Brent said, it's beautiful.

Stop being afraid.

As to #1: this brings up the very point as to why there needs to be an independent voice at the College, one who isn't at risk of losing their job if they do not tow the party line.

Further, your points 2-4 I stated (albeit more succinctly) in the 2nd paragraph of my original post. Does the College have some other, unknown reasons for their decision?

Since Marshall Rowe says that he's not going to respond any more on here, I suppose that I'm going to have to e-mail him directly, but Marshall, if you are reading, please define what you mean by "inappropriate materials".

Grammatical errors and factual errors are one thing, both of those are objective standards. "Inappropriate materials," on the other hand, is subjective, and I'm quite curious to see precisely what Covenant defines that to be.

I tend to give Covenant the benefit of the doubt with most decisions, but how can I avoid this one? This forces me to realize something I had been trying to ignore for the past couple years. Covenant has been gradually strangling its students more and more. We used to fight about smoking/drinking off campus (we never won, but at least that's justifiable), then we had to start fighting for doing pranks, now we have to fight to even speak to the Covenant community?

You *know* that the administration will gradually manipulate the Bagpipe more and more over time in an attempt to fulfill their unhealthy desire to build whatever perfect world they have in their minds.

Which means students have to give up whatever creative ideas they have. I saw a distinct drop in creativity over my 4 years at Covenant, which is sad. I don't see it improving anytime soon.

1. How many of you talked to someone in the administration before you posted on this blog?

Are you disputing any of the factual contentions of the post? If not, I can't see the point of the question -- except the obvious playing of the Matthew 18 gambit, which has been used for centuries as a distraction ploy whenever a church institutional policy is criticzed.

2. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out to the public forum with factual errors?

It has. It will.

3. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out to the public forum with grammatical errors?

It has. It will.

4. Do we want the Bagpipe to go out with inappropriate materials?

Well, now there's the question. And the answer, of course, is that whoever owns the press defines the appropriateness of the materials. Come to think of it, whoever owns the press defines "factual errors." And if that owner is a university administrator -- it doesn't matter if it's Wallace Anderson or Drew Gilpin Faust -- that person will invariably use it to protect the institution's interests. These are not the same as the students' interests, or the faculty interest, or the public interest. The fallacy of this policy (and really, it's the heartbreaking thing about any number of Covenant policy decisions in the past four years) is the conflation of the institutional authorities with the college community.

But, as a number of people have mentioned before, there is a solution at the ready: Buy another press.

Doing so via the Student Senate is a mistake: The Senate is funded by the college, which has always compromised the Bagpipe's integrity. Instead, seek funding through the alumni (I for one would be happy to donate an annual fee) and create an independent student-run publication. Start small: make it a four-page monthly, and don't worry about arts, religion or sports pages just yet. Simply print three pages of well-sourced news and one editorial page.

It's a simple solution. And it will work. Ask any number of independent college newspapers across the country.

By the way: I for one eagerly anticipate the reign of Dean Julian Wierenga.

There was that quote at the beginning of Gibson's latest movie, Apocalypto. It went something like, "A great civilization is not destroyed from without until it conquers itself from within". I'm with Micah. When Codington decides things have gone awry...ah, nevermind.

Here Here Mesh. I hope somebody takes you up on the idea. Thanks for your great thoughts.

All hail Dean Julian.

And I think Codington should post his review of "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" in the next issue of the Bagpipe. He seems to like the book, and Im sure the administration would approve.

If all this policy is intended to do is proofread articles before they go to publication, then that's fine. I can recall vividly how upset I was when I accidentally got a piece published that never should have been sent. I mistakenly sent the wrong version of my file to Neal Howard and felt extremely embarrassed to see my name attached to what I considered crap.

On the other hand, if the purpose of this policy is to prevent any sort of criticism of the college or accurate reporting of the goings-on, even the silly ones like pranks, then I'm very much against it.

I would like to see some sort of statement from the college explaining their intent before I let myself get too upset by any of this nonsense. I'd also like to see how it plays out in the coming year.

Anyone know how to get a subscription to the Bagpipe? Is it expensive?

Josiah, Mason and Mesh have all stated it much better than I ever could have. The Hugo Chavez Bagpipe move is really just one more small bump in a long history of representing the PCA Cultural Elite. It existed long before the current administration and is really just a symptom of the greater problem of dogmatic cultural superiority. They can have their yacht club, I've enough real culture right here to keep me busy.

Marshall -

Questions 2, 3, and 4 (if they are truly questions), need question marks at the end of each sentence if they're going to actually be...er, questions. I'd hate for you to stoop to post something on here again that included errors. Also, don't be such a tool. Your condescencion (while I'm sure a product of insecurity) is pathetic.

Just to clarify who he is, for your World & Life View perspectival preeiminent Worldviewness, Covenant's own Delta Bravo, Marshall Rowe

I'm coming late to this discussion, but I want to make a couple of points:

1) The Bagpipe's record on accuracy - at least in the years I was involved - was pretty good. Almost all that we published was stupid and boring, and there were a few typos in each issue, but c'mon! The whole time I was there, administrators said they were worried about our accuracy. But they could never make a reasonable case that we published errors with any consistency. It's not fair for Marshall or anybody else to play that card. Same goes for "inappropriate" material.

2) Got some bad news on where the Bagpipe gets its funding. Until a year ago, students paid a student association(SACC) fee. It was separate from other college fees, and the money - around $90 per student - went straight to the Student Senate, who decided what to do with it. Part of what they did with it was fund the Bagpipe. In my senior year, administrators announced that the SACC fee would be rolled into a larger "Continuing Student Fee." Seems relatively inconsequential, except that now Student Senate money comes from a larger pool of money that the college controls, and it doesn't go straight from the student to the senate. So in effect, the college funds the Bagpipe.

It's worth mentioning that the Student Senate's independence has always been tenuous. Even though the SACC fee was clearly marked for the Senate, it was still the college that forced students to pay and collected the money. Perhaps the only way to have an independent Bagpipe is for the Student Senate to collect its own money. That might work, but I suspect Niel Nielson and Wallace Anderson wouldn't like the idea. Emily tells me Voyles said that even if the Bagpipe found independent funding, it would have to move off campus, get new equipment (this won't be cheap) and might not even be allowed to distribute the paper on campus. Gee.

Ultimately, I don't think anything can be done. The administration is determined to control the Bagpipe, and as others have already written on here, most people who send their kids to Covenant or give lots of money to the school don't care.

Bagpipe could be published with a couple of mac mini's. The most expensive thing will be a copy of Quark and/or Indesign. I've got both those covered. The issue is facilities for them to work in, and printing costs. There are options for the former.

I echo Mesh's point about not going through Student Senate to start up an alternat(iv)e newspaper. Since posting I've discovered that student club fees have been folded into tuition which limits their access.

And just for the record - as a former member of both the CovColl faculty and administration (titled, rather uncreatively, 'administrative faculty'), I've talked with folks in both groups in the past 24 hours.

All this to say - I too would gladly help fund a student newspaper. I'd even consider such a sponsorship, for the sake of the students, part of my tithe.

I'd also write a letter to the editor about free speech in the first issue, or sponsor Mesh to write an even better one.

Hey, it might work. Printing a 4-page monthly (a good idea) newspaper would cost about $1600 per semester. Not sure if our friends on Sand Mountain would go for such a small job, but maybe.

Actually, I'm in pretty tight with a couple of printing companies in town. I may be able to get them to sponsor. Something like this is a drop in the bucket for them.

Come up with a workable plan for an alternative paper and count me in for a few bucks donation.

Just make the bagpipe a 4 pg nespaper double sided, and print them in the labs late at night.

Julian as dean would bring the cynicsm to a whole nutha level. And probably bring in more canadians... which in general scares me... nationalized healthcare.

It all sounds good on paper.

Wallace's response on the issue is now on Ryan's blog. Definitely a must read. Definitely depressing.

http://davidson.chattablogs.com/archives/059621.html

Hey I'm dropping a line also. I first want to say that I really do like Covenant or else I wouldn't have gone there. But it is true and disheartening to see the direction the college is heading with its "over-censoring and controlling" attitude. There has been more of a culture of fear that has risen over the last couple years from the trouble someone would get in if they said, did, or now even witnessed happen.(see new code of conduct that talks about "guilty by association" or guilty by not telling on someone rule.. basically...) I joined the Student Senate last year as treasure so that I could help clubs and the covenant community help express itself because I didn't like the way it was heading, but it did very little. I am sure the senate would not be "able" to endorse another student newspaper without the firm grip of the college over it. After all the administration wanted the senate to find out who was running the Drone newspaper so that some administration could have a chat with the editors about their "content". But it ultimately comes down to the fact that I don't believe that students on senate are given enough respect by the administration to make decisions or more importantly listen the voices of the students. There really is a lack of creativity which almost forced upon by admin with so many rules and regulations. Disheartening, but true. Where has the foundations of Covenants culture gone...and where are we heading now?

Viva la drone..or even some other new paper that comes out with creativity and wit...

The words of the Teacher, son of David, king in Jerusalem: "Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless."

Ecclesiastes 1:1-2

My brothers and sisters...praise the Lord we live in a fallen world, otherwise I would be terribly concerned with all of it's imperfections. I am encouraged by the measure of care for Covenant I see in all of your posts. Though let us not forget to love no matter what. Ya dig?

Wow - we got alums from all kinds of perspectives on here now, all on the same side of the issue. Nothing like controversy to bring us together.

What you say, Adam, is discouraging but unsurprising. I didn't know that the SACC rules would permit funding to be restructured like that. Ah well. The idea of a 4-page monthly sounds great though, esp. if it would cover real issues, although the Drone is always funny too, and more needed now than ever before.

Naw Evan, the alumns who disagree (and there are a handful of which I am aware) realize that their position is too unpopular / distasteful to be argued for in a public forum. They have sent their sycophant to sycophant support e-mails to Marshall, and have found comfort.

A feasible gameplan has been proposed to take the Bagpipe independent. It's up to the students & editorial staff at this point. I for one, hope they go for it.

i tend to agree with Matt Allison. I think the Bagpipe will become about as interesting as the last issue of "The View" that i leafed through, and as a result, students will probably start another publication that will hopefully be more thoughtful than the bagpipe was to begin with

it's sort of hegelian historiography right. Thesis - Antithesis - New Thesis.

I mean don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want to send my own kids there. not with the direction things are going.

I'm also late to this, but I have to say that Julian for Dean of Students is a fantastic idea.

Ever since the administration changed Covenant has been in a downward spiral towards becoming a glorified Student Life camp. As far as I can tell, that's what the PCA wants and there's nothing anyone can do about it. There's no longer any kind of school "identity" that I can see and turning The Bagpipe into a student run version of The View shows me that the student body of Covenant College no longer has so much as a voice.

Covenant College will never receive support, be it financial or otherwise, from myself or my family. An organization that was once a very important part of my life (employing both my parents for 9 years, myself for 5 summers, and providing me with a degree) might as well be dead as far as I'm concerned. Assuming control of The Bagpipe is a move that they without a doubt knew would cause consternation amongst the Alumni. I continue to find it amazing that the administration cares so little for the opinions of the very people they constantly beg for support.

And for Josiah (a TL:DR version):

This is bullshit!

-Steele

I'm sorry, I'm not an alumni of Covenant but that's just ridiculous. Don't they understand that it's not good journalism if there's external prior restraint? How bizarre.

One of the main draws to Covenant when I was looking for a college, was its unique individuality. And now over the past 7 or so years, it is losing that uniqueness by becoming mainstream and uninspiring.
This recent news of the Bagpipe is sad and it is my hope that the current students, who know that there is life off the mountain, will stand up and bring back a uniqueness that has been lacking over the past few years.

I love Covenant College and consider myself a faithful alumni. Even though the college isn’t paying me to work in the admissions office I still recruit high school students to Covenant. My experience was worth every dollar.

For two days now I’ve debated if I should comment on the recent goings on with the Bagpipe. I read the Bagpipe and Windpipe as a Covenant student and then later as a staff member. Most articles were well thought out and contributed to my education. I appreciated the way many of the writers endeavored to “think scripturally about culture so as to glorify God and promote true human advancement.” (Taken from the Statement of Purpose on the college website.)

Some articles I didn’t agree with or I didn’t approve of the attitude behind them. But I didn’t have to agree with everything- it was, after all, a student newspaper. I always had the freedom to respond to the editors if I felt so compelled.

My concern now is the question of what is driving this change in ownership of the Bagpipe? Did something go terribly wrong with the Bagpipe? Is it fear of what students write? Is it the need to control what students write? Is it the desire to protect students from the world?

I discover everyday that life is messy and the world is very broken. The Gospel is our only hope. There is a world to redeem for the Kingdom. Covenant has been and I hope continues to be a place to learn of the brokenness of the world and of our Savior’s healing power. Is this Bagpipe debate a Kingdom debate? I believe it is because the Bagpipe is a tool for students to wrestle with the world and Christianity. By God’s grace, they will find Jesus in the end as a loving, faithful and more than competent Savior.

Right now defenses are up on both sides. Where is the love and care for each other’s interests? Are we listening to each other? Can and will the administration & alumni be able to discuss and debate this issue and come out with a resolution? I pray that even if the resolutions and decisions that are made aren’t what some parties desire, that all will be able to leave as friends in Christ. This is a noble goal. Let’s all work towards it!

I'm in agreement with Monica. The Bagpipe was a good thing at Covenant. Sometimes controversial, but a good thing. Of course, there would be room for improvement but I don't think filtering it would be the best option. It seems the "freedom of speech" at Covenant has been infringed upon. College is not to create little robots, it's to create thinking human beings. I also agree with Monica on her conclusion. I hope there will be a resolution and that respect and integrity will be upheld on both sides.
On the flip side, I think the Tartan could use a little hand holding considering it's '05-'06 flop! That's just me being bitter...

If the admin is determined to control the paper, it will diminish to a glossy PR tool. And it will get the readership it deserves. I think CC will always have students who want something better though. The logistics of a real paper may take time; what about an electronic version? It seems the BIG new issue that needs to be reported by students is the demise of the Bagpipe itself. Shouldn't it be prompt?

If there's a new paper, can it use the Bagpipe name?

It's the heritage of a student newspaper, with ALL its weaknesses and foibles, that needs to be preserved. What a shame that Wallace didn't want parents to see the paper - doesn't he know that those parents know what their own kids are like? I'm a parent of a HS junior who's looking at CC. That paper wouldn't have bothered me at all. My fellow (male) RAs stole my underwear and wore it to breakfast on RA retreat. Big deal.

Mary Kathryn:
Excellent point. Any parents who couldn't appreciate an April Fools' Day paper probably shouldn't be sending their kids to Covenant. I was there for that episode, and it was glorious.

I think the admin was upset especially because some jokers had TP'd the trees the night before. So they were already ill-disposed to consider the Windbag articles for what they were (part of a long college tradition). I admit some of the articles were pretty heavy - like the one of dancers doing fealty to Wallace Anderson. But no harm was meant, I think.

An electronic paper would be an excellent thing. Depending on what level of quality you want, it could be done for free and right now. You could always improve it later.

I like the idea of a 4-pager though, just to keep the tradition alive. But I agree it's best to get the word out ASAP. The Covenant College website certainly isn't addressing this issue...

I want to add my two cents from afar...It is interesting that what I loved about Covenant (the concern for the school within the student body) ends up looking a little off once people turn into alumni. My hope would be that the same individuals who once poured so much devotion into Covenant would go on to pour passion into other things, more important things. Covenant is simply a school and was once, I believe, a great school for some individuals(although I have spoken to many people who had terrible experiences there dating back to the early years of the college). It may no longer continue to be a great school. But institutions never remain great. Covenant will die and/or become something we all hate as alumni. But there will be other schools, good schools, great schools. Honestly, we can do nothing by sending the administration letters, seriously, they already got most of what they are going to get from us financially. If we are that concerned with the state of future students maybe our energies would be better spent starting a new school or actually becoming the kind of people who could actually be in leadership at Covenant College if we feel strongly enough about this particular school (which honestly, I think our efforts would be best served elsewhere). Whining is usually not helpful. It just wastes time.

I came to Covenant College as a freshman in 1974. Yes, that makes me older than dirt. There was much discussion at that time about Covenant "changing" in ways that troubled people, and all the years since I left Covenant I have heard the same things from alumni. I remember hearing that there were naked Bible studies in Catacombs and as an alum, I was utterly shocked that children of the living God would think it would glorify Him and bring Him honor to have Bible study while naked. I just didn't get it. (I'm not a guy either, which may be part of the issue.) It puzzles me even more now that I am aware of so many of our brothers and sisters in Christ, yes at Covenant, who may be wrestling with homosexual desires. All that to say, I honestly thought Covenant had lost everything that I loved about it(remember IN ALL THINGS Christ preeminent) when things like that were happening, and lots of things like that WERE happening.

I'm not commenting on the Bagpipe issue here because quite honestly, even though I'm Assistant Director of Admissions, I didn't know a thing about this until I saw something on facebook. I don't know enough of the FACTS to form an opinion yet. But, I do think it is appropriate for alumni to address issues they are unhappy about. We can do that in a biblical manner, or we can choose not to. It is extremely easy to sit at a keyboard vomiting negativity and sarcasm. For all the benefits of technology, I remember the day when you had to look someone in the eye and talk to them. It usually made us a bit more thoughtful before we opened our mouths.

I would be very curious to know more specifically, in the opinion of you and your readers,what changes should take place that would again make Covenant a place worth recommending to students. I feel that it is my duty before God to tell visitors about the problems on campus AND the issues we have. I also tell them about the incredible opportunity they have to learn from intelligent, godly professors, while living in an amazing community.

God started Covenant College, and as far as I can tell, God is still using and blessing Covenant College. Don't send your contributions if you feel this way. In order to keep serving there, I'll gladly take a salary cut.

Amelia - maybe it's too early to just trhow in the towl and start a new school or go about our daily lives trying to be what Covenant taught us to be? (Have I misunderstood you here?) I tend to love the sappy believe that even the most messed up of things are redeemable. Though Covenant is know UC Berkeley, I think that it might be helpful to think about the incredibel power the Berkeley students' wielded back in the '60's during the Free Speech movemint, not as a model, but maybe just as encourajment? Granted, thees folks weren't perfect or "ideal" in any sense. (And also keep in mind that these weren't the San Francisco Haight-Ashbery Hippies that were admirable, entertaining, fun, but myabe ineffective??) The Berkeley students in the 60's were pretty >, intelilgent, concerned, compashionate, thoughtful people, who got upset about UC's and Reagan's attempts to squelch the right to speak one's mind, much like many of the folks who sat next to me in Davis' Epistemology or Foreman's American Novel classes amongst others.

We don't half to worry about the faculty going south. They're probably responsibel for the good spirit behind this discushun on Josiah's blog. And, I do agree with you that as Covenant alums, our infuelence on the adamantistration is minimal. Our letters sadly won't mean much, and their's way too much money floating around in the PCA for alums refusing to give to the college to cause anymore than a financial mesquito bite.

However, we all seem to be worried about the current student body's well-being. That's the bottom line, right? None of us are there anymore, and Covenant exists for them, rihgt? And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who hopes that within the current student body there are some with the awareness/ability/desire to effect some change, or at least crie out here. Maybe we can all take Todd's advise and email Emily Belz simply as encouragement to speak firmly when she meets with the adamantistration on Monday? She mite be one whose voice and leadership could mean something many years down the road. It's probably uber-intimidating to go against the adamantistration of a PCA insistitution as a woman - She culd use our supported.

Jan, its always appreciated when you take the time to post your thoughts here. I know its not easy considering the fact that the comments are so hard on the administration. But I personally am always encouraged when you chime in.

I think you will find a more well-rounded, less inflamatory approach to this whole issue on a facebook page entitled "I Love Covenant College, But I Love Free Speech Too." Check it out and check out the letter if you can that some alumni have been working on writing.

I hope this lifts your spirit a bit about the matter as I really do think alumni want to respond more positively and fairly to this issue.

Though I am currently on hiatus from Covenant College in pursuit of studies elsewhere, I am very concerned with this developing situation. I was minimally involved with the Bagpipe, and held it in respect as a quality student-run publication. I really hate to see this happen to one of the best things Covenant had going for itself.
However, in my humble opinion, I do see an underground publication as the best solution to this problem. The difficult thing with that, in my limited experience, is maintaining it. The alumni and other concerned CC community members would need to back an alternative publication on a long-term basis for such a paper to make its mark. Perhaps I'm just talking out my ass here, but I just would really like to see the student body prevail on this one. We lost the battle for pranking, which we all saw as a sign of the times to come. I never imagined that Covenant Admin would make such a bold statement so quickly- it just really makes my stomach turn. Anyways, I could think of two dozen people off the top of my head who would be qualified to participate in an underground paper like I believe Covenant needs. Josiah- could you supply the software? Also, if you had any connections to anyone looking to get sell a decent size and quality printer so that the paper could avoid outsourcing to cut down on costs. The quality would be shoddy, but hey- thats the point of underground papers. As a clarification, I think that an underground paper should retain as much of the quality standards set out by the BagPipe as it can. The main difference would be that it could be printed without fear of administration pulling you into an office and cutting your work study.

Unbelievable. And yet, so believable.

Perhaps now that Covenant College is finally dead we'll stop hearing about the death spasms here on Irresponsible Journalism? Seems there must be more important topics over which to be irresponsible, no?

Ya, you're right D. Look, finishing off the whole thing by helping establish a permanent independent voice at the College seems like an ok when to end things.

Just so you guys are aware - as far as printing goes, I used to use the mail-room copiers to print the Founders Gazette. The quality wasn't good, but the cost was low. I don't know if that would be an option in this case. Anyway, I would assume that an underground press these days would mostly be read online, but if you actually want to have print copies circulating, my experience was that the best way to get them read was to leave a copy in each dorm bathroom stall. That's probably also a good way to keep the student development stormtroopers from finding them.

This situation deeply concerns me. I am an alumni and have been a donor for almost two decades now. I have tried to consider Covenant the focus of my charitable giving, with the exception of a couple of years due to large capital projects with my church.

I know that I have not given a great amount when compared to many of the more prominent names commonly featured in The View or the President's Report, but it still represents an outlay of several thousands dollars over the years on my part. That stated: until this issue is resolved in an acceptable fashion I will not be giving to the College.

My hope is that the College will allow or will refrain from hindering the students from creating an independent Bagpipe, which is befitting any credible institution of higher learning.

Thank you for posting this information on this site.

Any Updates?

Don't Miss the Forest for the Trees.

1. Covenant shouldn't have assumed direct control of the Bagpipe. Nobody thinks a school newspaper represents the views of the school, so they shouldn't have even cared that much.

2. The Nielson/Anderson administration saved Covenant College. Without their business acumen the college would have incurred far worse than temporary sanctions. Alumni consistently fail to appreciate this point.

3. Covenant is not dead or dying. That's just emotionally driven hyperbole. Covenant exists to give a Christ-centered education to Christian students. As always, Covenant still does this.

4. Wallace probably shouldn't have seized the Bagpipe (I still don't know the whole story), but the good he has done has unequivocally outweighed the bad.

5. The agitators against Nielson/Anderson are mostly alumni who experienced a certain sort of rich dorm life while at Covenant. Mostly Catacombians. These alumni are angry because the Nielson/ANderson administration has compromised the dorm life they once knew. If such dorm life is what they think college is FOR, than they are rightly upset. But the type of dorm life they are so passionate about is neither a central part of Covenant's mission, nor has it been a component in the Covenant experience of most alumni. Therefore, the Covenant the vast majority of alumni experienced is still alive and well. Note that I am not saying that all dorm life is inessential to a good college education, nor that vibrant dorm life is no longer present at Covenant. Only the peculiar dorm life of the old-school Catacombians and maybe Ghetto has been affected.

Conclusion. So, unless you care way more about a peculiar sort of dorm life you experienced at Covenant than the Christian education they provided and continue to provide, then you need to keep the main thing the main thing. Cutting off giving to Covenant because you don't like the actions of the current administration only makes sense if all you care about is preserving that certain sort of peculiar dorm life that some cherish. Otherwise, you should profusely thank the current adminstration for saving Covenant-style Christian education. Sure, we should disagree with individual actions--like the Bagpipe takeover. But it would be foolish to allow such blemishes to cloud one's overall appreciation for the preservation of a Covenant education, for which we have Nielson and Wallace Anderson to thank.

Did I just count nine uses of the phrase "dorm life?" It's left my head spinning, but mostly because it doesn't make any sense.

Paul it's about time. I think we can officially call this a "Covenant Thread".

1. You're right. The College shouldn't have cared.

2. You're right. I've tried to make reference to this fact, but haven't enough. Wallace & Niel did save the school from financial disaster.

3. What I believe has died at Covenant is the "Christ Centered Education". We share different definitions of those terms.

If one attends Covenant merely for a degree and/or classroom instruction, then one can find better & more reputable options (in most cases).

If one attends Covenant for a culture, a vision, or (to employ the much-overused to the point of being trite) a "World & Life View" gained through an entire Collegiate experience, then I think Covenant offers (or had offered) something distinctive and Christ-like.

Striving for the former results in a "Covenant College" distinct from earlier incarnations, but not distinct from a host of other small, insular, liberal arts institutions.

The latter is something very potent & unique, and I'm sorry you missed it.

4. Fair enough, but you and I would both agree that institutions in and of themselves have little if any inherent value, and that their substance consists in their effectiveness in achieving worthwhile and honorable goals. Wallace saved the institution, but has changed it goals. Covenant is now something akin to a zombie.

5. In terms of numbers on this blog: 10 Catacombians posted negatively about this action, 51 alumni from other halls.

Therefor, you're incorrect about this conversation being dominated by people from Catacombs, but you're correct that there is a shared culture being discussed. That shared culture/experience went way beyond a single hall to a comprehensive campus vision about what it meant to spend four years at Covenant. It's that Christ-Centered" education that Wallace has killed, and that's why people are upset.

Paul... you fail to realize that a forest is not a forest without trees...

And if we don't have trees, then there is no forest, and if there is no forest, then where does that leave us?

In an empty field... I rest my case.

Paul,

Frankly it saddens me that you attempt to narrow this conversation down to being merely about disgruntled ex-members of Ghetto and Catacombs who just long for their own privatized community experience to continue to repeat itself at Covenant. You have grossly misunderstood the point here and I know you are above that. I stand with you as much as anyone on the fact that Nielson and Anderson have done great things for this college which we should appreciate in great measure. But Paul, it is so frustrating when the growing, legitimate complaints of faculty, students, and alumni are oversimplied and categorized as the mere grumbles of a small minority of people. That is far from the case now at Covenant. The divide between the administration and those it seeks to serve is getting deeper and more significant every year. And Paul, it really does disappoint me to here you suggest that because Wallace and Niel have done great things for the school, that that should somehow gloss over and shield the fact that these new censhorship policies are serious abbrogations of student liberties that deserve an incensed response. Granted, I dont think the intentions of the administration in creating this policy were in any way malicious or beligerent toward students. But the administration has seriously misunderstood its role, and so please dont go about squelching the voices of those who are displeased by suggesting that they just get over it and appreciate the good things that have been done.

I repeat Paul. This is serious. And even more serious is the fact that the adminstration never consulted the faculty at all in creating this new policy. And for that the faculty is rightfully angry. As of right now I know of at least five faculty who are incredibly frustrated at this new move. One faculty member even referred to Covenant College as "Wally World" to me. I asked a staff member at Covenant College yesterday if they thought that the majority of the faculty and staff were upset with the administration right now, and this staff member answered a resounding yes. Dont you see this goes beyond Catacombs and Ghetto? This policy takes away more freedom and responsibility from students than I would have ever imagined, and it was implemented in ways that were clearly dishonest in my opnion.

I have heard stories of some of the most gross abuses of power up there in recent years, all in the name of "student discipline" that if I were to repeat, I guarantee you would be sick to hear it. And yeah, go ahead and accuse me of throwing out vague information that I cant substantiate. I wish to God I could tell you the things I know to be true. And I wish more was being done. But sadly, Im not at liberty to say anymore than that you are miles from the truth when you suggest that all is well at Covenant and that us few Catacombian and Ghetto boys just need to move on.

I appreciate your love for the college (I love it too) and for your the fact that you dont want to demonize and over-criminalize the administration. I support you in that and I stand with you in praising the administration for its hard work in times of financial crisis. But that cannot be used as veil so that we are not allowed to look deeper into some of the serious mistakes the administration is making. We have the right to be angry and to seek change.

Josiah, I should have clarified that I was addressing people's overall discontent with Nielson/Wallace more so than the Bagpipe episode. I think ALL alumni, regardless of hall-allegiance, should object to the Bagpipe takeover. But for the other reasons I gave, that shouldn't lead people to stop supporting Covenant.

The larger issue that I was trying to address is the context of disgruntlement that some alumni share. The only alumni who appear to have genuine cause for grievance against the administration as a whole are people who value (in tragic disproportion, I think) a certain kind of "shared/culture experience" that, plausibly, the admin have undermined. I think most of the other alumni who are upset with the admin are so because they've been swept up in your (and a few others') rhetoric.

I say this because the Christ-centered education that BY FAR most alumni have experienced has not been undermined by Nielson, Wallace and Co. You are way out of line to say or even think that the micro-culture you and a handful of others experienced on Catacombs even remotely captures the essence of a Christ-centered education. Either you and your hallmates were the only ones receiving a Christ-centered education when we attended Covenant, or most were. I know you weren't the only ones because I and many of my friends did so. I can vouch with certainty that I and my seven roommates had a Christ-centered education in Covenant, though we were far from the Catacombian petri dish. And I am sure that the education we received, both in the classroom and in our "shared/culture experience", is still encouraged and flourishing under Nielson and Co. I repeat, it is unbelievably hubristic to imply that ONLY you and your Catacombian cronies had a Christ-centered education at Covenant during the time you were there.

And, I believe you should care more about this solid, educational core than you do for a bygone hall experience.

Furthermore, I will not be baited into a debate about whether Covenant still provides a Christ-centered education. It's so fricking obvious that it does, that arguing the point does a disservice to the patent truth. Again, any doubting alumni can run the simple thought-experiment by asking themselves this question: "Is the Christ-centered educational and shared/culture experience that I experienced while at Covenant still possible and actual at Covenant?" And unless they're former Catacombians (and maybe Ghetto-dwellers), the answer is clearly "Yes".

And so, Covenant still is providing a Christ-centered education, and is no zombie. Students--real people--are being helped by Covenant College, to this very day. This was never about merely saving an institution.

Maybe Covenant has become unpleasantly hygenic of late, but nobody should pull support from the ongoing mission of the school for aesthetic reasons.

Todd, I'm not trying to glibly brush aside the Bagpipe takeover. You should definitely send that petition to the administration. But I'm talking about a much larger point here.

Christian education is, I believe, deadly serious. Political, social, and cultural influences and pressures all stem from peoples' belief systems. And college is often the best and last place many people will thoughtfully consider what their views ought to be. Therefore, a Christ-centered education is invaluable in shaping minds and thereby shaping future culture. I don't have time or space to adequately argue for just how crucial this thesis is, but as a Covenant grad, I think you'll agree.

In light of this, we've got to be absolutely soberminded when deciding whether to resist the mission of Christ-centered education. We've got to count the cost. And the sterilizing and streamlining measures of Nielson and Co. aren't worth undermining it. The Bagpipe takeover isn't worth undermining it.

Again, I'm not saying lie down and take it. But I am saying we've gone myopic if we allow the transitory shortcomings of the administration to prevent us from seeing the larger and wildly more important mission of Christ-centered education.

I second what Todd says. He states well what I was going to say. I am neither Catacombian nor Ghetto, and I share deep concerns. I tend to think that the administration tends to brush the complaints aside as being just the isolated bitching of the same group of malcontents. This just isn't the case. I've heard frustrations from the strangest of places, such as the captain of a varsity girls sports team or a number of professors or members of student senate. In other words, some of the poster people for the school. This no small and isolated problem.

mg

Paul,

Once again, I know you were addressing more directly Josiah's post, but I just hate see this conversation digress more and more into a "Catacombs just thinks its better" type of thing. Paul, you are one of the most intelligent, thought-provoking guys I knew at Covenant and I loved having conversations with you and it is one of my true regrets at Covenant that I didnt pick your brain more because of how hall life tended to socially disconnect us. I really dont think your average Catacombian only glorifies the "Catacombian" experience and views it as the most "Christ-centered" of halls. I certainly dont think that, and I certainly dont think Josiah thinks that, and so I think the conversation only digresses when we start talking about Catacombians vs. Everybody Else. This isnt a Catacombian issue.

The fact is, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU about the absolute importance of a Christ-centered education, and its exactly why Im so passionate about this current issue. We stand on the exact same ground, in fact on the exact same two inches of ground. A Christ-centered education is a "deadly serious" matter.

Thats why this issue is so terribly serious and might lead some to even conclude, however erroneous it may or may not be, that Covenant is "dead" or "dying." I personally dont believe its dead. Its a long shot from being dead. The education provided by the faculty is still too good for it to be dead. But it begins the process of dying the minute it stops acting honorably as an academic institution. It stops acting honorably as an academic institution when it begins to strip away important academic freedoms and the atomsphere of institutional trust and student responsibility that is so elemental to a successful liberal arts education. That my friend is one of the foundational blocks of a good education. Students have to feel trusted, sense the true weight of their own responsibility, and they must be called upon to think for themselves. Take that away and you truly do have a "deadly" serious issue on your hands.

Max and Emily Belz have written an excellent editorial on the Bagpipe issue. I think they deserve great commendation for their work:

http://www.bagpipeonline.com/

Paul, you make some very interesting and flattering points. I suppose it's theoretically possible that I have the ability to whip the masses into some kind of anti-Wallace frenz