Living in covenant, profs included

Anders and I got into a debate last night over whether or not professors should sign the Life Together Covenant. He believes that because "non-traditional" students at the Ft. Wayne campus do not have to abide by the LTC, Upland profs should be able to drink and dance if they feel like it. Anders thinks maturity level should dictate to what extent one should follow the LTC.

It's not that I don't think our profs can handle a little fun; I'm sure most of them can. But I think the power of the LTC lies in the fact that although we can all do the things it tells us not to do, we choose to give them up for the good of the community.

I've always liked the idea that professors at Taylor abide by the same rules students do (i.e. they can't drink, have extramarital sex, gamble or dance). The giving up of these four activities leads to a stronger community. Sure the profs don't live with us, but neither do off-campus students. The community aspect of Taylor lies not only in its resident students but in all of its faculty and staff as well.

If fact, the LTC binds the Taylor community together. Since profs don't live with us, they sign the LTC as an act of participation in the community. One of the things I love about Taylor is that we don't really have any rules forced upon us by the school. Instead, we voluntarily commit to a set of guidelines which help us live out our faith in community. Granted, everyone at Taylor is required to sign the LTC, but if you don't want to sign it, why go to Taylor? I can understand some students are forced to come to Taylor by their parents or what not, but what is forcing a professor to work at Taylor? If they don't want to participate in the community by submitting to the LTC, why don't they work someplace else? It's not like we pay them anything, anyway.

The issue arose last night over the trouble with dancing. The LTC forbids "social dancing," but what exactly does that mean? I think there's a difference between clubbing (which is what I'd define as social dancing) and a husband and wife sharing an impromptu dance in the kitchen. A social setting usually involves more than one other person and usually takes place in a public arena. So within the limits of the LTC, I believe married professors (and students) can dance in private settings. The covenant's provision was established to condemn bumping and grinding, not romance.

The other point of contention hinged on alcohol consumption. At Taylor, alcohol is out of the question even if you are 21. Considering I've never enjoyed an alcoholic beverage (Mmm... beverage), I'm content to say alcohol is not a necessary part of life. Save your money for lattes. While I may not be the most authoritative person on alcohol, the point is not that alcohol is bad, but that it could be a stumbling block to other people in the community. Alcoholism is a serious problem in the United States today. Denying such would be ignorant.

The point? The LTC isn't really about rules and legalism. We spin it that way so we have something to argue about. As the covenant says, "We acknowledge that it is impossible to create a community with expectations that are totally acceptable to every member. Nevertheless, certain expectations must be specified to assure orderly community life. When individuals join the Taylor community, they freely and willingly choose to take upon themselves the responsibilities outlined in this covenant."

The LTC is about maintaining supportive relationships within the community. It would be a sin to exclude professors from this system just because they're old.