Last week's landmark compromise between the administration and Phillips Brooks House Association (PBHA) has raised a set of thorny new questions involving student autonomy and the definition of a student group.

In fact, student members of the Boston Church of Christ (BCC) are calling the compromise an important precedent, which could signal the start of a new war with University Hall.

As part of its deal with PBHA, the administration acceded to the public service group's request to allow non-students--including faculty, administrators and community service leaders--to serve as voting members of its board of trustees.

This concession is an exception to a long-standing rule at the College of refusing to recognize student groups not completely gov- erned by students--a rule that has recently been invoked in efforts to keep certain groups, such as the BCC, off campus.

Administrators have said an exception for PBHA is necessary because the public service group is quite complex.

Similar reasoning has been used to justify a non-student board for Harvard Student Agencies, which was granted an exception to the College's rules more than 30 years ago.

But BCC supporters are saying that the PBHA exception is arbitrary and that the administration is making unjust qualitative distinctions between student groups.

Michael J. Hrnicek '96, who tried to bring BCC groups to the campus during his college career, said the administration's rationale behind the PBHA compromise is akin to tyranny of the majority.

"When one has the mandate of the majority, one has might to enforce one's will over minorities' rights," Hrnicek said. "I think Harvard's administration is an excellent personification of this phenomenon."

Indeed, Dean of Students Archie C. Epps III said last month that the rule against non-students in governing capacities for student organizations has been used against BCC.

"The question is, is there a compelling reason to grant an exception [to PBHA]?" Epps said to The Crimson at the time. "This issue comes up quite a lot, and we use this principle to keep out organizations like the Boston Church of Christ."

And since the administration granted an exception to PBHA, the College should either consider granting exceptions to other groups or reconfigure its policy, said Natashya L. Trejo '97, a BCC member.

But Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 said last week's deal set no precedent, because PBHA is unique.

"This situation is extremely unusual with the nature of the organization," Lewis said. "I wouldn't assume that other analogous situations are likely to arise."

In response to the question of the attempts of BCC groups to gain a foothold on campus, Lewis again drew a distinction between PBHA and other such groups.

"The nature of this organization with its enormous campus presence already and the involvement of so many students and so many other people close to the University makes it quite distinctive," Lewis said.

According to Assistant Dean of Public Service Judith H. Kidd, the University has always recognized the complexity of PBHA's structure and mission.

"The principle of recognizing exterior resources was always recognized," she said.

The importance of the compromise that was eventually hammered out is that students still have final authority to overturn the entire board, giving them final authority over programming issues, Kidd said.

In the past, the Civil Liberties Union at Harvard has protested such attempts by the administration to draw distinctions between student groups, particularly in its efforts to keep BCC off campus