The Vagina Monologues will be performed in April as the centerpiece of a multi-disciplinary symposium sponsored by the Honors Program.
It would seem opponents of the performance, myself included, need to prove two propositions: First, that at a Catholic university there are limits to academic freedom, and, second, that a reading of the Monologues falls outside those boundaries.
The first premise is a matter of doctrine, while the second is a prudential (situational) judgment.
Ex Corde Ecclesiae was promulgated in 1990 by Pope John Paul the Great as the apostolic constitution governing Catholic institutions of higher education.
In it, the Pope, himself a former university professor, wrote: “Freedom in research and teaching is recognized and respected according to the principles and methods of each individual discipline, so long as the rights of the individual and of the community are preserved within the confines of the truth and the common good.“ (General Norms Article 1 § 5).
So then, does a reading of the Monologues fall outside the “confines of truth and the common good?”
On the one side of the common good ledger is the value of learning about the experiences of women and increased awareness of sexual violence against women. Opposite is the affect on the audience of the obscene and vulgar parts of the play, including extensive foul language and offensive stories about immoral activities.
As to truth, again on the one side is the literal truth of the rightfully shocking nature of violence against women, and the truth of the statements of women interviewed by the playwright. On the other hand there are the larger, transcendent truths of human sexuality, the family, love, and authentic femininity that are assaulted and insulted by the play.
I will grant there are arguments for both sides of the second question (I will assume that Marquette accepts the first premise, though unfortunately that may be a dubious assumption).
Many Catholic college presidents have also been forced to respond to the situation the Rev. Wild now finds himself in. Some have caved and admitted it in under a mistaken notion of “academic freedom,” denying the first premise.
Others have acknowledged the first premise, yet came to a different prudential judgment.
As noted above, there are both costs and benefits to be weighed on the question of truth and the common good. Thankfully, several college presidents have acknowledged that the benefits can be achieved without the costs, because the good of increased awareness of violence against women can be found in programs without the drawbacks of the Monologues.
This is the path Marquette should take – accept the first premise, that at a Catholic school we willingly accept limits to academic freedom for the sake of other, higher values, acknowledge the costs the Monologues impose, and instead support other ways to address the important issue of violence against women.
Popularity: 7% [?]
