Academic Freedom and Catholic Character

Several days ago, I received an email from the Notre Dame Alumni President regarding a series of discussions that had recently occurred on the Notre Dame campus. The new president is considering instituting a policy that would limit student access to material that is inconsistent with Catholic doctrine. One example of this policy already in place is that The Vagina Monologues, a theatrical piece that has been performed in a campus-wide setting for the past four years along with a publicity campaign and auction to end violence against women, has been relegated to a classroom setting only and the concurrent campaign and auction cancelled. The president's address to the faculty explained the reasoning and invited discourse as he begins the process of creating a broader policy on Notre Dame's Catholic character and how that relates to academic freedom. The following is my response.

I've debated how best to frame my response to the concern of academic freedom and Catholic character, how best to relate my position on these matters as a Notre Dame alumna, a Catholic, a wife, a new mother, and a woman. I can share my experiences of Catholicism both within and beyond the grounds of Notre Dame. I can share my difficult journey to accepting my own sexuality--a journey that might have been easier had there existed a forum anywhere in my life for frank and open discussion. I can express my profound grief at how matters of sexuality are handled by the Catholic church and at how such a remarkable institution as Notre Dame is continuing that mishandling.

Instead I'll pose three simple questions that should be considered before any long-term policies are made: Where does sponsorship end and censorship begin? Why deny a community of scholars and students such perfect forums for conversations about significant issues? Who does the University truly serve? I'll focus on The Vagina Monologues as I am familiar with it and was unsure of the exact trouble surrounding the Queer Film Festival and of its potential fate.

Several times in the faculty address the distinction was made between censorship and sponsorship. Censorship is the deletion of, among other things, morally objectionable material from media. Sponsorship is the vouching of an event, usually by monetary means. I can understand the need for the University not to be seen as supporting an event that is not compatible with its Catholic character. What I can't understand is when such a need turns into the deletion of such objectionable events from media. In other words, there are many ways to make it clear that Notre Dame does not endorse the elements of The Vagina Monologues that run counter to Catholic doctrine. Denying the broader venue of this performance and its surrounding publicity is the most dangerous and damaging of those ways. It shuts down public discourse about important issues. It sends the message, however unintentional, that a public, frank, and open discussion of sexuality is not allowed at Notre Dame. It leads to limitation of freedom as students, faculty, and even alumni are bound to wonder if elements of their next performance or publication will be found objectionable and thus be removed from its intended campus venue.

Setting aside discussions of slippery slopes and fine lines between censorship and sponsorship, the greater disservice of denying the public performance of The Vagina Monologues is to the soul of the University. If we are truly about maintaining Notre Dame as an intellectually rich and vibrant university and about forming students' character, then we should not hide things that we find objectionable but rather bring them fully into the light and examine publicly why they are objectionable. The Notre Dame student body is exceptionally bright, containing many future world leaders. They should be exposed to as much information as possible so that they can make their own decisions about the values they choose to incorporate into their lives. Quite simply, if Notre Dame chooses to limit what the student body is exposed to by removing from public view that which is inconsistent with Catholic doctrine, Notre Dame is depriving its students of the necessary tools to reason in the world. I always understood faith and values as concepts to be exhaustively examined and actively chosen, not blindly followed and forcefully accepted. What sort of Catholic character are we instilling in the future if we do not trust young adults to determine what to accept and reject in a performance that contains both a positive message about sexuality and a graphic description of deviant behavior? I hope that The Vagina Monologues will be performed in a broader venue next year with the concurrent V-day publicity and auction. It is the perfect forum for initiating a conversation about societal expectations and views of sexuality and how that differs from Catholic doctrine. It is a remarkable way to allow the young adults of Notre Dame to respect their sexuality and make informed decisions about their bodies. This is something that should not be limited to the classroom.

Even should it be decided that The Vagina Monologues is too loaded a piece to ever again be performed in a campus-wide setting, Notre Dame's first obligation should be to its students, not to the perceptions of those outside the university. We cannot simplify, restrict, and otherwise limit the Notre Dame experience because some may not understand the distinctions between engendering a vital discussion of human sexuality and endorsing non-Catholic viewpoints.

With the precedent set by the removal of the The Vagina Monologues from a public forum, I must ask what is next? Will Elton John and the Indigo Girls no longer be able to perform at the Joyce Center? Will this weekend's Student Union Board showing of the movie Rent be cancelled? And if these things don't come to pass, why not? What sort of message does it send to our students that it is acceptable for Notre Dame to seemingly sponsor a movie with strong homosexuality themes or a concert by artists openly living a lifestyle counter to Catholic teaching, but it is not acceptable for Notre Dame to seemingly sponsor a theatrical production designed to end violence against women and encourage women to accept and celebrate their sexuality? If the Notre Dame administration wishes to acknowledge its Catholic character by limiting student access to various viewpoints and denying avenues for public discourse about significant issues, then it must be prepared to take such a stance to its fullest interpretation or risk confusing the student body even more.

I have never agreed with the stereotypical alumni threat of withdrawing monetary support as a means to change university policies. I see no reason to engage in an action that would result in penalizing the student body for the actions of the administration. However, should the thinking that relegated The Vagina Monologues to a classroom setting be applied to a broader policy, I will no longer be able to serve as an advocate for my alma mater. I will no longer be able to encourage my son to attend the institution that helped shape my character. I do not support the view that, in order to create a Catholic value system, our young adults must be limited in exposure to secular media that may run counter to Catholic teaching, and I cannot in good conscience promote an institution that does support such a view.