<p>Somehow, I doubt that there would be much “reasoned debate” or “loving explanation of the moral and spiritual issues” in these performances. Not really much for the “Catholic intellectual tradition” or indeed ANY “intellectual tradition” to work with here. </p>
<p>"His work is frequently provocative, highly sexualized and he’s been arrested in the past for demonstrating for AIDS research funding.
One of his most popular performances is called My Queer Body, in which he goes into graphic detail about his conception. </p>
<p>Other performances include talks about his childhood masturbatory techniques, sexual conquests and physical traits."</p>
<p>Even Northwestern, a completely secular institution, canceled a human sexuality class after the controversy surrounding the after-class live demonstrations last year.</p>
<p>Here’s some of what the Mail article says, so that people don’t have to click through:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I leave it to each of you to decide if you want to endorse CatholicCulture.org’s approach to education.</p>
<p>(And, again, all the articles make pretty clear Miller was not invited to perform “My Queer Bod” or anything like it at Villanova. He was to give a workshop to student actors and performers, or a type he has given for years, in which they developed their own monologues and performed them. Villanova has a pretty well-regarded theater program, by the way, and its president is the former chair of that department.)</p>
<p>JHS, you seem more annoyed by the lack of explanation or justification by Villanova than by its decision. On the one hand, you have a point in that it would have been best for the school to issue a more comprehensive position statement on this. On the other hand, should we really expect or demand a school to issue statements for all similar decisions? </p>
<p>Should we not expect and demand that the schools that DID invite this performer to explain why they decided it should be part of a curriculum to start with. </p>
<p>Did a school such as Stanford find any obligation to justify its decision to showcase the Merce Cunningham Dance repeatedly on campus, and through the combination of zealots and humanities distribution requirements make it the inescapable focus on an entire trimester for some of its students? What if the students did not care to HAVE to write about Merce or Bill Jones in a … positive way? </p>
<p>“All power in human hands is liable to be abused.” We only complain when the abuse is directed at a cause we support. For the others, we applaud.</p>
<p>“And, again, all the articles make pretty clear Miller was not invited to perform “My Queer Bod” or anything like it at Villanova. He was to give a workshop to student actors and performers, or a type he has given for years, in which they developed their own monologues and performed them.”</p>
<p>Well, maybe. And then again, maybe not.<br>
But let’s turn this around. Suppose it’s a secular school, with a stated commitment to providing an atmosphere in which homosexual students feel welcomed and valued. And let’s take a leap and suppose that a young visiting professor at this school invited an openly fundamentalist Christian performance artist to give a weeklong workshop on “identity and culture.” And let’s further suppose that this performance artist was also celebrated for his programs devoted to the “gay conversion” movement – that he had given performances in which he played a troubled homosexual who was “saved” by a Christian therapist, and that he had publicly supported such conversion therapists.</p>
<p>If homosexual groups found out about this workshop, and forced the university to cancel it – even though the professor and performer both insisted that the workshop would not criticize homosexuality and that he was just helping students to develop and perform their own monologues – would you have a problem with that decision? Would it cause you to question the university’s commitment to reasoned debate? Or would you praise the university for sticking to its core values?</p>
<p>Perfectly valid question. Under the circumstances you described, I would not want to see the program canceled. On the other hand, there are some people whose behavior has been so inflammatory and denigrative towards gay people – i.e., the Westview Baptists – that I wouldn’t let them on my campus if I could avoid it.</p>
<p>I have to say, though, that I don’t think there is perfect symmetry here. Someone who attacks Christian values does not pose much threat to Christians, who are an immense and powerful majority in this country, even though rhetorically they love to claim oppressed minority status. Homosexuals in this country are still vilified, shunned, beaten, and even killed on a regular basis, and whatever claims are made for the size of the population they constitute a distinct, poorly organized minority, whose members, especially the young, are often isolated and afraid. So hostility to Chrsitians and hostility to gays are not equivalents for me, any more than a swarm of gnats is equivalent to a lynch mob.</p>
<p>There doesn’t need to be “perfect symmetry,” though I would take issue with your depiction of the relative political power of the two groups. Witness, to take just one example, the shameful and bigoted reaction of some members of the gay rights movement to the support of some Mormon business owners for Proposition 8 in California. And I would also argue that someone who intends to “attack Christian values” should probably not be accepting invitations to speak at Christian colleges. Not sure why it’s OK to “attack” ANYONE’S values based on the size and power of the group in question. What about tolerance and respect for diversity? </p>
<p>But, in any event, the point is that universities are, and should be, free to make these decisions. Others are free to decide not to work or study there.</p>
<p>Most of the Catholic values decisions seem awfully arbitrary to me. D1’s college was kicked out of the Catholic college system and became a secular college about 10 years ago, because the keynote speaker, Hilary Clinton, was pro choice. Yet Notre Dame is still a Catholic college even though they had Obama as their keynote speaker.</p>
<p>Gee what a surprise…another thread pretending to discuss an education issue, but really just a forum to further bash the Catholic Church. </p>
<p>As for the Marymount Manhattan situation: Each bishop is responsible for institutions that call themselves “Catholic” within his diocese…this includes hospitals as well. Each bishop has the right to declare that certain institutions may no longer declare themselves to be Catholic. Cardinal Egan made the decision for MMC - but not only because of Hilary. He felt the school had long moved beyond its Catholic identity. </p>
<p>Bishops don’t generally do things like removing Catholic identity based on one instance…it usually takes a series of instances where advisement has been ignored. The last straw is rarely the only straw. What gets played out in the public media is rarely a good representation of all the polite and gentle advising and warnings that are going on behind the scenes.</p>
<p>The fact that the bishop of the diocese that ND is located didn’t do the same was his decision…probably because ND did not have a history of moving beyond its Catholic identity. That said, ND did report that it lost over $100M in donations, so they probably did end up regretting their decision and would not likely make that mistake again.</p>
<p>My older daughters school has conservatives on campus- David Horowitz for example.
It wasn’t a week long event but part of a public policy lecture series.
This was her graduation year, Im sure they have had others that were equally as " unlike a Reedie" as Horowitz. ( or perhaps when they invited him, they thought he was still a member of the Communist Party).</p>
<p>Look on the website of Campus Crusade for Christ and just try and find a school without a chapter. Campus Crusade is against gay marriage and preaches conversion.</p>
<p>Gay college students at secular schools with a stated commitment to providing an atmosphere in which homosexual students feel welcomed and valued deal with your scenario every day.</p>
But a Catholic university is clearly not indistinguishable from a secular university, and it’s foolish to expect it to behave like one. It’s hard for me to believe anyone is that naive. I have no opinion on Villanova’s decision. How they run a private institution is none of my business.</p>
<p>Indeed, just how many secular universities have a chapel in every dorm, a crucifix on the wall in every classroom/dining hall/athletic facility, required theology courses, campus-wide Masses at orientation and graduation weekends, multiple Masses immediately after every home football game, and dozens of priests on the faculty? The premise is faulty. Plenty of Catholic universities are Catholic in name only (like Manhattan Marymount), but many others are actually serious about their Catholic identity, and a non-Catholic student who enrolls at one of those schools on the assumption that it’s “indistinguishable” from a secular school will have a rude awakening.</p>
<p>Thank you, alh. Clearly the cancellation of the workshop can be seen as a singular incident, and not a wholesale denial of exploring ideas (both academic and personal) at odds with Church teachings. It appears that this Catholic university can in fact fulfill its stated mission while broadening students’ experiences with cultural issues.</p>
<p>A couple of bits of interesting, relevant testimony:</p>
<p>First, from a tenured English professor at a Catholic university, who teaches a lot of African-American and third-world literature:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is self-explanatory, from a woman in her late 50s:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alh: You realize, I’m sure, that the person who is organizing the conference whose description you quote above is the same person who was sponsoring Miller’s workshop until Monday. She has been forbidden to discuss the issue; in fact, no one at Villanova will talk to the press about it beyond their one-paragraph press release Monday.</p>
<p>Just hoping someone with insider knowledge will show up and tell us what is going on. </p>
<p>Also interested in why that link doesn’t work. Is that new too? I am just guessing there is a huge difference at a Catholic university between a Gay/Straight alliance and an actual LGBT support group.</p>
<p>It is a conspiracy,no doubt.
The bottom line is Villanova is a religious institution, and they decided this ‘artist’ doesn’t fit their mission…That is it…simple…no conspiracy, no hidden agenda,nada…</p>
<p>And why do some of you think they need to explain their decision? The explanation is simple,so simple…it goes against their values…</p>
