By Tim Rohr
07/16/2000
It appears that my column a couple weeks ago about the Georgetown University theater production of "Vagina Monologues" has stirred up a bit of a challenge from the opposing quarter. My challengers have a right to question my credibility and I should have referenced my sources more clearly.
I also apologize for an error in the column. I stated that the play "glamorized" a lesbian’s seduction and rape of a 13-year old girl. Actually this is only one of several episodes. But it would not be appropriate for me to detail them here. However, the play has its own website where you can see for yourself. Just punch in the title on your search engine.
As per the challenge to my "sources" please see the following. The April 14 issue of the Wall Street Journal criticizes Georgetown for its firing of a student writer who criticized the University’s production of this play which "approvingly features a lesbian, pedophilic rape of a 13-year old girl." (My thanks to Leon Maquera for this information.)
The Journal also quotes William Peter Blatty, a Georgetown alum, and the author of the novel and film "The Exorcist" . Here is a direct quote: "With all that the demon says and does in my novel and film, The Exorcist, never until I read of the The Hoya’s (the university newspaper) and [President] O’Donovan’s support of ‘The Vagina Monologues’...have I truly appreciated the meaning of the word ‘obscenity’."
One can also see all kinds of stuff referencing the production with reviews both positive and negative by simply going to Georgetown’s website (just type Georgetown in the search engine). Click on Publications, then The Hoya, then type in "Vagina Monologues". (Apologies to the web-savvy for the pedantic instructions.) My use of the word "glamorizes" in recounting the lesbian episode comes directly off the front page of The Wanderer, a national Catholic weekly.
As to my not having seen the play itself, a challenge to my credibility put forth by more than one detractor, I simply submit that though I don’t have any letters before or after my name, I don’t have to walk into a topless bar to know what goes on there. The play in fact may have had a redeeming quality here or there, but spiritual mentors have taught me (they were Jesuits by the way) the importance of "custody of the eyes" and ears. And besides, I can read.
But my real concern in writing the article was not to discuss the content of this "play" but to question why our Holy Father’s wishes and directives are flaunted. In Ex Corde Ecclessiae he simply asked that Catholic institutions of higher learning remain faithful to the mission of the Church.
It’s taken the U.S. Bishops 10 years to get around to taking a vote on it, and the document had to be "revised" before they even did that. I must be missing something. I didn’t know that Papal and Vatican directives were something we could vote on. As far as I know we're a hierarchical Church with a Teaching Magisterium. The Pope isn't a mayor and this is not the city council (or University board) we're dealing with here. (I’m sure someone will straighten me out.)
The point in my column concerning the Vatican’s order to eliminate the "habitual use of Extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist at Mass" is the same. Are Vatican directives to be ignored, flaunted, voted on? If someone can show me that the document I referenced, Instruction on Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful In the Sacred Ministry of Priest, is invalid or does not pertain to this diocese, please do.
Some of my non-Catholic Christian friends wear a WWJD bracelet. It stand for "What would Jesus do?" Perhaps we can take a clue. If Jesus was anything, He was obedient..."even to His death".
So go ahead and vote, or debate, or dissent, or whatever. Meanwhile, I’m going to follow JP. Last I heard he still had the keys.