For students, the front line of this struggle is often the Office of the Dean for Student Development (ODSD), which not only publishes the student guide, but also reviews and gives approval to student events before they can be held.
For instance, when the Philippine Society of Boston College (PSBC) submitted the standard paperwork to the ODSD to sponsor performer Kevin Nadal's "Single: A one man show about sex, life, and karaoke," a show which explores Nadal's experiences as "a gay pinoy navigating single life in New York City," several small changes were requested, according to the events' organizers. The title was changed to say "love, life, and karaoke," and a clause inserted into Nadal's contract asking him to respect BC's Jesuit identity, according to the events' organizers. After the changes were made, the event went ahead Friday night.
Karl Bell, an assistant dean in the ODSD, said that the changes requested were common and nothing new. "It's fairly standard when we bring in large speakers," he said. Bell also said that the changes in the Nadal event had nothing to do with the revised speaker policy.
Even still, they do reflect the ongoing tension between being both Catholic and a university, which is as much at the heart of the University as is BC's Jesuit heritage.
Reaction to the revised policy has varied among faculty and students, though all recognize the balance that the University is striving to find. Disagreement ultimately comes down to individuals' perception of how that balance should be addressed.
"As a Catholic school, BC has a responsibility to be an advocate for the teachings of the Catholic church and if anything, I think that the new policy will encourage more discussion and more intellectual rigor surrounding ideas than anything else," said Christine Friedrich, president of the Pro-Life Club and A&S '08. "At the heart of the policy is that they're saying there has to be respect for the Catholic tradition of our school by providing the proper balance."
"Being Catholic doesn't necessarily mean having exclusivity of the Catholic view point or any time there is something that's not Catholic, having it be balanced by something that is," said Andrew Kaplun, a member of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) and A&S '09. "Just bringing someone to this campus who doesn't share Catholic views isn't necessarily a support of those views. It's just an endorsement of 'we think that all voices need to heard,'" he said.
Kaplun also said that the revised policy "represents a lack of respect for the students," in that it does not trust them to be able hear a non-Catholic point of view and make up their own mind about it.
While those in favor of the policy argue that there is no stifling academic inquiry by requiring opposing viewpoints to be expressed, critics point out the "double standard" in this since presumably speakers in line with Catholic teachings will not face the same rigor and balance.
"It would be singularly close-minded to only present a pro-abortion position," said Thomas Groome, director of the Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry and a professor in the theology department. "Open inquiry should be to hear a number of opinions. The openness is violated if somebody says you cannot have the Catholic position presented. People who want to be pro-abortion in a good Catholic university should definitely hear a strong argument against abortion. This is what it means to be open."
"Double standards like this are a recipe for serious intellectual problems," said Charles Derber, a professor in the sociology department, who believed that the former policy was adequate and was a better approach.
But paramount to Derber was a double standard of another kind - the difference in the academic inquiry rights of students and faculty - which he fears the revised policy makes worse. "The academic freedom of a faculty member depends on a certain kind of atmosphere in the classroom that can only happen when students as well as faculty are feeling free to voice their views, where there is an atmosphere in which students are being encouraged to express their views fully and freely.
"In my judgment, if you compromise the academic freedom of students you compromise the academic freedom of faculty," said Derber.
The policy has not changed, it's simply been codified, said Bradley Easterbrooks, vice president of the College Republicans and A&S '07. "The University has always had a policy of refusing to allow student funds to pay for student events which would be considered both one-sided and hostile to the University's mission," said Easterbrooks in an e-mail. "Students can always host events that include the expression of all opinions on controversial topics, but by ensuring some balance, the University asks that those student funds go towards academic exploration, not anti-Christian activism."
Others have taken issue with that view. Alex Yiannopoulos, a founder of the Association for the Protection of Civil Liberties - a group he and several others started on campus recently in response to the Student Guide speakers policy revision - and A&S '07, questioned whether student groups could actually sponsor events featuring unbalanced, non-Catholic views since only University-recognized and funded groups can reserve rooms. On Friday he stood in the Quad passing out literature criticizing the policy. "They're making it seem like only groups using student money will be affected. The problem is if you're not using student money, you can't have an event in the first place," he later told The Heights.
Both Easterbrooks and Yiannopoulos make valid points. Last year, the University cancelled a panel discussion sponsored by the WHI and College Democrats, motivated by concerns that the panel was comprised solely of abortion rights speakers. The panel discussion ultimately was held, however, when organizers took advantage of a loophole: they secured sponsorship from the sociology department. With faculty cover, the event went forward.
Amanda Short, president of the College Republicans and CSOM '07, drew a distinction between "restricting academic inquiry" and "restricting blatantly anti-Catholic values." "People who go here choose to go here with that understanding. I can see how people can say that this isn't fairly balanced and it doesn't necessarily promote inquiry, but I don't think that it is Boston College's mission to only promote academic inquiry, it is also to promote Jesuit ideals," she said.
Groome put it another way: "The challenge for a Catholic university is always to be both Catholic and a university. In other words, we should always be marked by academic freedom and open inquiry. On the other hand, we must always represent and be faithful to the core values of the Catholic faith."
And so the debate goes on.
Be the first to comment on this article!