Marquette Arts and Sciences dean search F-up

[Sir Lawrence]

I was waiting for the hyperbole to show up in this discussion.

Do you really believe your examples are even remotely analogous?

Hyperbole or simile?

[MUeagle05]

I was waiting for the hyperbole to show up in this discussion.

Do you really believe your examples are even remotely analogous?

Yes, I do.  Please tell me why they aren't.  

The point is that other similar situations would not be on the front page of the local newspaper and leading the 10pm local news.  If Concordia University refused to hire a professor that openly spoke negatively of Martin Luther would anyone care?  Why is it different when a Catholic school attempts to enforce its teachings?

[MUeagle05]

If MU only hired people who promotes activities that are totally consistent with Catholic teaching, then only priests would be professors.  Good luck finding any professors for the University if we are to do this kind of job search.  This notion is utterly ridiculous if you consider Marquette as a legitimate institution of higher learning, and not just a theology school.  

Are you comparing virulent racism to being a lesbian?  I'd say one of those things ought to be considered in the hiring process (at any University), and the other should not, especially given the University's anti-discrimination policy, but hey, maybe that's just me.....

Just to flip the coin, Professor McAdams, who has a position similar to yours on this issue, is strongly in favor of the death penalty.  Under your conception, I suppose the administration would have to fire him.  Catholic teaching disagrees with him...

I'm obviously not comparing racism to being a lesbian, just comparing a group enforcing its beliefs.

And I don't claim that MU has been consistent with its hiring or promotion decisions, just that it should not be ripped when it actually tries to do something consistent with Catholic teaching.

[MUfan12]

I was thinking the same thing, Sugar.   

Although .. perhaps their decision was the right one, but didn't factor in something that just wouldn't, or shouldn't come up, namely, a rich donor appears and throws-down.

They may have done 49 things right here.

If the "big donor theory" is correct .. clearly THAT is the most disturbing feature of this story.

I have a very, very hard time believing the donor theory. MU has done, and tolerated a bunch of things that would have pissed off conservative Catholic donors.

What appears more and more likely is intervention from the Archdiocese.

[GGGG]

I have a very, very hard time believing the donor theory. MU has done, and tolerated a bunch of things that would have pissed off conservative Catholic donors.

What appears more and more likely is intervention from the Archdiocese.

MU has also done, and tolerated a bunch of things that would have pissed off the archdiocese.

[GGGG]

Why would the administration care if the faculty is impressed?  And isn't the administration in charge here?  There is no overriding of the faculty.  I can't imagine standing up in a room full of people and attempting to shame or embarrass  my boss into doing something like Snow did to Wild (even if Wild did screw up the process by hiring and then rescinding).

First of all, a search committee generally makes recommendations to the Provost.  No doubt that the Provost (with the consent of the President) makes the ultimate decision.

Second, stop thinking of the faculty / administration relationship as similar to the normal employee / supervisor relationship.  It isn't.  Universities started out as partnerships of intellectuals who came together to educate.  Everything has evolved from that model.  Open debate is not only accepted, it is often encouraged, because of the nature of the organization.  Faculty can make life very difficult for administration if they want.

[MUfan12]

MU has also done, and tolerated a bunch of things that would have pissed off the archdiocese.

True. But we don't know how a new archbishop views the dynamic between MU and the Archdiocese. Weakland and Dolan were very lassiez faire with MU.

I just don't see the donor thing holding a ton of water. Unless it was a "name on a building" donor, the administration's decisions have tended to not show much regard for donors.

[Hards Alumni]

Yes, I do.  Please tell me why they aren't.  

The point is that other similar situations would not be on the front page of the local newspaper and leading the 10pm local news.  If Concordia University refused to hire a professor that openly spoke negatively of Martin Luther would anyone care?  Why is it different when a Catholic school attempts to enforce its teachings?

You wouldn't expect a predominantly black university to hire a professor who is a KKK member.  

around 95% of people would agree that this would not be okay.

You wouldn't expect a Lutheran university to hire a professor who openly speaks negatively of Martin Luther.  

Why not?  I think you underestimate Lutheran's commitment to free speech *snicker*

Why should you expect a Catholic university to hire a woman who promotes activities that are inconsistent with Catholic teaching?

Are you really arguing that 95% of people (I realize it is my made up number, but it is reasonable) would be against hiring a homosexual as Dean of A&S?  I can tell you, no, otherwise we all probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

Additionally, Marquette has faculty who are openly gay.  Making a homosexual Dean of A&S changes what, exactly?  This is a completley rediculous argument.  Who cares if she 'promotes' (you probably shouldn't have used this word) homosexuality.  Do you HONESTLY think that by promoting homosexuality that people will become homosexuals?  If so, Lord help you.  

It isn't as if she will stand in Gesu and hypnotize everyone into turning homosexual.

What is it you are so afraid of, exactly?

[Cooby Snacks]

I just don't see the donor thing holding a ton of water. Unless it was a "name on a building" donor, the administration's decisions have tended to not show much regard for donors.

When I heard the donor rumor, my first thought was that it must have been someone with a lot of clout.  It wouldn't surprise me if it were true.

[GGGG]

She is not even close to being qualified to lead a Catholic Jesuit Institution's largest college.  She should have applied to UW or UWM if she wanted to bring gay and lesbian teachings to the classroom.  No room for it at MU

You do realize that she worked for a Catholic Jesuit institution throughout her career, and was in fact promoted multiple times?

And the other question I have for the "not at a Catholic university" crowd is....what do you fear?  Is your faith in your beliefs so weak that you can't have someone challenge them?  What kind of education would it be if they just gave you the party line on every issue?  Having a professor stand up in a classroom and say "I believe in gay marriage and here's why..." is a *strength* of a university...not a weakness.

What I appreciated about my education at MU is that some professors challenged me.  They taught me how to think...they didn't just fill my head.

[Ohbie]

I was waiting for the hyperbole to show up in this discussion.

Do you really believe your examples are even remotely analogous?

+1.

My thoughts exactly.

[Hards Alumni]

You do realize that she worked for a Catholic Jesuit institution throughout her career, and was in fact promoted multiple times?

And the other question I have for the "not at a Catholic university" crowd is....what do you fear?  Is your faith in your beliefs so weak that you can't have someone challenge them?  What kind of education would it be if they just gave you the party line on every issue?  Having a professor stand up in a classroom and say "I believe in gay marriage and here's why..." is a *strength* of a university...not a weakness.

What I appreciated about my education at MU is that some professors challenged me.  They taught me how to think...they didn't just fill my head.

so spot on.  exactly what I was trying to get at.

[MUfan12]

Additionally, Marquette has faculty who are openly gay. Making a homosexual Dean of A&S changes what, exactly?

Interesting points within each of these sentences. Yes, there are gay faculty and staff at MU. But couldn't that also mean that it wasn't the fact that she was a lesbian, but rather other factors that caused this decision?

As I wrote before, it's not about having a homosexual dean. I'll use the biology example again. If she were a lesbian biologist, who was published on biology, it wouldn't be an issue. It's about what she has published, and certain pieces where she has espoused views in direct conflict with church teaching.

As much as some may disagree, MU still has responsibilites to uphold as a Catholic school. There are certain things you just can't do. Such as naming someone dean of your largest college, who has spent a large part of their career at odds with church teaching.

To me, if you subsituted Dan Maguire for Jodi O'Brien, I'd have the same issues. It's not about gender. It's not about sexuality. It's about their published works being in direct conflict with the church.

It isn't as if she will stand in Gesu and hypnotize everyone into turning homosexual.

What is it you are so afraid of, exactly?

I was waiting for the first homophobia allegations. Always the old, reliable fallback, right?

[mu-rara]

You do realize that she worked for a Catholic Jesuit institution throughout her career, and was in fact promoted multiple times?

And the other question I have for the "not at a Catholic university" crowd is....what do you fear?  Is your faith in your beliefs so weak that you can't have someone challenge them?  What kind of education would it be if they just gave you the party line on every issue?  Having a professor stand up in a classroom and say "I believe in gay marriage and here's why..." is a *strength* of a university...not a weakness.

What I appreciated about my education at MU is that some professors challenged me.  They taught me how to think...they didn't just fill my head.

I disagree vehemently with most of Dan Maguire's ideas.  I'm glad (sort of) that Marquette keeps him around.   College kids need to hear both sides.


(this wasn't a retort to the previous poster.  Dan Maguire is the poster child for teaching against the Church).

[NavinRJohnson]

And the other question I have for the "not at a Catholic university" crowd is....what do you fear?  Is your faith in your beliefs so weak that you can't have someone challenge them?  What kind of education would it be if they just gave you the party line on every issue?  Having a professor stand up in a classroom and say "I believe in gay marriage and here's why..." is a *strength* of a university...not a weakness.

It isn't really a question of a difference of opinion (although I would suggest there are very few classes where that type of evangelizing, regardless of the subject matter is really appropriate), it has to do with Catholic Doctrine, which contrary to what many 'Catholics' like to believe is not optional. Catholics have choices, but its not to choose which part of the religion you agree with or not, it is the choice to be Catholic or not.

For the record, the more I see of this, put me in the camp that says this had as much to do with her lack of qualification, as it does her sexual orientation/activism.

[Cooby Snacks]

I disagree vehemently with most of Dan Maguire's ideas.  I'm glad (sort of) that Marquette keeps him around.   College kids need to hear both sides.


(this wasn't a retort to the previous poster.  Dan Maguire is the poster child for teaching against the Church).

Agree, everyone needs to hear both sides.  More importantly, everyone needs to actually listen to and consider both sides.

[shiloh26]

As much as some may disagree, MU still has responsibilites to uphold as a Catholic school. There are certain things you just can't do. Such as naming someone dean of your largest college, who has spent a large part of their career at odds with church teaching.


[/quote]

Funny, because that is exactly what they were about to do before they pulled a 180.  Now, do you really think they found some 'smoking gun' in her research and only then decided to pull the plug?  I doubt it... they knew exactly what they were getting, and never should have made an offer that they weren't willing to go through with.  The people who researched her, I'm sure, alerted the administration to her 'radical' publications.  Somehow, it only became a problem this late in the process.

[NavinRJohnson]

I was waiting for the first homophobia allegations. Always the old, reliable fallback, right?

Agreed. Very weak.

[NavinRJohnson]

The people who researched her, I'm sure, alerted the administration to her 'radical' publications.  Somehow, it only became a problem this late in the process.

So what are you suggesting, that they should have gone ahead with a bad idea because they realized it was a bad idea late in the process?

[GGGG]

It isn't really a question of a difference of opinion (although I would suggest there are very few classes where that type of evangelizing, regardless of the subject matter is really appropriate), it has to do with Catholic Doctrine, which contrary to what many 'Catholics' like to believe is not optional. Catholics have choices, but its not to choose which part of the religion you agree with or not, it is the choice to be Catholic or not.

I don't know what you are trying to say here.  That only teachings consistent with Catholic Doctrine should be taught at MU?  That anyone who doesn't live by that doctrine shouldn't be able to teach or work at MU?

[MUfan12]

they knew exactly what they were getting, and never should have made an offer that they weren't willing to go through with.  

We agree on this.

Ultimately, I agree with MU on not hiring her. I also think they massively botched this whole thing. Almost a Gold-level botching.

Maybe Anne Zizzo can do some PR spin for them?

[Hards Alumni]

Interesting points within each of these sentences. Yes, there are gay faculty and staff at MU. But couldn't that also mean that it wasn't the fact that she was a lesbian, but rather other factors that caused this decision?

As I wrote before, it's not about having a homosexual dean. I'll use the biology example again. If she were a lesbian biologist, who was published on biology, it wouldn't be an issue. It's about what she has published, and certain pieces where she has espoused views in direct conflict with church teaching.

As much as some may disagree, MU still has responsibilites to uphold as a Catholic school. There are certain things you just can't do. Such as naming someone dean of your largest college, who has spent a large part of their career at odds with church teaching.

To me, if you subsituted Dan Maguire for Jodi O'Brien, I'd have the same issues. It's not about gender. It's not about sexuality. It's about their published works being in direct conflict with the church.

I was waiting for the first homophobia allegations. Always the old, reliable fallback, right?

I never accused you of anything.  I just don't understand why it matters that she has published works regarding homosexuality.  You fail to explain anything except that MU has to uphold responsibilites as a Catholic school.  I don't see how the two are related.  Are you insinuating that squelching free thought is a Catholic school value that MU needs to uphold as its responsibility, or are you proposing that MU's responsibilty as a Catholic school requires them to not allow homosexuals to become Dean of a college?

Why exactly is the demarkation line drawn at:

Faculty = okay
Dean = not okay

I would argue that simply by publishing pro homosexual literature does not mean she has spent a large part of her career at odds with church teaching.  Has she openly stated that the church is wrong?  Has she published an article that summarizes that she is even at odds with church teaching?  I don't believe so.  I do not see what her published works have anything to do with her ability to be Dean of Arts and Science.  So what exactly is everyone so afraid of?

Understand me now?  I was never implying any sort of homophobia on your part, please get over yourself.

[MUeagle05]

Additionally, Marquette has faculty who are openly gay.  Making a homosexual Dean of A&S changes what, exactly?  This is a completley rediculous argument.  Who cares if she 'promotes' (you probably shouldn't have used this word) homosexuality.  Do you HONESTLY think that by promoting homosexuality that people will become homosexuals?  If so, Lord help you.  

What's wrong with saying "promotes"?  I don't think anything turns people into homosexuals, but nice attempt at a straw man.

It isn't as if she will stand in Gesu and hypnotize everyone into turning homosexual.

What is it you are so afraid of, exactly?

Now you are being rediculous.

[Hards Alumni]

Simply answer how she will promote homosexuality by becoming Dean of A&S. 

[MUeagle05]

I never accused you of anything.  I just don't understand why it matters that she has published works regarding homosexuality.  You fail to explain anything except that MU has to uphold responsibilites as a Catholic school.  I don't see how the two are related.  Are you insinuating that squelching free thought is a Catholic school value that MU needs to uphold as its responsibility, or are you proposing that MU's responsibilty as a Catholic school requires them to not allow homosexuals to become Dean of a college?

Why exactly is the demarkation line drawn at:

Faculty = okay
Dean = not okay

I would argue that simply by publishing pro homosexual literature does not mean she has spent a large part of her career at odds with church teaching.  Has she openly stated that the church is wrong?  Has she published an article that summarizes that she is even at odds with church teaching?  I don't believe so.  I do not see what her published works have anything to do with her ability to be Dean of Arts and Science.  So what exactly is everyone so afraid of?

Understand me now?  I was never implying any sort of homophobia on your part, please get over yourself.

No one is afraid of anything.  Why do you keep asking that?  The arguments I read are that MU has the right to enforce the teachings of the church that it was founded on.  Maybe you don't understand how religion works.  Religions have a set of rules (beliefs, codes, whatever) that you are supposed to live by.  If you don't adhere to those rules, what's the point?  It works the same for Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Lutherans, Baptists, Mormons, etc.  

And you seriously need to stop with the straw men and red herrring arguments.  Squelching free thought is not a Catholic value and no one thinks O'Brien is going to stand in Gesu and hypnotize people into turning gay.  You make it hard for people to take you seriously . . .