Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 18, 1962 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1962-10-18

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Seventy-Third Year
Trutt! WfillPreval":
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily ex press the individual opinions of staf writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
Modern Church Should Result
Frmcum enical Council

Conscience (if A Conservative

E U.5"SupR M
Cou T ScNaa ,
,N EG t"it t+ tZul!NG
s oT r .
t ,w of ,
,. lp a
. r ,M~


Q .
; - = :
Oti. - i r..
r -
y Y

With Good Old Comed
IF GEORGE M. COHAN wasn't the most profound playwright in
American theatre, he was undoubtedly one of its finest entertainers.
And a play by an entertainer rather than a playwright can be a
dangerous thing if it falls into the wrong hands. But fortunately for
the late Mr. Cohan, and Ann Arbor theatre-goers as well, about a
dozen and a half of the rightest hands possible are tickling the ribs
of Cohan's "The Tavern," a melo-dramatic, pseudo-satiric farce in
Lydia Mendelssohn this week.
Flawless timing, slapstick antics, and several rather dusty lines
are flung around the stage with slap and polish that makes this 1920
vehicle play like the wind, even in spots where it seems a bit winded.
But where Cohan has weathered the years badly in a few comic lines,

ALMOST ALL phases of life these days are soon after the beginning of the Co
either the first, biggest, longest, oldest or 2600 bishops and cardinals voiced an
best that have ever been. This holds true even to this parochial tendency. \
for the Cathloic Church's Second Ecumenical The Pope heeded the opinions expr
Vatican Council. virtually changed the constituency oft
An Ecumenical Council is a meeting of the bers of the commissions, to be m
bishops and major prelates of the whole Ro- national and representative of the
man Catholic Church. This current council is Church.
only the 21st in the 2000 year history of the
Catholic Church. It is called by a Pope for NOW INSTEAD OF the academic
the purpose of discussing and acting on mat- sterile outlook which comes fr
ters of concern to the entire Church. representatives of the Curia, an em
In the past such Councils have been called being placed on the opinions and w
to deal with a specific problem or heresy, a the pastorally active bishops andp
fact which sets this Council apart from its hasrequired no small sacrifice on th
predecessors immediately, since there is no these prelates to give up the adminis
current dispute or particular abuse which would their home dioceses to come to Ron
necessitate a calling of the Bishops. Still, their active participation offe
hope that the grass roots aspect of th
ROPE JOHN XXIII had a much more positive will come to the fore in discussions;
reason. He is aiming to modernize the scholarly will be left where it belong
Church, to re-examine some of the positions library. In a Council called to re
and doctrines "to give the Church the pos- Church better to fit into a world w
sibility to contribute more efficaciously to the tional boundaries and sentiments ar
solution of the problems of the modern age." becoming obsolete, it was absolutely i
The Pope, when he decided to convene the that the gathering express the sentim
Council, was concerned with the adaptation of concerns of representatives from all
ecclesiastical institutions to modern needs. the world.
This does not mean simply the "liberaliza- Another distinctive feature of this
tion" of some of the traditional rules. He has which again stresses its forward loo
started with a more basic consideration-the the Pope asked heads of all Cathol
character of the Council. in the world, the faculties of leading
universities and theological centers, an
THINKING OF the need to renovate and to individuals to send to Rome theirs
adapt the interior life of the Church, he for a possible agenda.
decided that the Council would have a moreT
pastoral character than the doctrinal attitude THE FINAL list of subjects to b
of the preceding ones. This means an un- arose from the concern of those acti
precedented break from the domination by the life of the Church. Also, much atte
Roman Curia, the hierarchy and decision- paid to public opinion in official an
making bodies. circles concerning the needs of the C
The Curia is that facet of the Church which this moment in world hitory. Public
has always done the "desk" jobs from inside were also used to sound out the view
Rome proper. These officials of the Church clergy and laity in dioceses and count
carry no, difference in rank from that of pas- phases of work of the Council have
toral priests and bishops, but they have had termined by that aspect of the Chu
considerable influence. There is no doubt that has its finger on the proverbial pulE
the Italian segment of the Church has run it modern world-not those operatingf
in the past. Pope John has taken a mammoth confines of the Roman Curia. The tr
step towards the de-centralization of Church ists have lost this round to the innov
authority solely by increasing the numbers of The modern trend which demands
pastoral bishops attending the Council. of efficiency from any convened body
Only some 38 per cent of the representatives likely not be realized in Rome. W
will be from Europe, with 31.5 per cent from expect drastic changes-even in tho
North and South America, 10 per cent from changeable in the Church-to come e
Africa and 20.5 per cent from Asia and Oceania. from the Council. They will be deal
Earlier Councils seldom represented little more subjects which have caused contro
than the area in which they were held. The the entire 2,000 in some cases.
delegation of United States bishops is the The 14 basic commissions will be d
second largest, outnumbered only by the these subjects: theological questions,
Italians. and diocesan government, disciplinea
and laity, religious order, discipline
BUT THIS is only numerical, and thus a sacraments, sacred liturgy, semina
superficial majority. How the influence, universities, oriental Churches, Cath(
which will be running the discussions, has been sions, lay apostolate, ceremonial pre
divided is the real story-and it is here that information media, union of all Christ
Pope John shows his willingness to brush aside administrative secretariats.
precedent and traditions when he feels they T
are outdated. T IS IMPOSSIBLE to predict wheth
In June 1960 a Central Preparatory Com- can or will be taken in these ar
mission and 14 specialized commissions were agenda is not unchangeable; and p
established to deal with the specific cate- can and have been broken-as is seer
gories of questions confronting the Council. first move of the Council to moderniz
Heading these Commissions were for the most nationalize, and decentralize the Churc
part representatives of the Roman Curia. changes it appears can be made witho
This stress would have indicated a greater to the basic structure-on the contr
concern for doctrinal issues and ecclesiastical may be a much needed spurt of ene
procedures than for problems of the pastoral new vitality into the lifestream of the
administration and lay expression. However, -MALINDA B
Cornell Suspension Unjustified

uncil, the
essed and.
the men-
re inter-
and often
om those
nphasis is
)rkings of
priests. It
he part of
tration of
rs a solid
he Church
; and the
s-in the
ovate the
where na-
re rapidly
rents and
parts of
k, is that
c dioceses
nd private
e treated
ve in the
ntion was
d private
hurch at
s of both
tries. The
been de-
urch that
se of the
from the
will most
e cannot
se things
ach week
ing with
versy for
of clergy
e of the
ries and
oliC mis-
ians and
er action
ni by this
e, inter-
h. These
ut harm
ary, this
ergy and,


. t
i _
e° s.,

'cr .s. ..s

Policy Re eain~sRestrictive

he remains a marvelously gifted
craftsman of the elements of both
farce and satire.
* 4' *
ELLIS RABB as director and
the Vagabond, leads a uniformly
worthy cast through a night of
mingled hysteria and hysterics.,.He
reads every line like a travesty on
Christopher Fry interpreted by a
parody on Young Abe Lincoln,,
singing, dancing, strutting, and
at one point, launching a prolong-
ed aside at the audience which
makes the first rows squirm.
Rosemary Harris flits and twit-
ters around the stage, lisping out
an ingenue which must set silent
-movie stars spinning in their
chairsat Elizabeth Arden's. At
one point she flutters hysterically
so close to the roaring open fire
that she is endangered of cremat-
ing herself, but it does nothing
to quell her spirits.
* * *
IT IS USELESS to pretend that
everyone on stage is slightly in-
sane. The actors play together
with such intense belief, that the
spectator is constantly suspicious
that he is the one who is beig
persecuted. Rabb as the director
has second-guessed Cohan at every
step of the way, and builds climax
upon climax with arec'sion which
leaves the audience very little time
to catch a breath between belly-
laughs. At the risk of taking any-
one too seriously, the APA takes no
one seriously, and the result is the
kind of humor for humor's sake
that is sadly absent in the Amer;-
an theatre today.
AS FOR the. occasional .lapses
in sustained humor, it might be
speculated that with George M.
Cohan on stage in this play, as
he was in the Twenties, the entire
work may have benefited so from
his presence as to off-set any
discrepancies in dramatic-satiric
writing, but it is hard to imagine
any play receiving a more hilarious
production from a group of plsy-
ers than the APA is giving "The
Tavern." Those who constantly
complain that humio "ain't what
it used to be." will be delighted
to learn that for one weei in Ann
Arbor, at least, it is.
--Jack lG. O'Brien

Old Comedy
"BOMBSHELL" starring Jean
Harlow is an example of what
the ravages of time can do to
Hollywood comedies.
The story of Lola Burns, fa-
mous Hollywood star and heroine
of our picture, is basically a good
one. It was the antecedent of a
modern movie type-witness "Will
Success Spoil Rock Hunter?" and
multi others. But "Bombshell" had
it first; and, were it not for its
manner of comedy now outdated
and its generally-disdained style
of slapstick then popular, had it
* * *
LOLA BURNS is beset by head-
line-hungry newspapermen and
liquor-hungry relatives; they try
to run her life for their own. gain.
A Lola trying to be her "own
simple self" and in so doing play-
ing the role for herself, produce
the comedy. A few times the pic-
ture comes close to being tragi-
comedy as Lola's attempts to
adopt a baby are foiled by a pub-
licity 'stunt concocted by her
"friend" the publicity man.
* * *
BUT IN the main, the picture
is indeed, as the schedule an-
nounces, a comedy. The gags are
outworn, many of them too ob-
vious for modern audiences; and
the more serious scenes risk corni-
* *
SOME OF the expressions used
in the movie have a certain aura
of charm - "Gosh!" say the char-
acters when they are mad, tired
and surprised. "Ain't that a load
of oysters?" asks Lola plaintively.
"Bombshell" is what people
laughed and cried at in the Thir-
ties. For many, this is the only op-
portunity to see the famed Jean
Harlow, toast of Hollywood in her
day. It's not my idea of sophisti-
cated comedy, but it's worth it
just to see her.
--Ruth IHetmanski


DESPITE a letter of vigorous
protest by twenty student lead-
ers, the Regents included restric-
tive clauses in the bylaw on speak-
er policy that they passed yester-
So that there shall be no doubt
about what the letter and this edi-
torial refer to, here are the exact
"The speaker must not advocate
or urge the audience to take ac-
tion which is prohibited by the
rules of the University or which
is illegal under federal or state
law. Advocating or urging the
modification of the government of
the United States or of the State
of Michigan by violence, r sabo-
tage is specifically prohibited. It
is the responsibility of the student
organization to inform speakers of
these prohibitions .. .
"Any student organization vio-
lating the provisions of this bylaw
is subject to the procedures and
penalties applicable to students
and student o~ganizations that
violate other University rules."
* * *
THE LETTER that the twenty
student leaders sent to the Re-
gents protests these restrictions.
The protest was not prepared by a
few radical fanatics; signing the
letter were respected leaders of
many different organizations, in-
dicating widespreadand thought-
ful opposition. Those who signed
the letter were:
Margaret Skiles, president of
the Women's League; Robert
Ross, chairman of Voice Political
party; Mary Beth Norton, presi-
dent of Women's Assembly Asso-
ciation; Michael Olinick, editor of
The Daily - all Student Govern-
ment Council members; Kenneth
Miller, Sharon Jeffrey and Howard
Abrams, also SGC members;
Mal Warwick, chairman of the
Young Democratic Club; Ralph
Kaplan, chairman of SGC's Com-
mittee on the University; Eleanor
Winn, chairman of SGC's Inter-
national Relations Board; Herbert
Heidenreich, chairman of SGC's
HumanyRelations Board; Jesse
McCorry, former chairman of
SGC's Committee on Membership
in Student Organizations;
Douglas Peacock, chairman of
the Special Projects committee of
the Union; Ruth Galanter, mem-
ber and former chairman of the
Literary College Steering Commit-
tee; Paul Potter, former National
Affairs Vice-President of the Unit-
ed States National Student Asso-
ciation; Thomas Hayden, presi-
dent of Students for a Democratic
Society and former Daily editor;
Joan Schloeslinger, vice-president
of the Association for Commit-
ment to World Responsibility; Mi-
chael Seliger, personnel chairman
of Inter-Cooperative Council;
Ronald Newman, C h alle ng e
spokesman; and Judith Oppen-
heim, Daily editorial director.
THE LETTER, about 900 words
long, makes three main points:
First, rather than abolish prior
censorship, the new bylaw places
the responsibility for prior censor-
ship upon the organizations them-
selves. "To ask student organiza-
tions to practice prior censorship
is to ask them to develop habits
of thought and behavior which are
directly contrary to a potentially
rich American tradition of free-
dom of speech."
Second, rather than "liberaliz-
ing" the old bylaw by deleting the
vague phrase "accepted code of

have the University exercise po-
lice powers over speech which par-
allel and even exceed those of the
federal, state and municipal au-
thorities. "Should not a University
be especially jealous of those free-
doms which enrich and develop
the intellect? Is not controversy
and the presentation of conflict
.essential to growth, respon-
sibility and mature citizenship?"
These are good arguments. The
first two were made previously on
this editorial page. The third
bears examination:
THE University is a constitu-
tionally independent and generally
free institution. It should be the
most free of all institutions in this
democratic republic because it
needs the maximum of flexibility
examining all findings, policies
and philosophies.
The University should be a lead-
er. The students' letter stresses
this. The Regents were being lead-
ers when they decided to revise
the old bylaw on speakers. The
University was acting as a leader
when it permitted Carl Braden
and Frank Wilkinson to speak
here a day after they were banned
from Wayne State University and
at the same time that Michigan
State University wasbanning a
Communist from speaking on
campus there.
University President Harlan
Hatcher was a leader then, too; he
refused to give in to pressures to
prevent Braden and Wilkinson
from speaking here, a day after
the president of Wayne State Uni-
versity banned them from that
campus, and at the same time that
the president of Michigan State
University was going along with
a ban of a Communist from that
* * *
dent and a majority of the Re-
gents have compromised their
leadership. President Hatcher in
his own speeches continually de-
fends a spirit of free inquiry for
the University, but at the same
time he has been defending the
new policy with. its continued -
and added - restrictions. This is
in sharp contrast with President
Marion Burton's vigorous cam-
paign for a freer speaker policy in
the early 1920's, a campaign in
opposition to the Regents' restric-
tions on free inquiry.
Those who defend the new
speaker policy assert that it is a
"liberalization." This is a difficult
matter to judge; and the same can
be said of the two previous major
OBSERVERS from states where
violence and disorder mark the
race relations front try to tell us
we cannot maintain an island of
law and order within the Mag-
nolia State.
We not only think we can, but
we pointedly and sincerely are
dedicated to trying. Gov. Barnett
is leading the state in this en-
deavor, and the state is unified
behind him in this crusade as sel-
dom it has been united in any
* * *
What you are seeing today is a
gigantic profile in courage. This
profile follows the boundary lines
of the state of Mississippi in every
(Ta Nuwcalcnr ,a, a Nv

revisions. This year's revision is
similar to the past revisions in
that it subtracts one restriction
and adds a new one. Let's examine
this matter:
* * *
THE University's first speaker
policy was in effect from 1913 to
1920 and prohibited all partisan
speeches, and the Regents inter-
preted "partisan" loosely enough
to prevent former United States
President William Howard Taft
from discussing the League of Na-
tions when he spoke here.
The 1920 revision in speaker
policy consisted of changing the
full ban on partisanship to a par-
tial ban: private organizations
such as the Young Republicans
could have partisan speakers at
closed meetings. But at the same
time the Regents added the ban
on advocacy of violent overthrow
of the government. This provision
has been used ever since to keep
Communists from speaking on
The 1949 revision erased alto-
gether the ban on partisanship.
But it added the silly but menac-
ing ban on speeches that would
advocate violation "of our funda-
mental code of morals."
THIS year's revision - so far-
strikes out this phrase, transfers
the responsibility of precensorship
from the University to the spon-
soring organization (under threat
of punishment, including non-
recognition), and adds a ban on
advocacy of action "prohibited by
the rules of the University ord.
illegal under federal or state law"
If the scope of inquiry and dis-
cussion has been widened in this
year's revision - as it was some-
what in the previous two revisions
-it has not been widened much.
In fact, some speeches permitted
before may be punishable now,
such as speeches advising students
(in the words of the letter) "to
oppose, in the form of civil dis-
obedience, manifestations of rac-
ism." The letter asks:
"Would you (the Regents) not
admit that it is part of the legiti-
mate and in fact desirable contro-
versy of intellectual life if we wer
to debate among ourselves the
prudence of boycotting the student
judiciary system unless certain re-
forms are made in that system?"
Regent Power said last week
that there has to be some respon-
sibility and that the new bylaw
places it on the sponsoring organi-
zation. However, the responsibility
for an idea should rest with the
person presenting the idea. In a
democratic republic each citizen
holds his individual fellow citizens
accountable for what they say;
otherwise how could Congression-
al representation and libel laws
be effective? Another example:
The Daily has all editorials signed;
the opinions expressed are those
of the writer.
* * *
THE University's speaker policy
should be based on the University's
obligation to be a free forum for
ideas. The University should foster
a spirit of free inquiry. Agreement
is so substantial on this that the
new bylaw states these two points.
But at the same time the bylaw
violates them by placing a perim-
eter on the scope of ideas that a
speaker can advocate.
The spirit of free inquiry, of the
expression of all viewpoints, no
matter how hateful or odious, of
the open-mindedness to hear all
sides, no matter how controversial,
9a, cg nanernc tha ,nnr TTnirvovt

Our Football Failure

THE SUSPENSION of a graduate student
from Cornell University once more raises
the question of student conduct in relation to
a university's concept of correct student action.
In this case, it is not so much a question of
whether the student's'or the university's prin-
ciples of morality are valid, but whether the
student was fully aware of the implications of
his actions and knew what his punishment
would be. The Cornell graduate student unfor-
tunately did not know and he was suspended.
The student was found to be living with a
woman in his apartment. The woman was not
a Cornell student. On the basis of a faculty
.committee recommendation he was suspended
from the university for conduct not complying
with the student code.
But the student code does not specifically
outlaw living with a woman. The code is not
clear as to whether or not' it even deals with
graduate students at all. In fact, the student
was suspended for not complying with univer-
sity policy, a vague statement which could
mean almost anything.
T HE STUDENT in this case is to be pitied;
he could not know whether.the code applied
to him, he could not know that he would be
suspended. His education is interrupted and
partially lost by the suspension.
This is a situation which points to the neces-
sity of clarification in what a university ex-
pects from its students. If a student knows

Cornell is not an isolated case. At the Uni-
versity the policy includes the concept of con-
duct unbecoming a student. What this means
is never clearly defined in written form. Here
again, a student can act and not truly know
what will follow from his actions.
AT CORNELL, the student government is now
working to perfect a new student code which
will hopefully clarify the position of a student
regarding his actions. This code will need the
approval of the faculty. While it is doubtful
that the faculty will approve it, the whole series
of actions which have precipitated the. formu-
lation indicate a trend. Students everywhere
are now anxiously considering vague phrases
which can condemn their actions without
clearly defining what it is that has been done
"Conduct unbecoming a student" and other
phrases such as this necessarily -imply an ar-
bitrary policy which can be administered by
whoever is conducting an inquiry into student
conduct. While it is relatively easy to condemn
an individual for stealing a car since this is a
blatant transgression of a law known to all,
it is not easy to decide a case involving student
conduct since there is no law which is specific
enough to be broken literally. Therefore the
interpretation of the policy becomes the de-
ciding factor.
jNCIDENTS at Cornell have hastened action

To The Editor:
I SAW it all happen on the floor
of the Spartan stadium Satur-
day afternoon, 28-0.
We have apparently reached our
nadir of collegiate' football so the
only question to be answered now
is, "where do we go from here?"
It all started with Bennie's refusal
to recruit good football players
and is now ending with Dr. Hatch-
er and his educators reigning su-
preme so that Bump and his
splendid coaching staff find it im-
possible to get the nucleus of a
good ball club in school and keep
them there.
What does this leave in the way
of possibilities? There are only
one of three things we can do!
First, we can deemphasize football.
and schedule Yale and Harvard
with the idea of taking more of a
licking for the next five or six
years as the schedules for this
period are already contracted.
Needless to say the basketball,
track and swimming teams will
not have money to travel or equip
themselves but let the educators
take care of such trivial pecuniary
With seven home football games
the gross income is about $3,500,-
000, if the stadium is filled, and
with the recent outputs and the
way things are going they won't
be able to fill the Slippery Rock
bowl. Shall we let the taxpayers
take care of it?
* * *
THE SECOND thing we can do
is try to continue as we are with
a fine gang of fellows on the foot-
ball team 'who are taking a beat-
ing in a losing cause. This is not
a fault or theirs or of Bump's..
Everyone suffers including the
team, the excellent coaching staff
and the alumni. I wish it were
possible for Hatcher and his edu-
cators to be lined up on the turf
Saturday at Lafayette and pay for
their perfidy. It is too bad they
cannot take the physical ani
mental whipping and not the team
and coaching staff.
The third and only answer is to

I understand Hatcher still has
Ohio State banners in the kids
rooms so we might try to find if
he is wearing Scarlet and Gray or
Maize and Blue. Frankly, I think
we need a Micigan alumnus as
our leader like Alex 'Ihat, or let's
go the way of te University of
Chicago and forget the whole bit.
Can't anyone do afiytbing?
-Thomas S. Dornan '50
T*hanks *
To the Editor:
on again off again Clamor, I
feel compelled to offer thanks for
your concern. Your articles serve
to provide the information and
support we should have had from
our own local daily.
Those of us involved in protest
here at Flint Community Junior
College are beginning to question
whether education here is not the
very rotten core of which you
write, after seeing the displays of
indecision and vascillation here
by various student government of-
ficials and students generally.
We are summarily .concluding
that this demonstration or lack
thereof is a logical conclusion to
14 years of conditioning (i.e. edu-
cation) by the Flint public school
system. When there exists a
frightening continuity of policy
from kindergarten through the
second year of college, perhaps we
should not be .surprised at a lack
of concern. No third grader would
ever question the principal's right
to a paddle and far too many J C
students docially accept the dean's
possession of a honed axe.
A few of us have wondered
whether FJC students deserve a
College Clamor. The issue is not
one of worthiness; instead it is
one of the right (earned or not)
to freedom of the press.
--Chris Decker,
Feature Editor,
Flint Community
Junior College

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan