The "Ratzinger Letter" of 1986 as "Theological Pornography"

In the 1989 anthology Christianity, Patriarchy, and Abuse: A Feminist Critique, Catholic theologian Mary Hunt has an insightful essay entitled “Theological Pornography: From Corporate to Communal Ethics.”

Hunt approaches pornography using “three simple but inclusive categories”:

First, pornography objectifies persons. It makes them the object of perverted fantasies that bear little resemblance to real life. Second, pornography trivializes sexuality. It turns sexuality into distorted, usually violent images of women and children (sometimes men as well) subjected to the whims of others. Third, pornography leads to violence. There is debate as to whether pornography causes violence by suggestion or inhibits it by allowing people to act out in print and on film what they wish to do in person. My claim is simply that pornography and violence are deeply intertwined.

Hunt then proceeds to examine and identify as theological pornography the 1986 letter by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” (often called the Halloween Letter by its detractors, as it was released in late October 1986). For many Catholics – gay and straight – this letter and, in particular, the terminology it introduced to describe the homosexual orientation, remains a source of great contention.

Following are more excerpts from Mary Hunt’s critique of “the Ratzinger letter” as theological pornography.

___________________________________

Among the letter’s outrageous assertions is that homosexual tendency, and not simply homosexual behavior, is wrong. The letter states that the condition or tendency is “ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” This view has not been warmly received by lesbian and gay Catholics. The letter, apart from its content, represents a corporate approach to ethics, which produces pornography so regularly that few readers give it much attention.

The letter is a classic in the genre of theological pornography. First, it objectifies person, making no distinction between lesbian women and gay men. Neither does it make any distinction between persons who are homosexual by orientation, much less by choice, a category that does not seem to exist for the cardinal and his writers, and those who engage in homosexual activity but in fact may be heterosexual.

The letter gives no evidence of specific cases of homosexual behavior that modern psychology calls healthy, good, and natural. There is no effort to consult the data of the social or behavioral sciences. Careful ethicists find an abundance of psychological and sociological evidence showing that homosexuality is normal human behavior for a substantial percentage of the population.

Amazingly, there is little grappling with the basic theology of creation in the letter. Lesbian women and gay men are created in the image and likeness of the same God/ess as heterosexual people, not in the objectified, pornographic image of some lesser divinity.

Finally, the letter itself pronounces its message in the name of the whole church, as if this were the Word of God/ess. Such gross objectifications of persons, including the writer and team who produced this analysis, would be something to ignore if so many people were not affected by it. Like pornography available to children in the convenience store on the corner, this kind of dehumanizing and false portrayal parades as truth. It creates an environment in which sincere believers are seduced.

. . . The Ratzinger letter is pornographic, second, because it trivializes sexuality. It takes an integral part of human beings – our potential to love and be loved, to express that love in an embodied, genital way if we choose – and telescopes it into a narrowly focused fetish. Would that the writers had real experience of warm, loving, committed friendship in which sexual expression flows naturally. At least they could have consulted people who do have such friendships before publishing such material in the name of the whole church. Instead, they imagine or project onto others forms of behavior that simply do not correspond with reality. They trivialize sexuality by condemning what is part of many people’s responsible, human experience.

. . . The third characteristic of theological pornography found in the Ratzinger letter is the close connection between pornography and violence. The letter itself almost invites discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. It includes a disturbingly violent section: “When civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase . . .”

In the present homophobic, heterosexist climate, this sounds like an open invitation to violence. It seems to be a way of saying that boys will be boys. “Gay bashing” and instances of lesbians being attacked and raped for not conforming to heterosexist patriarchy are all but excused.

Perhaps the best thing that can be said for the Ratzinger letter is that it helped clarify what is really going on. We cannot forget that Rome used the same dynamic for the “natural resemblance” theory in 1976, which effectively erased the possibility of women’s ordination. Women do not bear a natural resemblance to Jesus in the Eucharist.

Again, we see the objectification of women and of Jesus, the trivialization of sexuality as if it were pertinent to ministry, and the unleashing of violence against faithful people who will be deprived of the eucharist due to a shortage of priests.


For more of Mary Hunt’s insights at The Wild Reed, see:
Mary Hunt: “Catholicism is a Very Complex Reality”
Our Catholic “Stonewall Moment”
Crisis? What Crisis?
A Mountain Out of a Molehill
A Time to Re-Think the Basis and Repair the Damage

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Pope’s “Scandalous” Stance on Homosexuality
And a Merry Christmas to You Too, Papa
Listen Up, Papa!
A Catholic’s Prayer for His Fellow Pilgrim, Benedict XVI
The Blood-Soaked Thread
The Catholic Church and Gays: An Excellent Historical Overview
What the Vatican Can Learn from the X-Men
John McNeill’s Message to the U.S. Bishops: “Enough!”
When “Guidelines” Lack Guidance
Be Not Afraid, You Can Be Happy and Gay
The Bishops’ “Guidelines”: A Parent’s Response
What Is It That Ails You?

Images: Catholic Rainbow Parents Darlene White and Mary Lynn Murphy protest the Courage Apostolate and its unquestioning support of Vatican rhetoric regarding homosexuality and homosexual persons - University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, August 2003. (To read more about this protest, click here.)

Scandalous News from Maine

I can’t tell you how disappointing and, well, scandalous, I find the following news:

Bishop Richard Malone of Portland – whose diocese covers the entire State of Maine – has asked all parishes to take up a second collection to support Stand for Marriage Maine. The organization is the principal force behind a November ballot initiative in which voters will decide whether to overturn the state’s new same-sex marriage law, which was approved by the legislature and signed by Catholic Governor John Baldacci in May.

For full story, click here.


This news isn’t just scandalous because of its clear demonstration of just how out-of-whack the priorities are of the Catholic hierarchs in Maine, but also because it highlights just how mean-spirited these same hierarchs are choosing to be when it comes to responding to same-gender couples willing (and actually able in Maine) to enter into civil marriage.

Honestly, if members of the Roman Catholic hierarchy are that concerned about “marriage” being redefined, then why don’t they push for that word to be reserved for religious use, and support “civil unions” for both gay and straight people in the civil arena? For many, this would be a win/win situation. Gay folks get the same civil rights and responsibilities as their straight counterparts, and those Catholics and others concerned about the “sanctity” of marriage, i.e., “holy matrimony,” get to keep and use that word for their religious purposes. Problem solved.

Of course, we won’t see such resolution by the time of Bishop Malone’s “second collection” to fund the hierarchy’s opposition to same-sex civil marriage. Accordingly, I hope we see the good folks in the Roman Catholic pews throughout Maine use this “second collection” as an opportunity to convey both their displeasure and disagreement with Bishop Malone. For instance, I hope people vocally challenge the bishops and priests when they announce this collection during Mass. And I hope some refuse to pass on the collection plate. Another strategy that I hope is enacted: messages added to the first collection plate notifying Bishop Malone that money is being withheld from the diocese and given instead to LGBT-supportive organizations until the time that the hierarchy stops meddling in the civil arena with regard the issue of same-sex civil rights.

Anyway, as always, I appreciate Michael Hamer’s no-holds-barred appraisal of this (and other) “scandals” within Roman Catholicism. Writes Michael:

There are times I truly wonder what alternate universe was the place of origin for members of the Roman Catholic Church. For an institution plagued by a world wide sex abuse scandal, falling membership and revenues in areas of the developed world, and a increasingly elderly and doddering priesthood, one would think that the Church fathers would have better things to focus on rather than fighting in opposition to recognition of committed, monogamous same-sex unions. First, there is Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, who instead of focusing on the horrific abuses that occurred in Catholic children’s homes and other Church run institutions in Ireland as revealed in a government report earlier in the year, has his panties all in a wad over CIVIL law recognition of same-sex civil unions. . . . I can only surmise that the good cardinal is trying desperately to change the topic from that of the Church’s failures and guilt.

. . . The Church’s hypocrisy [is] not limited to the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. In Maine where Catholic parishes are being closed and consolidated due to declining membership and/or revenues, the bitter queens in the Church hierarchy are nonetheless contributing moneys to over turn same-sex marriage legislation passed earlier this year. . . . The main stock in trade of the [Roman] Catholic Church nowadays seems to be hypocrisy as opposed to preaching the Gospel of Christ.

To read Michael’s commentary in its entirety, click here.


I also appreciate the perspective of “Chance” from Scarborough, Maine, who in May of this year posted the following in response to this article on the Catholic News Agency website:

A notary/justice of the peace in Maine has the legal authority to marry people. Under the law, marriage requires 1) a paid marriage license from the town hall 2) two witnesses 3) signature of the notary. Under the law, marriage does NOT require: blessings from any church or religious entity or a covenant with God. If a notary were to use their legal authority to marry two atheists, so long as they had their marriage license, two witnesses, and notary signature, that completed marriage certificate becomes, under the law, a binding legal document. That document does not require that they bear children; it does not require that they be married in a church. Religion, pro-creation, and divine covenants have no place in the marriage discussion under civil law, none.

There is no need to attack or defend religion as it applies to this discussion. Simply put, religion is moot as it applies to marriage under the law.

The actual issue here is about equal rights, not religious views. Excluding a person from marriage, or a job, or a place to live, under the law, based on a demographic (race, age, sexual orientation) is discrimination. I am not capable, in my heart or my mind, of discrimination. I have nothing but love for you all. God bless the faithful! Peace, joy, and love to the non-believer. I ask that you take all people one at a time, and extend equal rights to all people under the law.

Recommended Off-site Links:
Bishop Orders Statewide Second Collection to Oppose Same-Sex Marriage - Catholic Culture (September 7, 2009).
Irish Cardinal Urges Opposition to Homosexual Civil Unions - Catholic News Agency (August 25, 2009).
In Maine, Catholics Won’t Name Source of $100,000 Contribution to Anti-gay Campaign. What Are They Trying to Hide? - Joe Sudbay (AmericaBlog.com, July 18, 2009).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Misplaced Priorities of the Catholic Church in Maine
The Pope’s “Scandalous” Stance on Homosexuality
Why the Bishop’s Are Being Ignored
Maine Becomes Sixth State to Allow Same-Sex Marriage
Love and Justice in the Heartland
The Same Premise
Same-Sex Marriage: Still Very Much on the Archbishop’s Mind
What Straights Can Learn from Gay Marriage
The Same People
Love is Love
The Changing Face of “Traditional Marriage”
The Real Gay Agenda

In the Garden of Spirituality – Joyce Rupp

.

“We are not on earth to guard a museum,
but to cultivate a flowering garden of life.”

– Pope John XXIII

The Wild Reed’s series of reflections on religion and spirituality continues with an excerpt from that part of Joyce Rupp’s book, Prayer, in which she reflects on the gift of grace.

_______________________

We are mistaken if we think we can grow spiritually by our own efforts. This is actually the opposite of how prayer “works.” In prayer, we bring ourselves to the entryway of our relationship with the Holy One, but it is God “who is able to accomplish far more than all we can ask or imagine.” Divine power at work in us gives us what we need in order for our prayer to be a catalyst for union and transformation (Eph. 3:20).

The divine vigor stirring within us is grace, the loving energy of God’s movement. This gift enables us to grow into the person we are meant to be. The marvelous thing about grace is that it is freely contributed by God. We cannot force it to be given to us. We struggle fruitlessly if we try to grasp this gift in our clutches. What grace necessitates from us is our receptivity.

. . . Always divine grace draws us into relationship and encourages us into fuller life. Grace leads us into prayer and moves us out again. . . . [Like Jesus] we, too, are led (and sometimes driven) to union with the Holy One. We cannot control, force, or manipulate our relationship with God in prayer. Like Jesus, this encounter takes place when our spirit is ripe for it. If we are ready and willing to be graced, God enters in to reach and teach us in surprising ways. Through prayer we discover how God is present to us, guiding and encouraging us along the way.

Nurturing presence,
I turn the ears of my heart
in full attention to your voice.
I lean to catch the whispers
of your abiding love.
May I be ever and always open
to the countless places and times
you call me into relationship with you.

See also the previous Wild Reed post:
• Karl Rahner on the Need for Prayer

Others highlighted in The Wild Reed’s “In the Garden of Spirituality” series include:
Zainab Salbi, Daniel Helminiak, Rod Cameron, Paul Collins, Joan Chittister, Toby Johnson, Joan Timmerman, Uta Ranke-Heinemanm, Caroline Jones, Ron Rolheiser, James C. Howell, Paul Coelho, Doris Lessing, Michael Morwood, Kenneth Stokes, Dody Donnelly, Adrian Smith , Henri Nouwen, Patrick Carroll, Jesse Lava, and Geoffrey Robinson.

Image: Michael J. Bayly.

River Walk

Earlier this evening, I accompanied my friends Kathleen and Joey to the banks of the Mississippi River in Minneapolis.

I’m actually more use to seeing this part of the shoreline from the St. Paul side of the river - as where we were this evening is opposite my favorite place on the river, atop the bluffs below the University of St. Thomas.

After our walk along the river, Kathleen, Joey, and I saw the film Up at the Riverview Theater in South Minneapolis.



Above: Joey and Kathleen.

Around this time last year, Kathleen, Joey, and I had just returned to the Twin Cities from our road trip to St. Louis.







Above: Signs of approaching autumn. Where did the summer go? And why so fast?


Above: Wild (Mississippi) reeds.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Down By the River
A Delightful Summer’s Afternoon and a Moving Tale
Karl Rahner on the Need for Prayer

Images: Michael J. Bayly.

Downhearted

Tonight’s Wild Reed “Friday night music spot” features the promotional video for “Downhearted,” the third single released by the Australian surf rock band Australian Crawl from their 1980 debut album, The Boys Light Up.

“Downhearted” was released in May 1980 and reached #12 on the Australian Singles Chart in July of that year.

I left my heart back in the Orient
down on Bali bays
It’s not the way that I should feel
but it’s the way I’m going to stay

Downhearted
Broken dreams that never really started
Yeah, downhearted
Broken dreams that never really start

It seems all wrong back here at home
There’s no end in sight
Should I be made to drag you through
this lovers endless fight?

Downhearted
Broken dreams that never really started
Yeah, downhearted
Broken dreams that never really start

I sometimes I think that we should stay
happy on the farm
I sometimes I think that I’ll give it all away,
this love and all its charm

Downhearted
Broken dreams that never really started
Yeah, downhearted
Broken dreams that never really start

Australian Crawl was voted the Countdown 1981 Most Popular Group, and the band’s front man, James Reyne, was 1980 and 1981 Most Popular Male Performer. After the band split-up in 1986, Reyne went on to a successful solo career.

In my last year of high school (1983), during an excursion to Sydney from my rural hometown of Gunnedah, a number of my classmates spied James Reyne in an art gallery. Many of the girls went kinda ga-ga – so much so that security had to escort Reyne out a side door. As closeted as I was back then, I probably would’ve gone a bit ga-ga, too, had I seen him.

I remember James Reyne starring in a popular TV mini-series around that time; Return to Eden, it was called. Its plot was totally ridiculous and James wasn’t a very good actor. There was one brief scene, however, that left an indelible impression on me, and it involved James emerging from a Sydney Harbor-side pool in a pair of black speedos (see 1.28 in this YouTube video).

Now, at that time, I was pretty much involved in a lonely, inner struggle about simply the possibility that I was gay - a struggle I desperately tried to downplay, if not completely ignore. But watching that scene from Return to Eden . . . well, it stirred things up in me; brought certain realities to the fore. All of which made me profoundly uncomfortable.

Years later I attempted to convey this experience and others like it in my poem “Shards of Summer.” Also years later, a nun shared with me some words of wisdom that, looking back, are very appropriate to my coming out journey, heralded, in part, by the image of a speedo-wearing James Reyne: “The truth sets you free, but first it makes you uncomfortable.”


Musical artists previously featured at The Wild Reed”:
PJ and Duncan, Cass Elliot, The Church, Pet Shop Boys and Dusty Springfield, Wall of Voodoo, Stephen “Tin Tin” Duffy, Pink Floyd, Kate Ceberano, Judith Durham, Wendy Matthews, Buffy Sainte-Marie, 1927, Mavis Staples, Maxwell, Joan Baez, Tee Set, Darren Hayes, Suede, Wet, Wet, Wet, Engelbert Humperdinck, The Cruel Sea, Shirley Bassey, Loretta Lynn & Jack White, Maria Callas, Foo Fighters, Jenny Morris, Scissor Sisters, Kate Bush, Rufus Wainwright, and Dusty Springfield.

James Carroll on Catholic Understandings of Truth (Part 3)

Here is a third excerpt from Part 8 (“A Call for Vatican III”) of James Carroll’s book, Constantine’s Sword. You may recall how in the previous excerpt I shared Carroll’s contention that “revision, criticism, dialogue, and conversation are far more relevant to truth-seeking than conformity to dictation from above. This flies in the face not of Catholic tradition but recent Catholic tradition.”

You may also recall that I concluded the last installment with a number of questions posed by Carroll: “[Are] we condemned to a mindless pluralism that is ready to equate the shallow with the profound, the stupid with the wise, the cruel with the kind, all to avoid the monotony of the “one voice,” the tyranny of the self? Does subjectivity condemn the person to the tyranny of the self? Does subjectivity condemn the community to, in [theologian] David Tracy’s phrase, “the void of sheer fascination at our pluralistic possibilities?”

Following is how Carroll responds to these crucial questions.

________________________________________

Fearing the answer to [such] questions had to be yes, the Church set itself against democracy, and still openly regards pluralism with suspicion. But [William] Lynch, [David] Tracy, and others suggest that the antidote to the equivocation of modern skepticism is not the univocal but the “analogical imagination,” which, in its approach to truth, as Lynch puts it, “insists on keeping the same and the different, the idea and the detail, tightly interlocked in the one imaginative act.” Instead of a dualistic universe, with nature and grace impossibly alienated, or conformed into the mold of one or the other, the analogical imagination posits a world in which every affirmation contains its own “difference, without ever suffering the loss of its own identity.” Difference, therefore, is to be respected, not condemned.

This idea, rebutting the excommunicating either-or of scholasticism, returns us to the both-and mind of Abelard, whose Sic et Non affirmed doubt and ambiguity as essential to the theological method. And recall that, in that crusading era, Abelard stood apart from his peers in his inbuilt positive regard for Jews, as reflected in his Dialogue of a Philosopher with a Jew and a Christian. Alas, he too stood by a road not taken, but, with Nicolaus of Cusa, he lives on in the memory of the Church as a reminder that the road is still there.

Tracy explains the vivid connection between such a frame of mind and the respect for a formerly hated other: “We understand one another, if at all, only through analogies. Each recognizes that any attempt to reduce the authentic otherness of another’s focus to one’s own with our common habits of domination only seems to destroy us all, only increases the leveling power of the all-too-common denominators making no one at home. Conflict is our actuality. Conversation is our hope.”

Conversation is our hope. In that simple statement lies the kernal of democracy, which is based not on diktat but on the interchange of mutuality. . . . There is a special tragedy in the fact that, for contingent historical reasons, the Catholic Church set itself so ferociously against the coming of democracy – tragic because Christianity began its life as a small gathering of Jews who were devoted to conversation. . . . The assumption among the followers of Jesus was that they were all endowed with the wisdom, insight, maturity, and holiness necessary to contribute to the pursuit of the truth of who Jesus had been to them.

The religious language for this assumption had it that all believers were endowed with the Holy Spirit, which was seen to reside in the Church not through an ordained hierarchy but through all. That is why the apostolic writings are nothing if not manifestations of pluralism. Indeed, there are four Gospels, not one. Each has its slant, and each slant, in this community, has its place. “That there is real diversity in the New Testament should be clear to any reader of the text,” David Tracy comments, and he goes on to note that the first Christians could admit the validity of positions not their own – from the characteristics to the apocalyptics to the zealots to the prophets. There is even a diversity of images that disclose the meaning of Jesus’ life, with some giving emphasis to the ministry, some to the death, some to the symbolic assault on the Temple, some to the expected return. There are those who emphasized bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles and those who insist on the Gospel’s place within the hope of Israel. And because the texts gather all of this, honor it, and declare it all sacred, nothing could be further from the mind of the early Church than making its subjects conform to a narrowly defined “objective truth.” The Spirit was seen to be living in all, and the truth, for all, remained shrouded in mystery.


NEXT: Part 4


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
James Carroll on Catholic Understandings of Truth (Part 1)
James Carroll on Catholic Understandings of Truth (Part 2)
Thoughts on Authority and Fidelity
Genuine Authority
Comprehending the “Fullness of Truth”
Beyond Papalism
Thoughts on Relativism
Many Voices, One Church
“Something Exciting and Joyous”
What It Means to Be Catholic
Truth Telling: The Greatest of Sins in a Dysfunctional Church
Pan’s Labyrinth: Critiquing the Cult of Unquestioning Obedience
Dialogue is Key in Moving Past Theological Impasses

State Fair

My friend Kathleen and I spent yesterday afternoon and evening at the Minnesota State Fair. We had a great time!

I think it was the third time in my 15 years of living in the Twin Cities that I attended the State Fair. My last visit to the Fair was in 2007.

Above right: Kathleen and I sampling some of the locally-produced wines at the booth of the Minnesota Grape Growers Association.


Actually, before we hit the plonk, the first place we visited was the Fine Arts Pavilion (pictured at left).

I have friends who have long told me that the State Fair is a great place for taking photographs, and so that’s exactly what I decided to do - starting with some of the works inside the Fine Arts Pavilion that especially caught my attention.



Above: One of the works of art that definitely caught my attention was Donald A. Bajus’ “Time Travel 1510 Rome: Michelangelo and Me.”

I also enjoyed and appreciated Allen James Wood’s “I Am Knut” (right) and Ron Merchant’s “Street Series: Traffic Stop” (below).








Jars of colorful jams (above) and bottles of vinegar (below) in the Creative Arts Pavilion.




Above: Also in the Creative Arts Pavilion, beautiful textile artworks.



Above: Honey, honey, honey! But, alas, no buckwheat honey. They’d sold out earlier that day.



Above: A “crop art” portrait of President Obama!



Above: Good Gourd!



Above: The latest in . . . er . . . sheep wear!

I’d never visited the various animal barns during my previous visits to the State Fair. To be honest, it was rather depressing last night seeing the hundreds of chickens, ducks, geese, turkeys, sheep, pigs, cows, etc, in their pens and cages.

I was drawn to photograph the white rooster at left because of this.








Above: Closing up for the day. (Actually, I’d like to see all of us decide to close up shops like this for good! I think humanity will one day evolve to that point.)

Back in Australia, we don't have “fairs,” but rather “shows.” Many cities and towns have an annual show. I grew up, for instance, experiencing the Gunnedah Show. Australia’s biggest show is undoubtedly Sydney’s Royal Easter Show.


See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Out and About - August 2007
Everglades Exhibition
Northwoods
A Gay Presence at Pride
Billabong Koala Park

Images: Michael J. Bayly.

The Cowardice of Courage

By Christopher Howe
Guest Writer

On Tuesday, August 11, Michael asked supporters of The Wild Reed to contact the Courage Apostolate in New York. The American Psychological Association (APA) had just issued a public and pointed rebuke of therapies that seek to alter a person’s sexual orientation. I answered Michael’s call and sent the following email to Courage’s New York office.

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing to encourage “Courage Ministries” to accept the recent directive from the American Psychological Association (APA) that rules out “reparative therapy” for homosexual persons. It has been ruled out officially as a legitimate mental health approach.

Courage should remove any links to organizations or therapists which promote or defend reparative therapy. It should also state prominently in its publications that it does not endorse such techniques. To use an analogy: any medical organization that itself endorsed in any way or linked to any other organization that promoted "bleeding" for persons with infectious diseases would not only be mocked, but shunned by the public at large. Courage should classify reparative therapy in the same terms as bleeding.

Sincerely,

Christopher Howe

A couple of days later I was emailed this response:

Dear Mr Howe,

Courage is a spiritual support apostolate of the Roman Catholic Church. The Church teaches that there is no obligation for any person to undergo any psychological therapies at all. That said, Courage supports members who do desire to explore therapeutic options. We are with the Church . . . not the world.

The APA directive is written by a tiny 6-person task force, (who, not incidentally, admit to an activist bias and who allowed no dissenting voice onto their task force!) and approved by a committee . . . not by the full membership. It is certainly not the last word in science! We accept our directives from God through His competent authorities . . . and the APA isn't one of them. I don't mean to sound flip, but I am tired and it's Friday.

God bless you and Keep you in His Love.

Cordially in Christ,

Pat
Courage Office

I cannot say I was surprised, but that did not lessen my outrage. On the one hand, Courage seems to adopt a “hands off” attitude: “Oh, we really don’t endorse reparative therapy. We’re just communicating the many options available.” However, the second paragraph dismisses the APA’s report: “a tiny 6-person task force” with an “activist bias . . . approved by a committee . . . not the full membership.”

To me, this is disingenuous, condescending and dangerous:

1) The APA’s report clearly states that “gay reparative therapy” is not just a therapy without merit. Their review of many studies has shown that it can lead to depression and suicidal tendencies. More than a few gay men would shout, “Amen!” to that declaration. My allusion to bleeding, therefore, is quite apt. It would be inconceivable that any physician who would “just offer the option” of bleeding to a patient. That is an option that simply is not countenanced in modern medicine. It is positively harmful to one’s physical health. Likewise, reparative therapy to mental wholeness. The research seems clear: It is not a “neutral” therapy. It is often harmful and frequently fatal. It demonstrates gross irresponsibility for any organization that would claim to advocate for the Catholic “culture of life” to so much as allude to such therapies.

2) Had the full committee’s vote been less decisive (125-4 in favor of the report), Courage’s critique of a “tiny 6-person task force” with approval “by a committee . . . not the full membership” might have to be taken seriously. Moreover, I have not read a single article in which a significant number of mental health professionals has expressed umbrage at the methodology or conclusions of the APA’s committee. To draw a parallel: if a committee of world bishops had approved a synodal statement by this kind of margin, it would be taken very seriously, if not authoritatively, within most Catholic circles. For Courage to dismiss it so cavalierly only reinforces the criticism that the Catholic Church does not take the insights of the social sciences very seriously, in contrast to the call of the Second Vatican Council. Oh, and since when have God’s “competent authorities” instructed Courage to dismiss the APA?

___________________________________

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
• It's Official: APA Opposes "Reparative Therapy"
• The Continuum Just Shrank
• Holding the Courage Apostolate Accountable
• “Curing” Homosexuality
• Debunking NARTH (Part I)
• Debunking NARTH (Part II)
• What Scientists in the UK Are Saying About Homosexuality
• The Real Meaning of Courage
• The Many Forms of Courage (Part I)
• The Many Forms of Courage (Part II)
• The Many Forms of Courage (Part III)
• Beyond Courage

Recommended Off-site Links:
The APA Says “No Evidence” in Support of Ex-Gay Therapy - Wayne Besen (TruthWinsOut.org, August 5, 2009).
APA Passes Resolution Against Ex-Gay Therapy - Jim Burroway (Box Turtle Bulletin, August 5, 2009).
Exodus International Responds to the APA Resolution on Change Therapy - Jim Burroway (Box Turtle Bulletin, August 6, 2009).
NARTH Responds to the APA Resolution on Change Therapy - Jim Burroway (Box Turtle Bulletin, August 7, 2009).
Celibacy as a Therapy Goal - Wayne Besen (TruthWinsOut.org, August 6, 2009).

A "Stunning Turn": Bishop Martino Resigns

Last night my friend Connie alerted me to an interesting New York Times commentary by David Gibson, author of The Coming Catholic Church: How the Faithful are Shaping a New American Catholicism.

Gibson’s August 31 New York Times piece examines the “stunning” resignation of “hardline” bishop, Joseph F. Martino (pictured at right). Following is an excerpt.

____________________________________

The Roman Catholic bishop of Scranton is not normally known as a kingmaker – or kingbreaker – in electoral politics. But during last year’s presidential campaign, with pro-choice Catholic and Scranton native Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket, and the working-class voters of northeast Pennsylvania seen as keys to the keystone state and the Electoral College, Scranton suddenly moved to the spotlight.

And the local bishop, Joseph F. Martino, took full advantage of that platform. Martino became for many the angry face of the anti-Obama wing of the Catholic hierarchy thanks to his intemperate blasts about pro-choice politicians and an overweening administrative style that irritated the flock and even his brother bishops.

Now, in a stunning turn that has taken even veteran church-watchers by surprise, Martino on Monday resigned his post under highly unusual circumstances – citing the stress of the job and saying he could not continue in a post that should have been his for another dozen years, at least.

But church insiders say Martino had also worn out his welcome with his brother bishops and the Vatican. So his resignation may be further evidence that the U.S. hierarchy is divided between moderate voices and a more strident conservative minority that is struggling in the wake of Obama’s success with Catholic voters.

Martino is only 63, and adding to the air of mystery and suspicion surrounding his resignation, his auxiliary, or assistant bishop, also resigned at the same time. The resignation of the auxiliary, Bishop John M. Dougherty, was put down to age; he is 77, and the normal retirement age for bishops is 75. Martino’s sudden exit was officially chalked up to undisclosed “health reasons,” according to a statement from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishop in Washington, which said that Pope Benedict XVI had accepted Martino’s resignation.

But at a press conference Monday morning, Martino himself alluded to the divisions his style had brought to the diocese, and the toll it had taken on him mentally and physically: “For some time now there has not been a clear consensus among the clergy and people of the diocese of Scranton regarding my pastoral initiatives or my way of governance. This development has caused me great sorrow, resulting in bouts of insomnia and, at times, a crippling physical fatigue.”

“I seek forgiveness from anyone whom I may not have served adequately as bishop, due to my human limitations,” Martino said, adding later: “As the song says, you have to know when to hold them and when to fold them. And I think it’s time to move on.”

Many in Scranton, and beyond, would agree. In fact there are strong indications that Martino was pushed before he jumped. . . .

To continue reading Gibson’s commentary, click here.


Recommended Off-site Links:
Controversial Pennsylvania Bishop Resigns - Michael Paulson (Boston Globe, August 31, 2009).
In Scanton, the Curtain Falls - Rocco Palmo (Whispers in the Loggia, August 28, 2009).
Rumors, Resignations, and the Reform of the Reform - Colleen
Kochivar-Baker (Enlightened Catholicism, August 28, 2009).
The Church’s Mission: Turned Upside-Down by its Organization and Culture? - Paula Ruddy (Progressive Catholic Voice, September 1, 2009).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Bishops and Obama (Part 1)
The Bishops and Obama (Part 2)
What the Notre Dame Controversy is Really About & What's Really at Stake
Responding to Bishop “We Are at War” Finn
Weakland, the Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal, and Homophobia
Archbishop Nienstedt’s “Learning Curve”: A Suggested Trajectory
Why the Bishops Are Being Ignored
Will We See Change?
An Australian Bishop’s “Radical” Call for Reform
Bishop Thomas Gumbleton: “It Isn’t the Church You’re Being Asked to Say Yes To . . . It’s Jesus”
Gay Bishop Feels “No Diminution of God’s Love”