Thought for the Day: Ongoing Struggle to Find and Tell Truth as Heart of Artistic Endeavor

Artistic growth is, more than it is anything else, a refining of the sense of truthfulness. The stupid believe that to be truthful is easy; only the artist, the great artist, knows how difficult it is.

Willa Cather, The Song of the Lark (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1915), p. 409.

Thought for the Day: The Odd and Troublesome Focus of Contemporary Christians on Homosexuality

There is so much work to be done to battle against family breakdown and to encourage husbands and wives to strengthen their commitments to each other and to their children. It is, at best, odd and troublesome that religious traditions that have contributed so much to the just ordering of our public life should expend so much energy fighting the desire of homosexuals to have their own committed relationships respected by government, and their rights enshrined in law.

E.J. Dionne, Jr., Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics after the Religious Right (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2008), p. 115.

Frank Cocozzelli and Maggie Gallagher: The Voice(s) of American Catholicism

Frank Cocozzelli has an interesting essay entitled “Who Speaks for American Catholics?” at Talk to Action’s website (here). Cocozzelli notes the wide diversity of viewpoints of American Catholics on social and political issues, including issues with connections to Catholic moral teaching. As he notes, American Catholics frequently disagree with each other (and with official church teaching) on issues such as stem-cell research, abortion, and gay and lesbian rights.

Many of us find the political and moral positions of our brothers and sisters of the Catholic right morally repugnant precisely because of our commitment to Catholic moral teaching about economic and social justice and war and peace. As Cocozzelli rightly notes, “A strong case can be made that these icons of the Catholic Right are using abortion and LGBT rights as wedge issues primarily to elect laissez-faire economic conservatives.”

It’s interesting to read Maggie Gallagher’s latest contention that “Catholics”—by implication, all Catholics—will be penalized if the United States fully recognizes the human rights of gay and lesbian citizens, including the right to marry. Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan nominated Gallagher for one of his Malkin awards for the following statement (here):

After gay marriage, the most religiously committed Americans will be effectively marginalized as a public force—because they cannot act or support the idea that gay unions are marriages. Such people will, if we lose the marriage debate, be treated the way we treat bigots who oppose interracial marriage. Imagine: All it will take to make, say, a judicial nominee unconfirmable will be to establish that they are indeed Catholic.

I suspect Gallagher is fully aware that, in her interpretation of what Catholic moral teaching requires vis-à-vis her gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, she is already in the minority, and will soon be defending a position considered marginal and indefensible by the large majority of American Catholics. As I’ve noted on this blog, results of a Gallup poll released on 30 March indicate (here) that a majority of American Catholics (54%) do not believe homosexual relations are immoral, whereas only 45% of American citizens overall hold this position. The Gallup poll demonstrates that, even after several decades of sustained assault by the religious and political right, which has sought to force Catholics to walk lockstep with its political and moral positions, Catholics are to the left of other Americans on most moral and political issues.

I thought of these data recently when I watched Maggie Gallagher and Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign debate gay marriage on MSNBC’s “Hard Ball” program (here). Here, too, Gallagher speaks blithely of “the” Catholic position on gay issues, as if there is no disagreement at all among American Catholics about gay marriage and the morality of gay lives.

In fact, in this debate, Gallagher speaks as if the decision of Archbishop Sean O’Malley of Boston to close Catholic Charities in Boston in 2006 when that organization was required to place adoptive children in gay-headed households represents “the” Catholic position on such matters. And yet when the Boston archdiocese announced its intention to seek an exemption from this requirement in February 2006, 8 of the 42 members of the Catholic Charities board resigned in protest, noting that they considered it morally right for Catholic Charities to welcome gay parents (here).

Even as she speaks as though there is a unitary, dogmatically binding Catholic position on issues like gay adoption or gay marriage, Maggie Gallagher must know full well that there is a variety of Catholic viewpoints on these issues. And she has to know, as well, that this diversity exists for sound reasons, because a number of important moral principles are at play in the evaluation of these issues, and those principles can and do yield different moral outcomes as Catholics struggle to apply them.

Maggie Gallagher also has to know that the recent Gallup poll cited above explodes her claim to represent “the”—the right, the only possible—Catholic moral position on homosexuality. I can understand her political reasons for wishing to mislead the public into thinking that she represents the only thinkable Catholic position on gay issues. At the same time, I find that misrepresentation of the facts disingenuous and morally distasteful.

As a fellow Catholic, I would be much happier if Ms. Gallagher sought to ground what she says about the morality of gay people and gay lives in the truth. If a position is morally sound, it does not need lies to bolster it, and does not need to rely on cheap political tricks to compel people to assent to it.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on GLSEN Day of Silence

On 25 March, I reported on this blog (here) that the new Secretary of Education Arne Duncan met on 23 March with representatives of Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), an organization devoted to challenging homophobia in American schools. GLSEN sponsors the annual Day of Silence to combat school bullying based on sexual orientation. This year’s Day of Silence was held on 17 April.

I’m now pleased to read a report by Jenna Lowenstein at 365Gay (here) noting that Arne Duncan mentioned the Day of Silence on his Education Department blog (here) on 17 April. Mr. Duncan’s blog states,

Yesterday, many Americans paused to remember the senseless death of 32 students at Virginia Tech in 2007. Today, many Americans will honor the Day of Silence called for on behalf of victims of harassment and bullying around issues of sexual orientation, including a recent suicide who would have turned 12 today.

As Jenna Lowenstein reports, Secretary Duncan’s decision to make note of the Day of Silence on his blog is significant, since he is the first Secretary of Education to acknowledge this annual event.

As I’ve noted in a number of previous postings, I have a strong interest in this topic as an educator who has worked in church-sponsored universities with an historic commitment to preparing future teachers. I’ve also noted (here) that I was punished at a United Methodist-owned university for even mentioning GLSEN in a list of many organizations that faculty and students interested in civic engagement might consider studying.

As the Bilgrimage posting to which I’ve just linked, along with many other postings on this blog, notes, universities can and should play a key role in combating school bullying and prejudice based on sexual orientation in American classrooms. They can do so by preparing teachers who understand the mechanisms of discrimination, who are committed to opposing prejudice, and who are proactive about preventing bullying based on sexual orientation.

Church-related institutions should be leading the way here. Sadly, they are often not doing so. Instead, as Martin Luther King noted re: churches in the American South during the Civil Rights struggle, they are functioning as the taillight of necessary social change, rather than the prophetic headlight.

It’s time for our church-related universities to stop promoting homophobic prejudice. The new Secretary of Education is pointing the way, and universities that produce teachers for the American classroom—including church-owned ones—would do well to follow his lead.

Thought for the Day: Christianity, Candles, and Witches

I believe that men are generally still a little afraid of the dark, though the witches are all hung, and Christianity and candles have been introduced.

Henry David Thoreau, Walden

Rome's Witch Hunt Against American Nuns: Women as Source of Vatican's Loss of Authority

When I first read about the recent Vatican announcement that there is to be a doctrinal investigation of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) in the United States (here), I asked myself what sociological motives might lie behind this unprecedented attack on religious women in the U.S. I say “unprecedented” not because Rome cannot and does not investigate religious congregations, but because this is the second announcement in a matter of months that Rome has American religious women in its sights.

Last December, the Vatican congregation overseeing religious life announced an upcoming visitation of American religious women, to ascertain their “quality of life.” This latest announcement came from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) on 20 February, in a letter the officers of the LCWR received on 10 March. American nuns are now to be investigated on doctrinal grounds: are they upholding hard-line teaching about ordination (that is, hard-line teaching that ordination is to be forbidden to women) and homosexuality?

This is an unprecedented attack, then, because, to most of us observing the lives and activities of American nuns, nothing indicates the imperative need for not one but two investigations. American religious women are being used in some political game that transcends their own lives. Otherwise, there would not be the need to work up a case against this particular group of dedicated believers, at this particular time in history.

And as an aside, it bears noting that when a central investigating authority stages investigations of people or groups under its power, such an investigation always does constitute an attack. The very announcement that an investigation is underway is a form of an attack, an insinuation that something is there to be investigated. Powerful top-down systems of authority mount such investigations when they wish to give the signal that they are slapping down the person or group being investigated—and that this person or group is powerless to resist.

I have learned this lesson the hard way in academic life, when I was subjected on several occasions to “investigations” or “evaluations” that were all about consolidating the power of the big man/big woman on top. These “investigations” were always rigged. The person on top controlled them, feeding the “investigator” information, questions to ask, conclusions for his or her final report. There was no possibility at all to protest or to vindicate oneself, when the big woman/big man on top decided to mount such an investigation, since the point of the investigation was not to ascertain the truth about the one being investigated: it was to reinforce the power of the one on top.

As Colleen Kochvar-Baker points out in a thought-provoking commentary on the latest announcement (here), this attack on American nuns as possibly deficient both in the practice of religious life and in their doctrinal assertions is curious, to say the least, when the Legionaries of Christ, even after their founder was deposed following years of proven allegations that he abused seminarians in his community, are subject to only one investigation—and that reluctantly—and when the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has never been investigated after it has come to light that a large majority of U.S. Catholic bishops have sheltered and re-assigned known sexual predators among the clergy. Colleen asks, “Why do American nuns merit two Vatican investigations when the Legion reluctantly only gets one, and the seminaries who cranked out all those abusers only got one?”

Why, indeed? Why this obsessive focus on refractory nuns now, when there have been almost no news stories in recent months about nuns attending women’s ordination ceremonies, or nuns speaking out publicly about the hot-button issues of ordination or homosexuality? Just nuns doing what they typically do: going about their ministries quietly, courageously, faithfully—teaching, healing the sick, caring for the indigent, praying, helping immigrants and street people and the elderly.

Nuns doing what they always do, suddenly in the sights of one of the most powerful religious juggernauts in the world, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: what’s going on here?

My first reaction, when I read about the doctrinal investigation, was to wonder on what grounds Rome is wagering it can score points by announcing a double investigation of American religious women in the absence of any strong indicators of serious problems to be investigated. There will inevitably be a very powerful sympathy factor at play in this investigation, one dangerous to the Vatican.

Women religious are aging. The women in religious congregations today have given their lives in service of the church. They have maintained schools across the United States, staffed the hospitals they have founded, operated and staffed nursing homes and countless other institutions serving the church and society in admirable, valuable ways. And they have done so without asking for anything. Many women’s communities today can barely make ends meet, as their members age and, in many cases, do not have access to social security benefits.

These are the new doctrinal bugbears of the Vatican’s CDF, these faithful and long-suffering women. These are the women who merit special attention from Rome, because of apparent lapses in how they are living their vows and in what they believe. It will be exceedingly difficult for Rome to paint its attack on these aging, devoted women who have been faithful to a fault as anything other than a witch hunt—to use the phrase highlighted by Joseph Leary in his blog’s summary of the Vatican initiative (here).

If the stakes are so high, why this witch hunt now, I have been asking myself? To me, the answer seems obvious—and lamentable. Women religious are being targeted because they are aging, and relatively powerless. And above all, because they are women.

Rome needs, quite simply, someone to bolster its power right now. Rome needs someone to bully, in order to demonstrate its power at a moment in which the Vatican has done just about everything possible in recent months to undermine its moral authority. Against the advice of many insightful advisors, Benedict chose to readmit the schismatic and anti-Semitic Society of St. Pius X to the Catholic church, without expecting that group to accept Vatican II as a precondition for readmission to communion. And when the Vatican made its announcement about this initiative, it noted that it timed the announcement to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the calling of Vatican II!

The reaction to the rehabilitation of SSPX—and how it was done—has been devastating in Catholic country after Catholic country. And the unilateral, anti-collegial appointment of a bishop for Linz, Austria—right-winger Gerhard Maria Wagner—on the heels of the SSPX initiative did not help matters, and caused the Vatican eventually to have to back down in this case. As the pope’s tone-deaf and counter-factual remark to reporters in mid-March questioning the efficacy of condoms in curbing the spread of AIDS also did not help . . . .

The church, in its institutional side, is clearly on the defensive. From an American standpoint (but one that also implicates Rome as well), the church’s unthinking alliance—in its institutional leadership side—with a single political party for decades now, and its unwillingness to accept and work with a new political majority, compounds the problems the church now faces. When a tiny, 106-year old American nun living in Rome endorses the president-to-be, calling him a “good man with a good private life,” at the very time in which powerful American bishops are suggesting that Mr. Obama is the incarnation of evil, things have clearly gotten out of hand (here), from Rome's viewpoint.

The men who rule us are losing moral authority. And they also appear to be losing what counts even more to them in the end: control. And they’re losing these weapons of the ruling elite rapidly, right before our very eyes.

It’s time for a witch hunt. It’s time to find some witches. I use Joseph O’Leary’s term here with full deliberation, because it’s a correct term. Read the discussion following the National Catholic Reporter’s story about the doctrinal investigation to which the first link above points, and you’ll see a troubling, surprising theme running through not a few postings. This is the claim that this particular witch hunt is necessary because, well, witches remain alive and well.

And they’re nuns. Those same elderly women who have worn themselves out teaching children, praying, tending to the sick, taking in orphans and the homeless.

The witch rhetoric is already running through what many Catholics of the far-right say about women in general and nuns in particular these days. And as Johann Hari’s article about the timeless allure of witch hunting at Slate’s website today reminds us (here), witch hunting—hunting, accusing, killing of women outrightly accused of witchcraft—is not even a thing of the past in some cultures in the world today. It’s still going on.

Hari notes that witch hunts break out particularly in times of trauma and stress. They are fueled by a deep sociological need of communities feeling out of control to find someone on whom to blame their problems—someone to scapegoat and sacrifice in order to reassert the illusion of control.

And those “someones” are almost always women, when it comes to witch-hunts. Hari notes the deep misogyny of Christian traditions about witches, which is strongly evident in the classic textbook for witch hunters, the 15th-century book Malleficus Maleficarum (Witches’ Hammer). As Hari notes, women are susceptible when powerful social groups seek a scapegoat in order to bolster the illusion of power of the men on top, because

Women are generally weaker than men. They are less able to defend themselves from braying mobs. They are easier to pin down and turn into a screaming, denying receptacle of evil. The mobs usually choose the weakest women of all—old women and little girls.

Are we correct to think that witch-hunting is a thing of the past today, a throwback to ancient prejudices that have disappeared from the enlightened Western world? Hari thinks not. As he notes, even a vice-presidential candidate in an American federal election—in this case, Sarah Palin—is apparently not immune to the suggestion that witches are still at work in the world. Hari notes that Palin has been prayed over for protection from witches by Kenyan pastor Thomas Muthee.

No doubt about it: Rome is involved in a good old-fashioned witch hunt with women religious. And the claim that women religious have not been faithful enough in assisting the men who rule us to disseminate homophobia is part and parcel of the dynamics of slander and subordination that are driving this particular witch hunt. Though the rules are made by men in the church, and though ordained men claim absolute authority to enforce those rules, women religious are now to be slapped around for not leading the charge against gays and lesbians?

This stinks. To heaven. The use of women and gays as scapegoats by a Vatican increasingly isolated and robbed of moral authority by its own truculent refusal to dialogue with the people of God and to empower anyone other than itself is scandalous. It will only further erode the wavering authority Rome hopes to shore up, through this witch hunt.

Americans for Truth Attacks 17-Year Old James Neiley

Back in late March, I recommended to Bilgrimage readers (here) a video clip of 17-year old James Neiley speaking at the Vermont Senate hearing that preceded the vote of the Vermont legislature to permit same-sex marriage.

The Good As You website reports today (here) that Neiley is now being targeted by the odious Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality. Characterizing this courageous young man as “effeminate,” LaBarbera invites readers to send letters to Americans for Truth reminding James Neiley of his need for repentance and conversion.

Good As You is suggesting that readers of its posting send notes to Americans for Truth with a cc to Good as You. This strikes me as a good idea, so I just sent my own note to Americans for Truth. It reads:

Dear James Neiley,

I saw a video clip of your presentation to the Vermont legislature. I was moved by your intelligence, strength, and passion for what is right.

Because you have spoken out in public, you will, unfortunately, find yourself targeted by people interested in doing everything in their power to harm their fellow human beings who happen to be gay. Even more disgusting, many of these people will quote the bible as they seek to harm you, and will tell you they are acting in love and for your own good.

I feel sure you have long since learned to recognize these tactics as lies, and that you are aware that the pretensions of these moral crusaders to have the moral high road are completely unfounded. Still, it takes strength to resist powerful social currents, especially when one is young.

I feel sure you are capable of resisting, and will continue to recognize that who you are is very precious to the God who made you as you are. Thank you for your courage in speaking out in the Vermont hearings. Please know that in the days ahead, when you may be attacked by ugly political operatives claiming to be moral agents, you have many, many supporters across the globe.

To which I immediately got the following two replies from Mr. LaBarbera:

Sorry Mr. Lindsay, you can try to publish this on one of the thousands of pro-homosexuality sites.

William, I forgot to tell you: it’s never too late to repent. You too are on that same dangerous path, but forgiveness through Christ – a free gift – is always available to you. I suggest you read the Gospel of John as a starter. Truth is not dictated by your “feelings,” otherwise each of us would simply declare that our besetting sin is “who we are.” God bless you.—Peter L.

I’d like to encourage readers to take up Good As You’s suggestion and send Americans for Truth your letters of support for James Neiley. It is contemptible that this courageous, well-spoken, morally admirable young man is being targeted by a “Christian” group whose appraisal of him revolves around characterizing him as effeminate.

I have no doubt that James Neiley is more than equal to the assault. Even so, it doesn’t hurt, when we’re being attacked, to know that others care and are watching, and will intervene to defend us from wrongful assault.

Here are the two email addresses Good As You offers for letters:

americansfortruth@comcast.net
contact@goodasyou.org

If you send an email letter to the first (Americans for Truth) of these two addresses, telling James Neiley that you support him, please cc the second (Good As You) of the two addresses. I feel sure James Neiley will appreciate the expression of solidarity.