Fr. Martin: bridge-building in a time of (culture) war

It has been nearly a year since Rev. James Martin, SJ, probably best-known as Stephen Colbert's Catholic chaplain, released the book pictured here.  It's both ironic and sad that a message intended to, well, build bridges has become such a lightning rod for controversy.

The book's publisher, HarperCollins, explains that the book grew out of a talk Fr. Martin gave to New Ways Ministry, an organization that ministers to LGBTQ Catholics.  That address, which America magazine published in 2017, is well worth reading.  In the article, Fr. Martin uses as his starting point three terms found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church's presentation of the church's LGBTQ-related teachings.  Those terms are respect, compassion and sensitivity.  Fr. Martin calls on both the Catholic church's hierarchy and the LGBTQ community to engage with one another, using those three powerful ideas to guide their approach.

Here is one snippet, from a passage in which Fr. Martin is urging Catholic leaders to treat LGBTQ Catholics with compassion:

Church leaders also need to stand for their L.G.B.T. brothers and sisters when they are persecuted. In many parts of the world, L.G.B.T. persons are liable, again in the words of the catechism, to appalling incidents of “unjust discrimination”—to prejudice, to violence and even to murder. In some countries, you can be jailed for being gay or having same-sex relations and murdered for being a gay leader. In those countries the institutional church has a moral duty to stand up for their brothers and sisters, publicly. Remember, the catechism says “every sign of unjust discrimination” must be avoided. Helping someone, standing up for someone when they are being beaten, is part of compassion. It is part of being a disciple of Jesus Christ. If you doubt that read the parable of the good Samaritan (Lk 10:25-37). 

Closer to home, what would it mean for the church in the United States to say, when needed, “It is wrong to treat the L.G.B.T. community like this”? Catholic leaders regularly publish statements defending—as they should—refugees and migrants, the poor, the homeless, the unborn. This is one way to stand with people: by putting yourself out there, even taking heat for them.

The address is a call to respectful dialogue by both parties.  It's a request that strikes me as both reasonable and modest: let's try to improve the relationship, and the way to do that is by talking to one another and, even more importantly, listening to one another.

So Fr. Martin's pastoral initiative is about building bridges and fostering peace; but it seems that peacemakers are blessed only in the kingdom of heaven, not here in the realm of culture wars. In retrospect, what has happened to Martin ever since he has begun calling for respect and dialogue shouldn't surprise us, but it's still disappointing: Martin has been reviled, especially by right wing Catholics.  The most highly publicized aspect of that revilement are the Catholic institutions, including Catholic University of America's seminary, Cafod, the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, and the diocese of Metuchen, NJ, that have rescinded speaking invitations to Martin, apparently because of pressure from right wing Catholic activists.

That outfits like Church Militant and LifeSiteNews are attacking Martin probably is par for the course.  But the criticism is more widespread.  Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, in a blog post that deplores the sort of incivility in the church that has been heaped on Martin, and which overall was pretty respectful toward Martin, offered this critique of what Martin has been writing and saying:

[B]efore we prematurely enter another name on our list of Catholic martyrs, we should remember that Fr. Martin’s book is not above legitimate, serious criticism that has nothing to do with ad hominem rancor. 

Some might suggest that disputes over Building a Bridge, given its call for closer dialogue with the LGBT community, are really about whether we’re willing to eliminate judgmentalism from Church life. But that’s simply wrong. Clear judgment, tempered by mercy but faithful to Scripture and constant Church teaching, is an obligation of Catholic discipleship—especially on moral issues, and especially in Catholic scholarship. The perceived ambiguities in some of Fr. Martin’s views on sexuality have created much of the apprehension and criticism surrounding his book. There’s nothing vindictive in respectfully but firmly challenging those inadequacies. Doing less would violate both justice and charity.

At the same blog, affiliated with First Things, writer Dan Hitchens offered his take on Martin's "perceived ambiguities", in a post entitled, "Fr. Martin Does Not Actually Say".  After reviewing a  small and cherry-picked sample of Martin's statements over the years, he observes:

[T]here are two ways of staying within the bounds of Church teaching. There is the Catholic approach, which is to affirm these teachings as perennially, immutably true. And there is a very different approach, which Samuel Johnson once described in the context of the Church of England’s Thirty-Nine Articles: Some Anglicans, he told Boswell, “have considered them to be only articles of peace, that is to say, you are not to preach against them.” 

The simplest explanation, I suggest, is that this is Fr. James Martin’s attitude. He will not preach directly against certain of the Church’s teachings. But will he affirm them as true?

The implication (accusation) seems clear enough: Martin is a heterodox Catholic who coyly declines to explicitly state that he doesn't agree with the church's controversial and difficult teachings on LGBTQ matters, but issues plenty of winks and nods to audiences who would be receptive to that sort of heterodoxy.  When we consider that he is a Jesuit, and that he seems comfortable in the company of show biz types like Colbert - well, those factors help color the portrait of James Martin, Liberal Dissident.

In my view, the most straightforward response to that accusation is simply to read the text of the speech that Martin gave to New Ways Ministry.  Martin's metaphor throughout that talk (and, I assume, the book - at this writing, I haven't yet read it) is that the church is a bridge that bears two-way traffic; he calls on the church hierarchy to travel on the bridge toward the LGBTQ community - and he also calls on the LGBTQ community to make the same journey toward the church authorities.  In my opinion, everything he writes in that speech is impeccably Catholic.

Now Martin has authored an article that appears in the April 30 issue of America.  Martin writes it as sort of a FAQ that addresses some questions that tend to come up in his speaking engagements.  Whether he intended it as a reply to those who imply he is heterodox, he doesn't say; but as such a response, I view it as decisive.  Here is one representative passage:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church also states that gays and lesbians can and should approach “Christian perfection” through chastity, with such supports as “the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace.” In other words, gays and lesbians, the catechism states, can live holy lives. 

Needless to say, all these considerations rule out same-sex marriage. Indeed, official church teaching rules out any sort of sexual activity outside the marriage of a man and a woman—thus the church’s prohibitions on activities like premarital sex, adultery and masturbation.

If there is winking and nodding going on here, I haven't detected it.  As a straightforward and clear statement of Catholic teaching and belief, it would be difficult to find a better example.  To be sure, Martin also (again following the Catechism) takes care to emphasize (again) that the church must treat gays and lesbians with respect, compassion and sensitivity.  And he writes an excellent passage on how Francis's theme of pastoral accompaniment is one way that this can be lived out in the church.

I consider that this latest article from Martin conclusively refutes anyone who would accuse him of heterodoxy.  On the contrary: Martin has set a standard here for teaching Catholicism in a clear,  respectful and generous style that is well grounded in Catholic sources.  His critics would do well to emulate him.

I admire James Martin.  Writing and speaking publicly about the divisions between the Catholic hierarchy and the LGBTQ community is an act of courage.  It's courageous for a priest to point out to the Catholic hierarchy its shortcomings on this topic and call it to responsibility.  It's also courageous to urge LGBTQ leaders and activists to treat the church hierarchy with respect, compassion and sensitivity.  Martin has pursued a very difficult course here, in service to peacemaking, and it seems fair to say that he has suffered for it.  Archbishop Chaput may not be ready yet to add Martin's name to the canon of martyrs, but he's on my list of holy Catholics.