The Birth of an Anthropologian

I just uploaded another paper to my academic room site. It doesn't have a lot of footnotes but is my reflections on my years as a counsellor and the issues that I have encountered while walking with my clients. It mostly raises issues and questions about the difficulties of working within the Christian belief system while believing that most of its core beliefs are destructive to recovery from child sexual abuse. It was a reflection of my understanding of my accountability to my clients and to myself. It is interesting to go back and see what I said eight years ago. There is nothing to change. Read it if you wish.

http://www.academicroom.com/conferencepaper/accountability-trauma-therapy-adult-survivors-raised-christian-belief-system-birth-anthropologian

Now for a game of Plants vs. Zombies!

Vessels of Terror - revised

I have been meaning to write a comment in response to the blog Atonement, Cycles of Abuse, and Virtue/Atonement [this blog post is no longer available so I have removed the link] ever since I read it in the spring. It is gratifying to see how seriously students took the conundrums posed by mine and Brown & Parker’s articles in Patriarchy, Christianity and Abuse: A Feminist Critique.

What struck me the most was the reference to M.Shawn Copeland’s concept of “vessels of terror”. This is a powerful way of explaining the problem that people like myself have with Christian theology to those whose faith has never been destroyed by the very core values of their belief system.

A good example to explain how something seemingly innocuous can become a “vessel of terror”: I was explaining this concept to a friend of mine and he asked me whether the following story would be a good explanation of what I was talking about. A particular painting by Otto Donald Rogers of a prairie field with a leather belt on the ground was part of an installation in an Ottawa office building. A woman who would have had to face the painting every day from her cubicle said that she couldn't live with it. It reminded her of the beatings that she had had as a child. The installers took the piece out of the installation. This painting of Otto Rogers was a “vessel of terror” for this woman.

I tend to try and stay away from using the formal structures of theology, however, it appears that what I tend to do is called “a Hermeneutics of Critical Evaluation”: a bottom-up or ethnographic form of analysis (I discovered that this is the formal way to describe what I do in Schüssler Fiorenza, Wisdom Ways, 77). And this form of hermeneutics or biblical/theological interpretation if heard by “traditional (read malestream) hermeneutics” can only lead to serious questions about the received wisdom of the last two thousand years of Christianity.

There is an attachment to these beliefs (or virtues) that are at the core of Christianity. For so many people, they work to explain the world. However, just because people use the identified virtues of the system to find some way to ameliorate their position, that doesn't undo the damage that they have already caused. In fact, they serve to maintain the status quo. There are examples in the discussion on the atonement blog of women who use these beliefs to “get them through the night”. While it is understandable, I would argue that all this does is keep them in a place where they can be damaged again and again by these “vessels of terror”. Suffering, for example, can be accepted because this is part of the travails of this world, and you will be rewarded in the next life if you just "keep your chin up" ("God doesn't give you a mountain that you can't climb" - ask This time Lord, you gave me a mountain this time). It keeps the abused in their place and reproduces the structures that will allow the next generation to be abused once more. In the long term, it changes nothing, which is why I couldn't stay within the confines of the Christian belief system. In the final analysis, the structures/virtues are so embedded in the core belief system that there is no way to make any kind of compromise with it. And Lord knows I tried!

I do understand why people try so hard to find some way to make the belief system work. If they can’t make it work at some level, then where do they go? Is there any way around them? What do you replace them with? How much time will people actually spend trying to mitigate the impact of these "vessels of terror”?

I can only say, “Go watch Deliver Us From Evil, then tell me that these “vessels of terror” are worth keeping.” If you have already watched it, then go watch it again. 

ADDENDUM:
I looked to see if I could find the Otto Rogers' painting that I talked about. I didn't. However, I really like this one. It is called Marching Trees and is apparently currently on sale at the Paul Kuhn Gallery, although I couldn't find it on the gallery's website. 

Fear and Denial at the Crossroads.

So I decided that I might as well put up the other paper that I delivered this year. This is the document that will be published in the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society of Church History 2012. It is unedited so any problems with editing issues are solely my responsibility and will be fixed for the final version. However, I just thought that it might as well be out there. My 1993 paper has already had 234 views since I uploaded it in May. It will be interesting to see if this one is viewed as well.

http://www.academicroom.com/conferencepaper/fear-and-denial-crossroads-where-history-%E2%80%9Cchild-abuse-scandal%E2%80%9D-within-roman-catholic-church

The Personal is Still Political

I just uploaded the speaking document for the paper that I delivered in Amsterdam this summer at the SBL International Meeting in Amsterdam. It is a position paper.I cleaned it up, added a few footnotes.

I had tasked myself the job for the weekend and it's done!! Now to relax with a glass of red wine and an episode of Beauty and the Beast (actually it's not a bad remake!)

It is available at the following: The Personal is Still Political: What else did you expect, or have we forgotten just how radical feminist exegesis can be?

Sacred Witness 1

Author: Susanne Scholz
Title: Sacred Witness: Rape in the Hebrew Bible
Publisher: Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2010
Details: 279 pages; solid notes for the most part; no bibliography but index of authors, index of bible and other ancient texts and index of subjects. Nonetheless, a bibliography of cited sources would have been helpful.

I am going to do a number of blogs on this book over the next few weeks. It is an important book and in many ways, I can appreciate what she was trying to do. However, it epitomizes many of the issues that I have dealt with in one way or another in this blog. For example, the Bible is normative and "sacred", thus limiting the available options in her analysis - but more of that later. Already it is clear that there are serious methodological issues coming out of the introduction.

I often start academic books on contentious issues by reading the conclusion, and various parts of different chapters. Of all things, my first gut reaction was: "well, this woman was never raped." I wasn't exactly sure why that was my first thought but a few weeks later when I started the book from the beginning, it turns out that I was right. When I finish the book for the second time, I will reflect on this once more and come up an answer.

"The personal is still political". As a survivor, I come to this issue from a wholly different place than those who only know about it secondhand. It is going to be an interesting exercise.

A curiosity of typos

I always love looking at my typos - particularly the ones that I miss no matter how many times I reread what I have written.

In the review of The Bishop's Man blog, I wrote:

"The book barely scratches the surface of the problem. Could we call it a whitewash? I don't think that Linden MacIntyre did that on purpose. I think that he just doesn't get it. He creates a world where everyone is idolated. In the end, everyone is a victim so you don't have to feel really, really, really angry at the poor priests who are just trying to do their job."

As best I can figure out, this should have been "violated". I still think that there must be a use for such an interesting word: "idolated".

He's just such a nice guy

This morning on The Sunday Edition, Michael Enright spent half an hour talking with Cardinal Thomas Collins of the Toronto diocese. The purpose was to talk about the legacy of Vatican 2. It was a very pleasant interview and I applaud Enright for understanding that he wasn't going to get any real discussion from the Cardinal - so why waste the time. I am sure many listeners will have something to say about the interview. You can hear it at: http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/shows/2012/10/14/cardinal-thomas-collins-archbishop-of-toronto/.

It was interesting because it is in Collins' responses to Enright's questions that we can see the response that will be coming consistently out of the Vatican to those who question the Church in the midst of the child sexual abuse scandal. You got the impression that it really is under control and now the Church is preparing the mop-up procedures. He did say that we needed an updated version of From Pain to Hope. No kidding; not only is it 20 years old, but I can't even find a completed version of the 2002 review anywhere.

His interpretation of Vatican 2 would be questioned by many academic scholars. (see my review of Vatican II: The Battle for Meaning). And he managed to blame the "liberals" for all the misunderstandings that have occurred in the misinterpretation of Vatican 2. Among other things, he also said that celibacy wasn't mandatory (?) - there are married priests in the church after all, and of course, they were following Christ's wishes. Etc., etc., etc.

Years and years of scholarship down the drain. Why did we even bother?

Completely disingenuous, it was my morning smile - can't laugh about it, it is too serious.

I'll be looking forward to the revised edition of From Pain to Hope! I'll get a blog or two out it, I suspect.

The Redmond Women

Just came across this & thought what the hell, why not put it up!

This is a picture taken 4 years ago. Just thought I'd put it up on the blog. Just to put a face to the blog's owner, I'm the one in the turquoise. My youngest sister is in black, and the middle sister wears a beige shirt. This was at my mother's 90th birthday party Needless to say, she is the one in the middle!!. 

Enjoy the "Parables of the Not-So-Social Gospel"

By the Rev. James Martin, S.J.

Catholic priest and author, 'The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything

Parables of the Not-So-Social Gospel

This was today's wonderful read.

if only the people who really need to read this, would read it!

I am trying - I facebooked it and now am posting the link here.

Enjoy, I certainly did!

Clicking on the link of his name, brings you to his Huffington post blog. Seems to be well worth reading for the insight & satirical comment.

Then again, there are Roman Catholics in the hierarchy who actually "get it".

Cardinal says Catholic church '200 years behind' 'It's tired. Why doesn't it rouse itself? Is it afraid?'

If only Cardinal Martini had become Pope, what a difference it would have made.

May he rest in peace.

Just what is the colour of the sky in their world, part 4

Sexual abuse by clergy a 'mystery,' Pope says: Video statement may spark new anger among Irish Catholics

"How are we to explain the fact that people who regularly received the Lord's body and confessed their sins in the sacrament of Penance have offended in this way?" the Pope said, referring to church staff who abused children.

"It remains a mystery," he said. "Yet evidently their Christianity was no longer nourished by joyful encounter with Jesus Christ. It had become merely a matter of habit."

...

"Your forebears in the church in Ireland knew how to strive for holiness and constancy in their personal lives," Benedict said in his message.

Somehow I missed this particular story last June. Probably doing something else :-)

This is the sort of story that should make most Roman Catholics understand that they will get no true change from the Papacy and Curia. I understand the rationale behind Ratzinger's (PB16) comments. He is a true believer in the efficacy of the sacraments. He believes that when someone receives the blood and body in the sacrament of mass, it will have a magical edifying effect on the person who participates in the mass. This is especially true for priests who take both the wine & host. 

Now we come to the restatement of my original article's title (It can't be true, and if it is, it's not our fault). The latest paper will read "Well I guess it's true, but it's still not our fault" (will upload to the website after it is edited). It you read BP16's remarks closely, it is clear that this problem must be the fault of the priests, the people involved have actively refused the nourishment offered by the mass. This, of course, would go further than just the abusing priests. It must be, therefore, that the bishops, cardinals, etc. who didn't "do the right thing" also refused to be nourished by the mass.

Honestly I don't really expect the Pope et al to actually start questioning the theology and validity of the Roman Catholic sacramental theology but that is exactly what is in question here.

The second thing that is in question is the assumption that in the past, the priests were better & didn't sexually abuse children - were really nourished by the mass. How in heaven's name does he make that assumption? Hasn't he been integrating the understanding that we now have about the intergenerational nature of pedophilia? Obviously not. And if you read the 2004 report that came out of the Vatican*, which I will review on the website at a later date, you will understand why. However, even that document has a whole section (pp. 13-17, if I remember correctly) detailing how the church has been decrying this issue since the later part of the first century C.E. Clearly, another case of those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it - especially if they are locked into an ideological position from which they are afraid to depart.

*Hanson, R. Karl, Friedmann Pfafflin and Manfred Lutz, eds., Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church:Scientific and Legal Perspectives. Proceedings of the Conference “Abuse ofChildren and Young People by Catholic Priests and Religious” (Vatican City, April 2-5, 2003). Vatican City: Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 2004.