 |
| Heaven-Earth-Hell by Kaarle Juhana Kristoffer |
UPDATE: Daniel Avila has resigned his position at the USCCB.
In last week's edition (10/28/11) of Boston's archdiocesan weekly, The Pilot, columnist Daniel Avila wrote a piece titled “Some fundamental questions on same-sex attraction." In that article Avila opined that “disruptive imbalances in nature that thwart encoded processes point to supernatural actors who, unlike God, do not have the good of persons at heart.... Whenever natural causes disturb otherwise typical biological development, leading to the personally unchosen beginnings of same-sex attraction, the ultimate responsibility, on a theological level, is and should be imputed to the evil one, not God.” He also wrote that "the scientific evidence of how same-sex attraction most likely may be created provides a credible basis for a spiritual explanation that indicts the devil."
In the article Avila assigned similar responsibility to the devil for natural disasters.
The piece has been removed from the online edition of The Pilot and a "retraction/apology" from Avila has been posted.
Some have been looking for the original column. It can be found in Google cache here.
UPDATE: The cached text has been replaced by the retraction/apology notice.
Some have been looking for the original column. It can be found in Google cache here.
UPDATE: The cached text has been replaced by the retraction/apology notice.
In response to the column, I wrote to Antonio Enrique, editor of The Pilot:
Contrary to what Dan Avila writes, not all the faithful point to the devil and his malcontent minions to explain earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes. Nor do they expect that a resolution of the mysteries and variables of sexual attraction will pull back a curtain on the evil one hacking into genetic codes and redirecting human passions.
Church teaching on these matters is difficult for many to understand, let alone accept. As tempting as a medieval cosmology may be for some, it will not shed instructive light on a question as critical and complex as that of sexual orientation. This topic and the people discussing it deserve a theology steeped in deeper wisdom.
Rev. Austin FlemingConcord, MA
Tweet
Subscribe to A Concord Pastor Comments
Amen.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to believe that in this present day people believe such hateful prejudice and bigotry.
I am glad you answered it in the way you did.
Bravo !!
Blessings
I have just looked the article up on Google and discovered who this Dan Avila is which makes it even worse.
ReplyDeleteI am stunned and sickened that an associate director for policy and research for the U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference can come out with this.
Bill Lindsay also has an article on his blog worth reading here.
http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/2011/11/boston-catholic-newspaper-links-gays.html
Blessings
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. It is shocking that The Pilot published it.
ReplyDeletedeserve a theology steeped in deeper wisdom.
ReplyDeleteYes, indeed.
Do the bishops and this columnist, and all people using the language this Mr. Avila used, realize that they are inciting simplistic minds to acts of violence against the gay community?
Thank you for your action and post.
Amazing, and disheartening. When The Pilot becomes a medium for presenting all sides of the serious issues facing the Church, I'll start reading it. To continue to be a platform for one-dimensional & retrograde views of what our faith and tradition bothers me more than the individual articles themselves.
ReplyDeleteI cancelled my subscription to The Pilot. This article has caused pain for not only homosexuals but for their families and friends. Lives could be in danger. The damage is done despite a retraction and an apology.
ReplyDeleteIt's upsetting and sickening.
hopefully not many accepted that medieval outlook---shame on the newspaper of the diocese--ann
ReplyDeleteCP, thank you for responding to this outrageous article from Mr. Avila. The fact that the associate director for policy and research for the U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference a) believes this, and b) puts it in writing, gives the bishops and the Catholic faithful another black eye.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that it was allowed to be published by the Pilot, and Mr. Donilon's (the cardinal's PR man)lame response is another black eye for the Archdiocese of Boston.
When will the leadership of the church stop demonizing (literally in this article) gay people? All gay people and their families must just be mortified by this article. It is the latest in a long string of embarassments for the faithful.
I thought Jesus said love one another.
The very problem with the Avila article is that it does not present the Catholic faith in its integrity.
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting about this. Clearly there was an understanding by the Pilot that this article did not, as you said, present the Catholic faith in its integrity. However, it was published, and even though it was removed from the online version, it remains printed and leads many people to conclude, since it appears in the official diocesan newspaper, that it does accurately represent Church teaching. Will the editor of The Pilot be offering his resignation for such an egregiously flawed editorial decision?
ReplyDeleteIt was not wise for Avila to write as he did and the Archdiocese of Boston has concluded that he was in theological error. No one is saying that everything in the column was false. Only that which was false is being critiqued. That there were elements of truth in the column does not somehow make the false statements true as well.
ReplyDeleteAvilia says, in effect, that homosexuality is probably biologically caused, but because it is bad (his a priori assumption), it must be the work of the Devil; it couldn't be the work of God. Then he alludes to scant scientific theory and asserts that in any event, theological doctrine always trumps scientific and empirical evidence.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, "Don't bother me with facts; my mind is made up." His whole column is a classic example of circular reasoning.
Sorry I mistyped the link in my above post. This one should work.
ReplyDelete"Is there so much love in the world that we can afford to discriminate against any kind of love?!"
+ Father Mychal Judge, 'the Saint of 9/11'
I am annoyed that Mr. Avila's salary to be a lobbyist for the USCCB on the Defense of Marriage issue is being paid by U.S. churchgoing Catholics.
ReplyDeletePerhaps, Mr. Avila's article and his retraction and The Pilot's apology will wake up our tone deaf bishops. How many fiascoes does it take to get their attention?
Rosemary
Fr. Fleming,
ReplyDeleteYou say you are disheartened by Mr. Avila's article not stating Catholic teaching on same-sex attraction in its entirety. Let me ask you some questions about issues that he raised in the article, so you can clarify that teaching:
I was taught that the sin of Adam and Eve brought with it a rupture of the relationship between man and God, and was the cause of illness, hardship, brokenness and death. The Devil was the agent of that fall, and was described in scripture as roaming around the world like a lion, seeking to devour souls. Do you believe that the Devil is active and present in the world today? Still roaming? Still seeking to devour?
Do you agree with the Church's description of homosexuality as intrinsically disordered? Avila appears to take this as a given: is he wrong?
Do you believe that there is a genetic component to homosexuality? Do you feel Dan Avila should not have addressed the genetic issue at all?
Do you think that Dan Avila should have been terminated as a result of a speculative column? Won't this put a damper on the ability of theologians and others to engage in lively debate?
I respectfully await your response.
Mary Serr
Mary: I never said I was disheartened by anything Dan Avila wrote or didn't write.
ReplyDeleteI certainly know the hand of the evil one from the daily headlines and in my own life as well. It was Dan's particular application of Church teaching on evil here that merited the Archdiocese calling it a theological error.
Apart from that, I'd agree that Dan's column is a statement faithful to Church teaching on several issues related to his title, "Fundamental questions on same-sex attraction."
Those seeking greater clarity on such issues (for example: the Church's description of homosexuality as "intrinsically disordered") might consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church, available through a link on the sidebar here.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence of a genetic component for sexual orientation. Whether or not Dan should have raised this issue in his column was his call, regardless of my feelings.
I believe if Dan had submitted his column for vetting by the USCCB before publication (as is required of one in his position) the error would have been caught and we would not be having this discussion.
Sometimes one's position puts a short tether on freedom to speculate while others, on a longer leash, are freer to engage in lively debate.
Fr. Fleming,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the prompt response. I have other questions, but I'll take them off line.
Mary Serr
Daniel Avila has been forced to resign his position at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. Finally the bishops are drawing a line on just how far attacks on gays, lesbians, and their families can go.
ReplyDeleteLast year the Pilot ran another column claiming that children of gays should be barred from parochial school because they will bring pornography into the classroom.
Cardinal O'Malley should next fire Antonio Enrique, editor of the Pilot, who continues to run these scurrilous columns in the first place.