Note: Read Part 1 of this essay: “The Triumph of the Therapeutic Mentality” (June 6, 2024).
Call to Conversion and Holiness
Fr. James Martin calls all Christians to conversion. He says, “What I mean by conversion is the conversion that all of us are called to by God and the conversion of minds and hearts that Jesus called for” (BB, 23). He adds, “LGBT people are called to be holy, as all of us are” (BB, 44).
The crucial question I want to ask now is about the relationship between faith and morality in the context of the call to holiness.
As Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa rightly notes, “there is no sanctity without obedience,” and thus “to say that all those baptized are called to holiness,” which Vatican II does, “is to say that all are called to obedience.” He adds, “St Paul speaks of obedience to faith (Rm 1:5; 16:26), of obedience to the teaching (Rm 6:17), of obedience to the Gospel (Rm 10:16; 2 Th 1:8), of obedience to truth (Gal 5:7), of obedience to Christ (2 Cor 10:5).”16
There is no sanctity without obedience, and there is no obedience without the gift of faith in Jesus Christ as Lord, trusting fully in his saving work, following him, dying to self, and living for him who loved me and gave himself for me on the Cross (Gal 2:20; cf. Mk 8:34-36).According to the Catholic Church, there is an intrinsic and unbreakable bond between faith and morality. Jesus said, “Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love” (John 15:10; 1 John 5: 2-3).
This question about the bond between faith and morality must deal directly with the eternal significance of the moral choices that people make, indeed, with their eternal salvation. In this light, we can understand why St. Paul consistently urges us to make choices that are worthy of the calling that we have received in Christ (Eph 4: 1; Phil 1: 27; Col 1:9). In particular, he identifies the risk posed by, especially but not only, sexual offenses:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Stop deceiving yourselves: Neither sexually immoral persons [pornoi, i.e., like the incestuous man], nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor ‘soft men’ [malakoi, i.e., men who feminize themselves to attract male sex partners], nor men who lie with a male [arsenokoitai, a term formed from the Levitical prohibition of male homosexual practice] . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor 6:9-10)17
The Catechism of the Catholic Church instructs us that certain choices result “in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace.” The Catechism adds, “If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell.” How is that so? Because, the Catechism concludes, “our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back.”18
Against this background, we are not surprised that Fr. Martin never addresses the question of morality, let alone sexual morality,19 and hence never presents the members of the so-called LGBT community with the call to chastity, namely, “to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition” (CCC, no. 2358). In addition, “By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection” (CCC, no. 2359).
Yes, Fr. Martin generalizes by saying that “we are all imperfect people, struggling to do our best in the light of our individual vocations. We are all pilgrims on the way, loved sinners following the call we first heard at our baptism and that we continue to hear every day of our lives” (BB, 76). True enough. And yet, once again, one would think that in a book about human sexuality, an author writing from a Catholic perspective would identify the specific sexual struggles of the moral life in Christ as the sixth commandment bears upon them, and the corresponding sexual sins against chastity. But no, they receive no attention; they do not figure in this book at all.
In this connection, this is not the book’s only flaw. I surmise that Fr. Martin is trying to diminish the importance of sexual sins relative to others by suggesting that all sins are equal before God, with none being worse than others. He insists on an egalitarian view of sin.20
But is this true? There is a hierarchy of sins, such as is implied in the distinction between mortal and venial sins.21 In short, all sins are equally covered by the atoning work of Christ, but they are not equal in all respects, and hence some sins are graver than others.
Biblical scholar Robert Gagnon correctly identifies the reason why homosexual practice is more heavily weighted than other sins:
Homosexual practice, committed or otherwise, is the violation that most clearly and radically offends against God’s intentional creation of humans as ‘male and female’ (Gen 1:27) and definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman (Gen 2:24).”22
St. Paul tells us that the Church must not succumb to a lax attitude toward sin (see 1 Cor 5:6: “a little leaven leavens the whole lump”). He urges the believers at Corinth to take action against a man’s sexual sin (i.e., incest) by removing him from the community. The community should mourn for him rather than become inflated with pride (5:2). As St. Paul says elsewhere in 1 Corinthians, we must “not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoice with truth” (13:6). The truth being that we in the Church are all sinners who are saved by grace: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received in faith” (Rom 3:23-25).
Nevertheless, says St. Paul, the Church should take a stand against all sorts of sexual sin by warning the offending believers that if they continue in sexual immorality they will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Against this Pauline background, we should ask Fr. Martin how he proposes to help these offending believers to be “saved” from judgment “on the day of the Lord” (1 Cor 5:5). What about St. Paul’s teaching that serial and unrepentant immoral sexual practices puts one at the risk of not inheriting God’s eternal kingdom (1 Cor 6:9-10; 2 Cor 12: 21; Gal 5:19-21; Rom 1:24-27; 6:19-23; Col 3:5-10; Eph 5:3-6, 4:17-19; 1 Thess 4:2-8)?
This Pauline teaching is stated clearly in CCC, no. 1861:
Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment [regarding the eternal standing] of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
Furthermore, if sinners are called to follow their baptismal vocation throughout their lives, as Martin rightly says, how then does a person who is actively and unrepentantly engaged in same-sex practice change his life, radically reorient his whole life, put an end to sin, turn away from evil, if no one, least of all the Church, least of all Fr. Martin, calls him to interior repentance, conversion, that is, “the conversion of the heart, interior conversion” (CCC, no. 1430), and a holy life?
Moreover, how should we understand, as Fr. Martin holds, that “[we] are loved by God as [we] are” (10)? Yes, we come to the Lord just as we are, sinners who sins are under the mercy and justice of the cross. Is that what Fr. Martin means? Does he understand that “Christ died for the ungodly,” and so “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5: 6, 8). Indeed, “when we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son” (vs. 10).
Yes, God is rich in mercy (Eph 2:4). He forgave my sins out of love for me in Christ even while I was dead through my trespasses (Eph 2:5), even while I was still his enemy (Rom 5:10). In this light, we can easily understand the wideness of God’s mercy, why mercy is inclusive, grounded in divine redemption, and hence neither discriminating nor relativizing—all men are sinners and are under the power of sin (see Rom 3:9-18). But “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3: 16). The Church welcomes all sinners, none are excluded.
But how shall they know that they are called by the Gospel to repentance and amendment of life, if they have not heard that call (cf. Rom 10: 14-17). But “how can they hear without someone preaching to them” (vs. 14). Thus, when proclaiming the Father’s mercy in Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit towards others it must be clear to them that our action is rooted in God’s prior act of mercy shown to us in and through the finished work of Christ.
Thus: “if we confess our sins he is faithful and just, and will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us” (1 John 1: 9-10).
Pope Francis has written: “Although it sounds obvious, spiritual accompaniment must lead others ever closer to God, in whom we attain true freedom. . . . To accompany them would be counterproductive if it became a sort of therapy supporting their self-absorption and ceased to be a pilgrimage with Christ to the Father.”23 Fr. Martin’s book does not tell the so-called LGBT community the truth, indeed, the gospel truth, and hence he cannot help people avoid the danger of what Francis calls here therapeutic self-absorption.
This point undercuts Fr. Martin’s presupposition justifying self-authenticating experiences. Chiefly, spiritual accompaniment calls for conversion, including moral conversion. As CCC teaches, “This endeavor of conversion is not just a human work. It is the movement of a ‘contrite heart’, drawn and moved by grace to respond to the merciful love of God who loved us first” (Ps 51:17; John 6:44; 12:32; 1 John 4:10).
I conclude with the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nos. 1785, 1802):
In the formation of conscience, the Word of God is the light for our path. We must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church . . . This is how moral conscience is formed.
Endnotes:
16 Raniero Cantalamessa, O.F.M. Cap. Obedience: The Authority of the Word, trans. Francis Lonergan Villa (Boston: St. Paul, 1989) 30-31, 34, respectively.
17 See also Gal 5: 19-21; Eph 5: 3-5; 1 Thess 4: 2-8. I am using Robert Gagnon’s translation of 1 Cor 6:9-11. For a thorough exegetical justification of this translation of the passive and active partners in homosexual acts, see his The Bible and Homosexual Practice (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002), 303-339.
18 Catechism of the Catholic Church, no.1861,
19 It is not clear whether Fr. Martin denies “that there exists, in Divine Revelation, a specific and determined moral content, universally valid and permanent” (in the words of John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, no. 37).
20 For an insightful critique of the egalitarian view of sin, See Robert Gagnon, “Is Homosexual Practice No Worse Than Any Other Sin?,” January 7, 2015.
21 Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 1854-1864. See also, John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, nos. 69-70.
22 Robert A. J. Gagnon, “How Bad is Homosexual Practice According to Scripture and Does Scripture’s Indictment Apply to Committed Homosexual Unions?,” 1-11, and at 2.
23 Evangelii gaudium, nos. 169-170.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Thanks for taking on Fr. Martin’s latest.
Interesting (and rarely heard) quote from Pope Francis re spiritual accompaniment versus therapy supporting self-absorption . . .
Agree, Cleo, about how interesting is this quote from Pope Francis. Perhaps it is “rarely heard” because, as in other matters, what Pope Francis says is obscured by what he does, in this case, by the continual and constant access, moral support and political endorsement he gives to Fr. Martin.
Kudos to Dr. Echeverria for taking on James Martin. It’s dirty work but somebody has to do it. I look forward to the day when James Martin returns to the fold. I pray for him and all who have been deceived by his false teaching.
Amen, Deacon Edward.
And Jesus said, “in the end, white will become black and black will become white.” We are now living smack dab in the middle of this very reality. What use to be no longer is, and what is now is not what it seems to be. The fog of Satan’s bat crap manifestations has even become a smoke inside our Lord’s Holy Vatican Sanctuary.
Oh Come Lord Jesus!
Respectfully, I don’t think Jesus ever uses the words, “in the end, white will become black and black will become white.” Can you provide a Scripture citation where He says these words or something similar to them?
Isaiah 5:20 says, Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness…” (RSVCE). The Living Bible paraphrases Isaiah 5:20 as “They say that what is right is wrong and what is wrong is right; that black is white and white is black; bitter is sweet and sweet is bitter.”
Not long ago yours truly ran across guru Martin’s book at a used-book store. Martin is a breezy hack writer. I was reminded of what a NEIGHBOR’S DOG does once it has finished his business on your yard…
The canine turns around and kicks grass over the problem. Martin is kicking grass.
Instead of covering over the REAL PROBLEM—now with staged crypto-blessings two-by-two (like Noah’s Ark!)—he should be challenging the toxic culture at its source: absentee and abusive fathers, child sexual abuse and early sexualization of children in schools, indifferent sexual experimentation by the youth marinating in a porn culture, and society’s pretended moral neutrality. And clericalists evading moral content and even erasing the line between inclinations and actual choices and actions.
All this stuff behind and triggering the locked-in LGBTQ pandemic.
Genome research verifies that it’s not genetic. And, clearly, its multiplying by means other than biological! Martin deflects from reality by airbrushing that everyone needs to convert. Yes, Jimmy, the sky is blue! And, grass is green!
Is Martin the kind of lemming that Stalin referred to “useful idiots”? In a speech in 1965, American diplomat Spruille Braden said the term referred “countless innocent although well-intentioned sentimentalists or idealists” who aided the Soviet agenda. In the current culture and moment, why is Martin aiding the LGBTQ agenda and religion? With the possible difference that he might know exactly what he’s doing.
Meanwhile the 800-poiund canine is leaving his mark on upcoming generations.
Prof Echeverria continues his exposition of the fallacy of Fr James Martin SJ pastoral philosophy of affirmative therapy contained in Building a Bridge. Affirmative therapy that centers on ‘absorption of self’ [Pope Francis’ descript] rather than obedience to the commandments of Christ and conversion. Matthew 28 18-20 could not be clearer, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you”.
Echeverria does well in quoting Francis in support of his doctrinal expose of Building a Bridge. Although is Fr Martin’s affirmative therapy approach of healing the ‘whole’ person, including retention of sinful behavior, similar to other remarks made by Francis as well as the pontiff indicating his support in appointing Martin in his high profile Vatican communications position? Whereas the response of Francis has been criticism of rigid doctrinal adherence, the difficulty if not challenge is to address this with the Pope and secure a commitment to what Catholic doctrine requires.
Thank you. Scripture says it all. We don’t need a lot of arguments just the conviction of Holy Spitit with a humble and broken heart.
I continue to marvel at how so many regard this as a chosen condition. It most certainly is not. It most often is quite an unconscious adaptation due to inadequate nurturing. Every child is different and requires different assistance in development. When there is any sort of deficiency things can go off the desired track. For an individual child what adults perceive as a difficult though benign circumstance is, for the child, a real trauma.
A father’s proactive presence in the life of any boy is absolutely critical, particularly in the first few years. Absence, even of the most innocent nature, can be the determinate of what follows. Actual presence can be insufficient. Intimate engagement is required. Every boy is different in their necessity. What works for one could be insufficient for the other.
Our psychological lives, particularly in our developing years, are a bit more complicated than we sometimes care to acknowledge.
We are all vulnerable.
This should not in any way be read to lend credibility to the pastoral malpractice of James Martin. His involvement in the lives of individuals who shoulder the cross of same-sex attraction is a form of abuse, and he is by far more culpable than biological parent who made an innocent miscalculation in rearing their precious child.
Yes, paternal involvement in the life of sons is critical, just as it is critical to Christian growth and development of daughters.
One father with whom I am familiar summarily rejected his only daughter (due to his own psychological inadequacies). Concurrently he bonded well with his sons, lavishing time and attention on them. The father resented the girl and his being summoned by the wife to occasionally assist her with a bit of time or attention toward the daughter. The girl’s siblings modeled the father in their behavior toward their sister. That girl developed quite unhealthy attitudes and behaviors to men, choosing unsuitable partners to date and to marry. The family is sad and tragic in many respects.
Yet parental flaws, faults, and sins should in no manner be seized upon by thoughtless clerics to excuse or to convey acceptance of sin. Yesterday my local NO priest delivered a homily stating that while confession is good for everyone, sin is not necessarily as bad as we often make it out to be! Truly mispastoral. Akin to Francis, Martin, and so very many among their cohort. These shepherds without prayerful thoughtful heads do compound rather than compassionate, alleviate, and redirect their sheep away from dangers which cause harm.
You contribute excellent points. Mine was that free conscientious choice is rarely if ever involved in the development of the SSA condition. A man hands on manhood to his son. When that handing on is not in place from the beginning things are going to go awry one way or another. Rejection of a daughter by a father will leave her untrusting and resentful for life.
We are dealing with people — men and women — who have been psychologically wounded at the core from the beginning. How responsible they are for this condition has to be taken into account when it comes to moral responsibility. That requires the utmost pastoral discernment on the part of the priest. What can be approached with more aggressiveness is the propagation of the gay ideology. A same-sex attracted individual is dealing with greater and lesser degrees of compulsion that go deeper than simple attraction. Those willing to shoulder their cross responsibly need be acknowledged in our discourse as simply heroic. The ridicule and moral slurs hurled at this crew so commonly and arbitrarily magnifies social disfunction and gives credence — erroneously — to characters like Martin and worse. We are dealing with wounded souls. Saving souls is our responsibility. It can only be accomplished with conscientious devotion and informed understanding. No man or woman should can be regard as disgusting and worthless.
“A father’s proactive presence in the life of any boy is absolutely critical, particularly in the first few years.”
Actually, the father’s presence is equally crucial in the life of both boys and girls. For the first two-three years though a child is psychologically symbiotic with his mother dwelling in a narcissistic bliss. A function of a father is to enable an emotional separation of a child from his mother.
Speaking of girls, a father provides a daughter with a sense of self-worth as a woman and also with a model of a good carrying man (who is also a good reliable spouse). A daughter loved by her father is much less likely to become a victim of a manipulation of men and or to put up with their abuse of her. Of course, she also learns from her parents a model of a couple’s relationship (so as boys do).
As for homosexuality, I cannot provide the links now but I came across a study which showed that so-called “emotionally absent father” in the lives of daughters corresponds to the increased number of homosexual women in such families, being compared to controls with emotionally present fathers.
Personally, I observed a striking correlation of so-called emotional incest/enmeshment with a mother (often narcissistic) and a future homosexuality of a child. A disproportionate number of the Roman Catholic priests known to me were “the golden boys” of their mothers, far too close to them (did not emotionally separate from them) while their fathers were weak and subdued. It seems to me that the sons solved the Oedipus conflict via renouncing a possibility to be with women sexually and becoming priests, being thus forever faithful to their mothers via swapping mothers with the Mother Church. Via doing so, they also fulfilled the high aspirations of their mothers (I am not saying that they did not believe in God though). Needless to say, a notion of fatherhood is absent in such priests and this is a disaster for the Church. They cannot provide to the people what they do not know, a protection of a strong just father who models God the Father’s fatherhood.
The lack of fatherhood aspect becomes particularly evident when they have to deal with abuse (of all kinds) within the Church. Such people simply do not have a natural attitude of men, of protection of those who are weaker (women and children) because they were “protected” by their powerful mothers, “mother-goddesses”. I regard this unwholesome paradigm, “mother-goddess – her golden boy, a priest who is often confused about his sexuality or homosexual” to be an important factor in a current crisis of various “psychological heresies” including ‘Fiducia Supplicans’.
I don’t know what infants experience should be described as “narcissistic” bliss. Narcissism certainly may apply to some of us as we grow older but I don’t believe it’s the best way to describe infancy & the very young child’s natural attachment to its mother. What infants naturally & healthily experience in their development is something God intended for them.
When we extend that period into adolescence & beyond, then we do have a problem. Being a center of a mother’s attention is natural & critical for infants. The human race wouldn’t have survived long were that not so. But young people believing they’re the center of the universe & demanding special attention & privileges is a phenomena we see more & more of these days. And perhaps in part because they are likely to have had no siblings to have share that attention with.
It is a term of analytical psychology, “natural narcissism” etc. A very young child fused with a mother is a center of his own universe. He feels omnipotence because his mother is to satisfy all his needs and this is normal. He is not able yet to see the needs of others. This is what is called “a natural narcissism” without a clinical, negative connotation of “a disorder”. A disorder develops, among other factors, as a result of a failure to break an infantile fusion. This is why it is commonly said that a person with a narcissistic personality disorder has a stunted emotional development (interpersonal), of 2-3 years old – while being an adult in other spheres.
So what? I inherited a combination of my parent’s DNA, which, through no fault of my own, left me with congenital glaucoma and a lifetime of eye problems and surgeries. I did not “choose” to have the condition, but that does not make my affliction “natural” for me or part of my identity. I have to live with the cards I was dealt. Just because someone may not choose to have homosexual temptations does not mean they are excused from having to deal with the consequences of what can be, I am sure, a true affliction.
Mine did not infer otherwise. Mine did however point out that the condition calls for a decidedly different response from those who hurl pejoratives at individuals who are dealing with a reality that is essentially far different from what is commonly understood. The debasement of persons makes them self-perceived as victims, engenders visceral anger, ennobles fraudulent “gay” ideology, and the provides credence to those who turn this into a justice issue. Same-sex attraction is a human issue, a spiritual issue, a moral issue. It requires an informed intervention — not contempt and surely not the foul works of the likes of a James Martin who only magnifies a spectrum of erroneous notions which confirm individuals in a vice of interior agony.
It appears Fr. Martin may not recognize the injury, the loss of charity (love) and Grace from homosexual acts. If one does not recognize them as unnatural or perverse, they probably do not recognize how selfish and sensually self-absorbing they are. Life exists and is supported by true, self-donating love. Homosexual styles of relationships are not. They are full of Pride.
‘Spiritual accompaniment ‘ – Father Martin in offering of Holy Mass with the specific intention of bringing generational healing and Holy Spirit infilling for those he is trying to help is possibly one such aspect of the ministry .
Not that familiar with his work and there may be many other tools he is using – such as bible prayer study with focus on sources of generational spirits – Adam’s negligencce, for example – being addressed with invocation of The Spirit and Precious Blood -“save us Lord from the malignant enemy through the Precious Blood and The Spirit, thank You, praise You Lord !”
The heart breaking incident of the Benjaminites in Book of Judges – the concubine of the Levite brutally attacked ,all that follows …Rachel had stolen the idols of her father , dies in child birth after Benjamin is born …Saul too not spared – rebelling against the Father figure of Samuel ..The impact of the contraceptive culture too may be surmised in the atrocious incident – discord of the couple ,the ‘user ‘ attitude , in turn as attack against The Body – in receiving the Eucharist with unrepentant hearts leading to hardening of hearts, its internal warfares that spill out …
The Spirit brings forth a Paul from another Saul ..and it is Pope St.Paul V1 that was called to stand up for the Truth that holiness, chastity are the blessings that bring the freedom to trust that one is loved much by a Father of infinite Love , to want to reciprocate same with His own Love in The Lord .
The desire and efforts to share that truth with others to be the foundation of other relationships including and esp. marriage !
May there be many persons of good will who bring comfort and the truth to wounded hearts in all walks of life !
James Martin, SJ, made this Twitter post back on Dec 29, 2022 ” Dear friends: I don’t know much about drag, but have been appalled by the violent (and fatal) attacks on drag performers, most often by white supremacists.” Now a man who is in “outreach” to active homosexuals, and claims that he knows nothing about drag queens is either a liar or a fool. I do not believe that Martin is a fool, so let’s just agree that he is a con artist.
He, like his fellow Jesuit, likes to stir the flames of division within the Church, class hatred, and contrived hatred of homosexuals. Narcissists can’t stand not being the center of attention. James Martin needs to grow up and be a man.
What connection is there between “white supremacism” & drag queens? That’s a new one for me.
According to St. Peter Damien homosexual sins are so disgusting that even Satan and his demons can’t stand to look at them as they offend the natural order. If the devil finds what you’re doing disgusting that pretty much says it all.
Our Call to Holiness is a call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds and thus not engage in any act, including any sexual act that demeans the Sanctity of human life from the moment of conception to natural death or deny the Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony.
One need only ask the question how does an act respect the inherent Dignity of a beloved son or daughter to the understand the difference between authentic Love and lust.