The blog Daily Theology had an interesting back-and-forth about [pro-LGBT] Fr. James Martin, SJ’s book, Building a Bridge. The conversation centered on whether academic theologians have sufficiently engaged a book that has been making sizable waves in the Church, as well as about who should be doing public theology.
“In this new online space of ‘Catholic Twitter,’ theology is operating at multiple levels–as everyone from the Pope and bishops to average Christians strive to understand their faith in the midst of a challenging world. But what about academic theologians?Kevin Ahern, an assistant professor of religious studies at Manhattan College, said Building a Bridge has revealed “a crisis or perhaps even a failure in our public theology.”
Martin, Ahern acknowledged, is not the first theologian or minister to be attacked by the right-wing partisans on “Catholic Twitter.” But the vitriol the Jesuit priest receives has certainly been intense. Ahern wrote:
“While a few prominent theologians voiced support for Fr. Martin, the absence of strong statements of support from academic theologians, including those who write on sexual ethics and ecclesiology, was notable. I was truly surprised by the relative silence by my colleagues even as speaking events at universities (including Theological College at Catholic University of America) were cancelled. There are many possible reasons for this, including lack of time, fear of being denied tenure, lack of engagement on social media, a feeling like Fr. Martin is not saying anything new, an academic distance from prayer, spirituality and pastoral issues, or a failure to really grasp the power of these hate groups on the Catholic community. It’s easier to look the other way and there is a legitimate concern that engaging online vilification will give the angry voices more power. . .
“Who is directing the narrative of public theology today? Have academic theologians ceded the public discourse on theology to a handful of academics, non-canonically recognized groups, journalists, and vocal individual with a lot of time on their hands?
“Reading Kevin’s article made me think of my friends and mentors in the academy who have employed public theologies in books, articles, lectures, workshops, and conferences to affirm LGBTQ people for decades. They have paid a heavy price for their work yet choose to remain aloof from public engagement defending Building a Bridge. Why is this? It is important that we ask them.Jason Steidl, a theology doctoral candidate at Fordham University,responded to Ahern’s criticism of academic theologians and their engagement or lack thereof in public theology. Steidl, who identified himself as “a gay ecclesiologist and one deeply involved in LGBTQ pastoral ministry” said he has followed closely the debate over Building a Bridge. He wrote:
“I thought of organizations such as New Ways Ministry and Dignity, which have been doing public theology and queer ministry for generations. Many have also issued public statements in support of James Martin’s work. Do these count as public theologies? Who decides what counts as theology?
“I thought of an LGBTQ-affirming friend and pastor of a Catholic parish who has endured assault after assault by the alt-right and his diocese, yet remains steadfast in his support of open LGBTQ ministry. His public theology has communicated spiritual life and reconciliation to hundreds of queer people. He has challenged and changed the local Church in visible and radical ways. He has no interest in engaging internet disputes.
“I thought of my married LGBTQ Catholic friends, whose presence at a Catholic parish prophesies against systematic homophobia and institutional prejudice. The God they publicly serve has nothing to do with the far right’s condemnations. Their theology is public, too, and demands that the Church recognize the goodness of their love that comes from God.
“I thought of my queer friends who wonder out loud about sexual experiences in light of their Catholic faith. What does it mean to be LGBTQ and Catholic? What gives spiritual life and what steals it away? Is Grindr acceptable? This is personal, and often public, theology. Queer communities are discerning these questions for the first time. Will theologians listen?
“I thought of young queer people in CCD asking their religion teachers why the Catholic Church hates LGBTQ people. How can these teens join a religious community that excludes them and their friends? Many have challenged their bishops directly. The Jesus these young people know has nothing to do with homophobia and transphobia. These brave young prophets offer us public theology without apology.”
Steidl said, too, that he had done his own public theology from his experience in LGBTQ communities. And it is in these circles, the theologian claimed, where God was moving, and not in public debates. Building a Bridge, in his estimation, is doing much good. To conclude, Steidl suggested a corrective for academic theologians who believe it is their role to do public theology:
“. . . . [T]heologians need to pay attention to what is going on in queer Catholic communities. They need to listen closely and respect the long histories of struggle that continue inside and outside the academy and public debate. If they do listen, they will find that reflections on queer experiences call the Church to dialogue that goes far beyond the bounds of traditional Catholic teaching. . .Ultimately, listening to queer voices will challenge theologians to move beyond Building a Bridge to the mountains and valleys of queer experience. There, theologies of the excluded community thrive on the margins of the Church. There, life-changing and life-giving ministry challenges far-right theologies that perpetuate the sinful and harmful status quo. There, God is working. Theologians must pay attention.”
One interjection from the academy is that Building a Bridge was reviewed in a leading journal, Theological Studies, where the book is described as “gentle, gracious, an[d] attractive.”
There is truth in both Ahern and Steidl’s arguments. There has been relative silence from the academy about Martin’s book and the discussions it has fostered. It is not surprising that many theologians have not critically engaged a work that has a pastoral, rather than a scholarly, focus. But there are many people, perhaps described as non-professional theologians, who are doing public theology around Martin’s book. And Steidl makes the key point that these contributions are important because the wisdom they offer the Church is profound. Catholic theology today has much listening to do.
Rather than engaging the book directly, the best witness Catholic theologians can offer is to do public theology about some of the related issues raised by Building a Bridge. Ahern and Steidl both acknowledged the criticisms, some quite hateful, Martin receives, and that his lectures have been cancelled. Theologians can respond to such realities from their existing work, such as: how to move ecclesial discourse beyond seeming impasses and raise new questions; how to respond effectively and in a manner preserving university ethics when the online right-wing tries to stifle debate. Guidance from the academy could greatly benefit the Church on these matters.
Martin’s book picks up on the work of many people who have struggled for LGBT equality and then tries to point a way forward. It remains for others to describe what that way forward looks like and how, in concrete terms, to get there. The book is opening minds and healing wounds, for sure. But enacting Building a Bridge, finding and pursuing that way forward, is much harder work. Part of that work will require academic theologians to both listen more and to be much louder in their public theology.
To read Bondings 2.0’s interview with Fr. Martin about the revised and expanded edition of Building a Bridge that will be released this month, click here.