For its last CTSA consultation session on the sex abuse crisis, the Consultation has planned a reflective discussion of two important questions: 1) methodologically, how can or should the sex abuse crisis change our ways of doing theology? and 2) practically and structurally, how do we ensure that this question remains robust and lively in the CTSA, and in Catholic theology generally?
In preparation for the session, we invite you to download and read the two short essays and the Examen in the session Dropbox folder. They are in the “Session materials” subfolder; the Examen is below as well. In addition, we invite you to visit the “Additional resources” subfolder and download the list of suggested further readings.
Even if you do not have the opportunity to look over any of the materials before the session, please come! Your insight is essential to ensuring ongoing theological engagement with this issue.
Sincerely,
Julia Feder, Daniel Horan, Stan Chu Ilo, Megan McCabe, Cristina Traina
Consultation Committee
Examen
Because some of us are not directly involved in the sex abuse crisis as perpetrators or victims, and we may not address sexuality directly in our scholarship, we may feel that we have had no role in the crisis and that theological and moral responses to it need not affect our corner of the profession in the future. Thus, we may not have reflected adequately on the ways in which our own theological habits and our practices as a guild have helped to facilitate this crisis, to perpetuate it, or to diminish its importance. We invite you to reflect on the questions below.
Does my own work encourage a focus on the rehabilitation and forgiveness of the sinner to the detriment of attention to the care and rehabilitation of the sinned-against? Of potential future victims of sin?
Have I used the ideas of trauma and moral injury too generally, diminishing their precision and impact?
Who and what are the credible sources with which I do and teach theology? Do I treat the witness of children, gender queer persons, women, or people of color as less credible than others’ accounts?
What interpretive frameworks do I apply to scripture and theology? Do any of them impose psychological or gendered grids that might lead me to diminish the impact of, or explain away, abuse?
Have I thought adequately about how oppression, trauma, and wounds of all sorts might affect my vision of sin, grace, virtue, eschatology, sacramental theology, exegesis, and other theological questions?
Does my theology treat sins involving sex as either more significant or less significant than other classes of sins?
Do hiring, promotion, and colleague and student mentoring practices in my department create power imbalances that encourage abuse or that blame victims?
Do my writings or style of teaching promote greater deference to ordained scholars than to lay scholars?
