Friday, May 10, 2013

Children Growing-up Gay & Vatican's Antigay - Impact Harmful - Groupthink - Fr. Marty Kurylowicz

Krista Tippett - Speaking of Faith
American Public Media/Minnesota Public Radio

Revised: January 25, 2011

Martin Kurylowicz
Canton, Mi
United States
Roman Catholic, Gay Priest

My name is Martin S. Kurylowicz, M.Div., M.S.

If you find useful, I submitted my article on
Children Growing-up Gay & Vatican's Impact Harmful.

I wanted to submit this article I wrote, if you think it may be helpful in addressing a hopefully more precise look into the problem that the Vatican is repeating regarding their pronouncements against homosexuality, which is similar to their mistreatment of Galileo. I hope I have addressed the why and how the Vatican is wrong in their statements against homosexuality, and their responsibility for the harm they cause the world population.

I had a meeting with my bishop and this article I wrote is an further detail elaboration of the main points I presented to him on February 15, 2008.

The article focuses on the Vatican's misuse of scripture claiming it as the authority for condemning homosexuality, in the same way the Vatican misused scripture to condemn Galileo. I explain the social psychological concept of "Groupthink" as the cause of the Vatican's mistakes. I draw attention to other Popes (John XXIII and John Paul II) and their leadership that was more preventive in degree limiting the effects of "Groupthink," eliciting more information from the outside of the Vatican and insisting that faith and science must not be separated. Pope Benedict XVI, I understand has removed the representatives of the academic fields in science from the committees in the Vatican, which Pope John Paul II had insisted that they be on.

I avoid using the word "Church" when addressing LGBT issues, because the truth of the fact is that many people in the "Church" are very supportive of LGBT people, families and work very hard for changes. It is the Vatican that is the focus source of the problem.

I submitted an attachment of the article, which I eliminated my personal story.
below the full article:

Children Growing-up Gay & Vatican's Impact Harmfulby Martin S. Kurylowicz, M.Div., M.S.

Meeting, February 15, 2008
Dioceses of Grand Rapids
Galileo Galilei born February 15, 1564

The Vatican’s pronouncements against homosexuality are unsubstantiated and are harmful to everyone, particularly to very young children. Richard Isay, Psychoanalyst, Professor of Psychiatry, Cornell University Medical School, found in his clinical studies that children as young as 4 and 5 years of age, who grow up to be gay, know that they are different. These harmful unsubstantiated antigay norms of the Vatican influence the social environment of a child, fostering developmental disruptions in the expression of their sexual orientation and the formation of secure human attachments. This has resonating effects throughout their lifetime. It damages, in early childhood, the core part of a human being that hopes and believes that his/her needs for love are valid and permissible, which pushes the child into the direction of a depressive state of hopelessness for life. (Jack Drescher, M.D. and Henry Krystal, M.D.,

IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER that it has been noted that homosexuals who are not raised in environments influenced by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements or the like, do not display any unusual symptoms that would separate them out from the general population. They tend to live lives that are full, productive and well adjusted, combined with a strong network of close and enduring relationships. This paper is addressing specifically the harmful effects experienced by those who were raised in environments influenced by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements.

The Vatican, Galileo and the Bible

The Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements appear to be repeating the Vatican’s case against Galileo in 1633, which condemned him, as a heretic, for claiming “the earth revolves around the sun”, which contradicted the Vatican’s interpretation of the bible that it is “the sun that revolves around the earth.” Historians have described this conflict between the Vatican and Galileo, as the arrogance of authority vs freedom, and identifying the aspects that led the Vatican to make this error in judgment. The Vatican was the (1) sole source for interpreting the bible, objectivity is lost and the interpretations were biased to fit the unchallenged traditional constructs, which (2) opposed the free search for truth. Without the freedom of expression of ideas, the Vatican then becomes tightly insulated from any new knowledge that challenges their interpretations, which leads the Vatican to (3) rejecting the scientific findings of its time. Photo (Jerome J. Langford, O.P., “Galileo, Science and the Church” The University of Michigan Press, Michigan, 1992)

Revised  - Added 2 reference links: 1/25/11 

“Galileo had many problems trying to introduce the Copernican theory to be relevant.   Scripture from the Holy Bible was one problem that Galileo had to face.   Cardinals and many priests argued against Galileo and the theory, because it did not meet with Holy Scripture.   Scripture had professed that God made the Earth the center and that it was immobile.   Although many cardinals, priests, monks, and many others did not like the theory and thought it collided with scripture…” Photo 

Gay Marriage & Galileo: Pope described as …"so averse to anything intellectual that everyone has to play dense and ignorant to gain his favor"-- The Trial of Galileo - by Douglas O. Linder (2002) - UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY (UMKC) SCHOOL OF LAW

Resuming original article below:


The reactions of those in the Vatican are in part similar to the symptoms known as “groupthink” a concept from social psychology. (Irving Janis) “Groupthink” identifies a mode of thinking that develops in highly cohesive groups, where members tend to strive to be unified, agreeable and cooperative with each other. It is difficult to imagine how such benign qualities in groups, like the Vatican, which has the most honorable intentions and dedication to strenuously labor for achieving the best decisions that will be the most beneficial for people to experience the fullness of God’s love and blessings, however, in reality the outcome can unintentionally be quite the opposite. Making decisions that become problematic, causing unintentional violence, even murder to millions of innocent children and adults. What happens in groups to cause such devastating results? It is this effort among members to be in unity and conformity, which can be easily be mistaken as group consensus. However, this kind conformity unintentionally suppresses critical thinking and motivates members to avoid conflicts, or being too harsh in judgments or criticisms. “Groupthink” can happen in many groups, families, communities, organizations, etc. However, in groups similar to the Vatican, this type of “groupthink” conformity is much harder to identify. Because it can easily be confused, when it is under the disguise of the most sincerest efforts to faithfully be obedient to Christ‘s central command to love, which is that we are to live as one, in love and peace with one another. 
However, in scripture Christ provides many qualifications to the type of love, he commands of us. In the gospels, Christ is portrayed in a considerable number of challenging confrontations, dealing with love, from calling Peter satin, to fierce physical anger shown in the temple that of using a whip and kicking over tables, to making the statement that he did not come to bring peace, to this world, etc. Christ provides a number of remedies for “groupthink, “ which are also supposed by Irving Janis, as remedies i.e. to name a few, critical evaluators (warnings about false pride, and all forms of greed, helping the least among you, etc.), checking warning signs (when all think well of you, security in possessions, if your light is darkness how deep that darkness will be), challenging insulation of an in-group (the blind leading the blind, do not invite people who will repay you, invite people who cannot repay you). Photo

“Groupthink” is a situation that occurs in groups vulnerable to making unintentional faulty decisions. These groups are described as highly cohesive groups, members having similar background, insulated from opposing views from outside of the group, lack tradition of impartial leadership, responsible for making quality decisions, however, the rules for making decisions are not clearly defined. The symptoms of “groupthink” are not deliberately or intentionally done on purpose that is what makes them so difficult to detect. Some of the symptoms of “groupthink” are (a) the group overestimates their abilities, i.e. as in knowing all aspects of a excessively complex situations, subjects or topics (b) members feel pressured not to challenge established assumed group consensus, (c) among all members there is an unquestionable belief in the inherent morality of their in-group, that they willfully would not try to harm anyone (d) collectively the members construct rationalizations to avoid any questioning of the reasons for recommitting to past decision, (e) they form stereotypes of names and views of the “enemy groups” and their leaders i.e., as evil, stupid, weak, (f) the group discourages: individual critical thinking, reality testing, presenting negative feedback, (g) mindguards, group protect members from adverse information disturbing group shared complacency about morality of past decisions.

“No irreconcilable differences between science and religion”
Pope John Paul II

Every now and then, a surprising figure arises, inspired by a fuller understanding of Christ's love and meaning of his example, and decides to fly directly into the face of fierce opposition of complacency, with the hope to initiate the resiliency of true love for all people, and ending the causes of hate. Pope John Paul II was one of these surprising figures, who in an unprecedented gesture of humility, 359 years later, in 1992, publically apologized to Galileo for the Vatican’s error and declared him “not guilty.” Pope John Paul II’s purpose for this gesture was to stress the point that the Church does not reject scientific progress and is not opposed to the free search for truth. He stressed that there are no irreconcilable differences between science and religion, stating “Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes.” In 2000, Pope John Paul II’s unwavering persistence to right the wrongs of the Church in past, despite the resistance inside the Vatican, was unstoppable. On March 12, 2000, he made a public apology, asking forgiveness from God for sins committed by the Church, against groups of people, “We are asking pardon for the divisions among Christians, for the use of violence that some have committed in the service of truth, and for attitudes of mistrust and hostility assumed towards followers of other religions." Pope John Paul II pleaded for the hope that “Never again,” would the Church repeat these kinds of violence. (Rory Carroll, “Pope says sorry for sins of church” March 13, 2000- The Guardian Photo

Pope John Paul II began the process of removing the blindness of Church authorities caused by years of arrogance, replacing it with humility that would open the new ways to understanding and unity. His unprecedented act of humility rekindles hope, in the Church, similar to the way Pope John XXIII, inspired hope by his words "I want to throw open the windows of the Church so that we can see out and the people can see in." These unprecedented public acts made by world church leaders generates hope, which should not be dismissed too readily because the light of hope does not shine yet in all areas of human life. It is the work of hope to keep it alive, giving it birth in areas where hope has yet to shine. Photo

Intrinsically Disordered?
Lacking Supporting Documentation

The light of hope needs yet to shine on the Vatican’s process for formulating their unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements as intrinsically disordered, because it remains untouched, and follows the same process that led the Vatican to falsely condemn Galileo. The Vatican states the bible as the source of authority to condemn homosexuality, as they did to condemn Galileo. But this authority of the bible is (1) based solely on the Vatican’s interpretation of the bible, which lack impartiality and therefore is not an objective interpretation to reach truth. Instead, it is exceedingly vulnerable to perpetuate a systematic error for truth, by intentionally formulating interpretations to fit unchallenged traditional constructs. As proven to be the case with Galileo, the Vatican’s interpretation of the bible remained consistent with the accepted tradition of the Church and dogmatically stated as the truth from God that it is the sun revolves around the earth. Therefore Galileo was accused of contradicting God. The Vatican has made this same kind of error about homosexuality. The Vatican interprets the bible as attesting to the fact that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered and states that this interpretation by the Vatican is consistent with the same moral judgment “...found in many Christian writers of the 1st centuries and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.” (Vatican’s Congregation For The Doctrine of The Faith, previously Congregation For Universal Inquisition, held by Cardinal Ratzinger until becoming Pope Benedict XVI)

Free Search For Truth

The Vatican (2) continues to remain closed to the free search for truth, on the topic of homosexuality. There is a tremendous amount of psychological research data, complied over decades, from around the world, which the Vatican has summed up the importance of this data into a single sentence composed of 6 words. This sentence was incorporated into the section on homosexuality, which is a section composed of 230 words in length, and is found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The latest scientific data related to gender, gender identity, human sexuality, sexual orientation, etc. (3) are not open for consideration by the Vatican, their importance is rejected. Even though the research data from Gender Studies, alerts us to the fact that gender, gender identity is considerably more complex, than previously known, i.e. that it is fluid. It has broadened our understandings about gender, allowing more insight into how people relate and function, rendering obsolete many traditional views about gender. Core Gender Identity, is defined as a person's own sense of identification as male or female, are in ways “braincoded” and not necessarily dependent the genitalia of the person. In the late 1990’s, research from a Gender Studies presented at a conference, at an APA Convention, announced that we should not be thinking about only 2 genders, but more likely 2000 genders. The discrete categories once used to describe gender and sexual orientation are now, from more recent research data, suggesting tremendous variability, which has implications that involves the entire human race. At this point, it seems that science is once again at the same critical juncture where it was for Galileo in 375 years ago. However, the Vatican is insistent on making the same mistake, just like it did stating “the sun revolves around the earth” only now the Vatican is stating “there are only two discrete genders.” This information likely sound as stocking to the Vatican and to many others, today, as hearing, 375 years ago “ the earth revolves around the sun.”

Disinterested Friendship?

The Vatican repeats this mistake by holding onto their unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements, not based on objective principles from the bible or science. This is a serious mistake that fosters inaccuracies about human sexuality that are then incorporated into social norms, which incites various forms of implicit and explicit violence, on this specific population of people, most especially including children. However, the effects of these various forms of violence are injurious in numerous way to parents, family members, relatives and friends, which is far beyond the Vatican’s intended targeted group. In light, of the above mention findings from gender studies research data, the Vatican unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements are outdated, lacking clarity, and specificity in content. Vatican’s recommendations and directives to homosexuals are questionable at best and seriously harmful at worst. “Homosexual persons are called to chastity. 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.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church) What is the definition and meaning of the support for disinterested friendships? There are serious concerns and questions, as to what this terminology means and how it relates to healthy relationships with others, with oneself and the psychological well being of a person.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER, this paper is addressing issues related to those who at 4 and 5 years of age, who grow up to be gay, know that they are different. They do not know they are gay, at 4 and 5 years of age, only that they are different. It is only years later, in retrospect, can they identified what “different” meant and understand that it had to do with their early childhood uninhibited expression of love being expressed through their sexual orientation and core gender identity. It is important to remember that the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements are inadequate and in no way even begin to explain the astounding complexity involved in understanding human sexuality. From gender studies, it is understood that within the old defined categories of homosexuality, heterosexuality, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation, there is great variability and having more fluidity then once understood. What this means is that not everyone who grows up to be gay remembers feeling different as young as 4 and 5 years of age. This begins to show evidence of some of the variability that is involved.

From my personal experience of the Vatican's pronouncements against homosexuality, such as “disinterested friendship” has had a significant harmful effect in my life beginning, as a child growing up and throughout my adult life. As a child, I was educated in Catholic schools from 1st through 12th grade, in college and graduate studies in theology. In those first twelve years of Catholic education, it was taught continuously in our catechism classes that homosexuality was evil and such people were meant to suffer in hell. It was not until, I was in the 7th grade, on a weekly visit to the public library, I read through a book on Freud and found the first words, by a respected world renowned authority that were not condemning about homosexuality. However, from the beginning in early childhood, the Vatican’s negative message about homosexuality is unintentionally and implicitly conveyed in subtle ways to a child, by parents and other the adults in the life of the child. These messages are coming from the effects of social norms of the adults, who they themselves have been strongly influenced over the years by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements. Even at a very young age these subtle negative messages do cause a number of fears and confusion to a child, who grows up to be gay. It seems the parents make interventions to their child generally out concern and worries about their child’s future safety in the world, which are motivated by a reaction if their child’s behavioral deviates from the gender specific social norms.

“You Are Gay! This Is A Gift From God!”
Trappist Abbot

It was only in my late 30’s that a Trappist Abbot, challenged my thinking that I thought I was bad because I was “gay.” To my great surprised, the Abbot responded to me by saying, “Who told you that you were bad!?! You are “gay”! This is a gift from God.” The abbot went on to say, “You need to work at “coming out” to yourself, first, learning to appreciate who you are and to begin feeling good about yourself, as a gay person.” This was entirely the complete opposite from what I was taught throughout my life by the Vatican. The Abbot was the very first person I had ever “come out” to in my life. I never before felt such concern, understanding, and respect. This began a very long, extensive and expensive process of reversing years of the harm caused by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements. I drove twice a week from Grand Rapids to Detroit for counseling, because, as a priest, I was privy too much personal information about too many people and priests in the Grand Rapids area, for me to feel comfortable enough to speak freely in therapy in Grand Rapids. Photo

“What was I running from all my life!”

Besides therapy, as part of the “coming out” process, on Sundays, I would finish mass at noon, change out from wearing the Roman collar, into my civvies and drive 3 hours from Grand Rapids area, to Detroit to Affirmations (The Community Center for Lesbian, gay, bisexual & Transgender People) Ferndale, MI to attend "coming out" sessions, where I was just another gay person. I never disclosed I was a priest. If I was asked about my work, I would say, I work for human resources. My first time at Affirmations, I was beyond scared, I prayed the whole 3 hours driving from Grand Rapids to Detroit and when I arrived, I was stunned and said to myself, “These people all look normal.” Afterwards, I kept on asking myself, what was I running from all my life! It was at Affirmation, where I felt my life began but it was also the place where I saw and learned about so much injustice and violence that is directed, at LGBT people. And as a priest, I felt somehow responsible for this injustice continuing and the duty to speak out against injustice. I felt guilty for the years I felt bad about myself and all the negative stereotypes I had in my head.

Since, I was already driving twice weekly from Grand Rapids to Detroit, began taking classes at U of M, in Ann Arbor, got involved the U of M LGBT Office attending functions and classes. Next, I heard about PFLAG (Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians and Gays) and began attending meetings. PFLAG is one of the most supportive and affirming groups, because it was made tons parents. Imagine parents supporting their LGBT children, this is truly a gift from God. These parents I truly believe will be the first people in heaven, with nonstop tickets. Their love is strong, reassuring and so full of hope that everything is going to be all right that it leaves you feeling calmer and better. Here to I saw the grief, the stress and concerns of 100’s of parents, which just should not be. I would feel responsible being a priest that somehow the Vatican has to help these people, and follow their example make the world a safer place for all Children.

My first time attending mass at Dignity Detroit, I was in awe, such a holy place, which had nothing to do with the building where the Mass was being celebrate, it was all about the people there to celebrate the Mass. All these LGBT people, PFLAG people, and many other people, all singing, I mean all singing, like I never heard a congregation. No one could dispute that fact that Christ was truly, more than any other place I have ever been to, present among all those people. It was like a slice of heaven! 

Vatican and Tobacco Companies
For Harm Caused

And then one day, in 1997, in March, I was attending a conference, in Pittsburgh called the New Ways Ministry (A gay-positive ministry of advocacy and justice for lesbian and gay Catholics and reconciliation within the larger Christian and civil communities). Here I heard for the first time Richard Isay, speak about children as young as 4 and 5 years of age, who grow up gay know that they are different. Dr. Isay‘s address was emotionally quite revealing for me and I realize that I was younger than 4 years of age and when knew I was gay, looking back in time. Looking back in time, I could see all the harm that was done by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements, because at the young age of three, I did not willfully choose to be gay, to be evil or to do wrong that deserved to go hell. Photo

It was here, March 7 - 9, 1997, quite by accident, unexpectedly so, I was asked, if my name could be used in a newspaper article in connection with the convention. I felt that I was given an opportunity to help to make a difference. I was sure, at the time, there had to be someone else who would be better at "coming out" publically than me. However, I have said many times, in defense for my reasons for "coming out," "When you see a child on the train tracks of an oncoming speeding train, you don't think about anything else but to grab the kid to safety!" I knew too much by then and saw too much to remain silent while innocent children, who grow up to be gay should have to suffer needlessly their whole lives. I could not in good conscience remain silent and safe while so many others were not, especially children. I especially, remembered the very stern warnings that Christ made to anyone who harms one ot these his little ones. In March 1997, I came out publically to my parish, Holy Family Parish, Sparta, MI, with the hopes of drawing attention to children, who grow up to be gay and the pervasive harm that the Vatican causes by their pronouncements against homosexuality.

The Vatican is responsible for causing globally harm to millions of children and adults. And the Vatican will in the same way, as the tobacco companies had to compensate their consumers for the life threatening damage and deaths they caused by their cigarette products, the Vatican will have to compensate for the harm caused to millions of people globally by unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements. There are parents, who believed that they were doing the best for their teenager, by being faithful in enforcing these Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements on their teenage sons or daughters and only to find that their teenagers ended up committing suicide. They believe that they were doing what was right by God and the Church. Photo

Because the Vatican presented their pronouncements against homosexuality, as if they were coming from God, the same as they did with Galileo, dogmatically confirming that it is "...the sun that revolves around the earth." The Vatican needs to once again hear the words of Pope John XXIII about opening windows to see out and to follow Pope John Paul II unprecedented act of humility that leads to new understandings and by doing so the Vatican will be teaching us all by example that every individual is called to do the same. The master teacher to follow in this effort, as we know is Christ, in applying the remedies that Christ alerts us all to, found in the Gospels. They are consistent with the remedies listed for the prevention of the symptoms of "groupthink" that cause the making of faulty decisions that are life threatening to all people around the globe.

IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER that it has been extensively noted that those children who do not grow up in environments strongly influenced by these Vatican unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements, tend to live more fuller, well adjusted, and productive lives than those who do.

Presently, there are no civil laws to protect gays, LGBT children, teenagers and adults....this is truly wrong in the eyes of God and will soon change. Christ in the temple.

I explained to the bishop that my only fault was that I wanted to get healthy and to learn more. But in the process I learned too much and in the end I knew too much to keep silent, especially when children are being harmed, by the Vatican’s unsubstantiated antigay pronouncements.

Fr. Marty Kurylowicz
March 4, 2008

The Beauty and Challenge of
Being Catholic: Hearing the Faithful
“Speaking of Faith” – American Public Radio



Groupthink is a psychological terminology used to describe the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive ingroup that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action.  It refers to a deterioration in mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgments as a result of group pressures.
The symptoms of groupthink arise when the members of decision-making groups become motivated to avoid being too harsh in their judgments of their leaders' or their colleagues' ideas.  People would adopt a soft line of criticism and avoid conflict, even in their own thinking.  At meetings, all members are amiable and seek complete concurrence, which is likely to be recognized erroneously as consensus, on every important issue. 
The groupthink type of conformity tends to increase as group cohesiveness increases.  Groupthink involves nondeliberate suppression of critical thoughts as a result of internalization of the group's norms.  The more cohesive the group, the greater the inner compulsion on each individual to avoid creating disunity, which inclines him/her to believe in the soundness of whatever proposals are promoted by the leader or by a majority of the group's members.  However, this is not to say that all cohesive groups necessarily suffer from groupthink.  All ingroups may have a mild tendency toward groupthink, displaying from time to time one or another of eight interrelated symptoms.  But it need not be so dominant as to influence the quality of the group's final decision.  The eight groupthink symptoms are:
Pressure:  Victims of groupthink also apply direct pressure to any individual who momentarily expresses doubts about any of the group's shared illusions, or who questions the validity of the arguments supporting a policy alternative favored by the majority.
Self-censorship:  Victims of groupthink avoid deviating from what appears to be group consensus.  They keep silent about their misgivings and even minimize to themselves the importance of their doubts.
Unanimity:  Victims of groupthink share an illusion of unanimity within the group concerning almost all judgments expressed by members who speak in favor of the majority view.  When a group of persons who respect each other's opinions arrives at a unanimous view, each member is likely to feel that the belief must be true.   This reliance on consensual validation within the group tends to replace individual critical thinking and reality testing.
Most or all of the members of the ingroup share an illusion of invulnerability that provides for them some degree of reassurance about obvious dangers and leads them to become over-optimistic and willing to take extraordinary risks. 
Rationale:  No only do victims of groupthink ignore warnings, but they collectively construct rationalizations in order to discount warnings and other forms of negative feedback that, taken seriously, might lead the group to reconsider their assumptions each time they recommit themselves to past decisions.
Morality:  Victims of groupthink believe unquestioningly in the inherent morality of their ingroup.  To the extreme end, this belief could incline the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions. 
Stereotypes:  Victims of groupthink hold stereotyped views of the leaders of "enemy groups," that "They are so evil that genuine attempts at negotiating differences with them are unwarranted," or that "They are too weak to too stupid to deal effectively with what ever attempts we makes to defeat their purposes."  Organizations where competing groups co-exist should be cautious about this symptom because the damage of inter-group attack and/or mis-communications can counteract the totality of productivity of all groups.
Mindguards:  Lastly, victims of groupthink sometimes appoint themselves as mindguards to protect the leader and fellow members from adverse information that might break the complacency they shared about the effectiveness and morality of past decisions. 

Read more:

Groupthink, by Irving L. Janis
Published in Psychology Today, Nov. 1971

How Benedict XVI – silenced many like Archbishop Hunthausen - as head of doctrinal congregation – Conflict in the Catholic Hierarchy: by Timothy Peter Schilling - 4/3/13

DECEPTION 1997 - 2012
Fr. Marty Kurylowicz - Charged by the Vatican for “Coming Out” March 1997 - For the Protection of Children – 15 years later & 
President Obama’s letter of appreciation - 2012 

My Perspective on LGBT Rights Begins with Children - Fr. Marty Kurylowicz - 5/10/13


Gay 1990s Studies - Pope John Paul II’s group of THEOLOGIANS and SCIENTISTS studying homosexuality – for better understanding and fuller acceptance – ended with Benedict XVI 2005

Do I reject my gay brother? Bishop Gumbleton - Homophobia - "Always Our Children" PBS 1999

SEXUAL ORIENTATION is less about sex and more about LOVE, being one with another human being. Attachment Theory - - LOVE & RELIGION ---
Nothing in life is more precious than the intimate relationships we have with love ones. Healthy love relationships delight us give us confidence to take on challenges and support us in difficult times.

AUSCHWITZ -- CHRISTMAS 2008 -- A flashback far more severe than in --- BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN 
December 26, 2008 – Fr. Marty Kurylowicz

Obama ‘Changed Everything’ - Gay-Rights Backers See Progress in Year Since President Obama Backed Gay Marriage - 5/9/13

Truth, openness, wins election  vs. Deceit, secrecy, resigns papacy
Related news media & research links:

Benedict XVI & Bush 2003 against GAY MARRIAGE - Help Wins USA Presidential Election 2004 - A Well-informed Conscience - protects RELIGIOUS FREEDOM and NOT Tyranny in Religion 91212

Ratzinger, Reagan, Hunthausen and Gay Rights - 4/19/05
...Ratzinger's moves to undermine American bishops who sought to find a place in the church for gays and lesbians such as Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen of Seattle, who was also a leading critic of the Reagan administration's support for military juntas and death squads in Latin America... 

Conflict in the Catholic Hierarchy: A Study of Coping Strategies in the Hunthausen Affair, with Preferential Attention to Discursive Strategies - by Timothy Peter Schilling - 2003 

Sexual Repression and Pornography

No comments: