Madness on full display at NCR

Michael Sean Winters...oh, the poor man!

Sometimes I try to imagine what it must be like for him as part of the team at the "National" "Catholic" "Reporter" (quotation marks meant to indicate that none of these terms is accurate). At one time, I suppose, the editorial team might occasionally get together, but no doubt since Covid, all contact is remote, with additional masking encouraged in case we find out later Covid can travel via Zoom.

Mr. Winters, from what I can gather, has been exposed to serious ideas in the course of getting what was probably a fine education, and every once in a while there is evidence some of that obtained purchase in his mind. I imagine he fancies himself a moderate sort of person; in the midst of the progressive hive-mind that is the "N""C""R," I bet he is suspected of being a crypto-trad (indeed, I know it for a fact, from readers' comments, that got so embarrassing the editors eliminated them); all because every once in a while, he meekly demurs ever so slightly from the Progressive Project. So, for example, he will occasionally say abortion is actually a bad thing, and maybe a law here or there placing some limits on it might not be so awful...but then he seems to fall back in line for awhile. I dread the thought of the struggle sessions that must ensue when he questions the Revolution ever so slightly. 

This is a man who, whenever anyone behaves badly, is quick to roar, "to the guillotine!" (And, yes, he really did bring up that image in reference to people with whom he disagrees.) He has several times in his column urged the bishops to silence this or that person, or remove this or that person; usually for that worst of sins, according to the Progressive Project: being mean. And yet, here is a fellow who -- when attempting to "report" [stifled guffaw] on things he doesn't like -- averts almost instantly to ad hominem. That is, according to my ossified pre-post-modern way of thinking, being mean.

So let us look at the latest bit of eloquence Mr. Winters shared -- on the "transgender" phenomenon:

Bishops, listen to Catholic health workers, not culture warriors, on transgender directives

First of all, I think it's precious that he imagines "the bishops" pay much attention to the "N""C""R," whom very often, the writers in said publication openly complain about. When MSW isn't appealing to the bishops, as here, he is bashing them (notice the sly suggestion in the column that most bishops aren't "smart," apart from one or two that might actually converse with Mr. Winters: "I remember one of the smarter bishops I know telling me..."

I am tempted to delve into the whole "culture warrior" smear, but I think at this point, the gig is up. Almost no one outside the Progressive zone of mutual affirmation can deny there really is a war of ideas and values underway, and those who are resisting are not the aggressors. Mr. Winters advocates unilateral and total disarmament and surrender, which is not only incoherent, but profoundly immoral. It wasn't that long ago when the "N""C""R" made it's reputation on thundering against the sexual abuse of children by a few perverted priests, which too many negligent bishops allowed to flourish. But now that the abuse of children is called "gender affirmation," where is the "N""C""R"? Applauding from a front-row seat.

But let's get to the meat of this. 

What is at issue is whether Catholics, including those in health care, can ever cooperate with lying about human identity, and with mutilation of bodies as a consequence of that lying. This is what so-called "gender therapy" is.

Yes, some people do experience a disassociation or "dysphoria" regarding their sense of sexual or "gender" identity. This is not made up. Why it happens and how to deal with it are serious questions. But the wrong answer is to say that subjective feelings trump objective facts. It really is amazing to hear those who croak "follow the science!" at every opportunity, in this case demand the physical sciences be cast aside and expurgated as if they never existed.

Let me spell out for you what the so-called "therapy" -- which Mr. Winters says the bishops should allow for, if not endorse -- consists of:

- "Affirm only": this is the stance advocated by many in the "transgender community," and which is being endorsed at the highest levels, including our federal government. It means that if anyone -- even a toddler -- says, in effect, "my body isn't me, I may look like a girl, but I'm really a boy" -- or something else, e.g., "non binary," then the only acceptable response is to "affirm." Anything else is deemed "transphobia," "hate" and all other evil things.

- "Affirm only" means addressing Claudia as "Claude" from thenceforward and dressing him, er, "her" accordingly. Only, changing gender does not require any change of clothing, because that would reinforce oppressive "gender norms." But if Claudia wants to dress differently, "affirm"!

- Next comes the administration of drugs; hormones that will, in sufficiently high dosages, cause a female body to become more masculine, and vice-versa. And so-called "puberty blockers" which do exactly what they say: a young person's body that is about to enter puberty is prevented from doing so.

Do you realize no one really knows what affects these drugs will have, long-term? There are reports that they can cause infertility; and if you go looking, you will find numerous reports of individuals who went through this, only to discover that they couldn't function sexually afterward. And then you have the trauma of someone regretting it all and "de-transitioning." I cannot imagine the pain and regret involved in having your body be distorted and mutilated, only to conclude it was all a colossal mistake.

Now, you may say, oh but Mr. Winters didn't endorse any of that; and technically, that's true. But what, precisely, does he expect to change about the bishops' guidance as a result of "listen[ing] to health workers"? Who thinks this is about which brand of pain-killer to prescribe after the procedures? This is transparently about whether there can be any circumstances allowing for so-called "gender therapy," and the obvious answer to anyone who knows anything about the Catholic faith, is no. Mr. Winters is so ready to call other people, including bishops, not-very-smart; but to offer this pretense about flexibility is either a sign that he isn't very smart, or else he thinks you aren't.

Why can't the bishops allow this?

You know, this is not even primarily a function of doctrine. First and foremost, it is a scientific question. What makes someone male and female? What does this reality of biology -- if it is real, if biology is real -- consist of? These are questions on which science has very well settled answers; only in the very rarest circumstances is there true ambiguity about someones sexual identity. Even where the body parts may be malformed or there can be both male and female parts, the proof of sexual identity is found in the cells. 

We used to have a term to describe the state of misperceiving reality around one; the kinder term today is mental illness. Again, this is a real thing and deeply painful to all involved. But there is no love in going along with it, when that means causing actual harm, even if I don't know how to relieve you of the conflict you experience with reality. I have known people who experienced particular forms of mental illness; this is not a hypothetical.

The other day, I had a conversation with one of our teachers at Bishop Leibold School, which is part of the "family" of parishes which I pastor. Our school has earned several awards for it's "STEM" program (standing for science, technology, engineering and math). It occurs to me that right now, our society is asking everyone to practice a kind of cognitive dissonance. When it comes to engineering, there is no such thing as personal laws of physics or subjective mathematics. If you try to build a bridge according to any other but the one set of physical laws, that bridge will fail. Such is the respect we supposedly have for all sciences, this far into the modern era. Oh but not biology! Then we are told we must suspend all natural laws upon request. Men can have wombs; women can have penises. It is all madness, and the same wilful defiance of reality will end as badly as a collapsed bridge, if not far worse.