Talk:Mychal F. Judge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
LGBT Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Fire Portal
Mychal F. Judge is part of WikiProject Fire Service, which collaborates on fire service-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Suggested article edit guidelines:


Contents

[edit] 2005 comments

A lot of this article was removed citing POVness [1]. Some of it is clearly not POV. anthony (see warning) 12:16, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I replaced "Father Mychal" because it appears to be general policy not to use certain (though not all) titles in articles. (We do not write "Mr Smith," "Sir John," etc.) The section about the "lifeless face of their beloved chaplain" is without doubt POV. The insertion of the former President's remarks seemed like an attempt to end-run the NPOV requirement. "Honorable death" is definitely POV. -- Emsworth 02:02, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Actually, from the Manual of Style [2]: "Similarly, if someone has been knighted they may be referred to as Sir Steve or Dame Judy". What I'd really like to know though is how a Roman Catholic priest can possibly be "openly gay"! -- Necrothesp 14:40, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
You can be gay and celibate in Catholicism. Although openness is discouraged it happens. There are priests who openly keep mistresses as well.--T. Anthony 08:16, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Some of it was POV, I didn't touch those parts. I'm neutral on the "Father Mychal" references. I don't think they should be taken out, but I don't see much point in adding them back, either. But these sentences were removed even though they were clearly not POV.

It was while giving the holy sacrament to firefighter Daniel Suhr that Father Mychal removed his helmet and was struck by falling debris. He continued administering last rites even while injured. Father Mychal then entered the lobby of the World Trade Center north tower where an emergency services command post was organized. The south tower collapsed and debris filled the north tower lobby killing many inside.

Also an attributed quote by Clinton was removed. There were other parts which were likewise not POV. Some of the removed text was POV, but much of it wasn't. Here are the restorations I made. anthony (see warning) 16:54, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


His title was Father, and to address a priest by his first name is disrespectful. In the same way that you wouldn't refer to the Queen of England as Elizabeth. 88.110.7.28 11:51, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Must be a policy thing. Padre Pio is called "Pio of Pietrelcina", I assume, to avoid using words like "Father" or "Padre."... Although I assumed wrongly I see. The change is because that's what he's called on the canonization papers. Kooky.--T. Anthony 08:09, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Anon cleanup comments

I have removed the following (by 66.30.225.99 (talk)) as it does not belong in the article, but in deference to its spirit I have added {{cleanup-date}}.

This article needs attention. The NYT article linked here says Judge did not die from a jumper, and did not die while administering last rites. A myth. Still, he had been giving last rites just before. The text:
Early news accounts, repeated even recently, said that debris killed Father Judge as he was administering last rites to a firefighter who had been killed by a falling body.
The story was close. Father Judge did indeed anoint the firefighter, Daniel Suhr, said the firefighter's widow, Nancy. But then he went back into the lobby of the north tower, she said witnesses told her, and was killed by falling material inside when the south tower collapsed. Witnesses and videotape recorded inside the lobby confirmed that he died there and not while giving last rites. Some firefighters speculated that he died of a heart attack, but Brian Mulheren, a retired New York City police detective who attended the autopsy, said Father Judge died of blunt trauma to the back of the head.
Mrs. Suhr said that friends suggested she correct the anointing story. I said, 'Listen, Father Judge is a priest and people need to hold onto that myth.' How wonderful does it sound that he died giving the last rites to a firefighter?
Father Duffy repeated the story at the funeral. He was talking to God, and he was helping someone, he said. Can you honestly think of a better way to die?

Hairy Dude 12:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About his death

It says in the article that he was possibly killed by a falling victim. Do we know where he was when he was killed? In the French flimaker(s) documentary, it showed all the firemen scrambling up an escalator as the 2nd tower collapsed. Then after all was quiet they noticed Judge. So if he was inside (which he should've been) I doubt it was a falling/jumping victim.

So is he the 17th officially recorded victim or the first? It says both things in the article.

If you do a Google search on Judge, the story that he was hit by a jumper is pretty widespread. I think it needs to be acknowledged in the article -- if only to debunk it (but we need a source cited in any event). 23skidoo 03:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect information about Mychal's grave removed

Removed the text "A model of the World Trade Center cross was installed over his grave.[1]". While there is a model of the World Trade Center cross at Graymoor -- which is in New York, up the Hudson from the city -- Mychal is buried (as the article says) at Totowa, N.J. There is no cross over his grave. I have a photo of his grave, if anyone would like to see it. Jim 21:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Father Mychal's sexual orientation

An anonymous editor User:75.3.23.157 seems to have a problem with categorizing Father Mychal as an LGBT rights activist (even though he was a member of Dignity), or even as an LGBT person from the United States or an LGBT "ordained or vowed person of faith", though his identity as a celibate gay priest seems to be quite definite, and verified by several people independently in the articles linked to from his obituary. I am going to put the categories back, and I would ask the anonymous user to argue the case against them here on the Talk page, rather than editing the article itself. Thank you. Yonmei 19:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Membership in Dignity means nothing, he was a Catholic priest. Many white Catholic priests are active in the Knights of Saint Peter Claver, that doesn't mean they are African-American, though. The sources for him to be gay is not from himself, it is coming from gay people who obviously want to try and exploit the fact that the father was willing to minister to gays. It is ashame that some people could be so ungrateful, that Fr. Mychal did what not many priests would want to do, and the gay community attacks and disrespects him after he dies on 9/11. 75.3.23.157 20:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
He was not a LGBT rights activist, he never said anything publicly in support of gay marriage, because he was against it. He cleary does not belong in that category. 75.3.23.157 20:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, being a member of Dignity does not mean you support gay marriage according to the wikipedia entry. Yonmei, it seems like you and some other people believe that being gay makes someone automatically in favor of gay marriage. That is not true. 75.3.23.157 20:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Yonmei, by your logic, Bill Clinton should be in a homosexual category, since Ann Coulter has come out and said he is a homosexual. Yonmei, why don't you go over to the Bill Clinton article and do that? Be consistent with your ignorance. 75.3.23.157 20:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I think you are intruding your own POV here when you assert that being identified as gay is an ungrateful, disrespectful attack. It is not. Please don't confuse the issue.
Thomas Von Essen, the fire commissioner of New York, says he knew that Father Judge was gay, and several other people, not all of them gay (though it is wrong to assume that because they were gay their testimony must be disrespected) say they knew it. While Father Judge was alive, he preferred to keep his sexual orientation known only to a few: that was his right. But there is no reason to closet the sexual orientation of someone who is now dead.
There are several people who knew Father Judge personally when he was alive who are publicly quoted in obituaries and biographical accounts saying they knew he was gay. Unless you can show proper evidence that all of these people - including the fire commissioner - are either lying or being seriously misreported, Father Judge's identity as a celibate gay priest is a matter of fact. You will need to argue why this fact should not be included in a biographical article about him on wikipedia. Yonmei 20:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
These people that make that claim hate Fr. Mychal and what he stood for. He never gave out any information that he was gay. Because of this, there is no proof that he is gay, and no reason to be he isn't straight. Only critics of him are the ones that say he is gay, which is why, if you classify Fr. Mychal as gay, then you should classify Bill Clinton as gay, because Anne Coulter has said that he is gay. 75.3.23.157 20:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
You are asserting, then, that Thomas Von Essen, Tom Ryan, and Mychal McNicholas - all of whom knew Father Judge when he was alive, and all of whom say he was a celibate gay priest - are all saying so because they are "critics" or "hate Father Judge and what he stood for"? Can you link to any evidence for this assertion? Yonmei 20:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
His being gay is common knowledge and reported in the media, see this article. Haiduc 20:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Haiduc, GLAAD isn't a reliable source. There has been no reliable source given yet. 75.3.23.157 21:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I posted a link to this article on my Talk page when we were discussing this there. From the New York Metro. Yonmei 21:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Even if he was gay, that doesn't make him in favor of gay marriage or a gay rights activist, so why is that category still present? 75.3.23.157 21:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

He was a member of DignityUSA, which is an organisation that "works for respect and justice` for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in the Catholic Church and the world through education, advocacy and support". So, whether or not you accept he was gay, as a member of Dignity he was an LGBT rights activist. Yonmei 21:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


Can this work then to out pro-choice politicans that are actually pro-life? 75.3.23.157 21:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

How is this offtopic comment relevant to this article? Yonmei 21:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

It can set a precedent, that all it takes for someone to be identified as something on wikipedia is to have a couple of quotes form a couple of people that knew them saying they were something, even if they denied it. 75.3.23.157 21:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Please note that this user has been reported to WP:PAIN for personal attacks on several users' talk pages. CaveatLectorTalk 21:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I was a personal friend of Fr. Mike's and attended the wake. He was not a homosexual, despite what the media publishes. Closer friends of his, ie Steven McDonald, have stated to me as well that he was not gay. Scanz851 20:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)scanz851

Firstly, please place new talk at the bottom of a section and not on top. Secondly, even if what you say as true, there is no way to verify it through the internet, so the statement is rather useless here. CaveatLectorTalk 21:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
To clarify, Scanz: one of Wikipedia's core policies is that information must be verifiable. The article has links to reliable sources saying that Fr. Mychal was gay, which justifies the information's inclusion in the article. If you can provide equally reliable and verifiable (published) sources saying that he was not, then these can also be introduced, and the article can be amended to reflect the conflicting reports. However, if there are no published sources supporting what you've heard, I'm afraid that the word-of-mouth isn't sufficient to remove the content from the article. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Father Mychal's membership of Dignity

I am removing the activist category because Diginity did not have a position on gay marriage until 2003, Judge died in 2001. Just because he was a member of the organization does not mean he would have agreed with everything the organization put out, even after he died. 75.3.23.157 00:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I have now reached my "three revert" limit on this article in the past 24 hours, and cannot revert it again until this evening or tomorrow. The argument that the anonymous editor is apparently making, that same-sex marriage = LGBT activism, is false. DignityUSA "works for respect and justice` for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in the Catholic Church and the world through education, advocacy and support": it is an LGBT activist organisation, and active membership of it, without evidence the other way, strongly implies that the member is an LGBT activist. This is especially true for a priest who joins DignityUSA, unlike a lay Catholic, as the organisation is not a recognized entity within the Catholic Church because of its stance in opposition to Catholic teachings on homosexuality. Yonmei 07:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, Yonmei, active membership in the Roman Catholic priesthood would mean opposition to gay rights. Your logic is flawed.

He could have just been in the organization to minister to those people or as a support group. You have no source with a statement from the father that says what reasons he was in the organization for. 75.3.23.157 16:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I think it's quite clear that Father Mychal F. Judge was an LGBT rights activist, and because this has been disputed, I am laying out the evidence for it here. He was a longtime member of DignityUSA. As 75.3.23.157 has reminded us, for a priest - gay or straight - to support Dignity's Statement of Position & Purpose[2], especially the second paragraph, is intrinsically an activist position.

The history [3] archives at Dignity's website make clear that this Position & Purpose has been part of the Statement since May 1970 (and also recount Dignity's history as an activist organisation aimed at changing the Catholic church's position on gay people). ("We believe that homosexuality is a natural variation on the use of sex. It implies no sickness or immorality. Those with such sexual orientation have a natural right to use their power of sex in a way that is both responsible and fulfilling.... and should use it with a sense of pride."

(Also, an example of Dignity activism in early 2001[4])

The section on the 2000s includes a mention of Mychal F. Judge as a "longtime member of Dignity".[5]

For a gay priest to be a member of Dignity means he was an activist: his field of activism was changing the Catholic church's current attitude towards LGBT people.

I have therefore reverted the category LGBT rights activist, as it was before 75.3.23.157 removed it.Yonmei 00:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That argument doesn't work, you aren't arguing about Mychal Judge, you are just giving facts about the organization, but not Mychal Judge.
All the facts you are giving apply to the organization.
Membership in an organization does not make a person an activist. Ted Kennedy is in the Knights of Columbus, should he be classified as a Pro-life activist? According to your logic. Yes!
Mychal Judge has no history of public activism, he never made any statements regarding changing the Catholic's church current attidue towards LGBT people.
Yonmei, you have not provided any sources to qualify Mychal Judge as an activist, only the organization. He could have been a member of the organization for the support group aspect. 75.3.23.157 05:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, without any sources, you just attempting to connect two things together is original research, and that is not allowed on wikipedia. 75.3.23.157 05:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
75.3.23.157, you have not shown any evidence that Father Mychal F. Judge opposed the position and purpose of DignityUSA. Just as you could argue, if Ted Kennedy were a member of Human Life International, that showed that he was a pro-life politician unless his actions/speech were to prove otherwise.
Further, there are direct accounts from The Life of Father Mychal[6] that describe him working for gay rights issues without publicity. I am aware that this is a matter of strong feeling for you, which has resulted in your vandalising other wiki pages to "make a point" and in personal attacks on me in my Talk page and in summaries of your edits, and indeed seems to have led to your describing Wikipedia itself as an "anti-Catholic website"[7]. I suggest that it is a matter of such strong feeling to you that you are not capable of weighing the evidence fairly, and you need to step away from the issue. Yonmei 07:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Yonmei, you have not been able to provide any evidence he supported all the positions of Dignity, the burden is not on me to provide facts that he didn't feel someway, the burden is on you provide the facts since you are the making the asseration.

Also, as I said before, you just trying to assume Mychal Judge is basically original research, that is not allowed on wikipedia.

Also, you tell me to step away, but why don't you step away? You are trying to promote a pro-gay agenda and are clearly not concerned about whether you have facts or not. 75.3.23.157 14:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

The burden is on you to find facts, 75.3.23.157: so far you have failed to support your edits of this page with any facts at all. Please find a source asserting that Father Judge did not support Dignity's Position and Purpose to justify your latest edit. Yonmei 16:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Yonmei, you can not be serious. I am not the one trying to add content to the article without sources, you are the one doing that, and you need to leave it out until you get a source, and it can not be original research.

You have no idea how Wikipedia works, you don't add something to Wikipedia without a source and then when someone removes it tell them to prove it's not true, you have to provide a source for it to be included, which you have not done, you have only used original research. 75.3.23.157 23:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

For those curious, the statements in question are sourced within the article already. The anon user wishes to question the validity of the sources, but has clearly failed to present any viable reason to do so. CaveatLectorTalk 05:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

CaveatLector, there are no statements, there are no sources. Yonmei has is using original research. 75.3.23.157 01:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

It is very apparent that the statement is quoted and sourced on articles main page. (Note 2). CaveatLectorTalk 04:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The category debate

The main debate here is whether or not to include Mychal Judge in Category:LGBT rights activists or not, right? Well, it seems to me that this passage from the New York magazine article is evidence enough:

Back in the early eighties, Judge was one of the first members of the clergy to minister to young gay men with aids, doing their funeral Masses and consoling their partners and family members. He opened the doors of St. Francis of Assisi Church when Dignity, a gay Catholic organization, needed a home for its aids ministry, and he later ran an aids program at St. Francis. Last year, he marched in the first gay-inclusive St. Patrick's Day parade, which his friend Brendan Fay, a gay activist, organized in Queens.
Cardinal O'Connor wasn't exactly a fan. "I heard that if Mike got any money from the right wing," says McCourt, "he'd give it to the gay organizations. I don't know if that's true, but that's his humor, for sure." [3]

The problem that I see is that the article as it stands only says that Fr. Mychal was gay and celibate, and doesn't say anything one way or the other about his political actions in favor of LGBT rights. The answer, as I see it, is to incorporate the information from this quote, properly cited, into the article. Then the debate ceases to be about the interpretation of "what constitutes an activist", and returns to the subject of the article. If properly sourced information from a reliable source is in the article, questions of original research should evaporate.

I may attempt such an inclusion myself if I have time later; however, I'm concerned that having too much emphasis on Fr. Mychal's sexuality may constitute undue weight. The New York article would seem to indicate that his sexual orientation was part of Fr. Mychal's identity, but not the sum of it, and probably not as important as his identification as a recovering alcoholic. Whoever incorporates this information (whether it's me or someone else) should take care to present it as part of a balanced portrait of Judge's life and work. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

When the inclusion of Fr. Judge in the LGBT Rights Activists category was challenged, I did some link-clicking, discovered he was a long-time member of Dignity (and that at least one Catholic gay man says that Fr. Judge helped him to come out) and established that Dignity's primary "position and purpose" has been about the same since 1970 - to change the Catholic church's attitude to homosexuality. To me, when a Catholic priest makes that kind of statement - by joining Dignity, by publicly standing up for Dignity - that makes him a LGBT rights activist, whether or not he was himself gay. I think that mentioning his long-term membership of DignityUSA (with a ref link to the New York Metro article mentioned above) would be sufficient.
I agree that we don't want to overbalance the article with too much about Fr Judge as an LGBT Rights activist, but we probably need at least one sentence tucked in somewhere. Yonmei 08:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay that is something, sorry for the earlier thing above. I'm still tempted to think he was simply supportive the way he was to recovering alcoholics like himself, but I guess that isn't the reality. In any event it does make him poor as a priest, there's absolutely no getting around that even if one desperately needs there to be, and that likely made it hard to take. If you don't like that it does well I don't know what to tell you. The Church and the majority of American Catholics would agree that it's bad for priests to be LGBT activists.(Pew[4] indicates 64% of American Catholics consider homosexuality a sin, this is much higher than they do for euthenasia, and other polls indicate they oppose openly gay clergymen.) That this makes one a bad priest, by most standards including the faith's, was understood in his lifetime. So for Catholics like me it is/was, I had heard it for years, a difficult adjustment. We had/have to stop thinking of him as a good priest and start thinking of him as a noble gay man who happened to have been ordained.(And I know this is going to invite a bunch of angry responses, but if any such responses land at my talk page I will delete them unread)--T. Anthony 09:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for joining the discussion, T.Anthony. (Apologies for rearranging the Talk page a bit - I wanted to make it more clear where the discussion was going.)
I was quite aware, even before this page was being vandalized by an anonymous editor, that Father Judge's status as a good priest, a good man, and a gay man would be contentious for many Catholics who do not believe that a gay man can be a good priest.
I think that if this fact can be incorporated properly into the article it could be a useful contribution, and might make it possible to make clear why Father Mychal Judge was so covert about his LGBT activism - not only because many of the firefighters he worked with would have been unable to accept his orientation, but also because as a Catholic priest, he had to be covert about supporting Dignity's Position and Purpose - because the reaction of many Catholics to discovering that he was gay, was to assert either that he couldn't have been gay because he was a good priest, or that because he was gay he couldn't have been a good priest.
It might be better to have a separate section in the main bio called "Controversy" - to outline Father Judge's membership of DignityUSA, quote the piece about his giving money to gay organizations that right-wing organizations had given him, and outline the mainstream Catholic confusion over a good gay priest. What do you think?Yonmei 14:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I know the way I said it might sound pretty prejudiced so I have to thank you for handling it in a calm manner. Personally I'm not with the current Pope entirely as I think a gay celibate priest can be a good priest. For me it's mostly the "activist" part that was hard to accept. Because, for me, LGBT activist implies that the priest isn't passively of a certain inclination or even compassionate to people of that inclination. It is saying the priest was actively against the faith on a matter of sexual morality it's held consistently for what most would say was its start.--T. Anthony 16:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, suffice to say that over the past thousand years at least, many Catholics - and many Catholic priests - have profoundly disagreed with Popes and with mainstream Catholic opinion, on matters much more important than whether a loving and faithful couple ought to be condemned to hell forever because they are of the same gender. (That there are much more important moral issues than whether or not to condemn loving and faithful couples is something I hope we would both agree on.)
Catholics who disagreed with the Pope and with mainstream Catholicism may have been bad Catholics for their time, but then some of them were later canonized by the Catholic church, so obviously the Catholic church as an institution can and does change its views, however unlikely that may seem to most Catholics at the time. A priest who challenges mainstream Catholic thinking on homosexuality may, in the 21st century, be regarded as a bad priest: but who knows what the Church will think in the 22nd century? Or the 30th?
I think that something under the heading "Controversy" would be useful: if I write a first draft, referencing his membership in Dignity and his support of gay groups, and what I understand to be the position of the Church, then you can edit it, and we'll see how that goes. I'll put the draft version on the Talk page for now. Yonmei 18:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I see I pushed you too far on the matter and now you're not being as friendly. The Catholic Church can clarify in a way Eastern Orthodoxy does not, but there are many things set very much set in stone. For centuries there have been priests with mistresses who avoided saying anything against concubinage. At times communication was too poor to do much about that, but the Church then or now does not accept that. For centuries there have been priests who were Pantheistic, but that will never be acceptable either. That a pantheistic man who lives with a woman can be heroic or kind is not anything I'm disputing. There are just things that the Church has consistently stated and those things do not change, at least not in the way I think you believe. The Church still does not allow remarriage after a divorce or pre-marital sex. The only real difference on sexuality I can think of is less condemnation and more emphasis on forgiveness for sexual misdeeds, but even those aspects were always there.--T. Anthony 22:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
It's not a question of friendly or unfriendly. I understand what the Catholic church's official position is, but many good Catholics disagree with it - that's why Dignity exists. You support the Catholic church's official position, and so do many good Catholics - but all the verifiable evidence that has been found so far indicates that Father Mychal F. Judge did not support the Catholic church's official position on homosexuality. What we need as Wikipedians is to express: the Church's official position: the evidence that Judge opposed that position: the controversy that this engenders with Catholics - without expressing any opinion which side is right and which side is wrong. I've tried to do this in the section below, but I'd very much appreciate your input. Hopefully we can work through this to express the issue. I don't think we should argue any more about which is right and which is wrong: just try to get the positions down in a neutral way. Yonmei 08:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh I imagine you here will do fine. I was just, I don't know. I certainly don't want terms like good or bad in the article. Some kind of acknowledgment that being an LGBT activist and a priest simultaneously is usually considered contradictory would be enough. (Granting that a priest could be active against violence or mistreatment of LGBTs, while maintaining they should be celibate, and I don't think that'd be contradictory) I kind of doubt I'd do good at editing this much beyond that.--T. Anthony 16:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Draft: Controversy

Added this draft to the main article.

--- Okay, that's a draft. Edit away! Yonmei 19:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opposing Views

Since the editors want to give a greater prominence to speculation that Judge was either homosexual or an advocate of opposition to the moral teaching of the Catholic Church, perhaps we need to balance that with commentary from others who deny he was homosexual or was not an advocate of opposition to the moral teaching of the Catholic Church. patsw 20:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that the fact that he was gay is now accepted beyond dispute: there is already a link in the list of external links to a protest made by one of Father Judge's friends who was not aware that Judge was gay before he died, and evidently does not wish to believe it now. There is no need to balance fact with uninformed speculation, though.
If you can find evidence that Judge did not in fact support the Position and Purpose of Dignity[8], despite being a long-term member and supporter - some public statement that Judge made against Dignity's position and in support of ecclesiastical authority against lesbian and gay relationships.
I agree that there should be some information (I have written a first draft above) about why Judge's membership of Dignity and his sexual orientation are controversial issues for some Catholics. Yonmei 20:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how you could characterize this as "now accepted beyond dispute". Many people close to Fr. Judge have insisted that he was not gay. This is what defines a dispute. Any characterization that he was or wasn't gay, celibate or non-celibate, is itself speculation, absent a declaration from Fr. Judge himself or other evidence beyond speculation.
If you can find evidence that Fr. Judge was an advocate of opposition to the moral teaching of the Catholic Church despite his being a Franciscan priest and having made solemn vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience to God, to the Church, and to his religious order, please add it to the article. patsw 18:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Done. Yonmei 18:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I would maintain from my reading about his that he was faithful to the Catholic Church and involved himself in Dignity because he felt he could be as Christ was among sinners and not among the righteous Pharisees. patsw 18:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
If in your reading you have found statements by Judge indicating that he opposed Dignity's Position and Purpose, that will be a valid addition to the article. Yonmei 18:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I also believe he maintained his own sexual orientation as a matter private to himself and God. patsw 18:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Obviously, since many people knew of his sexual orientation - referenced in the article - Judge did not keep his sexual orientation "private between himself and God". Yonmei 18:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Furthermore, by hosting Dignity meetings and marching with the gay-friendly version of the St. Patrick's Day Parade, Judge clearly showed his opposition to the Church's official stance on homosexuality. I'd hazard that after prayer and contemplation, Judge concluded that opposing the Church's official teaching on this matter was consistent with his vows and conscience. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I think much of this discussion comes down to the meaning of the word "activist", and what level of activitism qualifies someone to be an activist. I think hosting Dignity and marching with in alternative St. Pat's Day parade demonstrates a willingness to stand with and advocate for the oppressed. In doing this, Mychal was doing no more than any Franciscan should do. The founder of the Franciscans, St. Francis of Assisi, cared for the lepers, in a time when leprosy had a definite moral taint. At the same time, Mychcal was "out" to only a few because he seems to have felt that it would compromise his ability to be an effective minister. We are, therefore, discussing a complex man. He was on the activist side on some things, but not willing to come out himself -- which I would think would be a very basic requirement to be labeled a "GBLT activist". Jim 19:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it's not even a requirement to be LGBT to be an LGBT rights activist. As the LGBT rights activists category itself says, "inclusion in this category does not necessarily mean that a person is themselves lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered". Father Judge could have been a heterosexual member of Dignity - but we know from separate sources that he wasn't. What I believe is that without evidence that he opposed Dignity's position and purpose, his long-term membership of Dignity (and the evidence that he was willing to publicly oppose the church hierarchy's attitude to LGBT people) made him an LGBT activist whose field of activity was the Catholic Church. It is the definition of an activist, as well as a Franciscan, to stand with and advocate for an oppressed group. Yonmei 19:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More POV

' It is hoped that the statue will be fully approved by the American Bishops and enthroned in the National Basilica to the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C." is clearly POV. I have removed it.Cross Reference 01:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)