Madam, - Bishop Pat Buckley is to be admired for his innovative theology and candid acknowledgment of his sexual orientation (Rite & Reason, September 12th).
He does, however, leave an unexplained gap in his thinking when he says: "Over centuries we have been seriously misled into thinking that the rejection, subjugation and punishment of the flesh was the only path to God. I challenge this most vehemently and declare that there is another, equally valid way to God - the way that embraces the physical, the sexual and the erotic."
So, "rejection, subjugation and punishment of the flesh" are also valid ways to God? How can punishment of the flesh be "equally valid" with the sexual and the erotic - unless God suffers from the schizophrenia which the Bishop tells us (rightly, I believe) is at the heart of Catholicism in sexual matters. I suspect the bishop did not mean to leave this gap in his argument, but he did so nevertheless.
Perhaps in his admirable work in expanding the boundaries of Catholic thinking he hoped not to offend those who would lag behind. But has he not learnt from the Catholic bishops that playing both sides of the fence always ends in disaster? - Yours, etc,
DECLAN KELLY, Davis Court, Dublin 8.