Evening star., 1947-07-21
Msgr. Sheen Denies Criticism
OF PsychoonaIysis in General

from the reporter of the first news
paper.
80 Why was there no correction
by me of the distortion? (a) A
personal letter of protest was mailed
by me on April 9th. (b) Since the
matter was of not great significance
anyway it was felt that it was better
to ignore publicly the misunder-
standing. (c) Many letters poured
in from all over the country from
people who declared that they had
been victimized by charlatan psy-
choanalysis. This put the writer in
dilemma when further critisicms
of the reported talk appeared.
Should he clear up the misunder-
standing on the part of the medical
profession which was so capable of
understanding the distinction be-
tween Freudianism as substitute
for the sacrament and psychiatry
or. should he keep from breaking
faith with those people who rendered
valid protest against the abuse of
a scientific method? He choose the
latter course until more recent Incl
dents make the recitation of the
facts necessary.
No Criticism of Psychiatry.
In regard to further devlopements
on this subject: Cd I did not make
any criticism of psychiatry or of
the psychiatrists and within the
last two months several were sent
by me, after consultation with rep
utable doctors, to the one whom
they believed and I believed to be
the outstanding psychiatrist in New
York City, DR.. Bernard L. Pacella.
90 The point of discussion is not
the Catholic Church and science. nor
have I ever presented myself as
spokesman of the church on the
subject Of psychiatry except to
praise it when it remains within
the limits of the scientific. Catho-
lies in psychiatry do not make Freu-
dianism Catholics any more than
Catholics in physics make atomic
bombs moral. "a I am however, a
spokesman of the Catholic Church
when I say that any positive denial
of sin on the part of Freudian
psychoanalysis renders that science
inadequate for the handling of the
problems which affect the whole
man.
S. My criticism of phychoanalysis
as substitute for the confessional,
because it substituted sublimation
for absolution, was not nearly as
universal criticism as that made
against the whole Freudian position
by such philosophers as William
Ernest Hooking, or by Arthur Koest-
Ter, who criticizes Freud because
freedom as datum of experience
hardly plays any role in the Freud
ian system: or by Reinhold Mel
buhr who describes Freud "as ar
irving at conclusions as nihilistic in
their character as Nietzsche";; or by
DR.. Alexander r. Mclean of the
Mayo Cline, Rochester. Mimi, who
asks: Can we, through some dis
torted psychiatric concepts, excuse
the loss of civilian virtues-morals;
should we disguise our psychiatric
failures and thus lose the scientific
virtue-truth?
I do trust that the psychoanalysts
have not been so sensitive to crit
icism as to ask for the condemna-
tion of the film Miracle on Thirty
fourth Street" Certainly they
ought to be generous enough to be-
lieve that man who prefers Jung,
Alters or Adler to Freud is not an
enemy of psychiatry. 1t would in
deed be a tragic day for civilization
If butchers went out of business be-
cause their meat was criticized, or
if athletes walked off the football
fields because their coaches found
fault with the way they ran.
ITO just the extent that I have
driven any milk man off his route
because I was quoted in a news
paper for having condemned tainted
milk, which he misunderstood as
condemnation of Holsteirs and Jer-
seys, I must humbly apologize. 1t is
to be very much regretted, however,
that the milkman lost so many pa
irons by publicizing throughout the
milk industry trivial misunder-
standing occasioned by the report of
a reporter who was not at the dairy
congress, and who in the isolation
of his news room announced my
condemnation of cream"
Dressmokine Doubles
Dublin's dressmaking classes have
doubled In attendance recently. since
Sreer ~, a s,-fo l. n7y, he 0ht iped mora.