Saturday, February 08, 2014

Warren Throckmorton blogs more about John Catanzaro and associations real and not

It looks like over at Warren Throckmorton's blog there's been some continuing posting about John Catanzaro, who in the past was a guest contributor at The Resurgence and touted by Mark Driscoll as a helpful naturopath.  A brief synopsis of the posts, posts by post:

John Catanzaro has response about cancer vaccines

Claims of Resurgence Ex-Author and Naturopath Questioned by Esteemed Cancer Institute

Dana Farber Cancer Institute requests John Catanzaro cease all unauthorized use of their name

So there's that.  For those who may not have noticed there's more than one John Catanzaro LinkedIn profile for someone in the Bothell area:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dr-john-catanzaro/6/357/b67
Founder And Ceo
HWIFC Cancer Treatment and Research Group 
January 1996 – Present (18 years 2 months)

...

Bastyr University
Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine,  Oncology and Cancer Biology 
Integrative Oncology


Bethany Divinity Seminary
Doctor of Theology,  Theology/Theological Studies 
Concentraton on theology science and medical ethics


That "concentraton" is in the original.  Here's a second John Catanzaro profile.

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dr-john-catanzaro/6/357/b67
Founder and Co-Developer
HealthCoach7 
2012 – Present (2 years)


Founder
Health and Wellness Institute Cancer Research Group 
January 2007 – Present (7 years 2 months) Bothell, WA


Owner
Health and Wellness Institute 
January 1997 – Present (17 years 2 months)


Education is

Bastyr University
1989 – 1995


Now check out interests here:

Alternative Medicine, Integrative Medicine, Cancer Research, Organic Food, Wellness
Groups and Associations:American Association of Integrative Medicine logo 
American Association of Integrative Medicine

Barnett Educational Services
Deepak Chopra
Insight Pharma Reports
Insight Pharma Reports - Biomarker Development
Lung Cancer (Localised and Metastatic)
Naturopathic Doctors (ND)


Did we just see Deepok Chopra?  This can't be the same John Catanzaro who has been Mark Driscoll's naturopath, can it?  Becausee Deepak Chopra was on the opposite side of Mark Driscoll in a debate about whether Satan exists ... wasn't he?

http://theresurgence.com/2009/03/26/watch-abc-nightline-debate-now

It's worth noting that there is no evidence available to indicate John Catanzaro was ever a contracted member of Mars Hill Church.  There's a few concerns raised about the legitimacy and veracity of Catanzaro's ethics and claims.  Catanzaro still has time to appeal his suspension.  Wenatchee The Hatchet has other interests that are more favored that blogging about the follow-up of the John Catanzaro situation but was Throckmorton has noted he has received a threat from someone in the wake of his blogging about Catanzaro's credentials and ethics. 

So if a John Catanzaro has an interest in Deepak Chopra, the Deepak Chopra against him Mark Driscoll participated in a debate about the existence of Satan a year before Driscoll would refer to James Cameron's Avatar as the most demonic film he's seen. [February 14, 2010 in Jesus & Demons]

It's interesting to note that in the sermon Mark Driscoll says:

Now Jesus is having one of those Jack Bauer days. All right, he’s preached, cast out a demon, healed a woman.

We'll get back to that Jack Bauer reference in another post. For those who heard the 2008 spiritual warfare series the mother who levitates off the ground while she's nursing her baby will sound familiar.  Let's get to the quote that people are most likely to actually remember:

And if you don’t believe me, go see Avatar, the most demonic, satanic film I’ve ever seen. That any Christian could watch that without seeing the overt demonism is beyond me. I logged on to christianitytoday.com and the review was reflective of Christianity today, very disappointing. See, in that movie, it is a completely false ideology, it’s a sermon preached. It’s the most popular movie ever made, and it tells you that the creation mandate, the cultural mandate is bad, that we shouldn’t, we shouldn’t develop culture, that’s a bad thing. Primitive is good and advanced is bad and that we’re not sinners, we’re just disconnected from the divine life force, just classic, classic, classic paganism, that human beings are to connect, literally, with trees and animals and beasts and birds and that there’s this spiritual connection that we’re all a part of, that we’re all a part of the divine. It presents a false mediator with a witch. It presents false worship of created things rather than Creator God in absolute antithesis to Romans 1:25, which gives that as the essence of paganism. It has a false incarnation where a man comes in to be among a people group and to assume their identity. It’s a false Jesus. We have a false resurrection. We have a false savior. We have a false heaven. The whole thing is new age, satanic, demonic paganism, and people are just stunned by the visuals. Well, the visuals are amazing because Satan wants you to emotionally connect with a lie.

Okay, so that quote.  February 14, 2010.  Driscoll mentioned a film being the most demonic, satanic film he'd ever seen.  Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but let's bear in mind that this was the year after Mark Driscoll debated the existence of Satan/the devil with Deepak Chopra and who's on the list of interests for at least one John Catanzaro? 

Bear in mind, I love the films of Hayao Miyazaki while not endorsing the ideas of pantheism in any fashion.  But at the risk of stating the obvious, regular readers of Wenatchee The Hatchet know very well I can read or listen to people with views I strenuously disagree with while being able to grant a few positives here and there.  The question I'm asking at this point is manifold:

1) Has Mark Driscoll shown himself to be capable of nuanced agreement with someone he fundamentally differs with?
2) Given Driscoll's history of publicly denouncing as satanic things he doesn't appreciate how thoroughly did he check out whether or not his naturopath may have had an interest in Chopra's work before letting him guest write most of his 18 guest articles for The Resurgence in the year of 2009?

Don't believe it?  Observe:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130425211223/https://theresurgence.com/authors/john-catanzaro

Dr. John Catanzaro is a Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine. His alma mater is Bastyr University, a leading medical university specializing in integrative and
alternative medicine. He is also affiliate clinical faculty of Bastyr University
and trains medical students.

Dr. Catanzaro is CEO of the Health and Wellness Institute and practices
integrative oncology. He is also medical director of HWIFC Cancer Research Group,
a not-for-profit, where he provides vision and leadership in developing innovative
vaccine immune strategies to treat cancer.

He is the author of numerous articles and two books, namely Cancer: An Integrative
Approach and Complete by the Master's Touch. He has been featured on radio and
media broadcasts including Consumer Magazine, KCIS Living Christian, and Campus
Crusade for Christ radio. He was nominated best naturopathic physician by Seattle
Magazine. He is a professional member of the American Association for Cancer
Research, Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians, Association of Clinical
Research Professionals, Academy of Physicians in Clinical Research and a
registered Principle Investigator with the National Institutes of Health.
He is married to Annamaria and has five children and three grandchildren.

You can find Dr. John on Facebook and Twitter.
You'll find that nearly every article Catanzaro guest wrote for The Resurgence was in 2009, the year that Mark Driscoll debated Deepak Chopra about the existence of the devil.  So "if" the John Catanzaro who has an interest in Deepak Chopra is the same one that has been Mark Driscoll's naturopath up until, well, quite possibly recently (as in January 2014 given what Mark Driscoll told Drew Dyck in an interview about consulting first one and then a second naturopath)  was Mark Driscoll aware of this interest? 

Catanzaro was suspended at the end of January 2014 for allegedly tricking cancer patients into using an unapproved experimental vaccine.  There's still time for Catanzaro to make an appeal, or to establish that he did not trick patients into accept an unapproved experimental vaccine. 

We live in a period in which, as Dahlia Lithwick recently put it about the controversy surrounding Woody Allen, that the court of public opinion take express outrage by way of appropriating legal terminology and jargon in a way that both divests that jargon of any meaningful content on the one hand and which rhetorically reinforces foregone conclusions on the other.  To quote her:

But recognize that these are opinions and inferences, not “evidence.” They are not “cases,” and we are not adjudicating this mess in any kind of court. Recognize that dressing your personal opinions up in fancy talk of “burdens of proof” and “presumptions of innocence” helps clarify almost nothing and confuses a great deal. Mob justice often has all the trappings of an unbiased search for truth, but it’s actually just an (understandable) outpouring of rage and blame. We have statutes of limitation, not to punish complaining witnesses but because the legal system recognizes that memories and evidence are degraded over time, even as umbrage on both side burns brighter than ever.

Investigative journalism is one thing. But the Court of Public Opinion is what we used to call villagers with flaming torches. It has no rules, no arbiter, no mechanism at all for separating truth from lies. It allows everything into evidence and has no mechanism to separate facts about the case from the experiences and political leanings of the millions of us who are all acting as witnesses, judges, and jurors. So go ahead and tweet your truth or publicly shame someone who is tweeting hers, but don’t believe for an instant that this is how complicated factual disputes get resolved or that this will change hearts and minds about our woefully anti-woman, anti-victim culture.

It's also worth suggesting that in the court of public opinion one person's quest for justice and the facts can inexorably slip into another person being attacked, harassed, and belittled for not sharing precisely the same sense of outrage.  As a little aside, various anonymous visitors over the last few years have expressed frustration that Wenatchee The Hatchet doesn't come to their obvious conclusion.  Driscoll can't imagine, it seems, why anyone would come to a conclusion other than his.  That alone should persuade you why this blog is not a blog dedicated to jumping to a specific conclusion.  Wenatchee The Hatchet does not have a clear-cut "positive" agenda but there is a clear-cut "negative" agenda of wishing to avoid being yet another bullhorn for the Court of Public Opinion when it may be possible to encourage people who actually know what they're talking about to share something on record if they feel up to it.  This is why even one comment from JSuffering counts for more than five anonymous comments from people who can only muster up "Mark's Hill". 

Catanzaro may be permanently suspended.  He may be a quack, or he may be able to prove that he was forthcoming enough with his patients to clear his name.  We should not be so committed to a foregone conclusion about a self-proclaimed gigachurch pastor that burning anyone associated with him at the stake becomes convenient.  Now this is not to be construed as a defense of Catanzaro but people on the internet are lazy enough at reading that someone's bound to jump to that conclusion no matter what. 

The question about Catanzaro's interest in Chopra in light of Driscoll's scorched earth, guilt-by-association approach to yoga but not martial arts where Eastern practice is concerned still seems like a legitimate question.  How credibly can we now take Driscoll's claim to spiritual discernment (if we ever took him seriously on that point to begin with?) if it has turned out that the year Mark Driscoll debated Deepak Chopra on the existence of the devil Mark's own naturopath may have had an interest in Chopra's work? 

No comments: