Jim Christie (“When theology trumps ­psychology”, 15 February) is correct to draw attention to the way in which the historic use of exclusively theological categories to understand psychosexual pathologies contributed to the occlusion of the clerical sexual-abuse crisis, and to argue for the need for further integration of psychology and psycho­analysis in diagnosis and cure. But this is still only part of the story. As Marie Keenan has indicated in her Child Sexual Abuse and the Catholic Church: gender, power, and organizational culture (2011), the ills exposed by the sexual-abuse crisis are not only individual and psychosexual but also cultural, organisational, and even ecclesiological. Here, properly critical theological analysis still has a crucial and, as yet, lar