Let us pause here and reflect on the stated aspiration of the nine bishops. They state that they are trying to help moral theologians. But the nine bishops say nothing new, because they seem to be incapable of thinking outside the box, as we say, of traditional Catholic moral thought regarding sexual morality. But moral theologians such as Salzman and Lawyer are trying to help bishops and other Catholics think outside the box of the very points that the nine bishops assert to be supposedly authoritative teachings. (Supposedly authoritative teachings are not formally infallible; they are non-infallible teachings, which means that informed Catholics may disagree with them in good conscience.) But for the nine bishops, thou shall not think new thoughts about sexual morality. Go away revisionists.
The nine bishops on the Committee on Doctrine do not want Roman Catholics to think in the bishops' view Catholics should obey the non-infallible authoritative church teachings regarding sexual morality, regardless of how misguided and mistaken those teachings are. I kid you not.
Here's what the nine bishops declare: "The fact that the alternative moral theology of THE SEXUAL PERSON leads to many positions in clear conflict with authoritative Church teaching is itself considerable evidence that the basic methodology of this moral theology is unsound and incompatible with Catholic tradition" (page 2). Evidence of what, you say? How about evidence of thinking? By definition, non-infallible moral teachings are non-infallible, which means that debate with Catholic tradition should be acceptable, but of course subject to further debate.
By implication, this statement by the nine bishops means that the only acceptable methodology for Catholic moral theology is one which yields only results that are not in clear conflict with the non-infallible authoritative Church teaching. In short, thou shall not think about church teachings regarding sexual morality. In the view of the nine bishops, non-infallible authoritative church teachings regarding sexual morality are not going to change, so new thinking is not welcome or needed. In their view, there is no need for a renewed Catholic anthropology. Go away revisionists.
The nine bishops advance their views in the name of a so-called hermeneutic of continuity, which seems to preclude in advance any serious change regarding sexual morality because the basic presupposition is maintaining continuity. Therefore no debate is welcome that would disrupt continuity in the teachings regarding sexual morality. Cagey, eh? On the one hand, it is acceptable for Catholic moral theologians to somehow discover new arguments to support the old teachings about sexual morality. But on the other hand, no new conclusions about sexual morality are acceptable if they would disrupt continuity. In this way, continuity precludes revision. Go away revisionists. It is hard to reason with people who start with the presupposition of the hermeneutic of continuity, because they have no genuine reason to enter into debate about their positions regarding sexual morality. They are here simply to broadcast their own positions regarding sexual morality. End of story. Go away revisionists.
As is well known, the Catholic bishops also want no debate about whether or not women should be ordained priests, no debate about whether or not diocesan priests should be allowed to be free from taking a vow of celibacy, and no debate about whether or not priests should be allowed to marry, which of course would run the risk that they might become divorced. I kid you not. The Catholic bishops want no debate about a good number of issues. Evidently, the Catholic bishops have already had their quota of change by accommodating the liturgical and other changes initiated by the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). Go away revisionists.
No One Philosophy, But Watch Your Epistemology
On page 11, the nine bishops quote a recent papal encyclical in which it is declared that the Roman Catholic Church today has no philosophy of its own nor does it today canonize any longer one particular philosophy in preference to others, as it did when Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophy was favored until the Second Vatican Council changed all that. Now think about that. For most of the twentieth century, Pope Leo XIII's encyclical AETERNI PATRIS (1879) made Thomistic philosophy and theology the favored philosophy and theology of the Roman Catholic Church. But the Second Vatican Council abandoned that position. As a result, today no one philosophy is favored by the Roman Catholic Church. Any philosophy will be OK provided that it does not overthrow old moral teachings regarding sexual morality.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
