What Constitutes Dissidence



Dear Mark,

Good article. Enjoyed the irony you projected here.

Yes, we Catholics do agree (i.e., who are orthodox to our faith) on fundamental issues as embodied in the Creed, etc. But we do disagree on some other issues that are less clear to the more “liberal-minded” among us: abortion (I'm personally opposed, but…”); male-only priesthood; celibacy; homosexuality, etc. I don't think we can include these issues in “everything else.”

Depends. Certainly abortion is a grave sin as the Church teaches over and over. Similarly, the Holy Father has made clear that the Church lacks the authority to consecrate women priests. But celibacy? Here we are talking about a discipline, not a dogma (which is why there are married Byzantine rite priests). I myself am of two minds about celibacy in the Latin Rite since (on the one hand) expanding the pool of to include married heterosexuals would greatly decrease the number of active homosexual priests who have wrought such damage in the past 30 years while (on the other hand) the things which recommend celibacy are still attractive and not to be dispensed with lightly.

As to homosexuality itself, that again depends on what is meant. Do we mean a person with same-sex attraction who is chaste and faithful to the teaching of the Church or do we mean an active homosexual? I know some conservative Catholics who have no room in the Church for the former, just as I know many liberal Catholics who have plenty of excuses for the latter. Both are, in the view of the Church's actual teaching, dissenting from the Faith.

Edwin Beasley

Dear Edwin:

What could be included in the “everything else” category? War in Iraq a just war, capital punishment, policies to help the poor, and the like.

Yes, though with qualifications yet again. Conservatives have a tendency to adopt a “minimum daily adult requirement” approach to the teaching office when it comes to stuff like capital punishment. Nonetheless, the teaching of the Church is:

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm — without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself — the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.” (CCC 2267)

In short, the overwhelming force of Catholic teaching is that, if human life can possibly be spared without endangering innocent human life, then it must be spared. It is not “That which is not intrinsically immoral is A-OK.”

Thanks for your thoughtful note!

Mark Shea

Senior Content Editor

Catholic Exchange



Editor's Note: To contact Catholic Exchange, please refer to our Contact Us page.

Please note that all email submitted to Catholic Exchange or its authors (regarding articles published at CE) become the property of Catholic Exchange and may be published in this space. Published letters may be edited for length and clarity. Names and cities of letter writers may also be published. Email addresses of viewers will not normally be published.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

MENU