The Church Must Speak in One Voice

During the past year the exercise of moral leadership within the Roman Catholic Church has attracted widespread public notice. For instance, different views on sexual morality occasioned conflict between Vatican authorities and a priest-professor at Washington’s Catholic University, Charles Curran. Next, two Vatican documents successively challenged American views on the legitimacy of homosexual conduct and the suitability of using in vitro fertilization in Catholic-sponsored hospitals. Finally, church authorities announced disciplinary dismissal for certain religious sisters who maintained pro-choice positions on abortion. In each of these instances the church intervened deliberately.

Predictably, Americans--Catholics and non-Catholics alike--question these exercises of authority. Especially do they challenge ecclesiastical interference in matters of personal conduct. For it appears to many that such authoritative teaching compromises values fundamental to the American experience, especially the freedom to pursue one’s own path in matters of religion and personal morality. So the question naturally arises: Why does the church teach so authoritatively?

Even in the face of ubiquitous criticism the church must remain faithful to its own identity and mission. As a sign of salvation and an instrument of the divine will, the church remains Emmanuel for all. Consequently, it sees no alternative to providing specific directions on what concretely constitutes the economy of God’s love. In doing so the church is essentially following the norms given by Thomas Aquinas, in particular his three arguments for why the church must take its moral authority quite seriously. He tells us, first, that everybody (and not just a few) has a right to know the truth about moral matters. Second, since morals pertain to personal salvation, they have to be learned without delay. Finally, dependent on the wisdom contained in revelation, the church can present sacred doctrine “without admixture of error.” Needless to say, St. Thomas’ arguments presuppose the divine assistance that we call grace; for, in the last analysis, we are measured not by any human norms but by those proper to God alone.

Consider the first criterion. The church, as the Scriptures make clear, proclaims a gospel of universal salvation. Accordingly, Aquinas tells us that all people must know the truth about a happy life. Even if human reason could roughly figure out life’s essential values, few people have both the ability and the leisure to pursue such sustained and concentrated reflection. Although contemporary pluralism encourages many opinions and political freedom respects them, America’s civic religion cannot guarantee anything like truth. Hence the church’s positions on the sanctity of marriage and the dignity of the human person. As in other areas of social life, all classes of people should have access to this truth.

Second, teaching morals, Aquinas says, ensures that all should know required truths quickly. Too much time defeats their efficacy. To be sure, human experience, since it relies on trial and error, can only slowly attain ethical wisdom. Moreover, experience can also be a hard teacher. The horrible signs of God’s absence in our world--drug abuse, economic injustice, civil strife--demonstrate just how irresponsibly we have managed our stewardship. Still, despite these signs, knowledge of God’s love and truth does not come easily. Each man and woman requires clear instruction in order to find “the surer way” that leads through caverns of moral complexity. As in the gospel, so today the supremely moral question reverberates: “Master, what am I to do in order to obtain eternal life?” In order to assist all peoples in answering this question, the church offers moral guidance.

Finally, Aquinas claims that since the church depends on a revealed wisdom, it can teach (to use his words) “without admixture of error.” Because moral matters directly affect both human life and happiness, no one--not even the state--can tolerate even minor errors. As Aristotle reminds us, a small mistake in the beginning means a big one in the end. The church, of course, rejects the liberal ideal of political neutrality toward different ideals of the good life. Indeed, as we sadly realize today, even a compromise position in morals, whether in the private or the public order, risks serious harm for both the individual and the common good. Conscious, then, of its own foundation, the church represents truth as a universal and humane value. As St. Augustine writes, “He who speaks the truth does so in virtue of him who is the Truth.”

So the church has to proclaim widely the good news as it affects such issues as the family and universal homelessness, sexual morality and the AIDS epidemic, distributive justice and education for life. Given the enormity of these concerns, we can be grateful that the Holy Spirit, the very life of God, so constantly aids the church, for this assistance ensures that God’s love will remain present in the world.

Indeed, as Vatican II assures us, “Man is the only creature that God has willed exclusively for himself.” The church’s desire, then, to instruct all nations corresponds to this divine desire.