Catholic Unity, Teaching, and Belief

 

 

Thanks to Michael P. for his directing our attention to the June 14 Commonweal editorial entitled “Catholic Unity.” The thrust of the editorial pits the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) against others regarding the March 23 health care law.

The editorial raises two interesting, rhetorical questions. The first is: “What makes the USCCB and its legal and legislative staffs so confident that they alone are competent to understand the new health-care law?”

The second question then follows: “Is there a possibility that the USCCB might be wrong?”

The editors of Commonweal then answer their own questions in the editorial by stating, in essence, that the voice of the Catholic bishops is but one voice in the Church—a major voice but still only one voice; and that the bishops’ conference was wrong in not supporting the health care legislation that became law on March 23. The editorial contains an remarkable presupposition that no one could agree with the position advanced by the bishops; however, this supposition is incorrect. One might add that not everyone who is or claims to be Catholic agrees with the position advanced by the Commonweal editors and those who concur with them.

This makes me wonder: what is the source of unity, and what is the source of this apparent division in which the editors of such a well-known journal (and those who agree with them) pit themselves against those who are called to be the Church’s teachers? What is it that the Church teaches about unity? Whose job is it to unify Catholics? The answers to these questions should be clear to all Catholics.

Thus, we must not forget what the Second Vatican Council said regarding such matters, i.e., the role of bishops, their duty, and their authority: “Bishops... have been made true and authentic teachers of the faith...” (Christus Dominus, N. 2) And, one of the things about teaching that fall within their competence is to address the subject of civil laws (such as the health care legislation) within the understanding of the doctrine of the Church so that the doctrine will be understood by all the faithful. (CD, N. 12) It is the specific duty of bishops to teach the faithful so that they have the capacity to defend and propagate the Church’s doctrine in a world that rejects Her teachings. (CD, N. 13) Moreover, it is the role of the bishops, in communion with the pope, have the responsibility of maintaining the “unity of the flock of Christ.” (Lumen Gentium, N. 22) It is the further responsibility of the bishops “to promote and safeguard the unity of faith and the discipline common to the whole Church.” (LG, N. 23) The faithful are reminded that they are to adhere to their bishops “so that all may be of one mind through unity.” (LG, N. 27) The Commonweal editors may well be free to express their opinions, but this does not mean that they speak with the Church’s teaching authority that is charged with the clear responsibility of promoting the unity of Her members. This authority and responsibility rest elsewhere as the Second Vatican Council demonstrated in the texts I have quoted.

As we prepare to celebrate tomorrow’s feast commemorating the martyrs John Fisher and Thomas More, we might recall another time in which some members of the Church went along with the government’s fiat but others did not. Many of those who did not, such as Fisher and More, suffered greatly. But they remained true to what the Church taught and to which Catholics were called in the exercise of their free will to believe. They understood the unity that is vital to the condition of following Christ in spite of the personal cost.

Saints John Fisher and Thomas More, pray for us!

 

RJA sj