Dear Professor Maguire,
As the bishop of the archdiocese where you reside, I am obliged to reply to your circular form-letter, sent to the bishops of the country on June 19, 2006.
The opinions expressed in the two pamphlets enclosed in that correspondence are totally at odds with clear Church teaching. Sacred Scripture, the Magisterium, and Natural Law are consistent in opposition to abortion and so-called same-sex marriage.
You speak of your duty to dissent. Well, at least call it such. To claim that support for abortion and same-sex "marriage" is consonant with Catholic moral teaching is preposterous and disingenuous.
I, too, have a duty: to teach what the Church clearly believes. Your opinion on these two matters is contrary to the faith and morals of the Church.
Faithfully in Christ,
Most Reverend Timothy M. Dolan
Archbishop of Milwaukee
This was in response to the letters posted here. Professor Maquire response to Archbishop Dolan in part says.
I have received your letter of July 13. I was pleased that you replied even though your message was not as gracious or as pastoral as that of the one other bishop who replied. Terms like "preposterous" and "disingenuous" (the usual code for mendacious) are not the words of a pastor so much as those of a scold. Some of my colleagues-too cynically I believe-said I should take no offense because the letter was obviously written not so much for me as for those with whom you shared it here and abroad. I don’t believe that…not for a minute. I think that, in your fashion, your intentions were to help me in matters where you feel I am mistaken and that you wanted to do this for the good of the Church. Therefore, I will continue in the hope that even from such a caustic opener, some fruitful dialogue might commence.
It seems the word Pastoral has taken on a meaning that only invokes wimpiness. This view of pastoral is when you see a wolf among the flock to politely say "excuse me that is one of my sheep you are eating." Sometimes a scold is the most pastoral thing to be done. I do wonder who the other bishop who wrote him back in a "pastoral" manner?
He then spouts some gook crouched in ten-dollar words, yet the meaning is not worth a cent and ends with this.
Also, on debated moral issues, such as the two you chose to focus on, how do you value the views of Protestant Christians? Recognizing that Protestant Christians differ with many Catholics on dogmatic issues, the Second Vatican Council said that "ecumenical dialogue could start with discussions concerning the application of the gospel to moral questions." What weight do you give to Protestant views on these two issues? If you are, as you seem, dogmatically certain on these two issues, could you enter into "ecumenical dialogue" on those issues? Would you encourage Catholic theologians to do so or simply to announce to these Protestants they are "totally at odds with clear Church teaching, Sacred Scripture, the Magisterium, and Natural Law," to quote you? That would not be a basis for dialogue.
This is quite a silly argument. You don’t have a dialogue with Protestants the same way you would with Catholics especially one that is a theologian in the Church. You don’t fault a Protestant for not following the Magisterium of a Church they don’t accept as authoritative. It is quite another matter in the case of a Catholic who should not only believe in the Magisterium but to obediently follow it. Though maybe the Professor brings up the Protestant example because in fact he has become a virtual Protestant.
Professor Maguire is of course the same theologian who was on Michael Schiavo’s side and recently tried to pervert St. Antoninus view on abortion.
Bravo to Archbishop Dolan!
[Article via Dad 29]