Charles Curran Makes a Confession

September 2016

Fr. Charles Curran has failed as a Catholic theologian. He knows he’s failed. And he wants us to know he’s failed. More importantly, he wants us to know that he knows he’s failed.

How does Fr. Curran say he’s failed? Is it by publicly dissenting against Bl. Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae in the 1960s with his statement that “spouses may responsibly decide according to their conscience that artificial contra­ception in some circumstances is permissible and indeed necessary to preserve and foster the value and sacredness of marriage”? Well, no.

Is it by insisting in the 1970s that “the official hierarchical Roman Catholic teaching should accept the moral value and goodness” of same-sex relationships and that “homosexual actions between committed partners are in a true sense objectively good”? Sorry, no.

Is it by promoting a host of other “errors and ambiguities,” as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) put it, in the 1980s, such as his rejection of the Church’s judgments on the immorality of masturbation, abortion, homosexual acts, and premarital sex? Or his denial of the Church’s basic competency to teach definitively on moral issues, the existence of intrinsically evil acts, the indissolubility of marriage, the all-male priesthood, and the possibility that any single moral choice can be mortally sinful? Nope.

You have two options:

  1. Online subscription: Subscribe now to New Oxford Review for access to all web content at AND the monthly print edition for as low as $38 per year.
  2. Single article purchase: Purchase this article for $1.95, for viewing and printing for 48 hours.

If you're already a subscriber log-in here.

New Oxford Notes: September 2016

Read our posting policy Add a comment
Fr. Curran could have saved a lot of ink by simply declaring himself to be a gender neutral, black and thus all of his reflections would not need to be labeled as being written from a white privileged point of view and thus written purely from his deepest, intellectual understanding at the time they originated. this would satisfy all critics including himself. Posted by: pescher
September 07, 2016 12:12 PM EDT
Words have no color. Not one of us has seen Truth, the man Himself. But, we believe the words He spoke. How soothing to the ego are academic freedoms. What's the one about, 'it's not what goes in that is evil, but what comes out' [my paraphrasing]? Who has been given more and, therefore, must be more careful of spoken words? To the one who been given much, is it blaspheming the Holy Spirit to scatter the flock? Maybe included in those Words of mercy, 'Father, forgive them for they know not what they do', is mercy for those who do not choose their words wisely. For this, we pray. Posted by: lilio31
September 07, 2016 03:06 PM EDT
Add a comment