2008 Woodie Awards
Letter: Letter neglected Church teachings about acceptance
Issue date: 12/8/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 3 next >
To the Editor:
Mr. Friel's letter to the Hawk last week disturbs the members of S.T.O.P. for a great number of reasons. Malicious and condescending tone aside, there are many points in which Mr. Friel are incorrect both logically and theologically. He has clearly ignored the pastoral recommendations put forth in Always Our Children, which calls priests to "Seek out those on the margins. Avoid stereotyping and condemnations. Strive first to listen…". Friel has done exactly the opposite. In ignoring this advice and voicing this message of exclusion he is rejecting a major component of the message of Jesus Christ, namely that of the dignity of all people and the inclusion of the most marginalized people in society.
But even if we put aside a discussion of what the Church should require of its clerics, Mr. Friel's stance on the morality of homosexual intercourse is still incorrect. He is correct to identify respect for human worth as the standard by which we should work with here. However, he does not realize that an important extension of human worth is the protection from arbitrary restrictions on our behavior; we should be allowed to do what we want within the bounds of respect for other people. This means that, if one can pursue a course of action without endangering another person in some way, then that person should be allowed to act as such if he or she so prefers. To prevent a person from doing something without appropriately identifying his or her actions as hurtful to others is to use that person as a means to an end, thus violating the inherent worth of that person. The point here is thus: that homosexual intercourse between consenting partners does not inherently hurt others and thus is a morally permissible act. A discussion of moral right and wrong is meaningless without first recognizing this important precept that people should be treated as ends in themselves, and thus are entitled to act as they see fit, within the bounds of respect for other persons.
Mr. Friel's letter to the Hawk last week disturbs the members of S.T.O.P. for a great number of reasons. Malicious and condescending tone aside, there are many points in which Mr. Friel are incorrect both logically and theologically. He has clearly ignored the pastoral recommendations put forth in Always Our Children, which calls priests to "Seek out those on the margins. Avoid stereotyping and condemnations. Strive first to listen…". Friel has done exactly the opposite. In ignoring this advice and voicing this message of exclusion he is rejecting a major component of the message of Jesus Christ, namely that of the dignity of all people and the inclusion of the most marginalized people in society.
But even if we put aside a discussion of what the Church should require of its clerics, Mr. Friel's stance on the morality of homosexual intercourse is still incorrect. He is correct to identify respect for human worth as the standard by which we should work with here. However, he does not realize that an important extension of human worth is the protection from arbitrary restrictions on our behavior; we should be allowed to do what we want within the bounds of respect for other people. This means that, if one can pursue a course of action without endangering another person in some way, then that person should be allowed to act as such if he or she so prefers. To prevent a person from doing something without appropriately identifying his or her actions as hurtful to others is to use that person as a means to an end, thus violating the inherent worth of that person. The point here is thus: that homosexual intercourse between consenting partners does not inherently hurt others and thus is a morally permissible act. A discussion of moral right and wrong is meaningless without first recognizing this important precept that people should be treated as ends in themselves, and thus are entitled to act as they see fit, within the bounds of respect for other persons.
Be the first to comment on this story