Yesterday, a friend of mine posted an article from the National Catholic Register in response to a New York Times letter, written by Marquette Professor Dan Maguire, in which Maguire predicts a schism in the Catholic Church akin to split within Judaism. I think Maguire’s claim is a bit outlandish for one primary reason: it focuses on tertiary, non-dogmatic issues to divide us rather than the primary truths that bring the Church together as a community united in love.
In the history of Christianity, schisms happen over dogmatic issues. The split between East and West in 1066 dealt with the theological authority of the Pope as well as issues dealing with the addition of the filioque to the Niceane Creed. (I admit I may be slightly reductionist here, but the point still stands.) The Reformation, while having a political element, was influenced by differing interpretations of scripture and the sacraments. These issues are central to one’s understanding of the Christian faith.
Maguire thinks there will be schism, in short, over matters of sexual ethics, which are not matters of dogma? Highly doubtful. One cannot start a church on the basis of a sexual ethic. It takes Christ away from the center of the Church. If that’s Maguire’s view of what Catholicism should be, then I want no part of it.
Maybe instead of schism, dialogue would be a more fruitful option?
Vink Think 