Sir, - A blast from the past! The article "Catholics can disagree on stem-cell research" by Father Paul Surlis (Opinion, August 17th) reminded me of his arguments when he was a Maynooth moral theology lecturer in 1968. At that time he and I (then a Sunday newspaper columnist) differed in our reactions to Humanae Vitae's message that artificial contraception was gravely immoral. He trots out the same old chestnuts today.
"Catholics are free to disagree with the papal teaching and come to their own conclusions, provided they accord respect to the Pope's teaching and have well-thought-out reasons for their conclusions." Who decides what is "well-thought-out"?
"No Pope has ever made an infallible pronouncement on a concrete moral issue in the 2,000-year history of the Catholic Church." So what? Does that mean that we may reject papal moral pronouncements with impunity?
"The question as to when a fertilised ovum becomes an inviolable human person is still an open one in Catholic teaching." What about what is stated in our Pope's 1995 Evangelium Vitae, par. 60?
Instead of singing the same tune 33 years later, Father Surlis might note that, for us lay Catholics, though moral theologians of all denominations are a dime a dozen, so to speak, there is but one Pope. - Yours, etc.,
Joe Foyle, Ranelagh, Dublin 6.