Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

12-12-89 . . . R. M. Hare [1919-2002] is right about the word “good”. It functions in our language as a general term of commendation. To say that object X is good is to commend it as a good object of its kind. There can be good horses, good baseball teams, good wrenches, and good persons. What does it take to be a good Catholic? I discussed this with Ken Kemp a couple of times, usually in connection with abortion. Given that the official doctrine of the Catholic Church is that abortion is wrong, can one be a good Catholic and at the same time maintain that abortion is not wrong? This is a subtle and interesting question. One view is that, to be a good Catholic, one must accept the official doctrine of the Church without question. Another is that there is room for disagreement on doctrinal matters even among good Catholics. In California recently, a Catholic nun ran for public office on a pro-choice platform. Her bishop rebuked her publicly, claiming that her position is at odds with that of the Church and implying that she could not be, and hence was not, a good Catholic. I’m sure she would deny the latter. At any rate, she won the election. Some commentators say that the bishop’s “intervention” in the political race made the difference. If so, it shouldn’t have. Voters should be intelligent enough to distinguish good persons, good candidates, good public officials, and good Catholics. I’m perfectly willing to say that she’s a bad Catholic but a good person.