course. Does it rise above the level of authentic nonÂˇinfallible teaching? Of course not. Therefore, does it remain on the level where it can be questioned and subjected to methodical doubt? Indeed, yes. And can the theologian propose the reasons which prompt him to suspend his religious assent. Again, yes, How? In a technical journal, which is precisely what McCormick has done. Now in interpreting McCormick's contribution, two separate questions are raised, and they must be kept separate. What is the intrinsic value of his argumentation? This question must be resolved by the moralists. Does he have a right to raise this question and to propose this solution? This is a question for the ecclesiologists and to this we respond with a very definite affirmative. This affirmative response is based upon the previously mentioned criteria for responsible publication. Does McCormick's article represent the results of scholarly research? Yes. Any reader of his regular "Notes on Moral Theology" in Theological Studies knows and appreciates the depth of his research on this subject. Are they published "in competent circles"? Again, yes. In these United States of America, what more competent technical journal could one find than Theological Studies? McCormick's responsible publication of his research findings is of great importance. His arguments may be weighed and found wanting by his peers, but his manner of presentation will stand as a true monument to the academic freedom of the Catholic theologian.