In the midst of perhaps the most significant crisis in relations between the Catholic Church and the British Government in the past 100 years, the Tablet has, true to form, attacked the teaching of the Church on the central issue.Its leader "Need for Compromise" refers to the document regarding homosexual civil unions issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2003 and signed by Cardinal Ratzinger as "ill-judged" and speaks of "the intemperate language of Rome."
Part of the argument runs as follows:
The Catholic Catechism says that Scripture describes homosexual acts as "grave depravity". This is far removed from the temper of the times, and probably no longer even reflects what a majority of practising Catholics believe about homosexuals. Many of them have gay friends and gay relatives; Catholic mothers have gay sons. Some of the most devout are gay themselves.I am trying hard to imagine what it would be like to belong to a Church that tried to follow the "temper of the times" as perceived in a highly secularised country in the affluent West. The assertion about the "majority of practising Catholics" is, of course, dubious in the extreme. Those Catholics who practise their faith tend to do so because they believe the teaching of the Church. If they don't, there are plenty of alternative denominations, faiths and "philosophies".
Many of us, of course do have gay friends and relatives. I also have friends and relatives who are Muslims, members of the Socialist Worker Party, and the Freemasons - it doesn't make me the least bit embarrassed or offended by the Church's teaching as it applies to them and am happy for any chance to engage in a "frank and open exchange of views." Knowing me to be Catholic, they tend not to be overly surprised or upset to find that I believe the teaching of the Church in which I publicly profess my faith.
The leader makes the interesting point that if all homosexual acts are depraved, it would not be licit to refer homosexual couples to other agencies. They attempt to enlist the Cardinal onside by saying that "the implication is" that he does not believe in using this argument. As readers of this blog have pointed out, there is no small evidence to support this implication. A change of emphasis would be wise at this stage. Given the Cabinet's determination to rub the Church's nose in it, there seems little point in accepting any legal requirement to refer or "sign-post." It was always a questionable practice when done voluntarily.
The final paragraph has a classic Tablet attack on Rome and, by implication, Pope Benedict:
The higher up the hierarchical ladder of the Church one goes, the less responsive it is to movements in grass roots opinion.(Those particular grass roots flourish especially in the manicured lawns of our leafier suburbs.) The article concludes by encouraging the Catholic Church in England and Wales to make more "progress" in the opposite direction from Rome.
In the same issue: "A love found wanting" by Martin Reynolds:
A gay Anglican priest, describes how he and his Catholic partner took on a child and why they wish to do so again.
32 comments:
This is really disgraceful. What exactly is needed to make the Hierarchy speak out and declare that the Tablet is no longer entitled to call itself a "Catholic" periodical.
Its constant wilful dissent from the formal teachings of the Church, its frequent attempts to undermine the faithful's obedience to the Magisterium and the repeated sniping at orthodox practice of the Faith surely must count as heresy.
I've often found that "grass roots movements" have root rot.
Why is this poisonous pill allowed to be sold in Catholic churches, esp in Westminster Cathedral where it is piled high each week?
"I am trying hard to imagine whatit would be like to belong to a Church that tried to follow the "temper of the times" as perceived in a highly secularised country in the affluent West.
Silly! You know already of course! It would be like being an Anglican.
I don't mind debate, but it seems to me that The Tablet must disagree on everything. Whilst still an Anglican, I also found it very confusing--"is this Catholic? No, it disagrees with Rome. But it says... but... but..."
I second Mac -- how can the Church give The Tablet the boot. ;-)
Fr. Tim, I'm very much in sympathy with your contributor Mac McLernon on this subject.
A few years ago, the Tablet published an article critical of Cardinal Pell in Australia. He wrote a nice feisty Aussie letter in reply which included the following gem: "I have long been disappointed by The Tablet's persistent subversions of some Catholic teaching and mystified by the inability of the English bishops to nudge it towards a more productive line of witness." (Here's the web address of the source if you want chapter and verse: http://www.ad2000.com.au/articles/2002/jul2002p7_1055.html)
Quite right, but unfortunately Cardinal Murphy O' Connor actually honoured the previous incumbent with a papal ward. It must be rather galling for him to receive such shabby treatment from a journal he has tried to cosy up to. Equally galling is the preponderance of liberal Catholics supposedly representing the Church in debate on the media and actually agreeing with the proposition that the Church is discriminating against gays. For example the Heaven and Earth show this morning and Clifford Longley and some other self-appointed Catholic commentator on the Moral Maze. Why does the Church not have a list of official Catholic spokespeople who can then allow its voice to be heard on such contentious issues.
"What exactly is needed to make the Hierarchy speak out..."
Better Hierarchs.
Hilary - I did think of the Anglican Church (I guessed someone would bring it up too:-))
However, even they don't set out to follow the "temper of the times" even if they often end up doing so.
I've been reflecting on why the English bishops don't (in the words of Cardinal Pell) "nudge [The Tablet] towards a more productive line of witness."
I keep coming back to the same nasty suspicion -- a goodly number of them privately agree with at least some of its unorthodox positions, which makes concerted action by the Bishops Conference impossible.
Having The Tablet out there championing things like optional celibacy, female ordination, changes in the Church's teachings on sexual matters, and "greater collegiality" allows heterodox prelates to keep these issues on the front burner without overtly breaking ranks with Rome.
What other credible explanation is there?
Dear Fr Tim,
Fr Guy has written a rousing article on this weeks Parish Bulletin. It will be on their web-site soon. He's happy to have a link from your site.
Newsletter of The Oratory, Birmingham..web site www.birmingham-oratory.org.uk
Many thanks,
Mrs Jackie Parkes MJ
Well at least if the Tablet is piled high in the Cathedral it suggests it isn't selling.
Fr Finigan Help,
How do I answer this (I am fighting a desperate rearguard action trying to defend the churches teaching about homosexuality and adoption in an argument. Good natured but very serious)
"But once Vincent Nichols, the Archbishop of Birmingham, admitted on Tuesday’s Newsnight that his agencies were happy to place children with single gay people, but not couples, his argument fell apart."
1. Did he say it?
2. Did he mean it, or is there more to it?
3. Is it true?
I have stated that they may be celibate homosexuals and obtained the expected response.
If the above is true I fear I have lost the credibility required to support the churches position and anything else I say will have no impact.
PS Thanks for the Blog.
These arch-liberals have their day, but eventually they will grow old and retire. The future of the Tablet will no longer be in their hands but in the next generation, which will hopefully be orthodox and faithful to the magisterium.
Bravo. I don't buy the Tablet, but do sneak a look at the free online bits and was really shocked on Friday. How undermining can you get?! Please continue to speak out about this kind of nonsense!
Personally I couldn't care less whether the Tablet is allowed to call itself a Catholic periodical or not. They can call themseleves whatever they want - doesn't change the fact that they are bigoted, and anti-Catholic in the extreme.
I do however feel very strongly that the Tablet should NOT be sold in Catholic churches. Why should churches allow messages of hate utterly against the Gospel message of love, be displayed on their shelves. It's completely ridiculous. The fact that the mother church of England and Wales - Westminster Cathedral, a church renowned for its fine liturgy, orthodoxy, and excellent priests that bears witness to true Catholicism in Mary's dowry, permits its sale is completely beyond me.
I'd second Ken's question. It really is time that Catholic churches (parishes etc) and the Catholic Church (bishops, priests and laity) stopped supporting 'The Pill'.
Unfotunately, our leaders don't help themsleves or the Church by acknowledging that Catholic Adoption agencies already refer requests for adoption by homosexual partners to other agencies. It's not unlike a Catholic doctor responding to the request 'can you please bump off my sick granny' by saying "I can't but here's the details of a man who can".
Excellent posting Father Tim. I am also totally baffled as to how the Tablet operates...........
It's just intellectualism for the sake of it........I suspect that if one went to a random selection of 100 non-Catholic national paper journalists and commission them to write on the article headings of a tablet edition you could get the same articles written plus a few that might from a position of non belief at least write without the old intellectual prejudices of the 'liberal catholic elite' and give a fairer and possibly more sympathetic account.
I don't buy it either, the first time I read it, the editorial was "Our bishops have let us down again", that was after the synod on the Eucharist... I don't read it, much better with FAITH or the Catholic Herald, Catholic Times or the Universe.
I keep coming back to the same nasty suspicion -- a goodly number of them privately agree with at least some of its unorthodox positions...
are you guys seriously just figuring this out now?
Get out much?
This week's editorial is a follow-up to last week's piece by (guess who?) Clifford Longley attacking for the umpteenth time 'Humanae Vitae' rather than recognising just how prescient Pope Paul VI was about the inevitable results of what his illustrious successor was to call 'the contraceptive mentality'. It has always seemed to me that the promulgation of 'Humanae Vitae' by a very liberal Pope is a clear indication of the veracity of the dogma of Papal Infallibility.
If the Bishops won't sanction anti-Catholic material such as Jack Chick tracts or Muslim propaganda against the deity of Christ being sold in Catholic Churches where it can serve to confuse the faithful, then neither should the Tablet be so openly sold.
I read about the article or more likely, the hatchet job on Cardinal Pell. It's terrible. Kudos to the Cardinal for his crisp and concise reply.
When Catholics go to Church and buy a publication, they expect something loyal to the Magisterium. Otherwise, they'd patronize the Call to Action bookshop wouldn't they?
(Hilary) - LOL.
As a flimsy, pathetic, spiritually bankrupt, propaganda mouthpiece of the liberal church lefties the Tablet has no 'spine', and neither have our Bishops who allow this overt dissent right under their very noses to further confuse and perhaps even win over poorly formed Catholics to their Zeitgeist teachings. They obviously have an anti-catholic agenda and selling this useless (well it could double for loo-paper I guess) heretical trash in Churches throughout the land should be stopped immediately. Parish Priests should bin this weeks pile and politely stop further sales.
Lord knows that people are leaving the Church in enough numbers as it is no-doubt as other commentators here have pointed out, because of the confusion that already reigns in the minds of poorly formed Catholics. How can we make good argument against the horror of homosexual adoption and homomarriage if so called catholic periodicals say 'hey get with times man, it's ok to be catholic and practicing gay sex, Jesus loves you anyway - kum-ba-ya la-lala-la'.
In Heaven's name some people really need to have their heads banged together - where has common sense gone, where has solid Catholic moral teaching and formation gone, we are all so open minded that it appears our brains have fallen out!
Since when has the Church's teaching been defined by what a majority of Catholics believe, even if their assertion is true, which I doubt? Catholics would believe what they were taught, if there were unity and coherence in the teachings they received. Unfortunately The Tablet gives all those high up in society every excuse to dissent. How can I now go to my local MP, a Catholic, whom I have discovered voted in favour of civil partnerships, and argue convincingly that he should inform his public role with the teachings of the Church? He will be able to point to The Tablet (if he reads it) and people whom the bishops in England seem intent on courting (Filochowski photographed in all the Catholic papers a week or so ago with the Cardinal promoting Romero's cause, Cliffor Longley, et al). As priests trying to teach faithfully our position is weakened. We can only pray for our flocks that they recognise the wolf and remain with the true shepherds. There will be losses, however.
Thanks for the time you give to such analyses.
Oh dear, I like to think of myself a 'liberal' Catholic (I'm also an occasional 'Tablet' reader), but every time something contentious like gay adoption comes up, I'm totally on the side of the Church's Magisterium.
By the way, Father, I read your blog several times a week for some 'real' Catholic teaching as I can't seem to find it in many other places, despite being very involved with the Church. If only I could like the Latin Mass (something I was brought up with and the boredom of which still stays with me now, some 45 years later), I'd give up any thoughts of liberalism altogether!
Anyway, long may your blog continue!
SJ - stop being an 'occassional' Catholic, form your mind and conscience on and ONLY on the Magisterium and get some consistency into your life!
God Bless.
George -
It is very difficult to form one's mind and conscience on the Church's Magisterium when it is so blatantly flouted at times.
For example (though whether this post is the appropriate place to put it I'm not sure and will perfectly understand if Father doesn't publish it, but here goes):
I know of a Deputy Head of a large Catholic Comprehensive school who is also Head of Year 10 (Confirmation preparation age) and also a Department Head. The lady in question:
1. Was married in the Catholic Church about 10 years ago.
2. The marriage broke up after about 4 years and she then went to live with her current boyfriend of the time.
3. Though living with her boyfriend was nevertheless still heavily involved in her parish with catechetics and pastoral work when;
4. She met a Catholic priest who subsequently left the priesthood and 'married' her in a civil ceremony. Both of them still think of themselves as practising Catholics and continue to receive the Sacraments.
The above situation is happening in a certain diocese in England and Wales, not somewhere in Latin America where, I believe, such situations of a priest taking a 'wife' are quite common.
As I said, it is very difficult to form one's mind and conscience when inconsistencies such as this are allowed to happen.
George - SJ said that he was an occasional Tablet reader, not an occasional Catholic!
SJ - thank you for your comment. Sadly, over the past few decades, many Catholics have come in contact with these sorts of scandals. (Imagine how dispiriting it is for a priest to hear of this sort of thing!)
When I hear of these things, I pray to St John Fisher. This post explains why: How to respond to scandal in the Church.
In fact, I think the Lives of the Saints are a very good antidote when we are downheatened by scandal. Their heroism can lift us up again to see what a difference it can make when even one person really lives their faith fully.
Another sign of hope is to be found in the vast majority of priests ordained in recent years - I have been really encouraged by the holiness and good example these young priests have set. I think they are part of the answer, in God's providence, to the damage done by the things we older Catholics have seen in our lifetime such the example you cite.
God bless.
By the way - if the priest has not receieved a rescript of laicisation and if the marriage has not subsequently been convalidated or sanated ("put right"), this couple may not go to Holy Communion. If you are aware that they do so, there is a procedure for dealing with it:
1. Write to the parish priest to ask him to rectify the situation.
2. If he does not, write to the Bishop, setting out the facts, including copies of any correspondence.
3. If there is still nothing done, send copies of all correspondence to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
You may not feel like doing this but I wanted to set the procedure down to illustrate that the Church, as a visible body, has ways of rectifying the situation when these blatant offences occur. People often moan about "the institutional Church" but it is very necessary to have authority and discipline in matters such as this where people are scandalised.
Sorry Fr Tim and SJ, but in my mind anyone caught reading the Tablet even occassionally, should get detention and 500 lines immediately! LOL!
What I mean by 'consistency' is trying daily to live the Catholic Faith in our ordinary working lives - reading the Tablet, other heretical books and periodicals, pornographic magazines, watching the BBC indeed anything that is anti-Catholic in its content and/or teaching is inconsistent and should be avoided.
Occassional but none-the-less deliberate reading of dubious material and watching heretical or 'dodgy' programmes on TV is I believe, sinful. Fr Tim?
Better, I think, that the priest left the priesthood and married - there is surely more decency, honestly and even integrity in following that very difficult path.
Am I correct in understanding that anyone marrying a divorce cannot receive communion?
Post a Comment