The Hermeneutic of Continuity

This poster was published in the USA during the second world war. I was reminded of it when I received this message in response to my post Dictatorship of relativism in action . It is from a mother who knows the adoption system in the UK very well: This was a disaster waiting to happen and will be replicated. Any grandparents with a delinquent, difficult or mentally unbalanced son or daughter (or a son who chooses to become a parent with similarly affected girlfriend without benefit of marriage) are in very real danger of experiencing the loss of their grandchildren to homosexual adopters, who are now becoming a very aggressive lobby, demanding access to the youngest and healthiest children and considering it "discrimination" to be offered older or handicapped children. (This I know from secular support organisations for adopters.) Grandparents in this position should stress ETHNIC ties which are far more respected than religion in terms of cultural roots: many Catholics can...

A five year old boy and his four year old sister have been taken from their mother because she is a recovering heroin addict and not considered capable of caring for her children. For over two years they have been cared for by their (46 year old) grandmother and (59 year old) grandfather in Edinburgh. Social services consider that the grandparents are too old to provide appropriate care and so have pushed for the children to be adopted. The grandparents have contested this decision in the courts but gave in because they could not afford the legal bills. Social services have decided to place the children with a male same-sex couple. There were plenty of heterosexual couples who wanted to adopt the children but social services decided that the gay couple could best meet their needs. This despite the fact that as part of the court records, the grandparents hold a social work report which says that the little girl is not happy around men. The grandparents have expressed their view that the...

In October, Bishop O'Donoghue wrote to the Catholic Caring Services, pleading with them not to capitulate to the Government's legislation on same-sex adoption but to seek an exemption under Human Rights & Religious Freedom Legislation, or failing that, attempt a legal challenge. The bishop has now written to say: Thursday 11 December 2008 will forever be etched in my memory, because it was on that day that the relationship between the Diocese of Lancaster and Catholic Caring Services suffered an irretrievable breakdown. Bishop O'Donoghue has resigned from the board and spelt out the consequences of the decision of the charity to drop "Catholic" from its title and go along with the Government legislation. Among other points, the Bishop says: With deep sadness I must declare that all churches, parishes, schools and other Catholic organisations or societies are to have no formal associations with Catholic Caring Services and the new charity is no longer entitled ...

The other day, I wrote about Bishop O'Donoghue's letter to the Catholic Caring Services of Lancaster ( More from Lancaster ). The day after the Bishop's Letter, the Catholic Caring Services offered a curious response . The new legislation has posed difficulty for the Church as it would appear to some to challenge the Church’s views on marriage. The "some" here include the Holy Father, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and Bishop O'Donoghue. The Sexual Orientation Regulations do not "appear to challenge" Catholic teaching on marriage, they flatly contradict it. The press statement asserts that the charity has taken legal advice, undergone extensive consultation and "discernment". Despite this, it does not seem to be able to offer any answer at all to the suggestions offered by Bishop O'Donoghue based upon his consultation with lawyers, moral theologians, and those involved in adoption. Jim Cullen, Chief Executive of the Cha...

Lancaster Diocese has just launched a new website. The old one wasn't bad, actually, but this one ties things in rather better with lots of the key information on the front page. (Incidentally, the new one is lancasterdiocese.org.uk which replaces the old "lancasterrcdiocese.org.uk") One of the most important items which I have not yet got round to mentioning is Bishop O'Donoghue's letter to the Catholic Caring Services of Lancaster. Here is a link to the text of the letter . The Trustees of the Lancaster Caring Services have voted to go along with the Sexual Orientation Regulations and accept gay and lesbian couples as suitable adoptive parents. Bishop O'Donoghue has responded by explaining the Church's teaching "as bishop and pastor", by insisting that the charity cannot unilaterally change its nature, and advising the trustees to seek an exemption from the SORs under Regulation 18. He makes it clear that if they insist on considering adoptio...

The other day, thumbing through the Southwark Catholic Directory for 1937, I found this advertisement for the Catholic Rescue Society, later the Catholic Children's Society, and now to become the Cabrini Children's Society (see also More on the "Cabrini Children's Society" ). I am sure that things were not perfect in those days but the emphasis on the saving of the children's souls certainly gives one pause for reflection. Ruined Sanctuaries You have seen them – indeed, how could you help otherwise, for from Land’s End to John o’ Groats, from St George’s Cathedral to the North Sea, they lie scattered about this once Catholic land, testifying to the Faith and Love that then flourished – abbeys and monasteries and convents, now in ruins, where once holy men and women dwelt; whose walls have watched their daily lives of sacrifice, have heard their nightly chanting of the Office, and whose cloisters have echoed to the voices of God’s saints. Ghosts of a former gl...

The Catholic Children's Society has published a statement indicating its intention to comply with the Equality Act 2006 and the Sexual Orientation Regulations. This involves accepting the requirement not to "discriminate" against same-sex couples when considering couples as adoptive parents. The statement avoids the canonical implications of this decision. As an organisation it can no longer be considered Catholic. As I reported before, ( Cabrini Children's Society and More on the "Cabrini Children's Society" ) the proposal is to change the name, removing the word "Catholic" and replacing it with "Cabrini". But then there is the question of the money that the society holds which has been donated by the Catholic faithful in good faith, believing that they were donating money to a charity that would act in accordance with the beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. Should this money be transferred to the new non-Catholic ch...

Philip at Carpe Canem has an excellent post concerning the recent decision of the Catholic Children's Society (dioceses of Southwark, Arundel and Brighton, and Portsmouth) to give in to the government's demands that they place children with same sex couples, and to change the name of the society to the "Cabrini Children's Society." (Cf. Mother Cabrini must be turning in her grave! ) As Philip rightly says: This is nothing less than the misappropriation of the good name of Mother Frances Xavier Cabrini, and the linking of her name to something with which she would profoundly disagree – a complete perversion of her principles! Mother Cabrini spent her life caring for children, rather than seeing them abandoned or given up into dangerous or sinful situations, founding orphanages to protect and care for the vulnerable. The Catholic Children's Society currently receives income from the following: An annual collection at Sunday Mass Offerings at the Christmas Crib ...

The Daily Mail has reported that the Westminster Catholic Children's Society is to challenge the SORs in the courts by ignoring them and continuing to refuse to place children with same sex couples. (Cf Daily Mail: Catholic adoption agency to defy gay rights law . This is very good news and certainly better than changing the name to a vaguely Catholic-sounding title and caving in. If it is wrong to place children with same sex couples, it makes no sense to do so in order to preserve the other aspects of a charity's work. This initiative from Westminster deserves our wholehearted support. As Neil Addison said: 'The Church may not win, but if Catholic agencies are to be closed and deprived of their right to provide these services, let that be done - and be seen to be done - by the Government and not by the Church.' H/T Fr Ray Blake

Philip at Carpe Canem has reported on the change of name for the Catholic Children's Society which operates in the south of England: In response to the Sexual Orientation Regulations, and hoping to continue to benefit from the generosity of the Catholic faithful, the Society is now to change its name to the "Cabrini Children's Society" (same initials, geddit!) As Philip comments: The Catholic Faithful need to know that they’ve just lost £10 million (the society's assets), and been sold down the river of political expediency as it is now technically outside Church jurisdiction. Is there not something in canon law about alienating property? Maggie Clitherow has some good comment on this issue from her own experience (Don't Know What I'm Doing: So-Called Catholic Adoption Agencies I am very pleased to hear that one of the Auxiliary Bishops in Southwark, Bishop John Hine has resigned from the board of the society. This action is very much to be commended.

There has been a worrying development this week in the UK's creeping discrimination against people who adhere to traditional Christian morality. Not only must the Catholic Adoption Agencies close, Christian foster parents will be struck off too. Vincent Matherick (a non-conformist minister) and his wife, Pauline became foster parents in 2001 and have since fostered 28 vulnerable children through Somerset County Council's Social Services Department. Social Services asked the Mathericks to sign a contract implementing the Sexual Orientation Regulations. The foster parents were told that they would have to discuss homosexual relationships with children of 11 and to explain how gay people date. It was made clear that they would have to present homosexual relationships as being just as acceptable as heterosexual relationships. The Mathericks considered that this was a requirement for them to promote homosexuality and not simply a question of non-discrimination; they refused to sign ...

Gosh but was today a bit frantic! An early Mass for a deceased person, followed by binning most of my post and dealing with some of it, finalising the talk for tonight and then motoring off to Parkminster . The M25 was ghastly today and despite leaving early, I arrived 15 minutes late, just as the Novice Master was about to give up on me. Deo Gratias ! If he had sent the novices and simply professed back to their cells, it would have taken ages for them all to gather again. Sadly, I had to miss Vespers today in order to drive back round the M25, and up the A2 to North Greenwich to take the tube. Even so, the traffic meant I was a little late meeting Fr Richard Whinder at the Spaghetti House in Victoria before the Faith in Focus meeting. There was a good attendance for the talk on "The challenge of the Sexual Orientation Regulations legislation." Several blog readers were there and I was happy to meet one or two commenters in person. I spoke about the SORs and their impac...

I'll be speaking at the London Faith in Focus group for young adults on Monday evening (18 June). The subject is 'The SORs - Proving Humanae Vitae right' so I'll be looking at the SORs in the wider context of the teaching of the Church on marriage, love and family. The Talk starts at 7pm and is at St Vincent's, Carlisle Place, between Victoria Station and Westminster Cathedral. Young (18-35-ish) readers of this blog very welcome. Afterwards, we usually go for a drink to the Cardinal pub nearby.

A correspondent has drawn my attention to page 27 of the print edition of the Daily Telegraph today. The 'Spy' column reports on a constituent who wrote to Alan Simpson, Labour MP for Nottingham South, asking him to oppose the SOR legislation. The reply was written by a member of Simpson's staff, one Paul May: 'You disgust me. You are so totally and utterly out of touch with the real world that it is no surprise to me that the Christian faith is fizzling out to nothing in the United Kingdom. Perhaps when we have managed to turn all our children gay the problem of religious bigotry affecting our laws will no longer be an issue.' Apparently Mr May has now apologised and made it clear that he does not speak for Mr Simpson. I be that caused some fluttering. The mask of "equality" is not meant to slip as dramatically as that!

Catholic Rights is a blog run by John Kearney whom I met at the SOR Prayer Rally yesterday. He has a good post called A Day in London telling of his experiences on coming down to visit our capital.

The Prayer Rally outside the Houses of Parliament tonight was a moving witness to the Christian faith. Led by a series of evangelical preachers using unerringly appropriate quotations from the Holy Scriptures, it was a stirring opportunity to proclaim the Gospel. The Rally took place during the debate in the House of Lords over the Sexual Orientations Regulations. In the order of business for the House of Lords was the following: Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 Baroness Andrews to move that the draft Regulations laid before the House on 13 March be approved. 12th Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee and 14th Report from the Merits Committee Baroness O'Caithain introduced the following amendment: to move, as an amendment to the above motion, to leave out all the words after “that” and insert “this House, having regard to the widespread concerns that the draft Regulations compromise religious liberty and will result in litigation over the content of clas...

On Monday, Peter Luff MP made a strong protest in the House of Commons about the "breathtaking abuse" of Parliament in the Government's handling of the Sexual Orientations Regulations. Several other MPs also complained about the rushing through of the SORs. Commenting in a press release issued today, Peter Luff said: “There are two quite separate issues here. First, are the regulations – which are complex– right in principle and in detail? Second, have they received proper parliamentary scrutiny? “There is room for debate about these two rival freedoms - the freedom of religious people and organisations to apply their own moral code to difficult and sensitive decisions, and the rights of gay people not to be discriminated against. Both are genuine freedoms, but I am deeply concerned that the second freedom has taken absolute priority over the first without any debate in Parliament on a matter of such profound importance. “With more time, a solution could have been foun...

A correspondent drew my attention this evening to an important passage in Sacramentum Caritatis : 83. Here it is important to consider what the Synod Fathers described as eucharistic consistency, a quality which our lives are objectively called to embody. Worship pleasing to God can never be a purely private matter, without consequences for our relationships with others: it demands a public witness to our faith. Evidently, this is true for all the baptized, yet it is especially incumbent upon those who, by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defence from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one's children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms. These values are not negotiable. Consequently, Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particul...

This coming Wednesday, there will be a prayer vigil outside Parliament at Old Palace Yard (the square opposite the St Stephen’s entrance to the House of Lords) on Wednesday 21st March from 7 to 9pm when the final vote on the Sexual Orientation Regulations will be taken. The Vigil is organised by Christian Concern for Our Nation . They say: We pray for a miracle next Wednesday. However, whatever the outcome it is vital that history records Christians standing for truth to the very end of the parliamentary process. This is my type of ecumenism! I will be there and it would be great to see any readers of this blog. Further information at Christian Concern for Our Nation .

I am happy to pass on this email received today from a friend. It can be copied for parish newsletters and/or passed on to friends. URGENT - contact Parliament IMMEDIATELY and ask Parliamentarians to VOTE AGAINST the SEXUAL ORIENTATION REGULATIONS (SORs) to be voted on in the House of Lords THIS WEDNESDAY 21st March. The government’s Sexual Orientation Regulations (SORs), in a misguided attempt to protect people against unjust discrimination, forces schools, adoption agencies, providers of goods & services and others to act as if homosexuality is as valid a lifestyle as heterosexuality. The Government has said about the SORs: “This is not just about legislation, it is about ultimately changing the culture of our society”. It is against Catholic teaching and against the natural moral law to regard homosexuality as normal, morally acceptable or as valid a lifestyle as heterosexuality. The SORs violate people’s freedom of conscience not to be complicit in the endorsement of homosexual...