Make Text Larger Make Text Smaller Email this Article to a Friend Print this Article

Vatican out of touch on gays: Blair

Published: April 09, 2009

Recent Catholic convert, former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has said in an interview that Catholic leaders are out of step with ordinary believers in their attitude toward homosexuals.

Blair, who formally converted to Catholicism in 2007, said he believes there is a big generational difference on the issue, and that ordinary Catholics are more liberal minded than their leaders, PR Inside reports.

"Actually, we need an attitude of mind where rethinking and the concept of evolving attitudes becomes part of the discipline with which you approach your religious faith," Blair said in an interview published in Attitude, a magazine aimed at gays.

Pope Benedict, when he was still a cardinal in 1986, described homosexuality as "an objective disorder".

Asked about that comment, Blair said "there is a huge generation difference here."

"And there's probably that same fear amongst religious leaders that if you concede ground on an issue like this, because attitudes and thinking evolve over time, where does that end?" Blair said.

"You'd start having to rethink many, many things. Now, my view is that rethinking is good, so let's carry on rethinking.

Blair suggested that ordinary Catholics would disagree with the official position.

"Look, there are many good and great things the Catholic Church does, and there are many fantastic things this pope stands for," Blair said.

"But I think what is interesting is that if you went into any Catholic church, particularly a well attended one, on any Sunday here and did a poll of the congregation, you'd be surprised at how liberal minded people were."

SOURCE

Tony Blair criticizes Vatican attitude toward gays (PR Inside)

LINKS

Tony Blair (Wikipedia)

 

 

Response to articles is welcome though it may take up to 24 hours for the posting to appear. Simply follow the prompts to post your comment. No posting of more than 250 words will be published. While critical comment on stories & issues is welcomed, postings that descend to personal attacks on or impugn the integrity of other commentators will be blocked.
If you have any problems please email news@cathnews.com
Email is requested for identification purposes only.

Recent Comments

  1. The cause of Mr Blair's misunderstanding is to be found within the inteview where he implied the belief that 'the pope is out of step with the public'!

    So many these days, and our own Fr Kennedy is one of them, seem to see the Church as some form of democracy, but fortunately they are wrong!

    Could you imagine it, in this day and age, that the Catholic Church should move to a democratic rather than a hierarchical model? We might even be 'blessed' with a Bishop Kennedy?

    It is up to our Bishops to begin acting decisively and to point out the Church never was, and never will be a democracy. This 'trend' is clearly growing but the Bishops seem to be doing nothing to rectify the situation, and that is sad.

    On top of the Documents of Vatican II, Pope John Paul gave us the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If only the Bishops would unite in preaching the wisdom and doctrine these contain?

  2. The stand of the Catholic Church is clear-that homosexuality and all other sexual deviant attitudes are gravely disordered.No amount of arguments would make this and other similar acts not to be what they are, and that is this:they are morally wrong and sinful.Marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman.Tony Blair should be conviced of this-that the teaching of the Catholic Church is one and does not change simply according to what is in vogue in the society.I pray that the Holy Spirit will enlighten all people to know the truth and live by it!

  3. Tony Blair was a failed Prime Minister who now wants to give the Church a lecture on faith and morals. What we see here is another attempt to foist the same old failed left-wing-liberal agenda upon the Church of Christ. When do these guys get it? Moral teaching is not negotiable. If you don't like it LEAVE!. Fr Kennedy's new cult is available for all those who want to join.

  4. So the Church is out of step with the rank and file Catholics. Is the tail wagging the dog now?

  5. Romans 1: 24 - 32.
    Personality is one thing, practice is something quite separate.

  6. Mr Blair is still very much an Anglican. He may have converted to Catholicism so that he could receive Communion with his family. I don't have a problem with that. People change religion for all sorts of reasons. But he clearly still believes that religious belief and practice is determined by majority vote by the constituency. Many Catholics have no problem with unfair business dealing which may be however, "acceptable business practice". I doubt if anyone would expect the Pope to change Church teaching in this area because it is a popular view among those concerned.

  7. So, Mr Blair, dumb down and compromise the Church's teaching because some people can't or won't use their heads?

  8. While I look forward every day to reading Cath News it occurs to me that when it quotes public figures challenging clear unambiguous church teaching, the editors of Cath News should make reference to a site or sites which fully explain why the church holds firmly to a particular though perhaps unpopular view.

    It seems to me that many Catholics today are poorly educated in the faith and sadly more influenced by popular opinion than the magisterium.

    For example, Blair's claim that many Catholics are more liberal than the Pope on certain moral issues may indeed be correct but fortunately truth is not decided by popular opinion. And we don't have one catechism for liberals and another for conservatives - or should I say "the faithful".

  9. Tony Blair: "the man who loved his country so much that he wanted to change everything about it."

  10. Woww, the amount of venemous hate here is overwhelming; reminds me of how the nazis use to call Jews as inferiors and somewhat disordered, less human, less deserving beings. It's really horrifying to see how some Catholics are talking like this again about an already marginalized groups.

    Good on Blair for standing up against the new holocaust, neo-nazi regime.

  11. With all due respect, civil generational differences in social lifestyles change all too much, but God's Law is Solid, Stable and Secure in how His Creation is to live and love. The result would be a better life for us all, rather than the present social structure that is full of errors and sin. Therefore, problems prevail...until we change to God's way.

  12. Mr Blair is correct - the Catholic Church needs to review its understanding of homosexuality.
    No, not just on the basis of popular demand but on the basis of science.
    Descriptions like homosexuality being 'gravely disordered' do not fit the science.
    Those people do not suddenly decide one day....'Gee, I want to be gravely disordered. I think I'll become a homosexual.'
    No, the results are coming in, in the wake of the human genome project, which examines the relative effects of heredity & environment.
    Studies show a genetic influence giving a person a predisposition towards homosexuality.
    Ironically, the respected head of the Human Genome Project is also a believing Christian. One book he wrote on the topic is called "The Language of God", because of the wondrous 'work' that shows up in our genes.
    And that includes (as science has demonstrated) predispositions towards homosexuality.
    Calling it a grave disorder shows lack of knowledge of the science.
    It is discrimination.

  13. " ... ordinary believers..." including those who apparently don't believe in what Catholics need or should believe.

    Oxymoronic; you'd think a politician would have spotted it.

    Homosexual behaviour is wrong and abnormal - it will always remain so because humans on their own account, cannot decide whether its good or evil.

    Bit like telling the car manufacturer that their instruction manual is wrong ...

  14. I believe in what the Church teaches about homosexuality.

    However, I think there is some truth in some of what Mr Blair is saying here.

    My parents are in their 70s and would be regarded by most as quite orthodox Catholics and if anything more "conservative" than "liberal" on most issues and many of their friends are similar people. Yet, I know many of them think differently about homosexuality and gay people than they would have thought 30 or 40 years ago. I am fairly sure a big reason this change came about was from meeting and coming to know a few openly gay people and also it is inevitable that many people nowadays will have at least one person in their family or extended family who is open about being gay; and they love that person.

  15. It sounds as though Tony Blair is going to be another typical "Cafeteria Catholic".

  16. As a recent convert to Catholicism I am encouraged that my experiences very much mirror Prime Minister Blair's and these have been through thoughtful conversations with nuns, priests and laity.

  17. Tony Blair is totally correct in saying that the Catholic Church's leadership is not supported by many, probably even the majority, of its baptised membership on an array of issues. However, that doesn't in itself make the leadership wrong and the membership right. Was Moses' leadership wrong because all of God's People under his leadership turned to worshipping a Golden Calf? The majority are not always right and morally correct. A majority of white Americans were pro-Slavery despite Abraham Lincoln's anti-slavery leadership. Arian Christians and bishops once outnumbered the pope and "orthodox" Catholic bishops/laity in the Church (the latter prevailed). Mr Blair would have claimed that he was morally right on removing Saddam Hussein and the anti-Iraq war British people were morally wrong, albeit for understandable reasons. In short, numbers of votes, polls, public opinion, and majorities do not make a position on a issue moral or correct (eg homosexual practices) in God's universe.

  18. Shock Horror,

    Comparing compassionate Catholics who hate the sin yet love the sinner, to Nazis who hated the innocent to the point of anihilation is the kind of thing for which Jesus will judge most...fairly.

    I suggest you take your words back, for your sake.

  19. "Shock Horror", the only person I see here expressing any "venomous hate" is you with your disgusting "Nazi" diatribe. Simply repeating the unchangeable truth which the Church teaches and which all men have the capacity to know in their own minds if they honestly look at the question, is not "hatred" nor is it calling anyone inferior, less human, or less deserving or "somewhat disordered". We all have somewhat disordered desires as a result of the Fall, but there is no such thing as a disordered human being.

    Marie H, the fact that homosexuality is a grave disorder (spiritually, emotionally, mentally and physically, as modern science clearly shows) has nothing to do with anybody choosing it. Indeed even the CCC states that most with this disorder do not choose or encourage the disorder, which is a torment to them.

    Laurence, whilst I encourage everyone to become Catholic, I DO have a problem with Blair "converting" for purely social reasons. I was worried this might be the case when he let it be known that he would become Catholic, but not whilst in office because it might lose votes. Now he has confirmed it.

  20. Marie H is the only one offering comments about science on this difficult issue. I completely agree with her comments. I also commend reading Donald B. Cozzens' book The Changing Face of the Priesthood, where he mentions the supposedly large numbers of priests in the USA of this sexual orientation!

  21. We can now expect that a flood of comments will come allegedly confirming what Blair says. 'Oh, I've spoken to priests and nuns who agree that the Church is wrong.' 'Oh, most people in the pews are more liberal.'
    When are people going to learn how to control their tongues and NOT abuse and white-ant the Catholic Church by spreading lies about what people believe and hold?
    What the Church believes and teaches is not to be found in the pews, but in the Magisterium of those who stand at the Head of the Mystical Body of Christ.
    The followers of Blair and Fr. Kennedy may number a hundred: people who spend their time undermining the Church through abuse of the media. The sheep that listen to Christ's voice, follow Him and hear that voice speaking through Christ's Vicar, the sucessor of St. Peter, the Holy Father in Rome, to whom Christ said FEED MY SHEEP! Sheep come together into a flock ONLY when guided by the Shepherd. Sheep without a shepherd are to be pitied. Christ pitied them and went out of His way to teach them. He still does today.

  22. Ronk, how do you propose to get rid of this 'grave disorder' a label which you persist in placing on homosexuals, when it is part of their genetic heritage? Destroy the people?

    With the medieval mindset of taboos that's still shadowing the church, something that is part of some 'created' persons, is being declared 'evil'.

    It is disgraceful.
    They might as well decalre persons with heritable dyslexia,evil.
    It's only because the Church has so much problem with getting its head around sexual behaviours.
    Instead of emphasisng personal responsibility for sexual behaviour & fairness to others.
    I was taught at Catholic school that sin depends on full knowledge about something & full consent. Full knowledge re homosexuality now reveals it to be heritable predisposition, so one where the issue of 'full consent' becomes questionable.
    Fortunately, there are poeple who are able to put the 2 things together. Francis Collins, Head of the Human Genome Project, is a believing Christian as well as a leading scientist. He writes very well about the implications that scientific knowledge is opening up re understandings of 'will'.
    If the Church is to pontificate about human behaviours then, as I've said before, those providing guidance, should be required to study both the sciences & the natural sciences as well as moral theology.
    Otherwise, a number of the directions will stay firmly in the medieval era.

  23. I find the response of many that Mr Blair is somehow not a proper Catholic because he questions, a little disturbing. St Paul questioned the teaching of St.Peter - our first Pope - on the issue of equality (of the uncircumcised). Obedience to the magisterium does not imply unthinking or unquestioning acceptance and one who does so should not have to leave as Michael Bernard suggests. If Mr. Blair is wrong, feel free to explain why but this can be done without attacking his faith. Who are you to judge?

  24. Marie H, the fact that homosexuality is a grave disorder is clearly taught by the Church and discovered by objective science, it’s not just some “label” that I dreamed up as you seem to think. I have given you no basis whatsoever for your idea that I “you propose to get rid of “ homosexuality, much less your assertion that I propose to “destroy the people” or “declare them evil”.

    And as a scientist I must say that your unfounded assertion that homosexuality “is part of their genetic heritage” is insulting to the intelligence. Even if we accepted your assertion that homosexuality is a “heritable predisposition”, this would have zero relevance to “the issue of 'full consent'”. A man does not become unable to control his own actions just because one of the (inherited or environmental) predispositions he has, happens to be homosexuality! You seem to be saying that homosexuals are NOT rational human beings who make their own choices, but dumb animals blindly following their urges and appetites. And yet you accuse OTHERS of insulting homosexuals! ISTM that “emphasising personal responsibility for sexual behaviour & fairness to others” is exactly what the Church is doing which you object to!

    God did not create evil, and man becomes more fully human the more he AVOIDS sin. Homosexuality, dyslexia and every other grave disorder are results of the Fall – they don’t become good things just because they appear in people who don’t personally and specifically ask for them. They are now, always have been and always will be evil – nothing to do with any “taboos” which you imagine were invented in the medieval era.

  25. Blair's been listening to the gay lobby too long.

    If they were serious about equality rather than rationalising fornication, homosexual activists would recognise the radical principle of equity that underpins Catholic teaching on sexual morality: we are all to live chastely, irrespective of sexual orientation.

  26. Marie H: heterosexuality is a "heritable disposition", too - but this fact doesn't exempt heterosexuals from trying to be chaste.

    A deterministic argument such as you present doesn't do justice to human freedom; and inhibits growth.

  27. Well conceived, Robert Leach: among other things, your suggestion that there be a handily accessible reference site for Church teaching and reliable information connected with Cath News would, among other things, offset the impression that authority in the Church is based on popular opinion.

  28. Marie H, you have oversimplified the science. Studies have shown that an indentical twin of a male homosexual has a 20% likelihood of also being homosexual compared to a 2-4% likelihood in the population in general. This seems to suggest some genetic basis as the incidence is 5-10 time more likely. But 20% is also a long way short of 100%, suggesting that other factors play a significant (perhaps more significant) role. The science is not as clear cut on this issue as the gay lobby likes to pretend.

  29. Darren, you’ve made a double error. Firstly, Blair is not simply “questioning”, he is actually declaring that the Church is wrong. Secondly, St Paul did not question St Peter’s teaching. In fact it was St Peter himself who first taught St Paul and others that Gentile Catholics do not have to obey Jewish ritual laws. St Paul was questioning St Peter’s failure to have the courage of his convictions, by permitting a party of Judaizing Jewish Catholics, when they were present, to insist that Gentile Catholics observe the Jewish Law, although St Peter had immediately prior enforced the Gentiles NOT observing the Jewish Law when this then-influential lobby group had not been present.

    And far from “attacking his faith”, Blair has demonstrated by his comment that “Catholic leaders are out of step with ordinary believers” on a matter of unchangeable dogma, that he quite misunderstands or misrepresents what the Catholic faith is. His statement is as absurd as saying “the drum-major is out of step, because I and most of the foot-soldiers around me are marching to a different beat”.

  30. Whilst I agree with Catholic teaching on homosexuality, I would just like to point out to those taking offence that it is called 'a grave disorder' when it is genetic, that I (and my daughter, my mother & her mother) are all pre-disposed through genetics to an anxiety/depressive disorder.
    We did not choose it, and it IS a grave disorder.

    Sometimes we just have to accept what we have for what it is.

  31. Ronk, it is you who is in error. What Peter’s initial position was is irrelevant. I simply asserted that Paul questioned the teaching of Peter. In fact, he declared that Peter was wrong and he did this publicly “I opposed him to his face” because “they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel”. I am not suggesting that the two issues are comparable, nor that the Church is in error, but that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with publicly questioning. The second point is that the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is not “a matter of unchangeable dogma” as you assert. Certainly Tradition has been consistent in its teaching on this matter but that does not equate with dogma.

    The essential problem I have with this debate is that too frequently a double standard is applied to homosexuality that is not applied to other sins against chastity. The Catechism treats them virtually equally: 2396 "Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices"; while 2352 uses language almost identical to that used in relation to homosexuality "masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action". Substitute masturbation for homosexuality in Mr Blair’s statement and do you think it would receive the same reaction?

  32. Darren:
    Exactly, "they were not ACTING consistently with the truth of the gospel”. St Paul did NOT question St Peter's TEACHING as you asserted. He questioned St Peter's ACTIONS on this occasion which were not in line with St Peter's own teaching, which remained consistent.

    Not only Tradition, but Sacred Scripture and the Sacred Magisterium have always been consistent on the basic principle of morality that all sexual activity between people of the same sex is gravely immoral. There is zero possibility that this can ever change. This is dogma - Catholics are and always will be required to believe it.

    Not sure what you mean by a double standard. The Catechism says by way of introduction that all those things are offences against chastity. It certainly does not say they are all of equal nature or gravity. It then goes on to discuss each of them using very different language in each case.

    If Blair had made the same comment about masturbation, orthodox Catholics would presumably respond with a similar correction.
    But I suppose Blair would have very few supporters rabidly fulminating that those opposing masturbation are Nazis, unscientific, pathological haters, unfair discriminators or stuck in the Middle Ages - for some reason there seem to be no immensely powerful pro-masturbation lobby groups as there are pro-sodomy groups.

  33. As a Priest-On-Campus at a Catholic Yr 7-12 College, I have been subject to the very assertive questioning and judgement of some of the students on this matter over the years.

    I listen and I let them vent their feelings and then I carefully and compassionately discuss the subject with them and if there is time, offer suggestions for particular matters.

    With young people - and with their teachers - I have adopted a general rule of sticking to a carefully chosen and limited vocabulary and imagery when discussing matters of this sort that could divide a community such as a Catholic College.

    The language and imagery I use with regards to comments about the Church's teachings on homosexuality are as follows

    "We are created as male and female with a lifelong mission of relating to one another - male to female, female to male and it is for our happiness and sense of living a fulfilled life that all our capacities for relating are directed as such. As humans, different from animals, we choose to construct a morality to do this and then to know we are on the right track to fulfilment."

    "God doesn't want anyone to have second best at anything."

    "People sell themselves short if they define their identity by way of sexual inclination."

    As the Priest-On-Campus I love teaching the Church to the students and staff, both Catholics and non-Catholics, because, the Church has the truth.

    Pardon me for saying it, but I think Tony Blair has swapped parliament for Catholic commentator without carefully studying the 'party's' manifesto. He is a dangerous loose cannon.

    How could I, with the future happiness of the students at heart, teach that homosexuality and lesbianism is okay, just as good as heterosexuality? I can't and I won't. I will always be truthful to the students. For the young men, telling them that anal intercourse is a legitimate alternative to vaginal intercourse and that they will be fulfilled as a man in doing it is a lie and for the young women, that they will be fulfilled if they allow another woman to digitally bring them to orgasm is also a lie.

    For many years our Western society has been living with confusion about friendship and sexuality. Just because two males or two women may have a very strong friendship doesn't mean that they have to begin a genital sexual relationship.

    Our Western society has relegated any thought of governing individual sexual behaviour away from a personal morality that protects our human identity to one that is less than human, instinctual. No wonder then that we are in an epidemic of child sexual assault and sexual exploitation of all ages on the internet.

    My experiences of homosexuals and lesbians in parish communities has always been one of humility, theirs. I have known many, some in relationships, some as couples, but all of them humble in their love of the Church and their membership of the parish. They don't go around promoting any cause other than to try, as best as we all should, to live the Gospel. They know they are not a good example for younger people so they can't get involved in youth groups etc. If they are teachers in a Catholic School or College, then they know they must remain loyal to the Church in its teachings on sexuality and keep their friendship/relationship strictly private.

    Over time, many of the younger ones in situations described above have matured and gone on to establish friendships with the opposite sex and some I have even been celebrant of their marriage and then baptised the children.

    And yes, I have baptised babies of lesbian couples. Just as with heterosexual couples, I use a preparation programme that is faithful to the Church's teachings.

    The Church has always and will always be a sanctuary for anyone who is wanting to faithfully live the mission of their humanity according to the truth about all areas of this identity, including our sexuality. Truth is the sanctuary that the Church offers us, we may transgress sometimes, or for a while, we may not be able to attend to all areas of our humanity at the same time or at the same intensity that truth requires, but we are not doing ourselves justice or provoding for justice for future generations if we start demolishing that sanctuary of truth. We will end up fulfilling what the Church has stated is the aim of the devil in his mission of getting humankind - the crowing creation of God, to hate itself and thus destroy itself.



  34. The church needs to have a big rethink on the whole issue of human sexuality.How much of our current magisterial thinking on homosexuality has its origins in a primitive culture a thousand years before Christ which by necessity revered hetero-sexual union for the survival of the species? This at least leaves room for reevaluating the status of same sex unions in committed relationships.I'm pleased that someone of Tony Blair's stature and intelligence has stood up on this issue.

  35. And to any inclined to argue that inerrant unchangeable Catholic dogma concerns only strictly “religious” matters such as the nature of the Trinity or the Immaculate Conception, see e.g. the Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution On Divine Revelation, 7: “Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion (see Cor. 1:20; 3:13; 4:6), commissioned the Apostles to preach to all men that Gospel which is the source of all saving truth AND MORAL TEACHING” – echoing the declaration of the Council of Trent to the same effect.

    Although God provides all men with access to the natural law He has planted in them, our minds are clouded as a result of the Fall and we are often prevented by our cultural milieu and our sinful habits from being able to see clearly the whole of the moral law (obeying which makes us most fully human) without the light shone by the Church’s infallible moral teaching imparted by Christ and guided by the Holy Spirit.

    Fr Mac, thanks for your insights on your obviously very challenging pastoral situation. It is sad that even a community such as a Catholic college faces divisive “very assertive questioning and judgement” against the truths infallibly taught by the Church.

    I’m puzzled how it could be possible for people who are “humble in their love of the Church” to be actively involved in ongoing activities which the Church teaches are gravely sinful. You seem happy or even endorse the fact that they keep these ongoing grave sins “strictly private” whilst paying lip-service to the Church’s teachings. Surely this merely makes them hypocrites?

    And surely there are no such people as “babies of lesbian couples”. Two women can not form a “couple”, and any child in their care is at most the child of one of them only, being the child of a mother and a father as all humans are (except some soon-to-be-murdered embryos. Even under our awful laws, it is not permitted to clone a human being and then bring him/her to maturity.)

  36. Bill Brady, Blair may have "stature" in the secular world, but his stature as regards the Church is no greater than any other recent convert. And he displays very little "intelligence" if he thinks the Church's doctrines are decided by "ordinary believers" dictating to "Catholic leaders" or that sodomy can ever be permitted. If anyone in an RCIA class voiced such views, he would surely be considered to be not yet ready to be received into the Church, since he clearly lacks understanding of the nature of such a step.

  37. A read of Professor John Haldane's "We all bring our sexual lives to the cross", featured on an earlier link of Cath News, is well worth it!

  38. Thank you Fr macAndrew for your explanation.Of course,only those who want to really know the teachings of the Church will give your explanation the attention it deserves.The ignorant and the arrogant of the present time and of past times will follow their own ignorant and arrogant views.

  39. Actually, Bill, historically, you are quite wrong. The Jews were strongly influenced by the Greeks, and the Greeks certainly did not have a 'reverence for heterosexual unions' (as you so quaintly term it). The broader point about the influence of the Greeks applies to Christianity as a whole. The reason this is worth pointing out is, that, like St. Paul's affirmation of an all-male priesthood, it is quite a deliberate and consistent choice across the centuries by a mature and intelligent culture. I would doubt that there are all that many people alive today who are a tenth as cosmopolitan as Ss. Paul, or Augustine, or Ambrose.

    Marie, one can only express wonderment at your blind faith in science, but I cannot share it. The whole idea that I am genetically predisposed toward certain sins need not necessarily contradict the Church's teaching, given that all creation shares in the fall. To argue by analogy, the fact that kleptomania is a predisposition that certain people have, does not change the fact that deliberate stealing is a grave sin. But the whole genetic view of the world (the idea that if I pick my nose, it is because I have a nose-picking gene) does make the world quite scarily deterministic. Additionally, something which explains everything, whatever else it is, cannot be a scientific explanation.

  40. Ronk,

    There is no such thing as 'Sacred Magisterium', it is heresy.

    That comment clearly puts your views in light of your worship of 'The Church' (Structure and Institution) which amounts to Idolatry, in comparison to your worship of Jesus or God in light of the church’s margisterium; your limited understanding of ecclesiology is part of the reason why our church is so damaged at this point of time in history.

  41. TJ, you once told us that you support Vatican II, which stated “all this teaching about the institution, the perpetuity, the meaning and reason for the sacred primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of his infallible Magisterium, this Sacred Council again proposes to be firmly believed by all the faithful …
    In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme Magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.” (Lumen Gentium, 18, 25)

  42. Why have you not reported that the Archbishop-elect of Westminster has publicly corrected Blair's ignorant comments?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5138618/Leader-of-Catholic-Church-dismisses-Tony-Blairs-gay-rights-comments.html

  43. Thanks Fr Mick for the insights.

    I have a nephew who is a gay and I don't see any physical, mental, emotional, spiritual disorder on him. It's the opposite I found. Among the siblings he's the most generous, intelligent and has a very lovely personality. Easy to get along with and musically talented who plays saxophone very well. Maybe he has gene problems. However, I do respect him even if I'm opposed to his being a gay and I'm waiting for the right timing to discuss with him about homosexuality.



  44. Dear TJ Lawson my old mate,

    You are shooting your mouth off and saying the exact opposite of the truth when you say that the idea and might I add the established reality of the Sacred Magisterium is in your belief a "heresy".
    It is your belief here that is the real heresy TJ.
    Good to see Ronk providing the official Vatican II documents to refute your erroneous statements.

  45. Fr MacAndrew, do you think it is possible that what you see as humility in the homosexuals and lesbians in your parish is actually deep fear? Fear of how punitive the church can be against people who stand out - shunning, sackings etc?

  46. In reply to "exa"

    No I didn't have a sense of 'fear' from the homosexual and lesbian couples that have been part of the parishes in which I have been a priest.

    The humility you so quickly want to dismiss has an extraordinary strength about it, something that fear would not be able to give, a quality that shouts out, not bravado or defiance, but understanding and love, understanding that what is being lived out as a fault will be one day made right, not in this world but the next and love, received from the Church because it does know about resurrection, both now and to come.

  47. Fr Mac,
    surely you're not suggesting that we should "live out" our inherent faults and temptations by giving in to them and habitually sinning, trusting "humbly" that all will be rectified in the next life? What happens to each of us in the next life depends on what we do in this life.

    And you don't seem to have answered my queries, how it could be possible for people who are “humble in their love of the Church” to be actively involved in ongoing activities which the Church teaches are gravely sinful? You seem happy or even endorse the fact that they keep these ongoing grave sins “strictly private” whilst paying lip-service to the Church’s teachings. Surely this merely makes them hypocrites? And surely there are no such people as “babies of lesbian couples”?

Delicious

More from this section

  1. Aussies to present message stick to Pope in WYD handover

    Sixty five Australian pilgrims led by Sydney Cardinal George Pell have journeyed to Rome to present Pope Benedict with an Aboriginal message stick that symbolically protected him during his stay in Sydney.

  2. Abortion a "relief": Queensland students learn

    Parents groups are demanding that Education Queensland withdraw its endorsement for a website that teaches primary school students that abortion can be "a relief" and hormones make you "feel sexy".

Church Resources provides a range of services for the Church and not-for-profit sector, including aggregating buying power for a wide range of products and services used by health, welfare, aged care, education and parish organisations. More »

Subscribe

Receive CathNews headlines in your inbox daily.

News Feed

Subscribe to the CathNews RSS feed to get the daily edition automatically delivered to you.