Initially it seems like Jesus is just a wise teacher, as He prepares us for the coming of God's Kingdom. He preaches the Kingdom of God is close at hand, but the revelation is that this does not just mean a Kingdom where God lives and we can hope to be if we pass the judgement but also “a veiled christology”, Christ is the Kingdom. We see this as He begins to reveal the deeper meaning of Scripture He begins to reveal Himself, the Messiah, the Son of God. Jesus comes to not only complete God's revelation but to bring us back to Him. He begins His mission by explaining God's will to us, revealing how we can have freedom of choice, how we can strive to become more perfect as God. He gives us not only guidelines but we can also follow His own actions and lifestyle. But what makes His preaching different from the other prophets is that “Jesus has brought God and with God the truth about our origin and destiny: faith , hope and love”. Because Jesus is not just fully human but also divine He is able to allow us to know God on a more personal level because “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No-one knows the Son except the Father, and no-one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him”. Jesus is able to unwrap the truths that have been a mystery hidden in the Scripture because He knows God's master plan.

The sex abuse crisis is still very fresh in our minds. We know from the Ryan report and the Murphy report in Ireland that Bishops moved priests around and covered things up. We know that in America a cardinal was involved...

He knew.

He knew about allegations that John J. Geoghan, the now-convicted child molester, had been attacking little boys and returned him to parish work nevertheless.

He knew that the Rev. James D. Foley had fathered two children with a woman who later died from a drug overdose after going to bed with him, and yet he kept Foley in active ministry until this month.

Law knew that the Rev. Peter J. Frost was an admitted sex addict and child abuser and still held open the prospect of future ministry for him.

With an undeniable certainty, the cardinal's own words, revealed in documents forced from locked chancery filing cabinets by court order, confirmed that knowledge.

[link]

For a moment, shut your eyes and imagine what it must have been like for a parent or a victim of abuse. To know from personal experience that you or your child had been abused, to know that your abuser was still at large and to know that he was being helped and aided even by Bishops and Cardinals.

If you mentioned this to your fellow Catholics, they might have said something like this...

[I cannot accept] criticism of the Bishops who reign by the God's Grace, who stand in the place of Christ as Apostles. It is by them the sheep and lambs are fed, it is through them that the Catholic faith is passed on. I cannot believe they will give stones instead of bread, scorpions instead of an eggs, a serpents instead of a fish.

Or this...

But as for the Bishops failing in the guardianship of the Catholic faith or suggesting that they would be compliant in anything contrary to the faith, that is a criticism I could never make and could never be true.

Fortunately we have learned our lesson. We now know that Bishops as individuals and even small groups (and Bishops conferences are relatively small groups) can and have done terrible things. Or at least, I thought we had learned our lesson.

You see. I am that parent. Somebody wants to abuse my children. Not, thank God, by raping them, but by treating them as guinea pigs in the governments latest experiment in reducing rates of teenage pregnancy. I am not alone, there are many parents like me who are deeply concerned and are writing to the Bishops and the Bishops are once again covering up the abuse.

And once again, Priests can be found saying the same things...

Those two quotes come from Fr Ray Blake who is not a stupid man and who should know better. In this instance he is dangerously wrong and his words are putting young souls at risk.

The truth is that the laity can and must criticise Bishops from time to time. That's not my view, that's the view of St Thomas Aquinas:

To correct the wrongdoer is a spiritual almsdeed. But almsdeeds are works of charity, as stated above. Therefore fraternal correction is an act of charity.

...

A subject is not competent to administer to his prelate the correction which is an act of justice through the coercive nature of punishment: but the fraternal correction which is an act of charity is within the competency of everyone in respect of any person towards whom he is bound by charity, provided there be something in that person which requires correction.

...

It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Galatians 2:11, "Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects."

[link[

When the government say Catholic Schools "must explain how to access an abortion" and Catholic Bishops say nothing there is imminent danger of scandal concerning faith.

This standing up to Bishops is not unique to Aquinas. St Thomas More was visited in his cell in the tower of London by groups of Bishops and chose to defy them and St Wilfrid, patron of our Diocese said "though your fathers were holy, do you think that their small number, in a corner of the remotest island, is to be preferred before the universal church of Christ throughout the world?"

Even Pope Benedict has something to say about the need to recognise the faults of Bishops and priests...

There are also, sad to say, situations which can never be sufficiently deplored where the Church herself suffers as a consequence of infidelity on the part of some of her ministers. Then it is the world which finds grounds for scandal and rejection. What is most helpful to the Church in such cases is not only a frank and complete acknowledgment of the weaknesses of her ministers, but also a joyful and renewed realization of the greatness of God’s gift, embodied in the splendid example of generous pastors, religious afire with love for God and for souls, and insightful, patient spiritual guides.

[link]

Pope Benedict also speaks about the responsibilities of Lay people...

ROME, MAY 28, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Laypeople are not merely the clergy's collaborators, but rather share in the responsibility of the Church's ministry, says Benedict XVI.

The Pope called on the laity to become more aware of their role when he inaugurated Tuesday an ecclesial conference for the Diocese of Rome on "Church Membership and Pastoral Co-responsibility." The conference is under way through Friday.

"There should be a renewed becoming aware of our being Church and of the pastoral co-responsibility that, in the name of Christ, all of us are called to carry out," the Holy Father said. This co-responsibility should advance "respect for vocations and for the functions of consecrated persons and laypeople," he added.

The Pontiff acknowledged that this requires a "change of mentality," especially regarding laypeople, shifting from "considering themselves collaborators of the clergy to recognizing themselves truly as 'co-responsible' for the being and action of the Church, favoring the consolidation of a mature and committed laity."

[link]

When Pope Benedict says that what is useful for the Church us "a frank and complete acknowledgment of the weaknesses of her ministers" and then he says that we laity should consider ourselves "truly co-responsible for the being and action of the Church" and when St Thomas Aquinas says that sometimes "a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly". See how rediculous Fr Blakes words sound...

I cannot believe they will give stones instead of bread, scorpions instead of an eggs, a serpents instead of a fish.

...

But as for the Bishops failing in the guardianship of the Catholic faith or suggesting that they would be compliant in anything contrary to the faith, that is a criticism I could never make and could never be true.

[link]

Fr Ray Blake is wrong, wrong, wrong on this one.

Does this mean I want to be "against the Bishops"? Most certainly not. It means that I agree with Aquinas that "correction is an act of charity" and I believe it to be an act of love for the Bishops that we criticise them when they fail so terribly.

It's also a question of language. If by "the Bishops" Fr Blake means "[the Bishops] dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the Successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held" then yes. He is correct. They will not fail in guardianship of the Catholic faith.

But if by "the Bishops" he means "their small number, in a corner of the remotest island" then no. That small number have failed before and may fail again.

Which is why you should definitely sign this petition.

You will note that most of the people in the United Kingdom do not criticise Bishops. They worry about politicians perhaps or celebrities but not Bishops. They don't think Bishops are very important.

I do think Bishops are important, which is why I think it's worth criticising them.

Fr John Boyle has a more canon law take on all this here.

Christ's position is clearly one of great importance and significance, so naturally He is the centre of teaching, but how does this work when God is three persons, the Holy Trinity should be at the centre of our teaching?

If we use the New Testament alone it is difficult to grasp who Christ is. We have to have the New Testament in light of the Old. God the Father creates the word “God spoke” and over time He begins to reveal Himself “His omnipotence is universal, mysterious and shows itself in the creation of the world out of nothing and humanity out of love”, He prepares His people through the prophets and signs. It is then through His love for us that “God so loved the World that He gave His only Son”. He is the Word made flesh, the Word incarnate, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched— this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us”.

But what of the Holy Spirit? “God left some trinitarian traces in creation and the Old Testament” but it remains inaccessible to human reason. “This mystery was revealed by Jesus Christ and is the source of all other mysteries”.

We see Christ bringing the Holy Trinity to light at a few poignant moments, for example at His baptism, but He forever proclaims His relationship with the Father and how we can be a part of that, and also His relationship with the Spirit guiding and strengthening Him in prayer as we too can be guided and strengthened as well as receiving the gifts bestowed on us as members of Christ's family, the family of the Trinity. It is the Holy Spirit who guides the living Church today as instituted by Christ with it's mission to guide us to the Father in heaven.

Though Christ is the centre of our teaching, as He through His incarnation has become our salvation, the guide which our human understanding can follow, He Himself makes it clear that we need to place all our hope, joy and trust in the fullness of God as the Holy Trinity.

I have received multiple emails from various sources asking me to publicise the following petitions. I am happy to do so...

Against Government-Led Sex Education in Catholic Schools

We, the undersigned, call upon the Bishops of England and Wales and the Catholic Education Service to fulfil their duty as guardians of our Catholic Faith and unequivocally reject recent Government measures forcing Catholic schools to teach what is explicitly condemned by the Church, viz: presenting active homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle, and providing information on the nature - and provision - of contraception and abortion services. Compliance on the part of the Bishops and the CES in such measures would effectively render our schools no longer Catholic in any meaningful sense, and would place the faith and moral life of our children in jeopardy. As Catholic parents, teachers and pastors, we earnestly beg of you, our Shepherds in Christ, that you do not allow this to happen.

[link]

Support of the Papal visit to the UK

During the recent Ad Limina Visit, the Holy Father announced his forthcoming trip to the UK, possibly sometime in September 2010. Sadly there is already opposition headed by the Secular Society of Great Britain to this visit. The Secular Society have an online petition which has already attracted over 20.000 signatures and yet a petition supporting the visit only has 1,200 signatures.

You are asked to visit the website below and sign the supporting petition as we welcome the Holy Father to our country.

[link]

Petition to Amend the Equality Bill to make space for Catholic Adoption Agencies

"Following the loss of some Catholic Adoption Agencies, and the severing of links between some agencies and the Church, it is clear that the Government has not achieved its aim of "not dissipating or diluting the expertise that the Catholic Adoption Agencies have developed in dealing with hard-to-place children."(25 Jan. 2007) Quite apart from the rights of children, the rights of those wishing to adopt in a Catholic ethos have been trampled on. The Government must use the opportunity presented by the Equality Bill to amend the Law to make space for Catholic Adoption services. Sexual Orientation laws on the provision of goods and services should not be used to prevent people of faith from accessing a service in the context of their faith tradition."

[link]

Fr Longenecker has an interesting article up today about the relationship between our contracepting culture and the vocations crisis.

His thoughts on this are very close to mine...

We have experienced a radical change in the deeper understanding and expectations of marriage. Before the sexual revolution, a young Catholic boy or girl experienced a family context in which being a husband or wife, father or mother, would have demanded a natural kind of self sacrifice.

...

It was within this context of self-sacrificial family life that a young man or woman's vocation to the priesthood or religious life would have been formed. The young person therefore did not question the demand for a life of self-sacrifice; it was assumed that this was the foundation of a good life. The question, then, was which manner of sacrifice is best for the individual: Dying to self through marriage and family, or dying to self through a religious vocation?

Now, because of artificial contraception, the whole underlying assumptions and expectations about marriage have shifted. Marriage is no longer a way to give all, but a way to have it all. Therefore, when a young person today considers a religious vocation, they are not choosing between different paths of self-sacrifice; they are choosing between a life that seems to have it all and a life that seems to have nothing. They must choose between a home in the suburbs, 2.5 nice children, and a double income or total self denial. The choice is between a familiar form of hedonism or an inexplicable form of heroism.

[link]

The priestly vocation crisis is a natural consequence of the marriage crisis because like it or not, the priesthood depends on marriage. Priests come from families.

It is difficult to think of anything that could more seriously undermine the sacrament of marriage than contraception. In marriage two people give themselves physically and spiritually to one another, the physical act of having sex is a sacramental. It is a sign and a symbol of this union.

Contraception physically breaks the sign and symbol of the sacrament. This is the equivalent of baptism without the water, or spitting out the communion host. I am fairly sure that if you spat out the body of Christ your priest would have something to say about it, yet if you treat the body of your spouse in a similar way he will probably have nothing to say about it.

Bishop Drainey has spoken extensively about the way everybody seems to think that priests are going to come from other families in other parishes.

Perhaps the time has come for him to start speaking about the way that everybody seems to think that people are going to come from other families.

Sort of. Maybe. Perhaps.

What I mean is that if you email Bishop Drainey a quote from Ed Balls and then email Bishop Drainey again to point out that the answer you got sort of sidestepped the subject at hand then Bishop Drainey will say something...

This is what Ed Balls said on the radio:

They must give a balanced view on abortion, they must give both sides of the argument, they must explain how to access an abortion, the same is true on contraception as well.

This is what I got from Bishop Drainey's secretary when I asked her if Bishop Drainey had anything to say on the matter:

The Bishop of Middlesbrough has no intention of allowing schools in the Diocese of Middlesbrough to teach ‘how to use contraception’ or ‘explain how to access an abortion’.

This is good news... The Bishop of Middlesbrough has no intention of allowing his schools to explain how to access an abortion.

The Bad News? Well, his secretary prefixed that with this...

Bishop Terry has asked me to forward the undermentioned, and suggests you refer directly to the CES in future as they are the main Agency concerning educational matters for the CBCEW.

So CES tell me they support the Bishops and can't speak for the Bishops, but when I speak to my Bishop he refers me back to CES!

In a shock move this morning (not that it suprised me very much) the Catholic Bishops Conference announced that since they have a Bishop of the Forces they might as well have a Bishop of the Schools as well.

Like the Bishop of the Forces, the Rt Rev Stannard has a diocese with no geographical boundaries but is Bishop (and indeed Pope) of anywhere that happens to be a school.

Ed Balls is thrilled.

“"This is the will of God, your sanctification" (1 Th 4:3). It is a duty which concerns not only certain Christians: "All the Christian faithful, of whatever state or rank, are called to the fullness of the Christian life and to the perfection of charity"”.

In his letter on the universal call to holiness Pope John Paul II reminds us that all Christians, what ever their position or circumstances in life are called to holiness through living their Christian lives by devoting themselves entirely for God, striving to remove themselves from worldly influences, in particular honing that fruit of the spirit charity.

The call to holiness is not something that is a personal thing, in fact it is assumed that the lay faithful play a fundamental part in “fulfilling the mission of salvation within the Church”. It is through the variety of gifts and talents that are bestowed on individual members that regardless of “rank or status [we] are called to the fullness of Christian life and to the perfection of charity".

This call requires us to place our focus on God, to do God's will by not being influenced by worldly demands but separating ourselves from the world (hagiosyne) by living our lives for God in the way God intended. We do this by placing our trust in Him, giving ourselves to Him (hosiotes). Through our redemption through Christ we cannot refuse this call as Mother Teresa stated "Holiness is not a luxury; it is a necessity."

The Catholic Encyclopaedia states that Holiness comes from the word Sanctitas which is a translation of two distinct Greek words hagiosyne meaning separation (from the world) and hosiotes that which has received God's seal.

The hagiosyne (separation) means that a holy thing has been separated from the world and that a holy thing can be identified as being different from the things around it. This can be seen in the example of enclosed religious orders such as monks who have removed themselves from worldly influences in order to devote their lives to God or Israel, a holy nation1, a people set apart.

The hosiotes (receiving of God's seal) means being owned by God. For a thing to be holy it must not just be separated from the world but also given over to God. For example the very earth around the burning bush or land set aside for God in the building of a Church.

These two themes can be seen clearly when looking at the Church and the Sacraments demonstrating the importance and prominence of holiness.

God Himself is by definition holy and anything He chooses for Himself is made Holy. People who answer His call are made holy because He has set them aside from the world (hagiosyne) and marked them for Himself (hosiotes). In this way sancitias takes people, places and things and puts them in divine light and majesty.

In conclusion, holiness is something that has been set apart from the world for and by God.

The “call to holiness is rooted in Baptism”, through our Baptism we are united to the Body of Christ. Baptism removes Original Sin, which ties us to the world. The removal of Original Sin separates us from the world (hagiosyne) making us adopted children of God (hosiotes); we are renewed and guided by the Holy Spirit. By accepting this covenant with God we must take up the call to holiness and act upon it, it would be ridiculous to say that you wished to be a member of God's family being set apart for His glory but then reject the call to holiness by not wishing to be set aside for Him. “It is the whole of [human] nature, extending from the beginning to the end [of history], that constitutes the one image of Him who is” though it seems we are individual members we make up the one body of Christ, it is this ontological unity which unites our attempts to achieve holiness with that of all the members, thus achieving holiness for one and all.

Marie Stopes herself was in to eugenics and in favor of "sterilisation of those totally unfit for parenthood [to] be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory" and when her son married a woman with myopia she cut him out of her will.

The folks at Marie Stopes continue this glorious tradition to this day. On their website they have a poll asking "Should abortion be legal in Ireland?" and above that poll they write...

Woman travelling overseas for abortion, include pregnant teenagers, women who have been raped or in a violent relationship, women whose life would be at risk if they continued with their pregnancy or women whose pregnancy has a foetal abnormality.

In other words, not being a perfect biological specimen should give your mother an excuse to kill you.

You can vote on the online poll here.

Is it only the baptised Christians who can take up this call of holiness? Gregory of Nyssa states “An image is not truly an image if it does not possess all the characteristics of the pattern” If God is holiness and if man was created in the image of God, the image of that holiness, then he is set aside from the world (hagiosyne) for God's work (hosiotes), therefore all humanity is called to holiness.

When Christ died for the salvation of humanity, He died that all might be saved, we see this in action at Christ's crucifixion when Jesus assures the thief a place in paradise, even though he had not been baptised. Jesus clearly states that Baptism is necessary for salvation, this applies to those who have heard the Good News and therefore could not refuse themselves this sacrament.

There are many people who are ignorant of the Gospels but who strive to search for the truth. Gaudium et Spes talks of how God created us in love, inscribing on our hearts a law, the way that brings us to Him. It discusses how man chooses to observe this law that he will be judged. Those who have not heard the Good News, and therefore are not baptised, may still be saved if they truly search for truth and follow the path God calls them on; they may unknowingly become partakers in the Baptism of desire. If one can obtain salvation without having received baptism then as Paul informed the Hebrews without holiness no one will see the Lord We can only conclude that all mankind has been called to holiness because we are all called by God to Himself, which requires all of us to separate ourselves from this world in search of the truth that is God (hagiosyne), in love/desire for Him (hosiotes) whether we are aware that our love is for Him or not.

It is important to remember that it is not only those who are baptised Christians whom God has chosen to do His work (it is the Pagan King Cyrus who is chosen to re-build the Temple in Jerusalem). James states faith without works is dead and John states “everybody who does wrong hates the light and avoids it […] the man who lives by the truth comes out into the light […] that what he does is done in God”. Therefore those who do “good works”, who follow those laws God has inscribed on his heart are striving to find the truth that is God.

This may mean that even though a baptised Christian may have a fuller understanding of the call to holiness, because “All of us who are human beings are in the image of God, but to be in his likeness belongs only to those who by great love have attached their freedom to God”, that is to say through our baptism the Holy Spirit fulfils this natural call to holiness with a sacramental sign of our separation from the world and dedication to God. There are some who may be ignorant of God's message who still manage to achieve part of that call to holiness without necessarily realising it!

Because “we are God's work of art, created in Christ Jesus to live the good life as from the beginning he had meant us to live it”, it is therefore imperative that those who are baptised Christians take up the call to evangelization and being witnesses of the faith seriously, as we understand more fully the call to holiness which encompasses the whole of humanity. It is our duty as part of the covenant we have undertaken that we make sure our family, friends, work colleagues and strangers on the street are aware of the holiness we are all called to.

I hope you will enjoy this optical illusion...

They are both the same picture, but one of them appears to be tilted more than the other.

[source: Richard Wiseman]

When I said I didn't know this, the Bishop said "shame on you". He said that "It's part and parcel of being a Latin Rite Catholic to at least know the Our Father".

In our parish there is no Latin ever. That's because the opinions of our Bishop are largely irrelevant here. If I want to experience things that are "part and parcel of being a Latin Rite Catholic" I have to go on YouTube...

Isn't technology wonderful.

When Christ completed His mission for our salvation He sanctified us, making us holy that we might live full lives in God. He instituted the Church to carry on His work on earth, He made the Church His bride, sanctifying her making her a sacrament, Holy as He Himself is Holy, setting her aside from the worldly influences (hagiosyne) for the work of God (hosiotes). Therefore participation in the sacraments, the mass etc. are holy acts because they separate us from the world for and by God. Regardless if the participant is worthy or not, the participation itself is holy. The guidance that the Church gives is also holy, rooted in Sacred Tradition as well as Scripture. We cannot ignore or be selective about the parts we choose to listen too, as this guidance helps us in both our own call to holiness and that of the whole Body of Christ of which we are members.

The inimitable Jackie Parkes has hung up her quill and stopped blogging for a period of prayer and to better focus on the more important things in life. She asked me to put this message for you all on my blog...

In order to concentrate on Almighty God & my family & friends more I have decided to cease blogging for at least Lent. I received wise counsel & guidance from spiritual directors & trusted friends & family in making this decision. Thankyou so much sharing my blogging journey & God bless you all. Please pray for me as I pray for you. Mrs Jackie Parkes

Pray for Jackie, she's been facing quite a few difficult situations recently. I look forward to her return.

Did I ever mention that our parish youth group has a blog?

Check it out!

A few days ago I blogged about an online poll by the people at Marie Stopes. They were asking "Should abortion be legal in Ireland?, Yes or no."

The result? 94% said no, abortion should not be legal in Ireland.

A great result, so naturally they have removed the poll from their website.

The York Aquinas Reading Group have asked me to pass on the following...

A group of us over in York (with the generous help of the English Dominican Province) have started up a reading group dedicated to studying the summa theologiae of Thomas Aquinas. We meet on the third Friday of each month at 7:30pm at English Martyr’s Church in York.

We have set up a blog to support the reading group and also to make available a discussion forum for those not able to reach York but interested in following and joining in our progress through the summa.

So, visit the York Aquinas Reading Group blog and if you are in the area pop along.

You you luckly, lucky York people. Not satisfied with having a Minster, a regular EF Mass and those Rudgate singer people, you get to have an Aquinas Reading Group as well. Meanwhile, we in Hull have to watch latin on YouTube to stay sane.

It's really not fair.

If like me you were wondering exactly what Catholic Education Services and the Bishop's Conference are playing at, if you've ever thought "what are they thinking??!?" then this letter should hopefully explain all.

Not that it will make you feel any happier...

Dear Mrs [name removed on request],

Thank you for your email of 22 February 2010.

The Children Schools and Families Bill which is presently passing through Parliament has been amended in important ways by the patient and thorough work done by the CES. As a result, the policy for Sex and Relationships Education in a Catholic School will be determined by the governing body. This means that the religious character of the school will be reflected in the delivery of the subject to the pupils. Furthermore, parents will have the right to withdraw their children from SRE lessons up to the age of 15 years.

In the face of a Government with a very large parliamentary majority, the CES considers that it gets the best results for the Catholic community by negotiation. I believe that this is the responsible stance for the CES to take and has protected the rights of Catholic parents and families. To oppose the Bill outright would have put Catholic Schools in a position where they would have lost out on the concessions gained by the CES.

Yours sincerely,

Rt Rev Malcolm McMahon OP

Bishop of Nottingham

Message sent on behalf of Bishop McMahon

Catherine Campbell

Bishop's Secretary

So there we have it. CES have chosen not to oppose the bill because they consider they will get the best results by negotiation.

I'm pretty sure that doesn't make any sense at all.

How do you negotiate over a bill you do not oppose? What do you say? "I have no opposition to this but I need a concession because..." Because what? Because you feel like it?

Is Bishop Mc Mahon, or his secretary, or the CES, or whoever it was in the maze of Bishop's Conference beurocracy that penned this letter... Are they saying that they do oppose the Bill but have decided to be silent as part of a deal? It rather sounds like it. If that is the case then it also sounds like an admission that they have knowingly kept silent about serious problems with government legislation, that they have intentionally not publicly taught that which should have been publicly taught.

It would mean that when Ed Balls (a senior government minister) said of Catholic Schools "They must explain civil partnership. They must give a balanced view on abortion, they must give both sides of the argument, they must explain how to access an abortion, the same is true on contraception as well." the resulting silence was not an accident.

It would mean that when Ed Balls went on to say "To have the support of the Catholic Church and Archbishop Nichols in these changes is, I think, very, very important" the resulting silence from Archbishop Nichols himself was not an accident.

Hey guys, if we oppose King Henry VIII he might chop our heads off, better to negotiate some concessions... wot?

"If the Church were to accommodate herself to the world in any way that would entail a turning away from the Cross, this would not lead to a renewal of the Church, but only to her death."

[Joseph Ratzinger]

And it worked so well for the adoption agencies...

Through our participation in the Sacraments particularly in the Eucharist, where we accept God into our very being, our holiness is honed and enriched. The more we choose to set ourselves aside from the world (hagiosyne) and dedicate ourselves to God (hosiotes), trying not to be influenced by for example, secular morality, the more we achieve this holiness. The parable of the talents makes it clear that the more we strive to do God's work the more gifts and graces He bestows on us helping us to achieve more for His glory.

We are justified in our attempts to achieve holiness through our salvation through Christ's Paschal sacrifice, which we partake in through baptism. This “Justification includes the remission of sins, sanctification and the renewal of inner man” and it is that renewal that is the honing of holiness within us. The call to holiness requires us to model our lives on Christ, who separated Himself from worldly ties and persuasions, focusing on God and the mission God had for Him. We must follow this example of separation and focus on the mission God has for us, we must "be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" and strive "to be holy in all conduct" because we have been told that, “without holiness no one will see the Lord”. God gives us gifts with which we can use to achieve this perfection for us and others but it is important to remember that what might seem like a nice gift from God is intended to be used as a tool... "This is the will of God, your sanctification".

It is also important to be aware that “The ways of holiness are many” because of the variety and skills of the laity. We do not have to achieve this holiness by struggling on our own merit, there is a call for "training in holiness", to be adapted to people's needs. The main source of this training can be obtained through deepening our prayer lives, the apostles saw this when they asked "Lord, teach us to pray!", but this is not enough on it's own the “primacy of holiness and prayer is inconceivable without a renewed listening to the word of God” which we receive in during the mass. As Christians we strive to live our Christian life in the fullest possible way and are therefore able to live our lives for the glory of God. Though this is no easy task we can strive to achieve it to the best of our abilities after all as St Gregory of Nyssa states “Christian perfection has but one limit, that of having none”.

Update: Just to clarify that this sentance was a bit confusing..."We are justified in our attempts to achieve holiness through our salvation through Christ's Paschal sacrifice, which we partake in through baptism." What I mean is through baptism our original sin is wiped away and we are saved. The salvation has been achieved for us by Christ's Paschal sacrifice therefore because Christ has saved us for His own our attempts to achieve holiness are justified. or as Gregory puts it "As Christ has justified us in baptism, our graced attempts to achieve holiness are meritorious, increasing that justification"

Unfortunately I have to go to work and I don't have time to watch this full video, but the first thirty seconds were enough...

I wouldn't want to be a priest incorrectly accused of abuse in his diocese...

I think any allegation of child abuse perpetrated by priests is a problem for the Church because it's real, it's reality, we can't deny it and it's going to damage the relationship between many individuals and their Church the way it's damaged the individuals who are the victims of the abuse we can't deny it.

I think what he means to say is that any allegation is just that, an allegation, and that we can't say whether it's real or not until it is properly investigated by the authorities and a conviction upheld.

As I say, I have to go to work now. If somebody has time to comment on the rest of the video please get to it...

Can there be even the slightest chance you don't already know about this?

[Image Source: American Papist]

The visit of Pope Benedict to the UK has been officially announced. There is an official website and everything.

Hey look! Suddenly people are available for press conferences...

The readings from the Third Sunday of Lent B give us clear guidance on how to take up the call practically. In the Gospel Jesus clears the temple of the money lenders etc., just as we, as temples of Christ, should remove the hindrances and sins which cause us to fail on our path to holiness. The first reading, the Ten Commandments, is a back to basics, this was not just a list of rules but a covenant with God's people, not just the Hebrews but us as Christians. It is important to remember that this covenant requires participation from us. We should keep them as our focus and guide in life, along with the two greatest commandments which Jesus uses to sum up and complete the ten. With these commandments as our focus we can separate ourselves from worldly expectations and live our lives for God. Finally the second reading, preaching a crucified Christ. Christ is our model and guide without salvation through Him there would be no possibility to achieve holiness. We must therefore listen to Him we can do this by giving time to God each week, removing ourselves from our busy, worldly lives.

By going to Mass every week we hear God's guidance on our call to Holiness through the liturgy of the Word, we get the strength and refreshment of Christ Himself through the Holy Eucharist. By going to regular confession we make ourselves clean again, removing those sins we have built up, clearing the temple of God (hagiosyne). By offering our sins and giving them to God He sanctifies them (hosiotes), making them holy. We are also given the grace to not sin again and the help needed to over come the stumbling blocks of the past and bring us back to the path of holiness and perfection as members of the 'bride of Christ'

We also look to the hierarchy of the Church, take Peter he was the first Pope, the head and leader that all looked to and yet he considered himself just to be one of the twelve, a servant to the rest. We look to how our Bishops act and what they encourage, bearing in mind that it must be in union with the teachings of the Pope. We look to them for both leadership but also encouragement and spiritual growth.

Congratulations must be given to Catholic Care who have won their high court appeal, but let's not get too excited: there's plenty of race left to run before the finish line.

Catholic Care must now go back to the Charity Commission with this ruling as evidence and the Charity Commission may still have another trick up their sleeves yet.

A question: If they do win in the end, will all the other Catholic adoption agencies re-open? The answer is clearly no, mainly because many of them were all to eager to de-catholicise themselves. So even if Catholic Care do win, we have still lost a great deal.

And the government are planning to do the same thing to our schools.

Renters rights in England are abismal. It sounds crazy to say it, but in many ways tenants had a better deal in the dark old days of Dickensian misery. Back then there were some quite favourable rules for renters that went back to the days of feudalism when it was considered that a landlord had certain obligations to his tenants.

The landlord couldn't just kick you out of you home just because he wanted to sell his house for example, he had to sell it with you in it.

That all changed in 1988 when regulated tenancies were replaced with shorthold tenancies. Shorthold tenancies put the boot firmly on the landlords foot - he can now have you out with only two months notice for pretty much any reason he likes.

Our landlady pulled this stunt on us just after the floods in Hull. Just after Christmas 2008 she gave our young family with a young baby only two months to find another house in a city where some people were forced to live in caravans. Eventually we found somewhere, but we now pay a lot more rent.

I can't imagine what it must be like for Fiorella - she is due to give birth in one month and now her landlord has given her eight weeks to move house. It's an awful, awful situation.

Welcome to modern Britain. Where young families cannot afford to buy a home so we rent, and live constantly in the knowledge that any day now we might be asked to move on.

God is love by being built in His image mankind was created in and for love. It is the ultimate call of man to be reconciled with God, all mankind feels the desire to know God1 and complete that love that was tarnished by Original Sin. The call to holiness is intrinsically linked with this love. We choose to take up the call to holiness because of our love for God, our desire for re-establishing our relationship with Him, our creator.

To love is to give ourselves to another we can see this in marriage the couples give themselves to each other and are sanctified through this sacrament of love, similarly Christ's marriage to His bride the Church sanctifies her.

This act of love however demands sacrifice, through marriage the couples give up many things great or small because of their love for the other. God shows us not only the importance of sacrifice as part of this love but how much He Himself loves us through sacrifices in the Old Testament and ultimately the sacrifice of His only Son for our salvation. God sacrificed His Son in love for us and so to our love for God demands sacrifices from us.

These sacrifices may come in the form of giving up worldly possessions2, separating ourselves from the world for God, or in other forms (hagiosyne). Even the sacrament of confession demands us to sacrifice the sins which we cling to in order to bring ourselves closer to God, to make ourselves holy.

If we love God then we choose to give ourselves to God (hosiotes), separating ourselves from the world for Him, striving to do His will. By giving ourselves to God He sanctifies us, making us holy.

An interesting development...

When CNA contacted the offices of the Catholic Education Service (CES), it was referred to an amendment to the SRE bill that says religious schools will be allowed to teach the material within a Catholic ethos. However, questions about the requirement to inform students of non-Catholic views on abortion, contraception and homosexuality were not answered.

CES staff also told CNA that Oona Stannard, the group's director, was on “a leave of absence.” Stannard has been quoted as calling the new SRE “a positive step forward.”

[link]

I wonder why?

It is clear that all members of the laity must 'co-operate' in the building of Christ's kingdom and therefore building up the holiness of the Church, because “Holiness is the greatest testimony of the dignity conferred on a disciple of Christ”. This building may be as simple as in the family home (the domestic Church) or with a work colleague or indeed on a more wider scale of evangelization. The catechism makes it clear that because we are all part of Christ's life even the humblest can “enlighten the learned and those in the highest positions”. It would be wrong to feel that we have nothing to offer in enriching not only our own holiness but that of the whole Church for the glory of God because God has called us to Himself, setting us apart and through our Baptism we have accepted this call. Not only have we accepted His call making us holy but we as members of His Church take on the mission of His Church for the salvation and redemption of others. By striving to be a holy member of the community we exude Christ. A community which is divided, self centred and sinful contradicts Christ's message and becomes a countersign of holiness and salvation. But the example of holiness is a “message that convinces without the need for words, is the living reflection of the face of Christ.” The Church calls and brings all sinners to her and is therefore also in constant need of being purified. For as a whole the Church is required to be a “sign and instrument” of holiness. Holiness which can be considered to be a direction rather than a destination.

The internet is awesome, not only can you walk the streets of Rome but now you can step inside the Sistine Chapel as well.

h/t Fr Finegan

Making the Sign of the Cross can become a force of habbit but for christians making this sign can mean a multitude of things. My ponderies continue...

The Sign of the Cross is our Baptismal birthright. In Baptism we become adopted sons through Christ and we can call God Father in the fullest way. It is our access to the life of the Trinity through the cross of Jesus, God's own Son.

The Pope's pastoral letter to Irish Catholics is out. It's long, but it's worth reading.

Which you can do here.

The Sign of the Cross is the Promise of Christ. Before Baptism the sign of the cross is an imprint of Christ it signify's the grace of Christ's redemption for those who are going to belong to Him. It is for all who are open to it, but it has a different meaning for those who are non-baptised than those who are baptised.

The Sign of the Cross is doctrine. It is a proclamation of our faith, the Holy Trinity, One God and three persons is the central mystery and the source and enlightenment of all other mysteries.

A few people have forwarded me this article by Gerald Warner in the Telegraph. I don't share the authors contempt for the Second Vatican Council, but I think he makes some good points about the general situation.

How could clergy transgress so gravely against the doctrines of the Church? What doctrines? These offences took place in the wake of Vatican II, when doctrines were being thrown out like so much lumber. These offenders were the children of Paul VI and “aggiornamento”. Once you have debauched the Mystical Body of Christ, defiling altar boys comes easily.

The “neglected” sacraments and devotional practices that the Pope says could have prevented this did not just wither on the vine: they were actively discouraged by bishops and priests. In the period when this abuse was rampant, there was just one mortal sin in the Catholic Church: daring to celebrate or attend the Latin Tridentine Mass. A priest raping altar boys would be moved to another parish; as for a priest who had the temerity to celebrate the Old Mass – his feet would not touch the ground.

There was a determined resolve among the bishops to deny any meaningful catechesis to the young. That is the generation, wholly ignorant of the faith, that in Ireland achieved material prosperity in the “Celtic Tiger” economy. Initially it still attended Mass (or what passed for Mass) out of social conformity. Then the sex abuse scandal gave Irish post-Vatican II agnostics the perfect pretext for apostasy: tens of thousands who had never been abused, nor met anybody who had, found an excuse to stay in bed on Sunday mornings.

The abusive priests are not the only hypocrites. “I am so shocked by the abuse scandal I am leaving the Church.” Right. So, the fact that some degenerates who should never have been ordained violated young people – in itself a deplorable sin – means that the Son of God did not come down to earth, redeem mankind on the cross and found the Church? This appalling scandal no more compromises the truths of the Faith than the career of Alexander VI or any other corrupt Renaissance Pope.

Should bishops be forced to resign? Oh yes – approximately 95 per cent of them worldwide. These clowns in their pseudo-ethnic mitres and polyester vestments with faux-naïve Christian symbols, spouting their ecumaniac episcobabble, have presided over more than sexual abuse: they have all but extinguished the Catholic faith with their modernist fatuities. They should be retired to monasteries to spend their remaining years considering how to account to their Maker for a failed stewardship that has lost countless millions of souls.

[link]

Personally, I think the culture of clerical cover-ups is a problem of which child abuse was just one instance. We now have an exception to the rule.

As I wrote last year...

So yes, that includes priests who rape children but it also includes priests that misuse their power in other ways. Priests who decide at their own whim to mislead people about the teaching of the Church or to commit acts of "liturgical abuse" such as modifying prayers to suit their own political agenda.

Once again, I am most definitely not suggesting that the priest who rapes a child commits the same crime as the priest who "merely" lies to one. What I am saying is this: Both men are abusing clerical power. Both men are protected by the same culture that protects and encourages priests who abuse their position of authority.

As far as I can see, the position of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales including our own Bishop Terrence Drainey is currently "let us have a culture that tolerates and even encourages clerical abuse, in which priests and bishops are free to abuse their power and authority and laypeople are expected to be co-conspirators or else face accusations of disrespect and disloyalty but let us make an exception for the sort of abuse that the civil authorities take seriously, that is, the sort of abuse that costs money and looks bad in the papers".

This is like saying "stealing is okay, as long as you don't steal anything somebody will notice" or "lying is okay, as long as nobody finds out". Essentially, the Bishops are saying "it's okay with us if priests abuse their power, as long as they don't do anything illegal".

What concerns me most of all is this: As long as the culture remains in place, the potential for harm continues. As long as the culture remains in place, the potential for "[hiding] behind a clericalism which is prepared to protect vicious behaviour at the expense of defenceless innocents" remains in place.

This is simply unacceptable.

You can read that blog entry in full: The Catholic Church: A Culture Favourable to Abuse and the follow up: How the Catholic Church Creates a Culture which is Favourable to Abuse as well.

The Sign of the Cross is a Witness of our faith. Though closely linked to the Sign of the Cross as a proclamation it is important to remember the difference. Witnessing the faith is not just a personal proclamation but a visible sign for ourselves and others of Christ's passion death and resurrection.

I enjoyed this blog entry from John C Wright. I'm not a Science Ficton writer (I'm not a writer) but I recognise the sudden awareness that this Christianity business has a habit of becoming the light by which we see the whole world.

But there is something weird going on when things I write that don't mention Christianity at all, not even to make fun of it, are regarded as Christian allegory. It is getting so bad that I cannot even write a simple story about a girl trying to get herself abducted by UFO aliens without it being read allegorically.

On second thought, no. There is nothing weird going on. The supernatural world has laws just as the natural world does. I was warned this would happen when I signed up. I was told.

If I were a bimetallist or a Ghibelline, no one would think everything I wrote was an apologetic for bimetallism or Holy Roman Imperialism. But Christianity is something different from and greater than mere economic or political theory: it is something unworldly and otherworldly, larger than life, and you cannot be marked with the chrism unremarkably. The winged powers and crowned principalities of Hell recoil in fear and loathing at the unseen torch of double flame that burns above the believer's head, and they cannot tolerate that light.

Even normal humans, (or "muggles" as we Catholics call them) if they do not recoil, cannot help but notice that light. If it does not affect everything you do, O Christian, you are doing something wrong. If the world does not look at you sidelong, puzzled or disapproving, you are doing something wrong.

[link]

People should use phrases like "winged powers", "crowned principalities" and "unseen torches of double flame" more.

Our new Diocesan Vocations Director doesn't have a blog, no priest in Middlesbrough Diocese will have a blog for a very long time. You know the sort of people that have blogs, and no priest wants to be tarred with that brush.

So he has a website and he posts things on it but it is definitely not a blog.

I am delighted if not a little overawed to have been asked to take on the work of Vocations Director for the Diocese. Overawed, not least because it is a great work for the Church in challenging times, but also because I have a hard act to follow, after the very blessed and fruitful work undertaken by Fr Gerard Robinson who has held the post for the last five years. Yet it is a very exciting work and one in which, in a sense, I really cannot fail. Why? Because as Pope Benedict reminds us in his Message for the World Day of Prayer for Vocations which is on 25th April, “The fruitfulness of our efforts to promote vocations depends primarily on God’s free action…”, and how could the Lord not want us to have more priests – since the harvest is still rich and the labourers few? I truly believe that we could be about to see a growth of vocations to the priesthood and the religious life. God’s grace is certain; all that is required is our generous cooperation.

[link]

You can follow his ongoing not blogging at Called.org.uk

The Sign of the Cross is a fourfold prayer, a prayer of proclamation, thanksgiving and praise because we are adopted sons, for protection against evil and for openess to the true light that enlighten us. We put this prayer, the cross over us.

The people at the Bishop's Conference department for Marriage and Family Life want to hear from anybody who prepares people for Marriage or who did/is doing Marriage preparation in 2010.

Yes, it's the Catholic Marriage Preparation Survey 2010

I took part in a survey once. It was called Listening 2004 and they didn't.

As a parent, I was amused by this take on the whole "the God of the New Testament seems rather different to the God of the Old Testament" thing. Probably because I am the latter kind of parent.

I was reminded of this by a child who lives around the corner who plays at my house from time to time. He is a nice enough kid but completely undisciplined. This kid could jump up and down on the roof of a neighbor’s new Mercedes and his parents’ voices would probably never rise above the tone of polite conversation. “Billy, get down from there,” they would likely say as the dings and dents accumulated. Then, after a try or two, throw up their hands in frustration and say, “That Billy sure is a handful. Do you want some more iced tea?”

Billy views his parents like the New Testament God. Billy expects them to take care of him, feed him, and clothe him, but any other instruction is most likely to be ignored with little or no consequence anticipated.

I am, on the other hand, like the Old Testament God and my children and Billy know it. My instructions are to be followed or there will be smiting.

It probably makes more sense if you read the whole thing.

The Sign of the Cross is priority of grace and our personal response. The Amen is an important part of the prayer, we are saying “let it be”, “thy will be done” and that it is a free response. It starts with God, it is of God and ends with God.

Yes it is.

A good article on the whole Vincent Nichols writes in The Times, but I still find it difficult to read anything like this without thinking "Good, you've started worrying about child abuse, what about all the other abuse?"

My shame is compounded, as is the anger of many, at the mistaken judgments made within the Church: that reassurance from a suspect could be believed; that credible allegations were deemed to be “unbelievable”; that the reputation of the Church mattered more than safeguarding children. These wrong reactions arise whenever and wherever allegations of abuse are made, whether within a family or a Church. We have to insist that the safety of the child comes first because the child is powerless.

Take the recent issues with the CES. What happened when we criticised CES? What happened when people were telling their Bishops that their Catholic schools are allowing people to come in who promote contraception? Was it not exactly the above?

The Bishops go to the schools and are assured that everything is okay. They make the "mistaken judgements" referred to above - that "reassurance from a suspect could be believed" and that "credible allegations" are unbelievable. A cover up ensues, parents get misleading letters - they try to make it look good because when it comes to the promotion of contraception in our schoools "the reputation of the Church mattered more than safeguarding children".

Archbishop Nichols is right when he says "We have to insist that the safety of the child comes first because the child is powerless" which is why those of us who have not only smelled a rat but gone in to investigate and found the entire cast of Wind in the Willows having a tea party, we are not going to be letting this go.

+Nichols continues...

Serious mistakes have been made within the Catholic Church. There is some misunderstanding about the Church, too. Within the Church there is a legal structure, its canon law. It is the duty of each diocesan bishop to administer that law.

Really? You don't say!

Read the whole thing here.

The Sign of the Cross is affirming the faith with body and soul. It is not just as a spiritual prayer but it brings in the bodily act, which works with the proclamation of mind and will. (cf “the Word became flesh”).

Many thanks to Fr John Boyle for drawing attention to this letter which appeared in the Telegraph on Sunday...

SIR – Parents and guardians have the primary responsibility for bringing up their children in accordance with their own values and culture. They may entrust the task of formal education to a school of their choice, but the overall responsibility for the upbringing of their children remains theirs.

The Children, Schools and Families Bill undermines this principle and seeks to impose a particular ideology by means of statutory sex and relationships education from the age of 5 (which primary schools do not currently have to teach). We would therefore urge Parliament decisively to oppose it.

A state which seeks to centralise responsibilities which are properly fulfilled by families is acting in an unjust manner and undermines the basis of a free society.

[link]

There's nothing particularly remarkable about the contents of the letter, it's all pretty obvious stuff really, the sort of stuff Catholic bloggers, associations of Catholic families and organisations like SPUC have been saying for months.

What is significant about this letter is that it breaks the silence, finally, from the Catholic Bishops. This letter has been signed by three Catholic Bishops: Bishop Brian Noble (of Shrewsbury), Bishop Mark Davies (coadjutor of Shrewsbury) and Bishop Patrick O'Donoghue (retired Bishop of Lancaster). The letter has also been signed by figures such as Fr Aiden Nichols.

The letter has been signed by 100 Catholic headteachers and governors and more than 200 priests and deacons including Priests of Middlesbrough Diocese such as Fr Gerard Burns SM from Hull and Monsignor G M Dasey who looked after our Diocese when we were Sede Vacante.

I will be writing to our Bishop to ask if he is willing to put his name to this letter. I recommend you do the same (obviously, write to your own Bishop) and if you live in Shrewsbury Diocese, send them an Easter Egg or something.

They deserve it.

I understand that several priests in our Diocese have this problem on a regular basis...

This has had me laughing all day...

[link]

The Sign of the Cross is claiming the faith. We mark the cross on ourselves, placing ourselves under the cross and claiming its victory over sin for ourselves and our part in that sin.

I wanted to draw your attention to a series of posts on the Dolphinarium blog. Red Maria has been shedding a bit of light on historical attitudes to paedophilia.

Let's be clear: Neither Maria or myself are seeking here to justify the actions of Bishops who covered up for abusive priests. It is however important to understand the context of their actions at a time when many "progressive" thinkers were suggesting quite openly that maybe paedophilia wasn't so bad after all.

Exibit A: Daniel Cohn-Bendit MEP

[orginal article on Dolphinarium]

Cohn-Bendit is a member of the European Parliament and is currently co-president of the European Greens–European Free Alliance. In 1975 he wrote a book "The Big Madness" about child education in which he wrote:

Later he added: 'It has happened to me several times that a few children opened the flies of my trousers and started to stroke me. I reacted differently each time according to the circumstances, but their desire confronted me with problems. I asked them: "Why don't you play with each other, why have you chosen me and not other children?" But when they insisted on it, I then stroked them. For that reason I was accused of perverted behaviour.'

[link]

I can't help thinking that if the Pope had written that in 1975 then there would be serious preassure from the press. An MEP for a trendy Green party wrote it? No problem.

Cohn-Bendit recently defended himself saying:

It was written in an autobiographical way and wasn't scientific - it was a literary exaggeration.'

But he added: 'I admit that what I wrote is unacceptable nowadays.

[link]

I wonder if the Irish Bishops could get away with that... "what we did was acceptable back then..."

Exibit B: 1987 Green Party Policy

[orginal article on Dolphinarium]

At a national conference in 1985 the Greens in North Rhine-Westphalia were calling for the legalisation of "nonviolent sexuality" between children and adults. Their 1987 policy included:

"When young people have the desire for older peers outside the family, prevented either because their homosexuality is not accepted by their parents, or because they have paedophile inclinations, be it for other reasons, they must be given the opportunity to do so."

[link]

If the Bishops Conference of England and Wales had called for such a thing in 1987 we would now be hearing about it in the media every day, but we don't hear so much about how any Bishop who removed a paedophile priest from office would be going against the latest progressive ideas of the time.

Exhibit C: Paedophile Information Exchange

[orginal article on Dolphinarium]

In the Catholic Herald Mary Kenny writes:

I remember a point in the later 1970s when there was a pro-paedophile "liberation" lobby. It was called the Paedophile Information Exchange and it argued publicly for the lifting of the prohibitions (or "prejudices") against paedophiles. Mary Whitehouse, that doughty campaigner against pornography, took up the cudgels against the PIE - as is described in her autobiography, A Most Dangerous Woman - and was laughed at by liberals for her "reactionary" attitudes.

In 1978, I was living in Bloomsbury in central London when the PIE held a rally in one of the local meeting halls once so beloved of Bertrand Russell and the Bloomsbury Group. Members of the PIE had affiliated themselves to the National Council for Civil Liberties and some in the NCCL supported their cause.

[link]

The National Council for Civil Liberties still exists under the name Liberty and it's a fair bet that some of the people who supported PIE in 1978 are still knocking around, probably now bashing the Church for failing to stop the very thing those people once supported.

No Excuses

Bishops who covered for Paedophile Priests were wrong, wrong, wrong. No doubt about it. We as a Church need to be open about what happened, what mistakes were made and who made them. As Pope Benedict said, the Church needs "a frank and complete acknowledgment of the weaknesses of her ministers"

But we also need to be realistic about different attitudes in the past because it's not hard to see why a Bishop might hesistate to remove a man from the Priesthood for doing something that members of the National Council for Civil Liberties support. Especially when he's got a psychiatrist sending him reports telling him that the guy is cured.

Bishops should have known better, but they didn't. If we are going to have a media witchunt against everybody who was saying stupid things in the seventies, let's not forget the trendy progressives who were campaigning the legalise that which the Bishops are now criticised for not condemning.

Oh, and let's not forget to thank Maria for her fantastic research on this subject.

Hat tip: Love Undefiled

The Sign of the Cross is entering into the faith. As well as claiming the Cross for our own we also accept it and share in Christ's suffering for ourselves, offering up our pain and suffering to Christ that He will make good of it with the hope that we might rise with Him.