To the uninformed, there may be a reasonable case for the gay masses: to reach out to people of a homosexual, lesbian, or other disordered sexual orientation and lead them back into the church. In fact that is the gloss put on them in comments on blogs by someone signing himself Terence or Terry.
Strangely a character called Terence runs a blog called Queering the Church. This Terence is involved in organising the Soho Masses, and a quick glance at his blog reveals that his agenda is not at all about bringing queers (his word...) back to Church so much as making the Church queer. Hence the title and content of his blog.
Archbishop Nichols said, referring to critics of the Soho Masses:
and anybody from the outside who is trying to cast a judgement on the people who come forward to communion really ought to learn to hold their tongue.
What he doesn't get is that it is his policy we are criticising: this whole debacle is causing grave scandal and risks losing souls.
.jpg)
4 comments:
Hear, hear!
I have just written something about Terry Weldon's misunderstanding / misuse of the "sensus fidelium" - a common ploy amongst dissenters!
http://areluctantsinner.blogspot.com/2011/01/soho-masses-watch-terrys-catholicism.html
The Soho masses are an interesting pastoral development. Now may we expect special masses for unrepentant adulterers or a pastoral provision for practising burglars?
Thank you for flattering me by taking notice of my writing at Queering the Church. I must however, correct a point of fact:
I have repeatedly encouraged my readers to stay inside the Catholic church (or if they have withdrawn, to return)and to participate actively in parish activities.
RS
Thanks: I read your analysis with interest and agreement.
Patricius
We already have, of course, regular parish Masses for unrepentant contraceptors, with no attempt to call them to repentance. I think the dissent from Humanae VItae was the thin end of a wedge which we see being pushed ever deeper into the Church's moral authority.
Terence
And thanks for returning the compliment.
I stand by what I wrote; I think one of the differences between us is a different meaning placed on the words 'inside the Catholic church' (or 'Church' as I would write).
Traditionally, that has meant submission to the teaching authority of the Church. That is clearly not part of your agenda.
In one way, our analysis of the problem is the same: we both see a chasm between the official teachings of the Church and much practice. But our solutions are of course diametrically opposed.
Post a Comment