Pandoctrinal Catholicism: A Balancing Act

Blogged by James Preece on 23rd February 2012

Yesterday's Guardian didn't use the words "Pandoctrinal Catholicism" but it's pretty obvious what they are talking about...

It is all part of a careful balancing act between the demands of Catholic theology, and of conservative factions in the Vatican, and the reality of the English Roman Catholic Church, where several of the most prominent lay figures are either gay themselves, divorced, or married to divorced people.

The emergence of the Catholic church into the mainstream of national life has been accompanied by a change in character: the old working class Irish-based Catholicism has almost vanished, to be replaced by a much less traditional English middle class which largely rejects the Church's teachings on birth control and homosexuality, while still treasuring it for its spiritual value.

[link]

The problem will balancing acts is you tend to fall down.

h/t Cavalier (in the comments)

Rate this blogentry: + -

+25

This Item Tagged With:

Reader Comments

+11

Salisbury John said...

Nichols is reported as saying:
"One talks about objective moral evil, you might say today, that's racism. No matter what's intended or understood, that, objectively, is wrong. In a similar way, you can say, in every sphere of life there is objective moral evil. But that does not imply subjective moral guilt. That does not imply guilt on an individual."

so let me get this right.... no matter what is intended or understood by the person involved in some kind of racist remark or act....they are guilty of the sin of racism because well it is always objectively wrong. period. Yet somehow no matter what is intended or understood by the person who [in conscience presumably] uses contraception aborts their baby or commits a homosexual act or supports homosexual acts...they are not guilty of sin necessarily even though these things are objectively wrong?
....and yet...

For a Catholic ‘to follow one’s conscience’ is not, then, simply to act as his unguided reason dictates. ‘To follow one’s conscience’ and remain a Catholic, one must take into account first and foremost the teaching of the magisterium. When doubt arises due to a conflict of ‘my’ views and those of the magisterium, the presumption of truth lies on the part of the magisterium. 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 of soul. This religious submission of will and of mind must be shown in a special way to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra (Lumen Gentium, #25). And this must be carefully distinguished from the teaching of individual theologians or individual priests, however intelligent or persuasive (Formation of Conscience, Canadian Catholic Bishops Conference, 1 December, 1973).

Patricius said...

"...several of the most prominent lay figures are either gay themselves, divorced, or married to divorced people."

Some questions:
1. What constitutes a "prominent lay figure" in the Church?
2. How have such "figures" achieved "prominence"?

Edward James said...

How can you possibly equate being divorced with being gay? How ignorant are you? Nobody could ever promote you as a "prominent Lay Figure" with your uncharitable attitude.

+13

Patricius said...

I, personally, do not equate them. Nor am I prominent.
Please note the quotation marks. The passage is from the article quoted. What does it mean? Is it true?

Brummey said...

One almost wonders whether some of our bishops are involved in the "gay" movement. Some at least surround themselves with gay men and seem tolerant of priests who seem to live lifestyles that imply gay relationships.

Patricius said...

I am sorry but this just looks like innuendo to me. How do you judge between someone "surrounding themselves with" a particular sort of person, on the one hand, or them finding themselves "surrounded by" that kind of person on the other? (The question is rhetorical but you surely get my point.) And, besides, what is meant by "lifestyles that imply gay relationships"?

English Pastor said...

"...the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent of soul".

This reaaly should have said "The Body of Bishops", qualified by "when united to the Supreme Pontiff", since the statement as it stands suggests each Bishop speaks in the name of Christ, and it is this inflated understanding of the teaching authority of individual Bishops and/or Episcopal Conferences that has lead to the current distastrous state of British Catholicism, with individual Bishops and the Conference and their Committees to allows sex education into schools and gay Masses in Soho. Meanwhile individual prelates can be heard to say they support sex 'marital' legislation. Catholics in Britain are no longer Roman Catholics but the new Church of England.

Catherine said...

As Archbishop Nichols stated in his interview with Sky News April 2009 shortly after his appointment to Westminster: "I don't go around looking for fights." To be fair to Vincent Nichols we have the "Leader" of English and Welsh Catholics that Rome wants according to the unchanged 70+ year policy of the Vatican towards the Catholic Church here, so he is 'perfect' for the job.
"At present the requirement demanded by the Vatican in the case of high appointments in Great Britain is that the candidate should be an efficient administrator of a religious minority and nothing more. This dates back to the time when indeed nothing more than this was expected of the Archbishop of Westminster"
"Cardinal Hume and The Changing Face of British Catholicism" cites the above 1943 document from the Foreign Office
The fault lies with Rome....They know there's a self perpetuating Magic Circle of hierarchs here but chooses not to square up to it big time. As one recently retired bishop here was allegedly overheard saying [when the name of Bishop Mark Davies came up] 'Yes...well we won't make a mistake like that again!'

Sarah said...

Thanks alot +VN, with friends like you...

Eoin said...

I presume you were reading "The Guardian" as some sort of lenten penance Mr Preece?

Georgina Heggarty said...

Brummey said... 'One almost wonders whether some of our bishops are involved in the "gay" movement. Some at least surround themselves with gay men and seem tolerant of priests who seem to live lifestyles that imply gay relationships.'

Yes, like the Pope. Erm....?

Genty said...

Evidence, please.

Georgina Heggarty said...

Evidence = Various vatican sex scandals involving various priests and members of the swiss guards exposed as engaging in intimate gay relations.

NOT Austin or Jack said...

I read in this week's catholic herald a vote of confidence in catholic voices in that the irish hierachy have set up a similar scheme with the same name even. Any comments/

Catherine said...

well when you've got divorce law and civil partnership supporting David Quinn at the Iona Inst behind it what do you expect

Georgina Heggarty said...

More evidence... that slap looks might gay to me!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwl7y0k5N4g

Genty said...

Condemned by a slap on the wrist, eh. Must be guilty, then, and very easy to ignore the substance of the video report that the then Cardinal Ratzinger broke ranks and went after a corrupt Order.
As The Guardian reported, as soon Ratzinger became Pope the Legionaries of Christ felt more than a slap on the wrist. Its founder Marcial Maciel Degollado was stripped of his authority and died in disgrace.
Intrigued by your conviction statements I've bothered to google extensively on gay sex and the Vatican, a gift to the media ever on the blocks for a Vatican scandal story. What do we find?
Three priests based in Rome, not the Vatican or anywhere near Pope Benedict, were exposed as active gays. They were not among the 3000 people working in the Curia, the Vatican's central bureaucracy.
Next, one senior priest at the Vatican alleged to be an active gay. Suspended from office.
A murder with gay connotations in the Swiss Guard in 1998.
A ceremonial usher involved with rent boys and an adult male chorister procuring them.
Er, that's it.
Obviously, it's incontrovertible that happy-slappy Pope Benedict is surrounded by and complicit in active homosexuality in his inner circle; one of his earliest moves as Pope barring actively gay men from studying for the priesthood being nothing more than a smokescreen, naturally.

Ioannes said...

"A much less traditional English middle class" Add "middle-aged" and you have the profile of the people who run most English parishes. Traditional they certainly ain't. Suggest that Gregorian Chant might be better than the toe-curling drivel they seem to think is the liturgical norm (and astonishingly seem to be able to sing without embarrassment) and their reaction is one of shock-horror. Should Father introduce a bit of Latin they'll be down on him like a ton of bricks - "We don't want to go back to all that!"

Yet these same people will happily toddle off to Covent Garden or Glyndebourne. They utterly baffle me (and I'm English, middle-class and middle-aged).