Marriage Preparation for Homosexual Couples

Blogged by James Preece on 14th September 2012

Archbishop Vincent Nichols is the president of an organisation going by the name of Catholic Marriage Care Ltd. An organisation that "offers support to people in their marriages, relationships and family life".

If you are the sort of person who likes to know where a million pounds comes from, you may be interested to know that in 2009-10 Catholic Marriage Care Ltd received £485,100 in grants from the government. In 2010-11 the "Strategic grant" from the Department for Education was £499,700 and made up more than half of their "Total incoming resources" for that financial year.

If you want to know how Catholic Marriage Care Ltd spend their money, you may be interested in this statement from the Chief Executive of Catholic Marriage Care Ltd. Mr Terry Prendergast...

he said that preparation for same-sex couples took place in private and not as part of a group with heterosexual couples. Mr Prendergast said: “We have offered them focused marriage preparation – private, and not in a group. This is about two people in love and one of our main aims is to support loving partnerships.”

[The Tablet, 15th September 2011, Page 34]

To clarify: Archbishop Vincent Nichols presides over an organisation that offers "focused marriage preparation" to homosexual couples.

A couple of years ago Archbishop Vincent Nichols was asked if the Catholic Church might have to show "flexibility" in terms of sanctioning gay unions. Archbishop Nichol's replied: "I don't know. Who knows what's down the road?"

It turns out that what was down the road was "marriage preparation" for homosexual couples presided over by Archbishop Vincent Nichols. This before homosexual marriage is even legal.

Meanwhile it's been over a month since Professor Tina Beattie (and twenty-six others including priests) signed a letter in The Times stating that "it is perfectly proper for Catholics, using fully informed consciences, to support the legal extension of civil marriage to same-sex couples" yet she remains in place as a member of the CAFOD Theological Advisory Committee. She didn't publicly support same-sex marriage, but she laid the necessary pharisaical framework for the Bishops to accommodate it...

It's a matter of conscience you see... and if a Catholic can support same-sex marriage then why shouldn't a Catholic Priest bless one?

The clear message to the government is that the Catholic Bishop's Conference of England and Wales can and will find a way to accommodate gay marriage. There may be a bit of a "struggle" as the Bishops make their submission to the government's "consultation" and there might even be a strongly worded pastoral letter but in terms of actual action? No.

In much the same way as they did with contraception and divorce, the Catholic Bishop's of England and Wales will find a way to accomodate gay marriage.

In fact, they are already doing so.

Rate this blogentry: + -

+40

This Item Tagged With:

Reader Comments

+19

Deacon StephenMorgan said...

This is, I think, close to the most scandalous thing you have ever posted about. I am staggered.

+18

Paul Priest said...

Oh Stephen it most definitely isn't...

what about +Vin and the RCOG?

or +Vin & the John & Lizzie?

or +Vin & CPs?

or +Vin & Connexions?

or +Vin & 'a foetus is of course of more worth than an embryo"

or +Vin & the Ordinariate?

or +Vin & the papal visit screw up?

where do you want to start?

Catherine said...

The Catholic analytic philosopher G. E. M. Anscombe (1919-2001), whose 1958 article “Modern Moral Philosophy” instigated new movements in “virtue ethics” and renewed interest in natural law, astonished her academic colleagues at Cambridge University in 1979 by publishing Contraception and Chastity, a defense of the Catholic Church’s position on contraception.
Analytic philosophy is famous for investigating logical connections, even in ethics, and Anscombe draws out the inescapable deductions that can be made from a value system accepting contraception. The Church (Institutionally-speaking) may call contraception evil but since (organisationally-speaking; i.e, in reality) - its pastors do NOTHING to apply the teaching, then in "accepting" contraception;i.e. not only tolerating it but NEVER preaching or catechising against it for fear of rejection...then we cannot be surprised by this strident homophilic culture within the institution and its agencies like Marriage Care [which has long since advocated dissent of Humanae Vitae] as Anscombe's thesis bears out below;

"If contraceptive intercourse is permissible, then what objection could there be after all to mutual masturbation, or copulation in vase indebito, sodomy, buggery, when normal copulation is impossible or inadvisable (or in any case, according to taste)? … But if such things are all right, it becomes perfectly impossible to see anything wrong with homosexual intercourse, for example. I am not saying: if you think contraception all right you will do these other things; not at all. The habit of respectability persists and old prejudices die hard. But I am saying: you will have no solid reason against these things. You will have no answer to someone who proclaims as many do that they are good too. You cannot point to the known fact that Christianity drew people out of the pagan world, always saying no to these things. Because, if you are defending contraception, you will have rejected Christian tradition…. For in contraceptive intercourse you intend to perform a sexual act which, if it has a chance of being fertile, you render infertile. Qua your intentional action, then, what you do is something intrinsically unapt for generation."

mike cliffson said...

Wholly selfindulgent comment:
I AM glad to see "the Anscombe" ,aka Mrs Geech, quoted! A redoubtable couple, a redoubtable wife and mother, academic, and public catholic figure! Wittgenstein a small price to pay!

Teresa said...

And + Vin and the "Catholic" Education Service?
In 1998, he was made chairman of the CBCEW Department for Catholic Education and Formation as well as chairman of the Catholic Education Service.What has been his legacy in that department?

+14

Jock Spratt said...

What an embarrassment your English bishops are to us north of the border.
The smell of lavender comes out of practically every English bishop's office.

+12

Ttony said...

It's depressingly predictable, isn't it: "organ of Catholic Church involved in heterodox activity" is "dog bites man" rather than the opposite.

I don't want to start something for which the take-up might be inadequate, but I wonder whether each of us writing to our own Bishops, asking whether diocesan support for CMC might be withheld pending clarification of this issue - ie that it has been stopped - might not be a good idea.

We don't want this just to be an attack on ++Vin and Westminster, or the CBCEW, when "Marriage Care" (they drop the Catholic when it doesn't suit) seems to be established in various parts of the country in Catholic parishes, convents, etc.

+10

Ttony said...

To be fair to Archbishop Nichols, it's only three years and two months since he was warned about Terry Prendergast's views on gay couples being as good as male-female (never mind married!) couples as prospective adoptive parents.

Prendergast's view that he should be preparing gay couples for "marriage" must have come as a complete shock!

See here for a contemporary comment (or look back through the archives of this site).

+16

Paul Priest said...

I'm certain every letter received will be regarded with the most dutiful discernment and deliberation; and, with the utmost expediency, it will be consigned to their eco-friendly open-topped filing system made from the finest wicker

+19

Mike Carroll said...

I contacted the nuncio's office to book an appointment to discuss some of these issues.

When I spoke to his secretary, who came across as a very devout woman, I mentioned a couple of the things that I would be bringing up with the nuncio and she nearly fell off her chair in disbelief.

+12

Ttony said...

Mike: insofar as you are able, please could you let us know what transpires of your meeting.

Allenby said...

Mike, on your visit to the Nuncio do mention to him also the continuing scandal of the Warwick Street gay masses.

+10

Chrysostom said...

I agree with the others: this is a disgrace. I suggest writing to the Apostolic Nuncio:

His Excellency the Apostolic Nuncio,
The Apostolic Nunciature,
54 Parkside,
LONDON SW19 5NE

Our Lady Help of Christians - pray for us.
St Athanasius - pray for us
All Ye English Martyrs - pray for us.
St. Charles Lwanga and Companion Martyrs of Uganda, who died resisting homosexual rape - pray for us.

Collect for today : The exaltation of the Holy Cross
O God, who dost gladden us upon this day by the festival of the Exaltation of the holy Cross : grant that we who have acknowledged the mystery of redemption here on earth, may rejoice in the everlasting fruits thereof in heaven. Through...

oona said...

Archishop Nichols is clearly going further than good pastoral care in this situation.

His personal sleeping arrangements should not, however, be the cause of such poor leadership. He is entitled to his views and alternative lifestyle, but should not seek to impose this on others, particularly not the ordinary, pew-sitting faithful Catholics who simply want a holy leadership.

Paul Priest said...

...and so it continues

[btw - nice attempt at impersonation on the other post; but people are fully aware I have no qualms saying what I think under my own name!]

Jock Spratt said...

The Nunciature's email address is
nuntius@globalnet.co.uk

+13

Damask Rose said...

Just read this.

YOU GOTTA BE KIDDIN' ME!

None of this would have happened if Julian Filochowski had been removed from his CAFOD tenure as CEO. He surely should never have been allowed to remain there (definately not for 21 years) and certainly asked to leave when his relationship with ex-priest Pendergast came to light. There are so many scandals here on a number of different levels.

How can Tina Beattie be dismisssed from the CAFOD Theological Advisory Committee when all she's doing is following in the steps of ever-so esteemed Filochowski? They're both at Roehampton. Then can compare their notes.

Why Card Murphy O'Connor and Abp Nichols have allowed/allows this I don't know. Pendergast is exceptionally active in his role in the gay movement, which the Soho Masses almost give a 'holy' credence to.

The scandal to the heterosexual Catholics is immense and our E&W prelates are stabbing us in the back. We seem to have recourse to absolutely nothing.

I can honestly see a gay priest bless a gay union in a Catholic Church sooner or later - what will come of it, I don't know...

I think a lot more gay priests, empowered by the state and passive Catholic hierarchy will start to come out and pollute the Catholics in the pews. They will justify themselves by that "accept" phrase in the new Catechism", as you can see here in this video :

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3453043.0.html

Who knows what's down the road".

Ben Trovato said...

Are you confusing Terry Prendergast (disgraceful head of Catholic Care) with Martin Pendergast (ex-priest, homosexual activist and long-time lover of Julian Filochowski)?

With so many scandals in the Church in E&W (and such a small clique responsible for so many pf them) it can get quite confusing...

Damask Rose said...

Hello Ben. No. I'm just commenting on James' Tina Beattie* para.

The Catholic Marriage Care scandal offering marriage prep to homosexuals is just one of the results of keeping a practising gay man in a top Catholic job for twenty years (amongst other RC posiitons) where his ex-alter Christus lover can subvert the Church in this country to a homosexualist agenda, along with his colleagues (wasn't the ex-Chair of Quest a gay ex-priest turned journalist?? - can't quite remember).

It's drip-drip homosexualism that's a result/part of the Lavender Mafia that has acceptance in "high society". The way they're leading the laity on in this whole NuChurch scam, they must think we're the proletariat.

It's as you say, "a small clique" of, unfortunately, what seems to be gay ex-priests or gay priests "in good standing" and liberal clerics/theologians*/RC bureaucrats who :

"In much the same way as they did with contraception and divorce, the Catholic Bishop's of England and Wales will find a way to accomodate gay marriage."

Yah, it's the "chaste but intense relationship". Let's bless it. Just like you bless the long-term adulterers who come up for their blessing at Communion time.

That's what I mean when I say Filochowski*/Quest et al should have been nipped in the bud way early on in the beginning so all this mess wouldn't have spawned.

Nobody cares about the homosexual scandal to the hetero laity. Perhaps it's been the plan. Bring in the "pastoral solution" for adulterers, do marriage prep for homosexuals.

Honestly, it's mind-blowing. I can't believe these priests.

* At Roehampton.

+13

James J said...

Rosie,
It is shocking to us homosexual Catholics too!
Difficult enough trying to make sense of myself as a human being without +Vin undermining my faith too.

Damask Rose said...

Hi everyone.

Here's another very apt and recent Voris video on homosexuality:

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3453572.0.html

What some of these E&W priests and prelates notions of chastity are, I haven't a clue.

I guess what goes around comes around. If Abp Vincent Nichols gives flowers to Hindus, who, in part, worship the phallus, it's just as well he never went to visit London Zoo after. He could have been chased by a Christian elephant.

New Friend said...

I too am shocked and dismayed by this thread. By the lack of charity being displayed. By the bigotry behind many of the comments. By the refusal to accept that there can be more than one way to view the same situation, and that alternative viewpoints can be both respectable and valid without threatening your own opinion. Learning to respect others seems an almost impossible challenge to some traditional Catholics. It is really no surprise that such people are being increasingly marginalised.

+14

mike cliffson said...

I for one feel able to live with your stated shock and dismay and namecalling.

Andrew Connor said...

John 8:7 comes to mind as I read the vitriol, anger and hatred in these blogs. Some border on libel.

For those of us who are gay and Catholic, your rants only prove that many of you would like a heterosexual Church. Whatever your views on marriage, charity and justice must prevail. Only with these virtues in place will God be glorified.

+20

Paul Priest said...

Nothing to do with being Gay and Catholic - no-one is denying anyone the right to live a partnered life of disaffected friendship..but as two men or two women could never possibly consummate a marriage the very notion of their being allowed to undergo marriage preparation by an institution where an Archbishop is the president is simply not on...

Andrew Connor said...

Disaffected? Who seems this to be so?

Denial of rights is not in your hands, Mr Priest, nor in the hands of the Catholic Church. I am obliged only to follow my conscience. if you are in any way representative of the church community, the church is losing its core values, losing augur of the fruits of the Spirit.

I increasingly balk at the vitriolic and narrow remarks here, knowing full well the number of RC priests and seminarians who are practicing what thy dare not preach. If you withdrew those who are in covert gay relationships, then we'd have to close more churches and Catholic institutions than ever before. Let's stop this hateful ranting and dogmatic posturing and tell the truth.
Utter hypocrisy!

Paul Priest said...

Being on the inside of the establishment for decades I am fully aware of gay and straight clerics not living up to their vows even up to the highest level in the land...

...but it doesn't make it right - a gay or lesbian couple can only mutually masturbate and therefore cannot consummate a relatonship through unifying lovemaking open to life...

therefore to pretend that such a relationship can afford 'sanctification' as a recognised marital union is absurd..irrespective of how loving, devoted, affectionate the relationship might be...

..nor can such sexual activity be engaged in without there being a grave risk towards compromising and jeopardising the relationship - it is narcissistic in nature and constantly reminds the couple of its intrinsically fruitless nature - you cannot tell me that the inherent biological and psychological desires and yearnings to share a partner's child is not present - and that impossibility will shake the very foundations of the relationship [unlike infertile/menopausal lovemaking which engages in that which brought their and ther partner's existence to fruition]...

it's not bigotry - it's reality

nobody is suggesting that any homosexual couple be denied legal rights to shared property, legacy, power of attorney, hospital visitation etc - but to demand that such a relationship is of a same equivalence as a union of bodies and souls which are holistically designed to be overwhelmed in love as to share in God's procreative process...

...is an affront to married couples AND the homosexual partnerships [as it denies the intrinsic dignity of the cross they bear in being denied to physically love to its fullest and share in bringing about new life...

I frankly don't care much about a priest being a sinner...they could be having it away with a rugby team, a rabbit or enter a relationship with an inflatable rubber rhino...

..providing they don't say it isn't sinful and seek to change Church teaching on the issue and claim victimhood when the Church says they are sinning...

Sure let them be as hypocritical as they wish - if they can't practise what they preach it only means they are weak or selfish...

I'll accept a world of hypocritical sinners...but will never tolerate one heretic in denial...

epsilon said...

Brilliantly put! The Catholic Church is riddled with heretics, both knowingly and unknowingly. Just ask your average pew sitter what they think of abortion, never mind contraception!

Andy connor said...

How sure you are in your opinions.

You say, "Heretics in denial."

Sad. Sad. Sad.

+15

SteveD said...

I have emailed the Nuncio begging him to ask the local episcopacy to provide clear leadership in adherence to the Church's teachings and protesting the use of my money in such works as the provision of relationship guidance to homosexual 'couples'. If enough did this, might we stop the red hat being awarded to this man? To think of him electing our next Pope is too much.

Jock Spratt said...

A red hat for this man would be sad indeed but it tends to go with the job. Of course J Ratzinger insisted K O'Brien took an oath pledging he believed in Catholicism before he got his.

Petrus said...

The Red Hat
A novel by Ralph McInerny

Ignatius Press

Extract from a review by Michael O Brien author of Fr Elijah

"The central character Archbishop Lannan is a kind of episcopal 'everyman'
who is paralyzed by his weakness,ambition, and mind numbing commitment to
ecclesial politics. He stands at the crux of a dilemma upon which rests the
furure of the Church in the West...this is a book that should be
read...wherever men have grown cynical about the Bride of Christ."

Christian said...

Can I ask if anyone on here knows when and in what manner Catholic doctrine about homosexuality was first formalised as part of Catholic belief?

Thanks.

Planechant said...

From 'Marriage Care' website:-

"Marriage care is an organisational member of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) and our counsellors operate within a code of ethics and practice.

We evolved from the Catholic Marriage Advisory Council, becoming Marriage Care in 1994. We are now an open organisation with the primary purpose of assisting couples in difficulty. Our Christian heritage is still strong. We are a client-centred organisation and those who come for help are our first concern. We accept those who come without any judgement or discrimination in relation to their marital status, creed, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation"

The charity comprises 54 local centres and one national office.

As mentioned in a previous comment, the organistaion is officially called 'Marriage Care', with the word 'Catholic' seeming to be generally omitted from documents, with just a few exceptions.

Looking at the annual report on the web-site, I get the impression that the role of Archbishop Nicholls as President, is more an honorary one, than an active one, rather like the Queen and Parliament! But I may be quite wrong of course!

Whilst browsing I did not see any reference to counselling for same-sex couples, although they do say 'without judgement or discrimination in regard to sexual orientation'.

Catholic Mother said...

There is the Couple to Couple League, and various other diocesan / parish marriage preparation courses that can be recommended for couples. Retrouvaille and Catholic Resource Centre for healing in Marriage that can be recommended for married couples seeking help.

Despite some good people in the past, the CMAC marriage prep materials became very weak years ago and there was no tangible support for married couples. The comments from the Marriage Care website suggest it is a bit of flotsam from the original Catholic ship; it's just a pity the bishops still put their names behind it. Do I understand they put our money into it too?

Catherine said...

“Preparing Engaged Couples for Marriage” Catholic Marriage Advisory Council (now Marriage Care a so called "Catholic charity" according to the Tablet) published the following 1972 in with an imprimatur from Westminster Archdiocese. All of their activities and policies since appear to have consolidated the following dissent.

on the theme of Marriage and Morals p. 75 states that when addressing couples the leader should bear in mind….

“A list of negative prohibitions about sexual behaviour does not help.”

On p81 regarding the topic of ‘controlling fertility’ there is the statement;

“Contraceptive methods….(sterilization, ‘the pill’, the intra-uterine device) or in the act of intercourse itself (condom, diaphragm or cap, spermicidal creams, withdrawal). It is inaccurate to brand these methods as ‘artificial’ as though there was something necessarily wrong in man using artifice. When someone uses a hearing aid or glasses he is using aritifice to help nature function better. With these methods the means of control and conception is more from ‘the outside’”.

On the issue of the teaching of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae in the same section the advice to leaders is

“It is inappropriate for the group leader to…display any extreme partisan or personal standpoint.”

Surely this begs the question; is not the opinion above about what is ‘artificial’ concerning contraceptive methods an extreme or partisan standpoint?

Ben Trovato said...

But it appears that the Archbishop has called them to order...

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2012/09/20/archbishop-nichols-reminds-marriage-care-to-follow-church-teaching/