The Bishops of England ans Wales have assured the MPs who have voted for the glorification of sexual abomination that they do not have to fear they will be denied communion. Bishop Egan is therefore (predictably) isolated in his position, and I do hope he does not cave in to his reprobate colleagues.
No embarrassment at the next cocktail, then.
Boy, these people stink of hell from Whitehall. After acquiescing to the politicians during the debate, they are now finishing the job (another word comes to mind) by helping the politicians to let the scandal die out. hey, it has happened. Yes, we can be privately opposed. In charity. Paying attention we are not “homophobic”. Being very “inclusive”. Just do not make any noise whilst doing so, thank you…
What a shame.
Enjoy the new Church of Francis.
Full of fluff, and Catholicism-free.
Bishop Egan of Portsmouth is, how should I say it, not exactly made in the mould of a Jorge Bergoglio.
The last example is here, where the Bishop does not limit himself to the usual mild and whiny criticism of the liberal classes, but finds words uncommonly clear for a Bishop of the rapidly declining – not in numbers; in faith – Church of the beginning of the XXI century.
“When people are not in communion with the Catholic Church on such a central thing as the value of life of the unborn child and also in terms of the teachings of the church on marriage and family life – they are voting in favor of same-sex marriage – then they shouldn’t be receiving Holy Communion,”
I can’t believe that. After Francis’ antics and Dolan’s blabber, a bishop actually speaking like a Catholic certainly makes news.
Bishop Egan explained that rather than a punitive measure, the denial of Holy Communion is “always an act of mercy.” It is done, he said, “with the hope and prayer that that person can be wooed back into full communion with the Church.”
Pope Francis less than politely disagrees. Pick one of two dozen adjectives he has used for the likes of Bishop Egan. Fun game.
We must not go looking for a fight, “but we will, being Christian, have to suffer, and have to go to the cross,” he said. “This is one of the ways, particularly as a priest or a bishop, in which that cross is going to come out, because you have to witness to the truth.”
Glad he said that. I thought we had to find ways to overcome the hiatus between what the Church says and what Catholics have been encouraged to think by Catholic clergy. In a pastoral spirit, of course.
Bishop Egan stressed that the witness to truth in the Church is made in love for “all persons especially those of same-sex attraction.” He noted that God has designed us for happiness and that “happiness is found only in God — it is found ultimately in our relationship with God.”
Exactly. Charity. He who points out to the abomination of sodomy and the perversion of abomination is being exactly that, charitable. On the contrary, the “who am I to judge” mentality is the contrary of being charitable, it is being accessory in another’s sin.
Looking to the future for Catholics in England, Bishop Egan’s views are mixed. He is at times “not very hopeful” because of the fact that “in the Catholic community we’ve not effectively communicated the beautiful vision of marriage and family life that Christ gives us through the teachings of the Church.” Bishop Egan said that in order to evangelize and woo people toward Christ and the truth, Catholics themselves must first be convicted.
However, he adds “the prospects are still good if we can hold the line and not lose our nerve.”
Let me translate this for you in practical English: “Dear colleagues, stop being little pansies and start preaching clear words about sexual abominations; if we work together as a team, we can still win this”.
As to the future regarding withholding Holy Communion from Catholic politicians who support abortion and same-sex ‘marriage’, Bishop Egan says, “I personally would be in favor of saying that somebody should not be receiving Communion myself here within the diocese.”
He added however that he’d “have to act really with the other members of the bishops’ conference.”
“We need to discuss this as a bishops’ conference,” he said. “I’ve already indicated to you my sympathies – if somebody is not in communion with the Catholic Church they should not be receiving communion.”
Once again: translated, this means “I alone cannot start a crusade without the Bishop’s conference, because this is the dratted way the post V II church is supposed to work, at least unofficially. But you see I do as much as I can alone anyway”.
I can’t avoid thinking this man has traits increasingly more rare among his colleague clergymen: he takes his job seriously, and is concerned about his own salvation.
All things you can’t say of this Cardinal here, or of many others. Starting from the very top.
Rev. Philip Egan
Bishop of Portsmouth
Roman Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth
Registered Charity No. 246871
Bishop Crispian Way,
023 9282 0894
023 9286 3086
Rt. Hon. David Cameron MP
Prime Minister and Leader of the Conservative Party
10 Downing Street
Dear Mr Cameron
From Rt. Rev. Philip A. Egan, Bishop of Portsmouth
I am writing to you to send you best wishes from the priests and people of the Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth, and the promise of our prayers for you, as you carry the heavy responsibility of leading our great nation. However, I am also writing to ask you, indeed to urge you, to change course on your intention to introduce same-sex marriage.
You have said you are an enthusiastic supporter of marriage and that you do not want “gay people to be excluded from a great institution.” Yet I wish respectfully to point out that behind what you say lurks a basic philosophical misconception about the nature of ‘equality.’ Equality can never be an absolute value, only a derivative and relative value. After all, a man cannot be a mother nor a woman a father, and so men and women can never be absolutely equal, only relatively equal, since they are biologically different. So too with marriage. Marriage, ever since the dawn of human history, is a union for life and love between a man and a woman. It is a complementary relationship between two people of the opposite sex, the man and the woman not being the same, but different. They are not, in other words, absolutely equal but relatively equal. This is why gay couples, two men or two women, are not being ‘excluded’ from
marriage; they simply cannot enter marriage.
By enabling gays to ‘marry’ and by equating the union of gay people with marriage, however well-intentioned, you are not only redefining what we mean by marriage but actually undermining the very nature, meaning and purpose of marriage. Marriage, and the home, children and family life it generates, is the foundation and basic building block of our society.
If you proceed with your plans, you will gravely damage the value of the family, with catastrophic consequences for the well-being and behaviour of future generations. The 2011 Census shows the parlous state of the institution of marriage which you claim to believe in so strongly, and of family life in general, with one in two teenagers no longer living with their birth parents and over 50% of adults living outside of marriage.
Can you imagine the confusion and the challenge for teenagers as they grow up and seek to reach a fully mature and integrated sexuality? This is why I fail to see how your intentions can possibly strengthen the institution of marriage and family life. Rather they will dilute it. More, you are ignoring the huge opposition of Christians, Jews and Muslims alike, as well as that of a huge number of ordinary people. You are imposing the aspirations of a tiny minority on the vast majority. Make no mistake, the change you are proposing is of immense significance. By it, you will be luring the people of England away from their common Christian values and Christian patrimony, and forcing upon us all a brave new world, artificially engineered. What you are proposing will smother the traditional Christian ethos of our society and in time strangle the religious freedom of the Catholic Church in Britain to conduct its mission. There is no sanction whatsoever in the Bible and the Judaeo-Christian tradition for gay marriage. I cannot see how anyone who claims to be a Christian can possibly justify what you are intending to do.
I know you have spoken of the ‘quadruple lock’ and other legal safeguards. Yet for me many grave concerns remain about the brave new world you are fashioning in the name of the false gods of equality and diversity. For example, will I as a Christian have to support your ideology when preaching? Will you exempt the Church, its resources and premises, from charges of discrimination if it declines to host same-sex social activities? Will Catholic schools, Catholic societies, Catholic charities and Catholic institutions be free (and legally protected) to teach the full truth of Christ and the real meaning of life and love?
I appreciate how politically difficult it can be to undertake a U-turn and to sustain the attendant criticism such would bring. But when it is a matter of the truth, and the reasons are cast-iron clear, a U-turn would be hailed by history only as brave and courageous. This is why, like a Thomas a Becket appealing to Henry II, I do not hesitate to ask you to consider doing what is the right and just thing to do. Otherwise, will we ever be able to forget that it was the leader of the Conservative Party (sic) who finally destroyed marriage as a lasting, loving and life-giving union between a man and a woman?
I assure you of my respect, best wishes and prayers.
Rt. Rev. Philip A. Egan
Bishop of Portsmouth
CC: Priests and People of Diocese of Portsmouth