The UCL brouhaha has brought out Catholic Voices in fine form. I am indebted to That the Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill for his latest three posts on this matter.
Their first attempt to explain Catholic attitudes, episcopal and lay, to ending abortion, England and Wales was:
1 'But in reality, Catholics on campus have nothing to fear. The motion contains no definition of "pro-choice"; if it means simply someone who accepts that abortion should be legal, most Catholics -- including the bishops of England and Wales, who advocate incremental restrictions, but not yet a total ban -- would fit that description.'
Really?
Their second go was as follows:
2 The motion contains no definition of "pro-choice"; if it means simply someone who accepts that abortion cannot be prohibited immediately, most informed Catholics -- including the bishops of England and Wales, who advocate incremental restrictions, but not yet a total ban -- would fit that description.'
And their third attempt to explain what they mean is here:
3 'But in reality, Catholics on campus have nothing to fear. The motion's definition of pro-choice ideology is so narrow and extreme, and its actions so brow-beating and authoritarian, that it will show informed pro-lifers who accept that abortion cannot be prohibited immediately -- including the bishops of England and Wales, who advocate incremental restrictions, but realise that a total ban is currently impossible to achieve -- to be the true advocates of moderate, rational and humane principle.'
I understand that "Catholic Voices" as a group offer training to aspiring Catholic apologists, and are said to be quite selective in their choice of speakers and writers.
You could have fooled me.
QUIS CUSTODET IPSOS CUSTODES?
Mundabor Takes The FSSP Challenge.
-
It seems some people inside the FSSP are now absolutely insisting in making
total clowns of themselves, in their desperate need to show Faggopope that
thei...
11 hours ago
7 comments:
It seems to me that CV is a great idea and they have some intelligent, articulate and loyal volunteers. But at the top, there is something wrong: I don;t know if it is a lack of expertise or a lack of sound Catholic understanding, but they do seem to score a lot of own goals.
I would like to see the project handed over to other leadership, so that it can fulfil its potential.
At present, the thought that CV leaders allegedly speak for me (as a Catholic in the pew) makes me nervous, to say the least.
Yes....very nervous.
Sandy.
Ben, Sandy - that thought makes me furious.
Makes me nervous, too. We are not supposed to speak out for pro-choice incrementalism. As Catholics we are called to stand up for the unborn.
Quis custodet ipsos custodes? Custodes ipsos custodes sunt!
Part of the problem is the lack of intellectual confidence in the Church's position on these hot button issues among many 'public' Catholics, let alone CV. During the same sex 'marriage' consultation, I remember being stunned when the journalist Katie Grant (who'd obviously been intended by Newsnight Scotland as a quasi-official defender of the Church's position) started attacking it. CV is inevitably drawn from well educated, middle class Catholics. How many of that pool are really signed up to (or understand the reasoning behind) Catholic teaching in these areas?
Lazarus - I did not know of Katie Grant. Thank you.
For too many middle-class Catholics, loyalty to the Church seems more cultural than religious, and therefore ranks with other culural loyalties, such as class, Guardian readership, and shopping at Waitrose.
I wish they'd just shut up.
God bless!
Post a Comment