The Pope and the condom

Pope Benedict is a thoughtful man. That is, he is full of thoughts. About how the Catholic Faith is maintained. Most people think the Church should behave according to the fashions of the age, both those within and without. That is not what the Church is about, however wonderful new fashion may be. The Church is about accepting received Truth and maintaining the Faith.

When it comes to condoms, the general mantra is that these are the best way to prevent the transmission of disease. As a stand alone concept, that is perfectly correct. But it does nothing to address behaviour, it does nothing to address attitudes. All it says is that disease is 99% guaranteed prevented, always assuming that the condom is used correctly.

The Pope is being taken to task. What's new, one wonders? In his latest remarks he quite naturally addressed the behaviour of, for example, a male prostitute and suggests that the use of a condom is at least a step in addressing behaviours and activity. Is it not better that in such circumstances a measure of trying to protect lives is introduced? This is a step on the road to personal transformation.

The ultimate in sexual activity as far as the Catholic Church is concerned is within marriage and for the purpose of allowing the free transmission of life into a new generation. That is the ultimate situation, within the sacrament of holy matrimony. That many fall short of this, or feel unable to commit to it, or even truculantly oppose it, does not in any way diminish the beneficial aspect of the doctrine.

The Church is about life and death. Life is supposed to be naturally born and death is supposed to occur naturally. Risky sexual activity of the form the Pope described may lead to a death caused by reckless behaviour. The Church is definitely not about reckless behaviour.

Claire Rayner's last rant!

I've never intended to speak ill of the dead and hope I don't, but reasoned comment is fair I think. Claire Rayner died this week and we all know she was a humanist and a detractor of religious belief. That's OK. But it strikes me as very peculiar that so-called liberals can be such vituperatively spiteful souls. I saw from her recently updated Wikipedia entry that she said this as she neared her deathbed.

"I have no language with which to adequately describe Joseph Alois Ratzinger, AKA the Pope. In all my years as a campaigner I have never felt such animus against any individual as I do against this creature. His views are so disgusting, so repellent and so hugely disgusting to the rest of us, that the only thing to do is to get rid of him."

I had no desire to get rid of Claire Rayner whilst she was alive. Pity she got so bitter about her animus. The repellent thing is that liberals can be such illiberal folk with some very nasty things to say at times. A real pity, indeed!

Papal Visit 2010

I think the Papal visit went very well. The Pope is obviously seen by many as a holy and spiritual man. Yesterday's mass at Cofton Park was well attended despite the gainsayers. All in all a positive outcome. The Pope can reflect on a visit that has secured a sound basis for further reflection within the Christian community of these islands of Britain.

Yesterday was the beatification of John Henry Newman. As Newman replied on his elevation to cardinal "What a turn up!" he may well have said the same thing about becoming blessed. Newman did have a sense of humour. I well remember an Anglican monk saying that to be a pastor or a religious it was essential to have a sense of humour. The best priests I know have exactly this. Not a frivolous froth of religiosity but a deep sense of belief and the ability to share this. Newman is seen as a convert as much as a cardinal of Rome. In many ways he never relinquished his Anglican roots. Was he one of the first modern Anglican Catholics ideally suited for anglicanorum coetibus? Those of us contemplating the Holy Father's offer of a spiritual home are wondering whether we will be absorbed or accommodated. It is now perfectly plain that there is room in the Catholic Church for a variety of flavours. Pope Benedict generously acknowledges that the Anglican patrimony is perfectly consistent with the Catholic Faith (for those, of course, keeping to traditional beliefs!). But Benedict is not a young pope and a successor may have different ideas.

The question is whether Anglicans can be Anglican Catholics or whether we will be gradually absorbed and our heritage expunged. Certainly more questions, with answers yet to come.

A stroll in the street for Sally Bercow and the Squeaker

Is this the secular Britain the Pope is talking about? All smirks, smiles and cheesy grins?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312857/POPES-UK-VISIT-Speakers-wife-Sally-Bercow-attacks-Benedict-XVI-Twitter.html

Pope pops in to pep up the faithful

So far so good. The Pope's visit to England and Scotland is going well. All those who were excited to see him are still excited. But I do wish the media would not be so obsessed with sin. In this case that of clerical abuse. It is a terrible matter indeed, but by incessantly bringing the topic up at the end of every sentence it just makes the issue sound like nothing on Earth can make amends. It is as if the reporters have a one track mind, with sex abuse stuck in front of their eyes as a reminder. Wrong deeds are not righted by bringing them up at every available opportunity. There is a time and a place for everything. The sin of sex abuse and the scandal of clerical cover-ups has been and should be in future (if ever it arises again) dealt with in context. Modern media types seem to revel in the bad and avoid the good.

Another thing I find strange. Much has been said, particularly on the radio, about the Pope being greeted by a female cleric in Westminster Abbey. Do those who are digging away at this think he will shrink from her sight, or admonish her publicly for something or other? It's so absurd. But I really think they are hoping for a Monty Python style punch-up. The fact that there are disagreements between Christians over doctrines, some within and some between denominations does not mean that Christian leaders do not have a warm regard for each other and a respect.

When the Pope visits Westminster Abbey today, it will be all Christian benevolence and spiritual warmth. But I suspect that some in the media will be hoping for something different.

The Times and its anti-Catholic diatribes

What is it with Murdoch's lot? They seem to have lost all sense of journalistic proportion and become opinionated bloggers. A bit like me and several thousand others.

I don't profess to report news in an accurate way. I don't distort it, I hope. I just have my say. Like Libby Purves and her "arrest the Pope" stuff in The Times. But it's not just that paper. Others are getting all anti-Catholic in a snidy way. Fair comment to say you think that Catholicism is baloney or not your cup of tea. But it's just the cheap innuendo that passes for cerebral journalism that I find hard to take.

Richard Dawkins is a known snide on the subject, as is the ascerbic Christopher Hitchens. But I'm surprised by some of the others. I think it is best to ride out this, as Damian Thompson suggests. Any response will be like feeding red meat to lions.

Anti-Catholic feeling stirred up by New Labour

New Labour in the personification of Harriet Harman certainly knows how to be illiberal when it wants to be. Now she has unleashed a load of anti-Catholic bile onto the nation. Maybe not personally, but her craven desire to make life difficult for the Church has encouraged all manner of diatribes against the Pope.

Now I'm not suggesting everyone has to believe in the basic tenets of the Christian Faith. If they wish to walk by on the other side, I'm not going to force them to think or behave otherwise. And it's not as if the Church is seeking to cajole securalists into the fold. It is just a very strange thing that those who say they are liberal and in favour of free speech seem so keen to rubbish the beliefs of Christianity in such a mean-spirited way.

Harriet Harman is besotted with control and legislation. In her zeal to prove a point, she has become the one who has opened the bottle and let out a rather unpleasant genie. Probably the New Testament is lost on her currently, but we are told "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." They certainly have today.

Pope and Queen to have beano at Buck House!

The Queen has invited the Pope to stay at Buckingham Palace when he comes to visit next year. She will be able to tell him how "appalled" she is with the state of the Church of England. The Daily Telegraph reports that the Catholic Herald thinks she also has "an affinity with the Holy Father, who is of her generation". They will have a lot to discuss. As Supreme Governor and Defender of the Faith it must be particularly galling when you have to sit back and watch some of the antics and complete disregard for the doctrines traditionally held.

In fact, her role now is more akin to the previous chief executives of Woolworths mulling over the Pick 'N Mix counters. If it carries on much longer she will have a state funeral carried out by a transgendered cleric clutching at straws and rabbits' feet!

Now she has dispensed with the likely lads and ladies of the synod, she can move gently across the tea and cakes and whisper, "More tea, Pope?".

Pope to become Presbyterian?

I see that the Prime Minister is off to Rome. Not in the same way that Tony Blair became a Roman Catholic. No, this is just a little bit of afternoon tea with His Holiness and a possible chat about the world's affairs. But there is a little gift winging its way into the Vatican as well. It is apparently a book containing sermons given by the Rev John Brown, the PM's Prebyterian ministerial father. This should make for good bedtime reading. We are not told what kind they are - fire and brimstone types or just good protestant rhetoric?

The Pope will accept the gift, but I'm curious to know why Gordon Brown picked this. Would he be pleased, surprised or shocked if the pontiff woke up the next day completely transformed as a presbyterian preacher?

Pope in "Saving the World" controversy

It is very much a case these days of the the secular society at odds with the Catholic Faith. Unlike in previous generations, though, many of us think the ways of the secular world are trying to get into the church. Trojan horses come to mind.

The Pope has a traditional end-of-year address to senior Vatican staff. This time he said that saving the dignity of the human race was just as important as saving rainforests. We live in an era where the word "sex" has been erroneously translated into "gender". So we have more than two genders suggested to us. Any government form now will have abandoned the word sex. "What gender are you?", the various documents will declare.

The church has an understanding of the role of the male and the female. These are not blurred by fashion, but understood to be a part of a timeless Creation. Of course, it is perfectly reasonable and legitimate for others to have alternative views. My case is that taking the church's doctrines and somehow mendaciously twisting them is doing the debate no good whatsoever.

Rev Sharon Ferguson, chief executive of Britain's Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, has described the Pope's remarks as "totally irresponsible and unacceptable". "When you have religious leaders like that making that sort of statement then followers feel they are justified in behaving in an aggressive and violent way," she said. I doubt that is the case. It is her hyperbole. She is suggesting things that are not so. I do not know of any Christian leader (other than those of crank sects) exhorting followers to be aggressive and violent.

Ms Ferguson has her views. This is a democratic society. However, the church has an understanding of the relationship between the sexes. It is not "totally irresponsible and unacceptable" as she says, but the basis of the Catholic Faith. It may not be easy, but it is certainly not the travesty she and others suggest.

Roman Catholics in US more in tune with Pope than Rome!

The Washington Post and ABC News have commissioned a poll of Roman Catholic thinking in the USA. The poll is perceived as showing that nearly half those respondents consider the Pope and the Church out of touch with their views. It then goes on to give percentages and information about views given.

The 45% who think the Church should bend with the wind are in favour, or don't mind, women as priests. They also want other things, which are not identified as such. But the poll says that Pope Benedict is a forceful advocate for traditionalism, including returning prayers, vestments and music from earlier eras to church services. This would suggest that some priests are conducting services in garb somewhat different from vestments, are making up extemporary prose, and plucking their guitars. Not being a Roman Catholic in America, I can only guess!

I fear the tragedy of clerical abuse has clouded some of the responses. However, it is hard to see that this is representative on such a small sample of 292. What it tells me is that, just like the Anglican Church, there are many who see Christianity as reflecting what they want and not what the Faith teaches them.

If the priesthood is seen as being a matter of human leadership, then it matters not who is a priest. However, the Church has taught differently over the centuries, emphasising the sacramental nature of priesthood and its combining nature with Christ. Marriage of priests is not the same issue as female ordination, although this poll confuses them a bit. Priestly celibacy is a discipline not a doctrine. It could be that the Pope may lead towards rescinding this discipline, back to early times. I doubt if female ordination will be on the agenda, not because it is right or wrong, but because it is not discerned as being compatible with the Faith.

As an Anglican Catholic, I'm intrigued by these answers, but not surprised. A similar ongoing "debate" is entrenched in the Anglican Church, but with the figures for change and innovation somewhat higher. That's why an ex-Roman Catholic is now calling the shots in the Episcopal Church. What the Pope makes of her, I do not know. But it defines the situation nicely. On one side, but from both churches, are the ecclesiastical democrats and on the other side, the traditionalists.