FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Bishop McMahon says there's no problem with same sex unions
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Yes, a Catholic Bishop this time:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10011815.html

It's hard to tell if he's a degenerate or a complete moron.

Quote:LONDON, January 19, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A member of the English Catholic Bishops conference, and the head of the Catholic Education Service, has denied that there is any Catholic objection to homosexual civil unions. Speaking to The Tablet, Britain’s leading left-liberal Catholic paper, Bishop Malcolm McMahon, the chairman of the Catholic Education Service, said that he had no objection to homosexuals in civil partnerships working in Catholic schools.

McMahon, once tipped by Paddy Power as a contender to replace Cormac Murphy O’Connor as Archbishop of Westminster, “has promised that the Church will not investigate the private lives of applicants for the headships of Catholic schools.”

The comments follow revelations of increasing difficulties faced by the Catholic school system in Britain in recruiting candidates who fully adhere to Catholic sexual teaching. Bishop McMahon told The Tablet that the Church is not interested in the “backgrounds” of “potential school leaders.”

Applicants should decide for themselves “whether they were able to live according to church teaching.”

“Their family life isn’t scrutinised,” said the bishop. “I’d be rather ashamed if the Church was doing that to people. But we do expect people in leadership in the Church to live out their Christian commitment as best they can.”

But not everyone is as sanguine as the bishop about the situation. Fr. John Boyle of Ashford, Kent, a popular priest-blogger, wrote that this announcement by the bishop is the “last nail in the coffin” of Catholic education in Britain. Fr. Boyle wrote, “The backgrounds of potential school leaders, indeed of every living soul, is of immense concern to the Church since She is concerned about the salvation, not only of those who lead our schools, but of those whom they are charged to lead and teach.”

“There needs to be some way of ensuring that our teachers are exemplary in their lives. Only in that way can they give example to the pupils and teach coherently what the Church teaches,” he continued.

Fr. Boyle quoted the Church’s Code of Canon Law that says, “The instruction and education in a Catholic school must be grounded in the principles of Catholic doctrine; teachers are to be outstanding in correct doctrine and integrity of life.”

Canon 804 says, “The local Ordinary [bishop] is to be concerned that those who are designated teachers of religious instruction in schools ... are outstanding in correct doctrine, the witness of a Christian life, and teaching skill.”

The bishop also told the Tablet that the Catholic Church is not opposed to homosexual civil partnerships. They are, he said, “precisely what they say they are. They’re not gay marriages or lesbian marriages. They’re simply a legal arrangement between two people so that they can pass on property and other rights in which they were discriminated against before.

“We have many gay people in education and a large number of gay people in the Church, at least the same as the national average. I think a person who is leading a church school should live according to the Church’s teaching whether they are in a civil partnership or not. A civil partnership is not a marriage, it’s not a conjugal relationship.”

Bishop McMahon, head of the Nottingham diocese, is well known for his “liberal” views on Catholic teaching. In November 2008, he told the Sunday Telegraph newspaper that the Church should reconsider its restrictions on the married priesthood, “Marriage should not bar them from their vocation, but they must be married before they are ordained.”

“It is a question of justice for those men who want to be priests and to have a wife,” he said.
I heard that the British Bishops will soon be making the ad lima visit to Rome. Let's hope that this bishop is scolded for these comments, in clear violation of the code of cannon law.
But again, don't hold your breath, it seems that the Holy Father has limited will and control to address these issues head-on.
I really don't understand why the Vatican thinks that they can't call-out these liberal bishops directly and publically. I suppose they think that if they do, it will cause the clergy to loose credibility, but the sad fact is that they have squandered it already.
The clergy these days is a pathetic joke and the irony is that if they did tackle these fruitcakes head-on and publically, with threats and consequences, the Vatican would gain credibility in the long run.
This emasculated soft-touch approach to church leadership inaugurated by John XXIII and Paul VI is taking a toll and they just don't seem to get it~!
The real tragedy is, that

- the no fault divorces

- the exclusion of God and the morality from the public life especially from schools

- the uncontrolled rule of the godless media

- and so on

is accepted without any protest. Fighting the remnant of the issues (same sex unions, abortions)  will not change anything

Also unfortunate that no one in the traditional side understand that the Church needs to fight the full and uncontested freedom of conscience in the issues related to the life and families of Catholics. Claiming that only we have rights, and loosing the battles with the godless forces is empty boosting. The point should be in the recent situation, that we have our inalienable right to be Catholics with all of its consequences
Here's to hoping that the Tablet (the worst Catholic newspaper in Europe) grossly misquoted His Grace to suit their own agenda.

Hope springs eternal.  At least for a while.
Gigas what r u om abput!! Maybe I misunderstand but what do u mean when u speak abpot those who claim only we have rights?
Abortion isn't a side issue its a center issue a cornerstone issue. I dpnt get it man. U roightly point a finger at the godless media ect ect yet in another thread u rail against the social kingshop of CHRIST.
(01-20-2010, 05:14 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: [ -> ]They are, he said, “precisely what they say they are. They’re not gay marriages or lesbian marriages. They’re simply a legal arrangement between two people so that they can pass on property and other rights in which they were discriminated against before.

A civil partnership is not a marriage, it’s not a conjugal relationship.”

I'm not quite sure what the problem is with these two statements.  As long as it doesn't go beyond that, who cares?
Because it affects society. That's why we have a dutu to try to stop it. Its one thing to have men do the dirty deed and live together which cannpot be stopped at the mpoment its another to have this legalized and ligitamized and taught in schools. It will eat society as all bad mor*ls do. A Bishop can't eve see this for what's it is. With leaders like this no wonder britain is all but gone.
(01-20-2010, 10:50 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: [ -> ]Because it affects society. That's why we have a dutu to try to stop it. Its one thing to have men do the dirty deed and live together which cannpot be stopped at the mpoment its another to have this legalized and ligitamized and taught in schools. It will eat society as all bad mor*ls do. A Bishop can't eve see this for what's it is. With leaders like this no wonder britain is all but gone.

Well, I understand that civil unions are being used by homosexual activists to then legalize gay marriage and destroy the traditional understanding of marriage.  I just don't understand why, in and of itself, two people registering to get civil benefits together, as long as it is understood that this is a legal agreement and in no way the same thing as a marriage, is such a horrible thing.  Maybe I'm just being naive, but I honestly think if they would just give the same insurance and tax benefits and whatever else that is not an intrinsic part of marriage, half the support of gay people for ramming gay marriage down the throats of those who are opposed to it would evaporate.  There's the gay activist who won't be satisfied until every last vestige of marriage as a strictly heterosexual union is destroyed from the public mindsent, and then there is the ordinary, everyday gay person who just wants to not pay twice as much for health insurance.
Honestly, I think there is quite a bit of naivety in your statement.  I think you underestimate the power and goals of the homosexual movement.  This really isn't about tax benefits.  That's a red Herring, a front. 
Hmmm...wonder what his preferences are.


Sorry, it was bad of me to wonder that. I should not automatically think that a prelate who stands in favor of gay lifestyles is gay himself but then why would he go against the teachings of the Church and have so little concern for souls , only looking to endorse a passing 'pleasure' in a perverse lifestyle in a worldly sense. Imagine, a bishop not caring for souls and leading them astray.
Pages: 1 2 3 4