@blondpidge Oddie was exploiting the ambiguity of the term 'legal recognition of same-sex unions', saying it meant CPs. But it means GM.
I'll be the first to say that I am not often on Twitter, but Paul Priest kindly sent me information about what our premier 'Catholic Voice' has been tweeting.
Do we take it, therefore, that the CDF gave approval to civil partnerships between gay couples? Do you really think, Austen, that William Oddie, in his latest piece, is 'exploiting the ambiguity of the term 'legal recognition of same-sex unions'?
Do you really think that he is spending his time writing with great concern over the recent statements of His Grace, in order to trip the Archbishop up on some minor philosophical detail? And, no, Austen doesn't mean GM crops.
Austen is suggesting that when the CDF condemned, without any hesitation, in 2003, the 'legal recognition of same sex unions' on about four or five different grounds, one of which was that they would open up the door to gay marriage, that here in England and Wales, the Bishops were then or are now, free to support these legal unions or give Episcopal approval to civil partnerships?
Hello! Church to Austen Ivereigh!
Do we take it, therefore, that the CDF gave approval to civil partnerships between gay couples? Do you really think, Austen, that William Oddie, in his latest piece, is 'exploiting the ambiguity of the term 'legal recognition of same-sex unions'?
Do you really think that he is spending his time writing with great concern over the recent statements of His Grace, in order to trip the Archbishop up on some minor philosophical detail? And, no, Austen doesn't mean GM crops.
Austen is suggesting that when the CDF condemned, without any hesitation, in 2003, the 'legal recognition of same sex unions' on about four or five different grounds, one of which was that they would open up the door to gay marriage, that here in England and Wales, the Bishops were then or are now, free to support these legal unions or give Episcopal approval to civil partnerships?
Hello! Church to Austen Ivereigh!
 |
| "Hey! Thanks Austen!": The happy couple, but who's the Daddy? |
From the CV website...
So, in what capacity is 'Austeni' speaking when he is tweeting? As Joe Bloggs or co-ordinator of Catholic Voices? For Austen Ivereigh, it seems, pretty much everything about the Catholic Faith is 'ambiguous'. That's why many people are concerned with the project. But they're all nutters, they're just the Pyjamahadeen, aren't they? I'm writing this now, and I'm telling you, I am fully clothed. It it you, Austen, who is naked.
'Please note that while Catholic Voices has the blessing of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales it does not speak officially for the Conference.'
So, in what capacity is 'Austeni' speaking when he is tweeting? As Joe Bloggs or co-ordinator of Catholic Voices? For Austen Ivereigh, it seems, pretty much everything about the Catholic Faith is 'ambiguous'. That's why many people are concerned with the project. But they're all nutters, they're just the Pyjamahadeen, aren't they? I'm writing this now, and I'm telling you, I am fully clothed. It it you, Austen, who is naked.
2 comments:
I think you'll find that when Archbishop Nichols hears what's been said in his name, he'll cut both Catholic Voices and all of the wastrels of Eccleston Square loose, and then give us a black and white statement of Catholic belief in this area.
He's the Archbishop of Westminster, for goodness sake!
Hope springs eternal!
Post a Comment