'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.'
A vast improvement, but, if I may be so bold, bad syntax. I still believe that no matter what the political climate of the modern age, all Catholic Bishops of England and Wales favour an immediate legislative end to abortion, no matter how unlikely that remains. Of course, I have no right to speak for the Bishops of England and Wales and it is beyond my remit, but then we had been reassured that Catholic Voices does not speak on behalf of the Bishops of England and Wales either. Which one is it? Finally, I think that at some point both the co-ordinators of Catholic Voices and some of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales are going to come very unstuck over their nuanced presentation of Catholic belief. I found this definition of nuance which I found struck a chord. Nuance is actually a PR nightmare. It cannot grab headlines for the right reasons and its so open to misinterpretation that it grabs headlines for the wrong reasons. I cannot believe that with so much experience in the media, the co-ordinators of Catholic Voices are scoring such bewildering own goals. Our Lord didn't establish the One, Holy, Catholic Church to blend in with the rest of the World. He established it to proclaim Salvation and in every age, She is called by the Lord to be a contradiction to the World and to run against the prevailing culture which in every age tries to bury the message of the Gospel and the Messenger and Saviour Himself, Our Lord Jesus Christ.
One would have thought they'd have chosen people who could write clear expository prose. One would have been wrong. Be that as it may, it's even worse after you figure out what they were trying to say.
ReplyDeleteSorry, just realised I put this on the wrong blogpost...
ReplyDeleteOur Lord told us to do two things when teaching the gospel. First, 'Preach the gospel boldly' and secondly 'In all your speech be 'yea, yea, nay, nay' (Matt 5:37). If we aren't doing that we can hardly expect our evangelisation to work. Too often our Bishops and now spokesmen like CV have behaved like sorry a**** in front of the cameras or in print and consequently we've evangelised practically no one. Contrast this with the reaction John Sentamu got from the press last weekend when he spoke out against gay marriages. What happened? He got instant respect and people understood very forcefully this was a man to be reckoned with. You could hear the applause in the background. Why? Because he spoke the gospel BOLDLY and he was plain in speech and manner i.e. he did what Our Lord told him to do and behaved exactly as He would. One of Our Lord's chief characteristics was his courage and boldness - people loved him for it. Unless we start imitating Him our evangelisation will fall on stony ground.
If we continue down this track of parsing our words and nuancing everything we are going to come serioulsy unstuck. I've seen Jack Valero faltering on TV on the issue of homosexuality where the interviewer had him squirming in his seat and this CP legislation with the 'missing clause' has the ability to make us look positively Machiavellian. How Jesuitical I can here the audience saying. No, this approach is doomed to failure and Our Lord has told us so. It's 'preach the gospel BOLDLY', not 'be a wimp' and 'in all your speech be yea, yea, nay nay' not 'play jiggery pokery with everything I say and get the best deal you can'.
BJC
'all Catholic Bishops of England and Wales favour an immediate legislative end to abortion, no matter how unlikely that remains.'
ReplyDeleteYes, but this is no longer denied by the Monitor statement. It simply says that they realise it is unattainable.
The problem which remains, in my view, is the impression that the political impossibility of an outright ban is actually quite convenient, because it helps Catholics to get along with people with more 'moderate' views. Catholics should be working, arguing, organising, campaigning, to make what is currently impossible possible, including by making the case for an outright ban.