Saturday, May 30, 2009

Feminism and Homosexuality

Feminism, as an ideology, is clearly completely contrary to the Catholic view of human nature and to Catholic practice. The fact that serious feminists regard an all-male clergy as inherently unjust gives the game away. Amazingly feminists have nevertheless been able not only to enter official Church structures but even exercise an ideological domination of them, through 'Women Word Spirit' and its historic stranglehold on the National Board of Catholic Women.

Just as Catholic women are the special targets of prosletising militant feminists, homosexual Catholics are targetted by militant gay groups which reject the teaching of the Church on sexuality and embrace the gay sub-culture. What is amazing, again, is that they have been able to do this for decades with some measure of official approval.

Click on the names to see our full dossier on each group.

Marriage Care, formerly the 'Catholic Marriage Advisory Service', then 'Catholic Marriage Care'. It is no longer 'Catholic' in its self-description but it is still in the Catholic Directory. Once a worthy organisation dedicated to marriage counseling, now they want to help people in all 'relationships', and undermine the Church's teaching on the nature of marriage and homosexuality. They also promote sex education, of a kind completely at variance with the Church's guidelines. The Chairman of Marriage Care has repeatedly spoken in favour of homosexual unions.

Women Word Spirit (WWS), formerly Catholic Women's Network (CWN). Recently ejected from the Catholic Directory, it still has a stranglehold on the National Board of Catholic Women, an official consultative body of the Bishops Conference of England and Wales, and its quarterly newspaper 'Catholic Omnibus' (which is now to be published only as a download). As Feminists they ceaselessly campaign for women's ordination, and also support abortion. They are part of a network of dissenting groups on the issues of contraception, the liturgy, clerical celibacy, homosexuality, and the role of women in the Church.

Roman Catholic Caucus of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (RCCLGCM)/ Soho Masses Pastoral Council (SMPC)
Two very similar organisations seeking to undermine the Church's teaching on homosexuality. Although neither is listed in the national Catholic Directory (Quest was ejected in 1998 for refusing to 'clarify' its position on homosexual sex) they have considerable success at local level organising Masses and other events with the agreement of bishops and priests. At their events, and in their literature, there is a pervasive assumption that a homosexual couple's sexual relationship is perfectly ok, and that the Church's teaching to the contrary is 'fallible' and wrong. They are supported by a handful of dissident theologians. They campaign to guide or even be put in charge of the pastoral care of homosexual Catholics, a remarkable attempt by the wolf to apply for the shepherd's job.

Catholics for AIDS Prevention and Support (CAPS)/Positive Catholic (successor to 'Catholic AIDS Link'): another organisation promoting dissent about homosexuality. It has close links to RCCLGCM, and is listed in the Catholic Directory. As Positive Catholics it organises an annual retreat in Douai Abbey.

The arguments used by apologists for these groups are examined here.

The Archbishop Romero Trust: an interesting over-lap between 'Justice and Peace' dissent (CAFOD, Progressio etal.) and the homosexual dissent. The Chair is Julian Filochowski, a former director of CAFOD, whose civil partner is Martin Pendergast, the leading figure in the RCCLGCM, SMPC and CAPS. So we find CAPS Masses promoting Romero (or Romero Masses promoting CAPS?) and both being promoted by the Justice and Peace establishment.


Stevo said...

You people are still in the dark ages as far as your policies on Gay people, contraception and even worse you are criminally in denial over your peodophile priests and nuns.

Hercules said...

On the last point, 'not guilty' actually - see our posts here, here, here and here (if you're interested). We noted: "the strength of the Pope's recent condemnation of clerical sex abuse at Sydney is worth noting. The UK is fare from free of these problems."

Steve said...

What is astonishing to me is that homosexuals are statistically much more likely to suffer STD's, to be in a physically abusive relationship, to attempt suicide or actually do so, to be raped or sexually assaulted, to abuse alcohol or drugs, to die (on average about 20 years) earlier than heterosexuals and this is proposed as a matter of choice to young people! It's much less dangerous to encourage young people to become heavy smokers and drinkers.

Anonymous said...

Where do therse statistics come from Steve? Fantasy island? People choose whether to smoke or get pissed. Gay people are the way God made them. And she did a damn good job of it....

Stephen said...

Suicide, sexually risky behaviour, physical abuse, and substance abuse are all strongly connected to low self esteem. For gay men and women supportive family and friends, and a positive gay identity make them no more likely to engage in negative behaviours than straight people.

Sexual behaviour really is not important, and need not impact on anyone else, but tolerance and an understanding attitude for other people is. It is negative, and inaccurate portrayals of homosexuality, Steve, which are most harmful.

Anonymous said...

I don't know how or why feminism is being equated with homosexuality.

I am pro-family pro-life and value feminism as a heterosexual mother, and I am far from alone in that respect.

Many mothers value the traditional values within the Catholic faith but the basis for this sort of rhetoric which is not clear is not supportive to our chuldren or family values.

Hercules said...

Feminism, using the term in any meaningful sense, is incompatible with Church teaching in a very obvious way: the Church upholds distinct gender roles, obviously in the clergy but also in the family, and Feminism regards them as unjust.

Where do you go from there?

Anonymous said...

Where I go from there,
after amending the typo - children -

I have stumbled on a strange myth being cemented into the Catholic debate

I ask you to try reading my comment again, instead of negating my personal view as a mother of a boy

And I gently tell you, That is what feminism means

that mothers and heterosexual women plus girls are afforded dignity in the role they carry out and can have autonomy in marriage or as a child or a single adult, to express their feminity and assert a view without being called masculine or homosexual

Perhaps you might want to understand that your loggerhead debate may be in error, so that you can break the deadlock
towards actually having some influence in the mainstream
currently debasing our children's standards, relying on prejudice to promote questionable liberalism agendas

This odd labelling of homosexuality to = feminism not only take the eye off the balls re forced gay adoptions terrorising families in the UK and USA
but also dicerts the fact that these are frequently gay coupldes who are getting the right to erase the name of birth parents from a baby child's identity

Anonymous said...

oh that's just great

Catholic Church supporters so busy bashing women with strange ideas about feminisms

that mandatory gay sex ed and abortion slips in through the back door to brainwash our children in the era of gay forced adoption

Wake up, you could do with the support of us wholseome mothers in this debate, even single ones whose husband has let the family down; as mothers we still have strong family values and our children are faithful and lovely and the adoption industry is rabid to get its profiting corrupting hands on them

ever thought about the single mother bashing in the media

Think again

Anonymous said...

One of your biggest protagonists in pushing forced gay adoptions is Mr Blair
a converted Catholic (I don't believe it personally)
because of his wife, a Catholic
I would have thought you could consider Cherie a feminist in her status and employed role, she earns more than her husband
she did anyway

What are you lot talking about

or are you confusing feminisms with homosexuality because you are expressing misogyny

and you know what they say about that closet.

Hercules said...

So people who are not in denial about the aims of the Feminist movement are 'expressing misogyny'?

It really isn't controversial. Just read what they say about themselves - notably the groups discussed in this section, but also the mainstream feminists from whom they take their cue. Then you can decide for yourself whether you are a feminist.

Michael Simons said...

I have met over 10 Priests who are openly gay. I found each one of them to be most tolerant, they gave a very good account of themselves when saying mass and made me feel most welcome in their Church.
I have attended many different churches for mass and I respectfully say that some of them are an embarrasement to our sacred church. In particular, after a Mass I was approached by several stewards from a nearby church who wanted rid of their Priest. He was anti-Irish at school governor's meetings, he blamed the thick Irish pupils for bad Ofstead reports. I was asked to agree to be chairman of the governors and the Priest was to be voted off the board. I politely declined.
In far too many catholic churches, the Priest celebrating mass is cold, uninspiring, needs lessons on how to make people sit up and listen, has a poor diction, has not prepared his sermon, lacks the ability to communicate with the ordinary parishioners.
Fairly recently our local assistant Priest was promoted to Parish Priest in the black country. A coach load of our parishioners attended on his installation. The general comments were thank God he (the out goin Priest) has gone, he was a pain.
A friend of mine was interviewed at Oscott college and he was far too embarrassed to tell me what was the line of questionion. It was about his sexuality.
A few weeks later I met a catholic priest who is openly gay and I put this question to him: Our Archbishop has laid down very stringent tests that a candidate must satisfy the diocese before he can be considered eligable for training at Oscott as a Priest. The Priests reply was in words to the effect "Michael, if he sacked all of us, there would be at least one-third of the diocese without a permanent Priest. There would be insufficient Priests to cover all of the parishes. Sunday Masses would not exist in many Parishes and the likes of you would be called upon to do Eucharistic Services on a regular basis.
I am sure by now you are wondering what on earth are my comments directed at? Quite simply that each gay Priest I have heard say mass has done so in a way that is inspiring to his congregation.
To the critics on this issue I say this: direct your attention to making sure that your Parish Priest delivers the goods in a truly professional manner and if you are not prepared to do so, have the courtesy to belt up and be positive.

Br Michael Patrick, Bidar Mission, North Kanataka, India, and an Extra Ordinary Minister of the Eucharist when in Birmingham.

Hercules said...

The corrollary of not letting openly homosexual men into Seminary is not throwing openly non-homosexual men out of seminary. As long as both policies are implemented together, the number of men being presented for ordination shouldn't suffer - on the contrary, it will rise.

Pope Leo XIII's Prayer to St Michael

Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in the day of battle. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust down to Hell Satan, and all wicked spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen