Statement from Bishop Egan regarding gay ‘marriage’.

 

We thank Almighty God for giving us Shepherds who are not afraid to speak on the serious issues confronting our Church, our country and indeed our Roman Catholic lives. The issue of so called ‘gay marriage’ is an issue that most of the major faiths have shown their disapproval, and for us Catholics, it violates that most sacred sacrament of marriage which is, as the word of God proclaims, between one man and one woman.

 

BISHOP OF PORTSMOUTH

Rt. Rev. Philip A. Egan BA, STL, PhD

 

 

STATEMENT ON “GAY MARRIAGE”

December 2012, Memorial of St. Lucy

In response to a recent TV interview with David Cameron in which he gave his backing to gay marriage in church (BBC News, 7th December) and the outcome of the so-called consultation process, Bishop Philip Egan has issued the following statement to the priests and people of the Diocese and to all people of good will:

David Cameron has said that he is an enthusiastic supporter of marriage and that he does not want “gay people to be excluded from a great institution.” Yet however well-intentioned, and despite huge opposition from Christians, Jews and Muslims alike, by attempting to change the natural meaning of marriage, he seems utterly determined to undermine one of the key foundations of our society. Such a change is of immense significance. By this change, he is luring the people of England away from their common Christian values and Christian patrimony, and forcing upon us a brave new world, artificially engineered. To “extend marriage to gay people”, he intends to impose the will of a tiny minority on the vast majority. If the Prime Minister proceeds with these intentions, he will pervert authentic family values, with catastrophic consequences for the well-being and behaviour of future generations. He will smother the traditional Christian ethos of our society and strangle the religious freedom of the Catholic Church in Britain to conduct its mission. I would like to ask Mr. Cameron: What about the rights of Christians? Will you exempt the Church, its preachers, resources and premises, from having to support your harmful ideology? Will Catholic schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Christ and the real meaning of life and love? The institution of marriage has had its ups and downs, but will we ever forget that it was the leader of the Conservative Party who finally destroyed marriage as a lasting, loving and life-giving union between a man and a woman?

+Philip

Bishop of Portsmouth

About Gertrude

Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium.
This entry was posted in Catholic Culture and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Statement from Bishop Egan regarding gay ‘marriage’.

  1. toad says:

    .
    My, haven’t we all just got our chasubles in the very devil of a twist!!! Toad keeps vainly trying to reassure vast aglomerations of wailing, hand-wringing, Christians that this is no big deal! Not the end of the world as we know it” Small beer! Trivia! A passing fad!

    You are hysterically morphing a pitifully small handful – for that’s all it really is – of generally aimiable and inoffensive “gay” people into a vast, sinister, legion of demons, afreets, hobgoblins,and downright scamps assembled under the personal command of Beelzebub himself.

    Which is amusing, stimulating, and enormously ego-massaging for them no doubt, but wholly counter-productive for their opponents. Who are, Toad suspects comparatively few, really. Most of us regular eejits simply shrug our shoulders and save our breath to cool our genetically-engineered porridge.

    For once, Boris was right – put the whole storm in a pee cup to a referendum vote.

    Then accept whatever comes. Gracefully. And quietly. Whichever way the vote goes.

    “….will we ever forget that it was the leader of the Conservative Party who finally destroyed marriage as a lasting, loving and life-giving union between a man and a woman?” …asks the splendidly attired Phil the Bish, talking through his gem-encrusted mitre. If Toad knows politicians, (and he has met a few) most of them would be grateful to be remembered for anything at all, except for the things that finally get them thrown out of office, or stuck in pokey.

    But you won’t listen.

    .

    Like

  2. johnhenrycn says:

    LONDON, December 10, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a two-page letter to Prime Minister David Cameron, Joseph Devine, the Catholic bishop of Motherwell in Scotland, has compared Cameron to Nero, the Roman emperor who persecuted Christians, for his determination to bring forward “gay marriage.” Cameron and his government are “devoid of moral competence,” wrote Bishop Devine, adding that that no one believes their promises that the churches will be immune from legal action by homosexualist activists if gay “marriage” is legalized.

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-disciple-of-nero-uk-bishop-castigates-david-cameron-over-gay-marriage-p

    For Toad to call all of this a “storm in a —cup” is to forget that this is how Fifth Columnists operate when advancing their civilization-destroying agenda: death by a thousand cuts. And sometimes, even though they are Fifth Columnists, they are honest about it (cf: The Frankfurt School).

    Like

  3. toad says:

    What Toad is getting at, …JH,…and he’s starting to get a bit serious about this, which will turn out to be a gross error, is…

    “By this change, (Dave, “Nero’s Disciple” Cameron) is luring the people of England away from their common Christian values..”

    …froths Pompey Phil, brandishing his “crozier” ferociously. But, as far as Toad can see, and hear, and read on CP&S – common Christian values in the U.K. these days are about as common as poverty-stricken bishops, ungreedy bankers or honest politicians.
    Dead parrots, in fact.

    ..And then…
    ”Will Catholic schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Christ and the real meaning of life and love?”
    and/or…
    Will Anglican schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Christ and the real meaning of life and love?
    and/or…
    Will Muslim schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Allah and the real meaning of life and love?
    and/or…
    Will Jewish schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Jehovah and the real meaning of life and love?
    and/or…
    Will Atheist schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of Marx and the real meaning of life and love?

    What silly questions!

    And even …Will Agnostic schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the possible, don’t know really, not sure, hard to be positive, “truth” of anything at all – and the real, or at least perceived, maybe, who can say with any confidence – meaning of life and love?
    Certainly not! Quite right too!

    By all means let each and every one stuff their childrens’ heads with whatever particular prejudices regarding “the real meaning of life and love,” (whatever that might be) happen to take their fancy.
    If they can pay, of course. Or it’s off to the local Secondary Mod, Innit?

    Oh, and this just in…

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9737886/Jedi-religion-most-popular-alternative-faith.html

    Will Jedi Knight schools, societies and institutions be free (and legally safeguarded) to teach the full truth of “Yoda”(?) and the real meaning of intergalactic life and love?

    Like

  4. kathleen says:

    Well Toad, after your indignant rant in support of “gay marriage” for (“generally amiable and inoffensive“) gays, I would suggest that you are the one who has his ‘whatevers’ in a twist. No one is attacking the people who have a homosexual bent; that is something between each individual and God, and is not being disputed here. This is quite a different argument. It is the very fundamental meaning of marriage that has been put on the chopping block.
    Your disparaging remarks of this brave and straightforward bishop is the typical gutter press type reporting, that Bishop Egan knew only too well he was risking when he dutifully spoke out.

    Look, no one is being unkindly marginalised here. All institutions have certain requisites for applicants to fulfill before they can be accepted. To get into University, the Army, the Priesthood, etc., certain levels of either academic, physical, moral and/or other basics are required from their enquirers before they can be considered for entry. Marriage is the same.

    There is a definition of marriage that is the same everywhere in the world – in spite of varying types of ceremonies and minor differing rules – and this has always been accepted and understood by all men throughout the centuries. Likewise, unions outside this ancient understanding of marriage have always been seen as an abomination.
    Mr. Cameron’s move to alter the time-immemorial definition of marriage is, to use his own adjectives, a huge and massive mistake……. as time will surely tell.

    Like

  5. I mean, a donkey looks a bit like a horse, doesn’t it? So while they’re at it, perhaps the government should redefine it as a horse? Would this actually make a donkey into a horse, do you think? (pace Brother Burrito)

    The metaphysics underlying natural law theory that marriage is, not by human definition, but as an objective metaphysical fact determined by its final cause, inherently procreative, and thus inherently heterosexual.

    I suppose it could be worse though; the government could have redefined ‘evil’ as ‘good’, eh?

    Like

  6. toad says:

    .

    “I mean, a donkey looks a bit like a horse, doesn’t it?”

    Indeed it does, Shieldsheaffson ….and that is where Mules come from!
    (Toad could explain, but that might be unseemly, and possibly there is a diagram in Wikipedia.)

    “To get into University, the Army, the Priesthood, etc., certain levels of either academic, physical, moral and/or other basics are required from their enquirers before they can be considered for entry. Marriage is the same.”
    Well, Kathleen, Toad can’t remember being tested, morally, academically or physically before getting married. You obviously were.
    If Toad, had been tested any any of those ways he’d surely still be a bachelor.

    What was the physical like? Much fun?

    Like

  7. kathleen says:

    Shucks Toad, K didn’t have one! 🙂

    But my husband and I (like all couples) had to produce our birth certificates (among other documents) in order to get married, and one’s gender is mentioned there.
    Besides, when I mentioned the requirements needed when applying to an ‘institution’ before being admitted, I did add on an “and/or other basics“, as you can see.

    You’re slipping up Toad, by side-stepping some of the rationale of commenters (mostly me) who at least try to rebuff your accusations or questions, you are having to resort to repeating the same old arguments! Better rewrite a new “Toad programme”. 😉

    P.S. This “slipping up” of yours refers not only to this thread, or even just this blog. I looked into yours, in which wicked K features rather unflatteringly! (Probably well-deserved though, to be honest!)

    Like

  8. toad says:

    .
    No one knows better than Toad how patiently and charitably you deal with him, Kathleen, and no one is more appreciative than he.

    To be sure, he does think the reason he’s reduced to asking the same soppy questions over and over, is that he never gets any satisfactory answers.

    But then, as you know, he is also of the idea that there really are no such answers satisfactory or otherwise, regarding Hell, Heaven, Original Sin, Limbo, Transubstantation, The Holy Trinity, Miracles or The Natural Law (whatever that may be) to be found on Planet Earth, where we happen to live.
    Elsewhere, possibly. But possibly not.

    So, by persistently asking unanswerable questions, he’s generally being unfair, or a bit of a bully.
    Or both.
    Either way he really ought to stop.
    Probably won’t though. Just yet.
    It’s a sort of therapy for him. You understand.

    (There seems to be something amiss with the “Loreto” post which may be mussing up CP&S a bit.)

    Like

  9. johnkonnor72 says:

    …since marriage is a natural institution…(owing to the freedom afforded by the faculties of the rational soul) the participants themselves become the ministers who confect the union…it is the responsibility of the participants to adjudicate the moral, intellectual, physical suitability of their respective spouses and as such they safegaurd the mechanics of the natural institution of matrimony….so what kathleen says is correct like any other institution marriage requires an examination of character which is the responsibility of the participants to ensure a complimentary union….since the participants have free choice it is not an examination which relies on any a fortiori judgements… so the presiding duly qualified notary or minister only presides over the union and vouchsafes that the form of the union is executed according to proper custom… there is also the diamond of consent which must be respected in order for the marriage to be considered valid….

    Like

  10. johnhenrycn says:

    Some interesting research:
    Children of gay couples academically disadvantaged:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/children-of-gay-couples-academically-disadvantaged-study

    I see from an earlier thread that our friend “Jerry” has no use for LifeSiteNews:

    “Lifesite News” is new to me, — nice to see that the gutter press is still with us in the 21st century. What a revolting website.”

    Oh well, chacun à son goût, as they say in Gaza 😉
    ____

    Hi, johnkonnor72. Still mystifying the masses, I see 🙄

    Like

  11. srdc says:

    johnhenrycn,

    Some people only have use for non-relativisit reasons for the positions they hold.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s