|
Sign up to our Weekly Newsletter.
 
|
|
From the editor’s deskFaith?s place in public life3 February 2007 The proposed "compromise" by the Government over the fate of Catholic adoption agencies is in truth a defeat for the Catholic Church and a victory for those who have been opposing any exemption to the new regulations against homosexual discrimination. But the Government's position has to be confirmed by Parliament, and MPs have yet to test the strength of Catholic feeling in their constituencies. Not just Catholic either: Anglican and Muslim leaders have sided with the Catholic case, without subscribing to every detail of Catholic doctrine. The Government will be particularly embarrassed about the situation in Scotland, where, with elections pending, the nationalists are ready to exploit the fact that Westminster wants to overrule undertakings by the Scottish Executive to safeguard the position of Catholic agencies. It is a perfect demonstration, they say, of why Scotland needs to be master in its own house. There are other principles at stake. One is that the leadership of the Catholic Church must start to engage with the many Catholics who find the Church's traditional treatment of homosexuality repugnant and indeed homophobic. The language of "gross depravity" - as in the Catechism - has to be repudiated. The Catholic case also needs to be more sharply defined as to what is really at stake. As Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor expressed it in an article in the Daily Telegraph this week, the argument is not that homosexual couples could never qualify as good parents for an adopted child - some have and more will - but that the new law demands recognition of a fundamental equivalence between homosexual and heterosexual couples and their lifestyles. The proposed law, in short, leaves no room for the many, who could well be in the majority, who believe that the best family setting for raising children is one parent of each sex. Any adoption agency, Catholic or not, that agrees with that principle is about to be driven out of business. That is an alarming proposition. But more broadly even than this, politicians need to consider whether they are dealing a fatal blow to the policy, now promoted by both main parties, of drawing the religious and voluntary sector deeper into the functioning of the welfare state. Ministers have seen that the voluntary sector has a lot to offer; not just expertise but compassion and dedication beyond the call of duty between the hours of nine and five. But those qualities arise precisely because the motivation comes from deep religious commitment. With that religious commitment comes religious convictions, not all of which are likely to be compatible with a monolithic liberal-progressive orthodoxy. In short, the Government may be beckoning the voluntary agencies on board with one hand, and waving them away with the other. And this will be made worse if the perception grows that even politicians with deep religious convictions are no longer welcome in public life. Religion has long had a place in British public life, although as an influence rather than as a protagonist. The interim period the Government has proposed before the agencies have to comply with the legislation gives time to devise working arrangements that could keep the Catholic agencies in being, perhaps no longer dealing with the public directly. But such a solution will demand goodwill, and it is that which has been lacking. It is ironic that in the name of fighting discrimination, the Government has stirred up intolerance.
From the editor’s deskFaith?s place in public life3 February 2007 The proposed "compromise" by the Government over the fate of Catholic adoption agencies is in truth a defeat for the Catholic Church and a victory for those who have been opposing any exemption to the new regulations against homosexual discrimination. But the Government's position has to be confirmed by Parliament, and MPs have yet to test the strength of Catholic feeling in their constituencies. Not just Catholic either: Anglican and Muslim leaders have sided with the Catholic case, without subscribing to every detail of Catholic doctrine. The Government will be particularly embarrassed about the situation in Scotland, where, with elections pending, the nationalists are ready to exploit the fact that Westminster wants to overrule undertakings by the Scottish Executive to safeguard the position of Catholic agencies. It is a perfect demonstration, they say, of why Scotland needs to be master in its own house. There are other principles at stake. One is that the leadership of the Catholic Church must start to engage with the many Catholics who find the Church's traditional treatment of homosexuality repugnant and indeed homophobic. The language of "gross depravity" - as in the Catechism - has to be repudiated. The Catholic case also needs to be more sharply defined as to what is really at stake. As Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor expressed it in an article in the Daily Telegraph this week, the argument is not that homosexual couples could never qualify as good parents for an adopted child - some have and more will - but that the new law demands recognition of a fundamental equivalence between homosexual and heterosexual couples and their lifestyles. The proposed law, in short, leaves no room for the many, who could well be in the majority, who believe that the best family setting for raising children is one parent of each sex. Any adoption agency, Catholic or not, that agrees with that principle is about to be driven out of business. That is an alarming proposition. But more broadly even than this, politicians need to consider whether they are dealing a fatal blow to the policy, now promoted by both main parties, of drawing the religious and voluntary sector deeper into the functioning of the welfare state. Ministers have seen that the voluntary sector has a lot to offer; not just expertise but compassion and dedication beyond the call of duty between the hours of nine and five. But those qualities arise precisely because the motivation comes from deep religious commitment. With that religious commitment comes religious convictions, not all of which are likely to be compatible with a monolithic liberal-progressive orthodoxy. In short, the Government may be beckoning the voluntary agencies on board with one hand, and waving them away with the other. And this will be made worse if the perception grows that even politicians with deep religious convictions are no longer welcome in public life. Religion has long had a place in British public life, although as an influence rather than as a protagonist. The interim period the Government has proposed before the agencies have to comply with the legislation gives time to devise working arrangements that could keep the Catholic agencies in being, perhaps no longer dealing with the public directly. But such a solution will demand goodwill, and it is that which has been lacking. It is ironic that in the name of fighting discrimination, the Government has stirred up intolerance.
Back to the front page
|
|
In this week’s issue
Being Christ’s hands and feet An easeful death? ‘Give the poor the oil that anoints them with dignity: a job’ ‘Migrants bring the vitality of non-Western spirituality’ Cosmic connection of the heart Gross, and not so moral Yes, we can confirm
Medics don't want assisted dying legalised Dr Gillian Paterson, guest contributor
Why do Catholic schools need to turn to Stonewall? Elena Curti
Banishing O'Brien answers some questions, raises others Abigail Frymann
Does Cardinal O’Brien deserve banishment or pardon? He at least owes us an explanation Elena Curti, Deputy Editor
Don’t stop there, Justine Greening, the current model of aid is problematic Bishop Kevin Dowling, guest contributor
Welby's right - St Benedict has much to offer banking reform efforts Laurence Freeman OSB
Pope attacks the tyranny of the markets Cult of money is today's golden calf, warns Francis
Pope Francis yesterday gave his first major analysis on the causes of the global financial crisis. In a speech to ambassadors he said:
I am pleased to receive you ... Hospitals must ensure the LCP is not misapplied Professor David Albert Jones, Director of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre
The Liverpool Care Pathway, which sets out guidance about the care of dying patients, has come under fire from patients' relatives and some doctors who claim it has been misapplied.
Professor ... Same-sex marriage bill must not discriminate against the Church Archbishop Vincent Nichols calls for amendments to the legislation ahead of next week's debate
This week the Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, wrote to leaders of the three main political parties arguing that amendments are needed to the same-sex marriage bill - ... Tiptoeing towards Scripture
Pope Benedict XVI has exhorted Catholics to become more familiar with their Bibles, in his round-up of the 2008 Synod on the Word of God. At the same time the Bible Society ...
|
|