Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fr John Hunwicke
was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Now incardinated into the Personal Ordinariate of our Lady of Walsingham, he has his base within the Oxford Ordinariate Group. This blog now replaces the Blog Father Hunwicke's Liturgical Notes. Its main purpose is to explore, ad mentem Summi Pontificis, the possibilitiesfor mutual enrichment between three forms of the Roman Rite: the Extraordinary Form, the Ordinary Form, and the Anglican Use. I have been told that my previous blog was disliked because of some the comments on the 'thread'. I take the point. In this blog, all comments will be moderated, and anything which is even implicitly critical of the English Hierarchy or of any member of it, will not be published.
NEW: Click below to order the 2013 ORDO
The purpose of this ORDO is to serve the needs of both Anglicans and Roman Catholics. For the former it provides for the recitation of Morning and Evening Prayer and the celebration of Holy Communion in accordance with modern forms authorised or encouraged in the Provinces of Canterbury and York. These forms are selected, arranged, and interpreted in the the spirit of what has become generally customary in Western Christendom since the Second Vatican Council; but notes draw attention to Orthodox insights. It also provides a full Calendar according to the modern Roman Rite, together with explanatory and catechetical notes. Anglicans who prefer forms of Liturgy based on the Book of Common Prayer will find a lectionary designed for use with the BCP.
Search This Blog
Followers
Links
Raffaello's Madonna di Foligno
The original once graced the high altar of the church of Sancta Maria in Ara Coeli on the Capitoline Hill. A fine copy is at the centre of the great baroque reredos at S Thomas the Martyr, Oxford.
7 comments:
Are you having a go?
No, he's just being Fr Hunwicke. It's a reference to statistics of societies with accessible abortion concerning foetuses with conditions such as Down Syndrome being aborted.
(I'm pro-choice, since I believe a woman should have as much control over her own reproductive system and body as possible. This would be in conjunction with fully available birth control and comprehensive sex education, including educating men that rape is utterly unacceptable and that it is within their power to stop it. One need only look at the historical treatment of women, unwed mothers and sexuality in Christendom, since this is a Christian blog, to see that a policy such as Ireland's doesn't work. If a woman believes it is morally wrong to abort or even to use birth control, then that is her right. Eugenics should not be the reason for an accessible abortion policy. Although I respect Christians who can maintain a pro-choice position, since Christians as a whole have adjusted themselves so willingly to things of the world such as usury, war and exploitation, I'm not presenting this on the basis of Christian arguments)
Wow, Nate, that's one big fat parenthetical!
Fact is God is "pro-choice". He says: It’s your choice to kill a baby as it’s your choice to go to hell. Heaven is life, hell is death.
Nathaniel,
I know. Father has posted before on the topic. Poor attempt at a joke on my part.
Here (in America) I only ever people with Down's syndrome in church (RC myself).
Nathaniel,
Given we live in a culture where more and more women are being turned into genderless/androgynous wage-slaves chained to the desk and many men believe them unworthy of a life-long commitment, I think your judgement on Christianity's effects on women to be a little skewed.
It was Christ himself who decreed that women were not to be cast aside by proscribing divorce. This has assured countless women, many of whom have been poor and with little hope of the lifestyles many of our leading feminists enjoy, security and something of the respect due to them. Quite logically, orthodox Christianity extends this protection to the unborn, another vulnerable group. In fact the most vulnerable of all.
In opposing these principles, you make the position of both extremely untenable. There is dangerously little respect for women, or for sex. They and the unborn are cast aside by some like rubbish after the cheap, infantile thrill is over and the "consequences" must be "dealt with". The irony is that in giving women "control" over their bodies, you have denied their God-given vocation to motherhood, dignity and of being worthy of lifelong commitment and love. Are strip-bars and on-the-tap prostitution really your idea of women's lib'? Extreme as it may seem, they are symptoms of the same disease.
Added to this is the death of over 200,000 unborn children a year in this country alone. The shackles of a blood-stained conscience enchain many women in our "liberated" society. May our Lady of Walsingham pray for them and for us.
Stuart
"I believe a woman should have as much control over her own reproductive system and body as possible."
And over other people's bodies, even to the power of life and death, evidently. Did the Lord send you to this blog to learn better?
so, Nathaniel, belying his own name (Deusdedit) insults the Giver of Life by opining that mothers should be able to have their own children slaughtered like sheep or pigs for their convenience. How sad.
Post a Comment