Jonathan Sacks writes in The Times that Without a shared moral code there can be no freedom in our society.
Robin Gill wrote in last week’s Church Times about Synthetics — the new moral playing-field.
This week, Giles Fraser writes about a white-water ride of old atheism.
Over at the Guardian Christine Allen writes about the Catholic Church and social justice.
At Cif belief Afua Hirsch wrote about The boundaries between race and faith. For the background, see this news report.
And Antony Lerman asks What can religion offer politics?
What? No columns on the death of Michael Jackson? How very, very refreshing, as the saturation coverage in the US has passed the point of absurdity. Bless you.
But what do those columns on Michael Jackson’s death mean? What is it saying to us ?
I think we should or rather could, listen with open ears and hearts.
“For well over a century, popes and councils of bishops have issued letters and documents that have added to the church’s tradition of teaching; analysing and reflecting on the challenges of the day, whether it be peace, capitalism and socialism, international trade or ecology.” – Christine Allen, in The Guardian – However, one of the aspects of social justice which seems to still cause trouble for the Roman Catholic Church is its insistence on outlawing the use of contraception among the faithful. One of the problems with ‘social directives’ in the Church – whatever their origin – is when people… Read more »
Fr Ron
“However, one of the aspects of social justice which seems to still cause trouble for the Roman Catholic Church is its insistence on outlawing the use of contraception among the faithful”
This goes beyond mere social justice. Denying life saving protection to HIV ravaged Africa is a moral crime on a grand scale.
It’s no good Christine Allen complaining that people focus on those nasty little bits the church gets wrong and doesn’t applaud it for what it gets right. When you’re that far outside the morally acceptable, you cannot expect people to applaud your sweeter side.
“Denying life saving protection to HIV ravaged Africa is a moral crime on a grand scale.” Erika, I am not a supporter of Rome when it comes to birth control in general, and I agree that opposing condoms in the age of AIDS is gob smackingly ignorant. But why is it a moral crime for the Church to oppose the use of condoms when it does not seem to be all that much of a moral crime for male truck drivers to have unsafe intercourse all up and down Africa, then bring the infection home to their wives? In a… Read more »
Ford
I agree, it is just as morally wrong for a truck driver to cruise through Africa and then infect his wife with HIV. I don’t recall absolving anyone from personal responsibility – if anything, I’m so liberal that I often fall off the edge because for me, it’s all about the individual’s responsibility before God and not about following some church discernment.
And yet, seeing you brought this argument into play, I have yet to hear a truck driver claim that what he is doing is not only morally acceptable but God’s will.
“It isn’t all about the evil Church abusing it’s power yet again to the detriment of the innocent.” No, it isn’t, but by golly the [leadership of the] church should be the first to wake up and lead the way away from bad behavior. In this instance, it’s outright abandonment of any solution to a problem. There use to be a philosophy in both Anglicanism and [Roman] Catholicism that decisions on doctrine were made to incrementally bring those outside the scope where brought closer to the ideal by making decisions in that doctrine to bring those populations closer. What has… Read more »
Erika and Choirboy:
Absolutely. I was perhaps a bit peevish. But, I still think it’s way too easy to take potshots at the evil power abusing Church. Perhaps because the Church does abuse her power. And I have made the argument in the past that by refusing to bless gay union, we have not called whole groups of gay people to faith and fidelity.