Will Archbishop Nichols ask Soho Masses Pastoral Council to sign Oath of Fidelity?

Following the news that Bishop Cordileone, the new Archbishop of San Francisco, has required a homosexual group in his previous diocese to sign an oath of fidelity will Archbishop Nichols take a leaf out of his book by requiring the same from the Soho Masses Pastoral Council?

LifeSite news reports:

After over a year of talks with the group, in April Cordileone warned its board that he would take “public action” to clarify its status “with regard to authentic Catholic ministry” if board members refused to sign an “oath of personal integrity” that they would “strive to clearly present Catholic doctrine on homosexuality in its fullness.”

The board had refused to sign the oath twice before, claiming it raises issues of conscience.’

Protect the Pope comment: In light of the hard evidence that the Soho Masses Pastoral Council are causing misunderstanding and opposition to the Church’s teaching on sexuality wouldn’t it clarify matters if Archbishop Nichols called on the members of the Soho Masses Pastoral Council to sign an ‘oath of personal integrity’ to clarify its status “with regard to authentic Catholic ministry” indicating that they would ‘strive to clearly present Catholic doctrine on homosexuality in its fullness’?

By appointing Bishop Cordileone to the homosexual capital of the world Pope Benedict is obviously signalling his approval of his pastoral approach to homosexuals who claim to be Catholic. Wouldn’t it be a good idea to follow his example, for all kinds of reasons?




19 comments to Will Archbishop Nichols ask Soho Masses Pastoral Council to sign Oath of Fidelity?

  • Michael Petek

    By appointing Bishop Salvatore Cordileone to the homosexual capital of the world, Pope Benedict is obviously making the homosexuals an offer they can’t refuse.

  • Karla

    I can not believe nothing has been heard of him pursuing action against this council yet

  • Nicolas Bellord

    I have said this before but what needs to happen is for the Parish Priest at Soho to set up a proper Parish Council in accordance with Canon Law with himself as Chairman. Its role will be merely to advise the Parish Priest who should himself organise the masses. Existing members of the Soho Masses Pastoral Council could be invited to join on condition that they accept the Church’s teaching as laid down in the Catechism. In view of the history of the matter such acceptance of Church teaching should be in writing at the very least.

  • Paul Waddington

    Better still would be for Archbishop Nicholls to order the Soho Masses to stop.

  • George

    I dont know about signing a declaration, I think it was about time that a stop was put to these Masses. What is wrong with them going to an ordinary mass?
    in fact I think we have too many Massses these day for various groups/nationalities.

    • Eric

      I agree that signing a declaration is a distraction. And actually one that sets a president that I am uncomfortable with. Either these massses are fine or they are not and Nichols is surely capable of deciding that.

      I don’t have a problem with a special mass for gay peeople or anyone else if the alternative is them not going to a mass at all. But whatever takes place in a Catholic church has to be proper Catholicism.

      • Teresa

        I agree – why should they not just go to an ordinary Mass? The Mass is the Mass is the Mass, is it not? It may be ok to hold Masses for specific intentions or people occasionally (so long as they are public Masses) but I disagree very strongly that they should have permanent special Masses – and not just because they are gay – I also have feelings about separate Masses for other groups such as immigrants as I feel they do not encourage integration. How can we be encouraged to truly treat gay people with the Christian charity and compassion required when they are being held up as a special case.

        However, as long as they remain, then I think it is perfectly reasonable for such a declaration to avoid scandal and misunderstanding. Surely the scandal is more of a distraction than the declaration would be, and a declaration would serve to settle people’s concerns over the matter (providing it was stuck to). However, I still think it preferable for Masses to be aimed at all.

  • I lost all faith in Archbishop Nichols. I’ve made a short clip about Soho Masses proving their approach is clearly opposing the wisdom of the Church, but nothing happened since. If anything, they became even more bold in their heresies and blasphemies. I’m afraid only apostolic visitation (similar to recent Slovakian) would sort out this long term painful problem.

  • Mary

    What are all these “Gay” masses? I thought there was only one Mass – the Holy Roman Catholic Mass in either the Novus Ordo or Extraordinary form. All these “gay”, “nationality” “Family” “Childrens” “Youth” masses? This is rubbish. What ever happened to just the Mass? Mass can be offered for these purposes and groups, but there is no peculiar mass for each of these groups with their own committees and their own selfish agendas. What a way to kill unity in parishes.

  • You ask rhetorically: “(W)ouldn’t it clarify matters if Archbishop Nichols called on the members of the Soho Masses Pastoral Council to sign an ‘oath of personal integrity…?’” I’m rather afraid that it wouldn’t. Since these people lack anything approaching “personal integrity”, their signatures on any declaratory oath would be meaningless.

    • Eric

      “Since these people lack anything approaching “personal integrity”, their signatures on any declaratory oath would be meaningless.”

      Perhaps, but when you try and enter the USA you have to fill in a form asking you if you were involved in Nazi atrocities in 1939 to 1945. Now I am pretty sure that someone who had sent people to the gas chamber would be more than capable of telling a lie on a form. But the point is that it is setting a trap for that person. It means that if you were a Nazi we can simply deport you for the crime of lying on a form.

      And I am not sure you are being fair in assuming that the Soho mass people would intentionally make a dishonest oath. Many of them will have strong personal integrity. You can defy the Church for reasons other than lack of personal integrity. When this kind of thing has been tried before you often get people refusing to sign. If they lacked integrity they would sign regardless of whether they intended to keep their oath or not, but that is not what we find.

      But I am not in favour of oaths in general. They seem to be part of an attempt to defining opposition to homosexual equality as a marker of catholic identity rather than as a universal moral position applicable to all (all the talk is about whether they are an “authentic Catholic” rather than a good or bad person.)

      Being against gay marriage isn’t like jewish people keeping Kosher. It isn’t an abritary marker of identity that we regard as important for ourselves but irrelevent for outsiders and carries no intrinsic moral weight. It is a moral position which whilst we don’t have the right to force on others we do nevertheless regard as a moral position applying to all people equally not just Catholics.

      • Nicolas Bellord

        I agree with Eric that an oath is the wrong idea. What I suggested was some sort of assurance that they accepted ALL Church teaching and that it might be a good idea to have that in writing if they wished to be on a properly constituted Parish Council.

  • Aline

    I believe this so-called “pastoral” approach is rooted in the current heresy that everybody eventually makes their way to Heaven, and so long as you get on the boat, you will get to the shore. We will water down Church teaching for you to make you feel welcome. That’s not however Jesus’s approach as shown in John 6. He kept saying what he had to say never mind if people were leaving. Today’s Gospel (Mt 13: 47-53) has it: “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a net thrown into the sea, which collects fish of every kind. When it is full they haul it ashore and sit down to put what is good into buckets. What is bad they throw away.”
    True pastoral concern is primarily concern for the soul. It does not allow people to kid themselves in thinking they are fine when they are actually condemning themselves. This is what Jesus has to say about them: “But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars —they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.” (Rv 21:7-8)

  • Robin Leslie

    I remember being instructed in the Faith in 1966 in the Church in Soho Square by Fr. Brendan
    Soane who before he died was a moral theologian to the Vatican. Needless to say I was subsequently received into the Church. It appals me to hear that the incumbent priest in Soho
    cannot discipline his Pastoral Council, he has the necessary canonical measures he needs so
    why does he not act on them? The Church’s teaching on homosexuality is clear and unequivocal
    flouting this teaching so openly and brazenly is continuous with the in-your-face strategy
    of homosexuals in all dimensions of social life. Close them down.

  • SteveD

    Who knows what’s down the road? Let’s all express ourselves in a nuanced way about this or we might upset somebody and be made to look like we are in some way connected to those awful people in the Vatican when the Guardian and the BBC have been assured in a nuanced way that we are not. ‘Faith of Our Fathers, now quiet and still, for fear of ridicule and the ‘old bill’.

  • Paul Waddington

    Robin Leslie, I think that you are talking about the Church of St Patrick in Soho Square. These Masses are taking place in the Church of the Assumption in Warwick Street that was formerly part of the Bavarian Embassy.

  • Trish F

    I shall continue to pray for those who are more familiar with Canon Law than 1 Corinthians 13.

  • Meistern beduerfen

    Whydo we have to have regular masses for special groups of people? I can understand red masses once a year. But why can’t shortsighted people or blondes have special masses every week? They are also objects of discrimination.Incidentally I used to go to Polish mass in Cambridge, Eng. Couldn’t understand a word but everyone was prayerful and one did not have to listen to heresies from the pulpit. The church was usually jammed and the average age was probably 16. I can hum along with quite a few polish liturgical songs.

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>