Wednesday, January 24, 2007


Here's a prediction: in ten years' time, or perhaps slightly less, there will be reports of the psychological damage done to children who have been adopted by homosexual and lesbian couples. Within twenty years, we will see the first legal cases mounted by people who were adopted this way as children and seek redress for the harm done to them.

Meanwhile, have any readers of this blog joined me in speaking out for the right of the Church to insist that in its official agencies, adoption of children is carried out only into families living according to the Christian traditions of marriage? Letters to MPs? To newspapers? Er....if you have remained silent, are you absolutely comfortable about that?

So far, comments to this blog haven't indicated much in the way of lively Catholic action on this point: one merely pointed out that an American bishop had already allowed "gay adoption" in his diocese. I am not sure what this is meant to prove. That British bishops should therefore follow suit? If fifty Cardinals in Rome announced that they could see no reason for opposing gay adoption, it would make no difference: the Church cannot and will not accept that two people of the same sex can be in any way regarded as "married" and it is not possible for the Church to sanction the adoption of children into a couple living in this way. Deo Gratias for our splendid Holy Father who has recently specifically spoken on the subject of "same sex marriage" and made the Church's position absolutely clear.

The position of Ruth Kelly, the Government minister at the heart of this row is odd: she is vigourously pushing the whole "no discrimination against same-sex couples" line. The media endlessly refer to her as a Catholic and a "member of Opus Dei" and if this is the case, I fear she may be one who values the traditions and structure and life of the Church but regards its teachings as for personal use only and not in any way related to public policy: not an approach that is in accord with the message of the Second Vatican Council, or Opus Dei, or any Encyclical dealing with Christian social and community values. (At least it dents the image of Opus Dei as a powerful network: I know a good many individuals in OD and not one would agree with Mrs Kelly's apparent position on this).


Anonymous said...

Dear Joanna,

Agree with you wholeheartedly, but i do think we must be very clear in our compassionate approach. We must avoid 'mud-slinging', not that i'm suggesting you do!

The predicament many homosexuals find themselves in involves a great deal of suffering. i have witnessed this first-hand, & thankfully those with same-sex attraction that i know have chosen to remain celibate, & follow the magisterium of the Church.

I think the line that anyone unmarried cannot have a sexual relationship, or adopt, might carry more weight, than singling out homosexuals.

This is where our Archbishop & Cardinal are at their best. Instead of moaning about what they did or didn't say we should show them our support & continue praying.

Divisions amongst ourselves must be avoided at all costs, because we know where they come from.

God bless,

Mrs Jackie Parkes MJ

Anonymous said...

I don't know of any American bishop that allows this, but I could be wrong. It is unacceptable. The bishops would be required to close down adoption services. It seems that the only ones you can discriminate against are the Catholics.

Fr. Jim

Anonymous said...

You still refuse to address the fact that Catholic adoption agencies let divorced Catholics adopt children. Is it Catholic truth you are concerned with, or suburban prejudice against difference? Praise God for Mrs Parkes. She demonstrates a more Catholic understanding than you, Joanna, perhaps because she lives and prays it, rather than adopting it as a lifestyle and using it as a soapbox and a source of income.

roydosan said...

I disagree with the assertion that homosexuals make bad parents, even though I am in principle against such cases. The importance of this debate has nothing to do with homosexuality and everything to do with the rights of the Church as opposed to those of the state. If we do not stand up now and defend the rights of the Church to live and act within its own principles where will this end? Will the Catholic Church be forced to 'marry' homosexuals in Church or ordain practising homosexuals? This is only the thin end of a very large wedge and if we do not stand up for our rights now we may regret it tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

Dear Joanna,

I am totally against the governments discrimination against people having a moral choice.

I am a single mother and, as i was in my late teens when expecting the baby, I looked into adoption through one of the Catholic agencies.

I apparently had a very old-fashioned idea of what would be involved. I thought it would be a couple at the top of the list and the baby would be immediately removed at birth - the end.

It was explained to me that what would in fact happen was that they would take a profile of me and try and match me to similar couples who i would then meet and I would choose the one that I thought was the "best".

If these new laws had been in place, would I have the choice to say, "I want a hetero-sexual couple" or would I have been in court on the grounds of discrimination?

Ultimately, I decided to keep the child, who is now 5. His father and I did try to make a go at it, even planning a wedding but we weren't really suited. I am now in a (long-distance) relationship with someone who I want to spend the rest of my life with.

My son, is loving and wonderful etc but he is at his best when my boy-friend is around. I believe every child needs a mother and a father (and in some ways it was selfish of me to keep him when my future was so uncertain).
Men and women bring different strenghts to parenting, both of which a child needs.

No matter how loving or well-intentioned a homosexual couple may be, they can only offer one half of what a child needs (x2!)

In response to your predictions about the future, there is a case in sheffield where a magistrate has gone to court to prove (besides morally) scientifically why he doesn't want to place children with homosexual couples. Apparently, in America they have done studies, which, although "in their infancy", show that a child placed in a homosexual couple's care has a poorer outcome similar to children who live in single parent families. Very interesting!

I love your blog.

God bless you and your work.


Anonymous said...

"If we do not stand up now and defend the rights of the Church to live and act within its own principles where will this end? Will the Catholic Church be forced to 'marry' homosexuals in Church..."

I thoroughly agree that this is a very serious issue and certainly one not to be underestimated. This affects all Catholics and things are only going to get hotter!

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous,

Thanks for the compliment but i think like Mother Teresa used to say 'you can do something i can't..let's do something beautiful for God' Joanna, you anonymous, me & Emma etc can all together promote our wonderful Faith, in the circumstances we find ourselves.

Emma i have lots of fiends who are single moms, doing a great but difficult job in raising their children. I'm concious of the fact that when they see my husband & i united that they feel pleased for us but kind of second class...& this should be understood.2 of the moms come to my Catholic women's Book Club,& they are very much to be admired.

Take care one & all,

Anonymous...bear in mind our Cardinal, said of Joanna, 'Where would we be without her?' Praise indeed!

God bless,

Mrs Jackie Parkes MJ

Anonymous said...

Someone asked where it will end- is it not clear? Someone will sue the Church for not being allowed to become a priest if they are a woman or gay.

Anonymous said...

Re Ruth Kelly, John Reid and other Catholic MPs. They cite John F.Kennedy's view that in government responsibility to the country takes priority over faith. If they believe faith comes first they should stay out of politics. The corruption of public life frequenly neutralises conscience.

Anonymous said...

James, your argument doesn't work. Nobody has a right to be ordained, there is no case against rejection. Canonically, it is the Church, in the person of the local bishop, who accepts or declines men who present themselves, there is no court of appeal. Ordination to the priesthood is not, has never been and never will be. a matter of rights.

Anonymous said...

You rightly predict the fall-out among the child victims of this idealistic folly - but what of the mothers?

In the past, Catholic adoption agencies were a means whereby Catholic women could place their babies in the knowledge that their children would be brought up in Christian homes, taken to Mass, etc. What now of the rights of these women? Does a mother not have the right to require a certain lifestyle of the people who wish to adopt her child? Does her right not override those of a gay couple? And are we really to live in a society where a childless married couple is denied a child because a gay couple is higher up in the queue?

Maybe I am being unduly pessimistic here, but could this 'one size fits all' legislative sledgehammer cause a rise in abortions among the more vulnerable? Pregnancy can make a woman more fearful, and if a pregnant woman were to worry that her child might be taken into a home where it would not be safe, would face playground bullying..... then, yes, I can imagine that some of these desperate women might think abortion is an 'option'. I hope not.

I've begun an informal poll among my female friends (not all of whom are Catholic and pro-life) and so far have not spoken to anyone who, if having to hand over a baby for adoption, would be comfortable with it going to other than a man and wife; however charming the gay couple happened to be.