Not surprisingly, a number of C of E bishops at their recent Conference refused to receive communion at the opening service on the Sunday, since same-sex-partnered bishops and those who ordained bishops in same-sex relationships were present. We can understand that.
But, I think there are things to consider.
First of all we must remember that God’s choice for human beings creates a basis for avoiding misbehaviors. But we know that human beings were developed through evolution. Without our complementary sexual organs there would have been no human race. But, should we take into account that a number of people have strong homosexual desires and, perhaps, dislike ‘orthodox’ sexuality?
Of course there are some concerning aspects. While I, personally, am not drawn towards homosexual activity, are we entitled to respect only those who are not homosexual? We suspect that homosexual behavior is potentially damaging to society since it leads to multiple partners and the dangers of spreading medical conditions. But might we support homosexual ‘marriages’ on the grounds that it is likely to reduce this effect?
Quentin writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/ ) :
// First of all we must remember that God’s choice for human beings creates a basis for avoiding misbehaviors. But we know that human beings were developed through evolution. Without our complementary sexual organs there would have been no human race. But, should we take into account that a number of people have strong homosexual desires and, perhaps, dislike ‘orthodox’ sexuality? \\
Take into account as a fact, certainly. But the Church’s objection is to anal intercourse, period, no? Or does it also proscribe close male friendships that involve mutual erotic attraction?
Quentin writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/ ) :
// We suspect that homosexual behavior is potentially damaging to society since it leads to multiple partners and the dangers of spreading medical conditions. But might we support homosexual ‘marriages’ on the grounds that it is likely to reduce this effect? \\
Well, forcing a change in the meaning of words is a tried and true trick for changing minds. If I understand correctly the official goal in calling a homosexual ménage a “marriage”, it is to convince the masses that homosexual “intercourse” is just as worthy of respect as heterosexual intercourse. If my understanding is correct, isn’t the likely end result rather the opposite of what you suggest?
Is no one else going to contribute to this topic?
I’ve just read Quentin’s note suggesting that secondsightblog.net may be coming to an end. That, I think, would be a great shame. Can nothing be done to save it?
I haven’t read any thing about the end of seconsightblog.net. but I agree it will be a shame. It will be the end of an era. The blog has been very educational from my point of view and I thank Quentin for his sterling work.
With regard to the topic in question, I agreed with Quentin’s comment years ago, about the plumbing being incompatible with homosexual activities. They weren’t Quentin’s exact words but it’s the gist of what said.
Thank you Quentin for Secondsight, it has been very interesting getting involved with several topics over many years, and especially with other people who also wanted to join the fun by commenting, even if that meant crossing swords with others on occasion.
So thank you Quentin very much for supplying hundreds of well-written posts that set a lot of us, I included, ablaze.
Reading the brief responses (5 at current,) it seems a though we want to separate homosexuality into some kind of various compartments when we have scripture to guide us ( but no mention of it as yet!) We hardly see the word homosexuality now as all references are ‘Gay’ ones. This has the effect of sanitizing something that is unnatural, unhealthy and unnecessary.
Thank you Quentin, and all the best for the future.
Homosexuality is a conundrum. The way that I have been able to come to grips with homosexuality is to watch documentaries on ABC TV about the issue. What struck me immediately is that homosexuality isn’t a con. Homosexuals are real people who didn’t choose their sexuality, and who could find themselves in a very serious predicament.
The towering genius of Bletchley Park during World War II, Alan Turing, comes to mind who lived through the fear and angst of being a homosexual during an era of widespread intolerance.
Ironically, it was Turing’s eminence as a mathematician which spared him a custodial sentence, since his 19-year-old lover was a minor and therefore in the eyes of the law a victim. Instead he (Turing) received probation dependent on his taking a course of hormone therapy. In England and Wales his relationship would have been criminal as late as 1994, after which the age of homosexual consent was reduced to 18.
The issue of homosexuality was discussed at length on this blog in October 2017. Since then identity politics have reached manic proportions and LGBT activists are arguably their own worst enemy. What individuals get up to in their own bedrooms is their own affair (as long as they don’t frighten the horses) but most of us don’t want it rammed down our throats (no pun intended).
Expertly stated by John Nolan. I couldn’t have said it any better. I am pretty tolerant on the issue but I don’t want it shoved in my face either!
John Candido writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66460 ) :
// Expertly stated by John Nolan. I couldn’t have said it any better. I am pretty tolerant on the issue but I don’t want it shoved in my face either! //
The reality is that these are days of reformation, and the reforming radicals and iconoclasts hold all the high places. Moderates and traditionalists are entirely on the defensive, and their wishes are ignored or damned. Tolerance is weakness. There will be no compromising. The revolution that burst asunder Western culture beginning in about 1950 (read Christopher Booker, “The Neophiliacs”, 1969) let loose an angry storm of emotionalism that has yet to blow itself out. (Vatican II and its aftermath, by the way, in taking place during the first fury of all this, reflected it.) You’ll have a lot more shoved in your faces and if you’re sensible, defying it will cost you much more than you’re willing to pay. These are bad days for bystanders who have not plugged into the current weltanschuung.
The French think that homosexuality is a peculiarly English condition. It’s an interesting exercise to count up the number of slang expressions in English denoting a male homosexual; some of them quite obscure, for example ‘iron’ (rhyming slang, iron hoof = poof) and my own favourite, ‘uphill gardener’.
None of these expressions is particularly complimentary, yet the outrageously camp character has long been a staple of British comedy – remember Julian and Sandy in ‘Round the Horne’? Sadly the LGBTQWERTY crowd don’t get humour and to laugh at such things would no doubt constitute a ‘hate crime’.
John Nolan writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66464 ) :
// the outrageously camp character has long been a staple of British comedy – remember Julian and Sandy in ‘Round the Horne’? Sadly the LGBTQWERTY crowd don’t get humour and to laugh at such things would no doubt constitute a ‘hate crime’. //
As a very parochial person and an American, I find the English tradition of cross-dressing humor baffling. So far as I know, it’s not a staple in the States. I don’t know that I’ve ever actually seen it, except very briefly in a British film or two, but I find the concept off putting and unpleasant. I can understand that some men may find cross dressing erotic – fetishes abound and humans come in many flavors – but I don’t see anything inherently amusing about it. I wonder how the tradition developed and why the English – evidently – find it funny. John, evidently you’re among those who laugh at it or at least smile. Can you explain why? That’s a serious question – I’d like to learn.
First, I think we must always distinguish carefully and definitively between homosexual people, and homosexual acts, we must distinguish between homosexuality and the practice of homosexual acts.
We must “love the sinner and hate the sin”, in all cases; homosexual people I have known have almost all been lovely people (if a bit confused, at times). Being opposed to homosexual acts does in no way required hating homosexual people.
But we have to recognise that homosexual acts (not just anal intercourse, but rimming, felching, water-showering, etc.) are physiologically very dangerous – how anyone can not see this is crazy, and due to the ideology-led medical “science” that rules in our society.
And what of “homosexual people” – this implies that, yes, some people are by their nature same-sex attracted, “born that way”, which many dispute.
Yes, Quentin, such acts with multiple partners – I have read that same-sex attracted people are not capable of exclusivity (having just one partner) – so the idea that homosexual marriage would prevent the ills of promiscuity (physiological and social) may not be true.
John Nolan, where do you get the idea that the French think it is an English condition? When I worked in France in the 1960s, homosexuality was tolerated and accepted. They were more open about it than us. As a young man in my twenties, I was most uncomfortable about it.
I am a lot more tolerant about it now. Until I got too old to watch rugby in the cold, I went regularly with a group of French friends to Murrayfield to watch the Scotland v France games. They told me on one occasion that two of the younger friends had just gone through a same-sex marriage and did I mind them coming to our home. They know I am a practising Catholic. My wife and I were happy greet them as friends and they were happy with that.
Being made in the divine image is to be worthy of respect, full stop. Sexual acts are generally considered to be carried out in private and between consenting adults. Same sex unions should be encouraged though they are not ‘marriage’ as we understand it but something else. Chastity remains important for partnership and is the norm. I have known three homosexual couples who seem perfectly capable of monagamy, well, as capable as are heterosexuals are anyway. Really we need to get to the place where all this no longer an issue. I have been on this blog less these days having sensed, for some time now, its winding down. Thanks everyone for the past few years of this blog, they have been helpful and interesting.
David – It’s nothing to do with eroticism – female (and male) impersonators were part of the music hall tradition going back to the 19th century – songs like ‘Burlington Bertie’ were written to be sung by a woman dressed as a man, and in pantomime (still enormously popular) the principal boy is played by a girl and the dame is played by a man.
However, I wasn’t referring to cross-dressing, but to the ‘camp’ stereotype of the male homosexual. The 1970s sitcom ‘Are You Being Served’ featured John Inman as the outrageously camp Mr Humphries (the voice, the innuendos, the mincing gait were played for all they were worth) and he was the most popular character in the show. When it was aired in the US in the 1980s it was a hit, so quintessentially British humour can cross the Atlantic.
Mr Humphries lives with his mother, and his possibly ‘gay’ lifestyle is only hinted at. There is in the character a strong undercurrent of sexual frustration. American audiences were somewhat scandalized by Mrs Slocombe (Mollie Sugden) constantly referring to her cat as ‘my pussy’. The double meaning was not lost on British audiences, although British slang for the female pudenda is ‘fanny’ which in American usage means arse ( sorry, ass).
John Nolan writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66473 ) :
// It’s nothing to do with eroticism – female (and male) impersonators were part of the music hall tradition going back to the 19th century //
Eroticism in a wide sense, I imagine. Wouldn’t Freud likely agree? The Victorians were generally not as up front about it as are we in this all-too-literal culture.
No new comments for ten days. I will mourn the passing of Second Sight Blog, but I don’t want it to happen just yet.
My views on same-sex `marriage’ are quite simple. I do not want same-sex civil unions to be legally called `marriages.’ I’ve written about this a year or two before: let them have all the rights and privileges of marriage if it has to be that way, but have a disclaimer on the official document: this is not a marriage license.
Why? just look at how so many monuments are being torn down and the people they honor are vilified because of having racist views. This includes famous scientists like Linnaeus and James Watson (who shared the Nobel Prize with Francis Crick for discovering the structure of DNA), whose names are being removed from buildings, games, etc.
As an educator, I do not want future generations to think the same way about people who looked upon marriage, by definition, as being between a man and a woman.
pnyikos writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66502 ) :
// No new comments for ten days. I will mourn the passing of Second Sight Blog, but I don’t want it to happen just yet. //
Must that happen? Quentin is the father and mother of this weblog, but why must it cease to be simply because he considers it wise to let go of the burden of researching current topics, writing a proposal for discussion every three or five weeks, and checking to ensure that the site stays up? Surely someone can pick up this task.
I’ve copied below the material (from the “Apostolate of the Blog” page linked to at the bottom of the main-site graphic) that explains Quentin’s rationale behind secondsightblog.net and his guidelines for responding to the proposal submitted to the community for commenting every month or so.
Cannot and will not someone else take up this work? If it seems too much for one person, why cannot a small team take it on? Let’s discuss.
THE APOSTOLATE OF THE BLOG
Speaking truth to the power of public opinion.
The aim of the Apostolate of the Blog is to review current blogs on matters of Catholic interest, and to seize the opportunity to educate the casual reader in what the Church is and does – and the reasons why.
Tips on composing answers
* Your target is not the writer of the offending article or of the contribution you are opposing. Even if you convince them, they won’t say so. It is the casual but interested reader, whose mind is open enough to take in new ideas, whom you want to inform.
* Your contribution should always be polite and thoughtful. The clever put-down wins neither the argument nor friends. There are excellent examples on this site of good contributions on controversial matters.
* Keep your contributions short and to the point. Don’t try and get everything in – just get your key message across.
* Be honest. Where relevant, admit shortcomings. This willingness to prefer truth to comfort enhances credibility.
* Be factual. You must be ready to produce evidence if you are challenged. (If you can’t support your points, don’t make them.). Do distinguish between your own view and the Church’s view, particularly if the views are different!
* Be short. Two hundred words is too long; few will even start reading. Use paragraph spacing, if you can; it’s easier on the eye.
A typical routine
a. As a result of a Google Alert, or perhaps just by chance, you see an article or a web site which appears to be attacking some aspect of the Church on which you are interested. Check up on what has been said, and whether there is an opportunity to reply to the article or to a comment on the article
b. Compose your response and send it. It may or may not come up immediately, depending on the moderation policy of the site. You will need to register for the site (unless you are registered already) since they must have your email held in confidence in case you are gangster.
c. See above for tips on composing an answer. And below for some examples.
d. You may want to get back to the site to check on responses to your response etc, so keep a note of the site address or bookmark it.
e. If you have discovered research facts on a topic, or composed a new answer, let Quentin know so that he can circulate.
I would be quite happy to submit the occasional topic and to be part of a team effort of some sort to maintain this blog. It would be good to have some wider topics, a bit more about belief, doctrine, spirituality etc rather than our endless banging on about sexuality..If we had a team then topics would probably reflect a broader spectrum. I once suggested and offered a topic to Quentin but he said that it wasn’t policy to accept topics from contributors to the blog. It was and probably still is the case that the blog comes under the auspices of the Catholic Herald Newspaper (not sure if it defunct by now) and there may be issues there.
I agree with Ignatius that SecondSight should continue, and I also agree that a team, or depending on the ownership & control of Secondsight by The Catholic Herald, a loose group of regular people producing original posts could produce a broader range of topics.
I read another blog where the original creator retired from producing new posts around a year ago and it is still going strong. The website owner creates new ‘open threads’ when the previous one passes 1000 comments and becomes too long to easily browse. It seems a feasible idea here. There is certainly plenty going on in the Church and in the news.
The idea that a group of septuagenarians take over from a nonagenarian seems a tad optimistic! To every thing there is a time …
!0+ yeas ago we might have 10-15 active commentators, now we are largely down to 3-5. How would someone find this blog? Why would they contribute? For the last 5+ years we have been largely (or merely) revisiting previous matters.
I respect that many of these topics (Abortion, Homosexuality, Birth Control, Natural Law (with a Stoic emphasis) are about eternal truths but with whom do they resonate?
We should be grateful for the opportunity we have had to converse, compare and share opinions. Sadly almost no public discourse on the above mentioned matters start from any position which could be described as moralistic.
A week ago I visited the Brompton Oratory, copies of the Catholic Herald were in sealed pastic bags; the idea that someone might pick one up, read an article and then be moved to consider something outside their personal perview is entirely eliminated.
The Catholic Herald speaks only to its own constituency as does The Tablet (which is NOT available at the Oratory).
Thank you, Quentin, for the oppotunites you have provided to each of us.
You make good points milliganp. I rarely comment on here now as we do largely just trudge over old ground. I’m not desperate to breathe life into a well dead donkey either. I would be happy to contribute but have no idea about how to ” sell ” a blog online either.On the other hand it is interesting to have a catholic sounding board. Do you know of any others?
I respect that many of these topics (Abortion, Homosexuality, Birth Control, Natural Law (with a Stoic emphasis) are about eternal truths but with whom do they resonate?
I think there are some interesting ongoing discussions of these topics in what sometimes gets called the ‘Post-Liberal’ sphere of the internet. A young woman called Alex Kaschuta makes a podcast/Youtube series called ‘Subversive’, she has interviewed a lot of thinkers and writers from this side of things, including Mary Harrington from Unherd and a couple of the other younger prominent transgressive feminists like Louise Perry and Nina Power. Louise Perry’s recent book on why the sexual revolution failed seems very relevant to topics like this, though it’s from a secular rather than religious perspective.
There was a surprising interview a few months ago where Alex and Mary Harrington were talking about Bronze Age Pervert and his book Bronze Age Mindset, I hadn’t really taken BAP seriously before that but I read his book and it turned out to be more interesting and relevant than I expected. (That episode is called ‘Cyborgs in the Long House’).
A lot of these discussions happen on Youtube, Substack, video sharing sites like Odysee.
Substack is where a lot of blogging has gone. People talk about the period from the early 2000s to about 2015 as the great age of the blog and message board. I remember New Atheism, Secularism and the War on Terror as being some of the big topics in religion discussions.
For anyone interested, WordPress is now almost as dead as the Dodo! The media to be in (I couldn’t bring myself to incorrectly pluralise medium) are Unherd, Medium and Patreon – there may be others. These media are indexed in such a way that articles are suggested to readers / viewers who follow similar topics and thus ensure a wider exposure. If this is an apostolate we need to find people to evangelise.
milliganp writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66518 ) :
// The idea that a group of septuagenarians take over from a nonagenarian seems a tad optimistic! //
// yeas ago we might have 10-15 active commentators, now we are largely down to 3-5. How would someone find this blog? Why would they contribute? //
Point taken, and appreciated. But do we know how many subscribers there are? I suspect that many weblogs may have considerably more subscribers than regular commenters. But even if there are only a handful of subscribers, a little spreading of the word is likely to increase that number. But even if the number of subscribers remains small and frequent commenters even fewer, might it not be wise to resist the temptation all but dominant in the Weltanschauung to measure the value of things by how numerically large they are?
I’ve thought a little, lately, about the issue of web overflow – what can seem like an overabundance of written material calling for our attention. My mail is full to bursting with offerings of texts, many of them excellent, and I’ve felt a need to withdraw my paid subscriptions to a few blogs, though I still receive and value what’s available to non-payers. I certainly do not read everything, but I dip and dabble, sometimes caught by a header echoing something just encountered in or outside the web.
I imagine that we all are adjusting in our own ways to this gigantic cornucopia of individual thought, and I suspect that I’m not alone in choosing to devote a chunk of my time every day culling my several inboxes. Is it worth it? I think so. And I suspect that not a few others may be doing the same. If they are, even if only a relative few of them choose to receive notices of new secondsightblog.net postings and if only a handful of those choose to read them, surely it’s a positive thing, especially if even one of them is moved to reflect on an issue that he or she might otherwise, in their busy lives filled with the constant distractions of daily life in these noisy times, simply have passed over.
Enough. My apologies for the length of this.
Ignatius writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66521 ) :
// I rarely comment on here now as we do largely just trudge over old ground. I’m not desperate to breathe life into a well dead donkey either. I would be happy to contribute but have no idea about how to ” sell ” a blog online either.On the other hand it is interesting to have a catholic sounding board. Do you know of any others? //
I know of no others. In these extraordinarily divisive times, perhaps most people, Catholics included, simply want to keep their heads down and not risk being branded a heretic, a hater, or a lawbreaker. Cancellation is real, and when speaking out can endanger one’s community and professional standing as well as one’s livelihood, the temptation for most people must be strong to just obey authority and stay silent.
As to the point that we’ve simply been re-hashing old ideas here and the implication that there’s nothing left to say, I respectfully suggest that Ignatius re-think that idea. The universe of thought is boundless.
And as to the puzzle of how to recruit new members, there can be no single best solution. We can try anything that seems worth giving a chance. One possibility that occurred to me only as I began writing just now was simply to place occasional small advertisements in Catholic publications, local, national, and international.
I would very much like to help in trying to keep secondsightblog.net going. Those of us able and inclined to spend a small amount of time in that endeavour might want to begin a private correspondance. I can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
“As to the point that we’ve simply been re-hashing old ideas here and the implication that there’s nothing left to say, I respectfully suggest that Ignatius re-think that idea. The universe of thought is boundless…”
The universe of thought may well be boundless but the circumference of our selected topics over the past couple of years has been tiny!
I’m glad to see the interest in continuing this blog in some form. If that succeeds, I will commit to a more active role than I have maintained heretofore, in hopes of keeping it alive as long as possible.
As a token of that commitment, I return to the topic of this thread.
My attitude towards homosexuals ever since early adolescence has been, “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” I have never been sexually attracted to another male.
On the other hand, already back then, I was very strongly attracted sexually to girls my age, and older women, whom it would have been disastrous to marry. And I knew it was out of the question to have sexual relations with them. This is not only because I was taught that sex outside of marriage was a mortal sin, but also because I was concerned about being fixated on one or the other of them and unable to have normal relations with my future wife.
And so I bore the same cross that homosexuals wanting to be faithful Catholics have to bear for the first 37 years of my life, when I finally got married. By that time, my libido was somewhat reduced, and so, if I had not gotten married, my remain-chaste cross would have become progressively lighter. At the end of life, I would have fully understood what faithful Catholic homosexuals have to go through, what with the stigma of homosexuality long gone in the secular culture, and “love the sinner even if you hate the sin” having become the norm even among Catholics who haven’t gotten the message that same-sex attraction is a temptation, not a sin.
I am certain that I speak for everyone on SecondSight, for people in the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth, and around the world in marking the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
The Queen reigned for over 70 years and diligently attended to all of her duties with grace, dignity and integrity.
Her death is the sad end of the second Elizabethan era and is singular moment in history.
Queen Elizabeth is dead, long live King Charles III.
I remember the coronation very well, from pictures in the magazines and reports on the radio [we had no TV nor friends who had one]. I was 7 at the time. I remember thinking she was very beautiful.
The inner beauty that this Queen had with her tireless sense of duty and compassion and deep religious faith was far more important than physical beauty. If her successors are half as good at being monarchs as Elizabeth was, England and the whole world can count themselves lucky.
I was never her subject, but I have a daughter who became one, with permanent resident status, about a year ago. Sheer coincidence: her name is Elizabeth.
The queen was very dutiful and always acted in the public’s interest.
Does the Royal family have a greater sense of compassion and understanding for gays and their circumstances than the public in general, or is their disposition similar to that of the general public?
John Candido asks ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66571 ) :
// Does the Royal family have a greater sense of compassion and understanding for gays and their circumstances than the public in general, or is their disposition similar to that of the general public? //
Who are the Royal family? This is the third decade of the twenty-first century, in the age of individualism. I would imagine that they do not all think as one. Even so, I hope that they do not go full Diana and start each having a session with a media personality in which they tell all. I hope that we will never know how they all feel about homosexuality.
Personally speaking I couldn’t care less!
I agree that I would not like any member of the royal family to give a ‘tell-all’ interview.
Every person needs a private life where they can be discreet and be themselves.
Nonetheless, I have a feeling that most members of the royal family are tolerant or compassionate toward gays and the circumstances of their lives.
I don’t think that I am idealising their attitudes towards gays, but I could be wrong about the matter.
John Candido writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66580 ) :
// Nonetheless, I have a feeling that most members of the royal family are tolerant or compassionate toward gays and the circumstances of their lives. //
I imagine you’re right. Unless they’ve been able to confine themselves to a closed bubble of traditionalists – and that seems highly unlikely for such necessarily public folk – they inevitably will have been influenced by the aggressive amorality of the dominant secular culture. One can of course be sympathetic to individuals without wholly approving of their sexual proclivities, but the dominant culture rather demands at least public approbation of whatever most gays are assumed to do in their bedrooms, not merely acceptance of them as individuals.
It is with profound sorrow that my family and I have learnt about the passing of Her Late Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II.
The passing of Her Late Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II is a singular moment in history, and Her Reign will be characterised as the Second Elizabethan Age.
Her Majesty has been my Queen for all of my life, and I am both saddened and privileged to have been alive during Her Majesty’s long Reign of over 70 years.
Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II has given the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland, the Commonwealth and the entire world, the highest example of lifelong duty to every person.
I pray that Her Late Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, will continue to guide and pray for all of Her subjects from heaven.
Queen Elizabeth II has passed into eternal life, Long Live His Majesty, King Charles III.
I hope that SecondSight doesn’t close in the coming days as I am preparing a post on homosexuality that some people might find interesting even if they disagree with the post.
I’m looking forward to it, John. I don’t expect to agree with all that you are going to say, but that’s part of what makes this blog interesting. We’d probably quit from boredom if we all marched to the same drummer.
pnyikos writes ( https://secondsightblog.net/2022/08/11/homosexuality/#comment-66602 ) :
// I’m looking forward to it, John. //
I take it from the lack of response to my hints here that if we choose, we can do something to keep this weblog going that there is very little interest in doing that. I hope that’s an overly pessimistic conclusion. We are a small group of people either interested in learning more about the state of the institutional church or willing to discuss that subject intelligently and civilly. I’ve felt privileged to be among them. The normal state of the Internet seems to be ceaseless frenzied change. That may be the norm, but it need not be so in every instance. We *can* hold on to secondsightblogdotnet if we want to. It is *not* bound to disappear.
Thanks for those words of encouragement, David. Unfortunately, being based in the US, I would not be as suitable for handling it as those of you in the UK.
I was reminded of this blog being on its last legs when I posted the following meditation this evening to a private Catholic Facebook group based here in Columbia, South Carolina:
“But when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”
These words of Jesus, right at the end of today’s Gospel reading, have become for me one of the most poignant verses in the whole Bible. As I see the statistics on the percentage of Catholics, especially young Catholics, abandoning the faith and even turning against it, and how few young single Catholic adults there are at the Masses I attend, I can’t but help wondering whether we are in for a “free fall” of the number of faithful, committed Catholics.
Yet I take heart from the fact that our faith has come back from even darker times. The tenth century was one of them. It was then that two French monks, thoroughly dissatisfied with the laxity of their order, set out on a long quest for a monastery that adhered to the rule of St. Benedict. These two, Odo and Aghedrin, wandered through France for a long time, and there encountered only monasteries like the one they had left.
Odo gave up for a while, but Aghedrin pressed on. Then, in a hidden valley in the Jura mountains of Switzerland, he came across a little monastic house that was all they had hoped for. They joined the community in 909. The abbott, Berno, went on to found a monastery at Cluny, from which a great monastic reform slowly spread through Europe, overcoming many obstacles and setbacks.
This comment is not about the current thread, homosexuality. Instead, it’s about the Catholic Herald and about a web site that’s worth reading if one wants to be kept up to date on what’s happening at the level of the institutional Church.
Herald first. I’ve subscribed for several years. I usually look at the web site every day and I subscribe to the magazine both on paper and online. I probably will subscribe until they dispose of my dead body and my credit card becomes worthless. I always read much or most of the magazine. The layout is lovely and the articles are often both edifying and educational. But I have two bones to pick with the web site. One is about the editorial policy, which seems to me to be straying left of center. I’ve not noticed that in the magazine. It’s as though different editorial policies are working uneasily together. The second bone of contention concerns the comments feature. It is misleading and illusory. At the foot of some articles there is an invitation to comment. I’ve commented several times. Each time, the comments are almost immediately declared closed and no comments are printed. End of comment about the Herald.
Comment about the web site that’s very useful for staying abreast of Church political news, of which there is of course a great deal, since we have been gifted with a Pope who is clearly a frustrated Latin American Jesuit pot stirrer. This is the site:
It comes highly recommended by Damian Thompson. For me, that’s high praise.
We seem to be nearing the end of https://secondsightblog.net/
I am very sad about this, though I completely sympathize with Quentin’s predicament. In a month, I will complete my eightieth year of life on Earth outside my mother’s womb, and I have no desire to add external responsibilities.
My deep gratitude to Quentin for this his gift to us all. And thank all of you for making this forum a civil, informative, stimulating, and enjoyable place to spend time talking and, most especially, listening.
I have a suggestion. If Quentin has truly left off managing this site and writing essays for us every so often to prod us to focus on and comment on one issue or another, why do we not simply choose one or another of the essays he has written in the past and focus, tightly or loosely, on that one for a while? There are many essays; Quentin has given of his time generously to this project.
This site seems to a surprising extent (surprising to me, at least) to run itself. Without a manager, glitches cannot be addressed, but I have noticed few glitches in the time I’ve been here. Why don’t we simply continue to muddle on? I have not yet discovered anything on the web to compare favorably with secondsightblog.net. It seems to me a shame to let it wither.
Is SecondSight closed, or can people continue to comment?
John, hi. It looks as though the site is still up but only the owner (Quentin, probably) can initiate new topics.
Are you interested in continuing secondsightblog.net, in one form or another?
I am interested in continuing
I would like to continue commenting.
I would like to continue.
My apologies for the repeated comments. I have become a little rusty logging into Secondsight.
Keep it going if you can.
I, too. I’ve written a short note to Quentin asking for his thoughts.
Quentin de la Bedoyere is an internet pioneer. Taking the faith to the massess via the online world using his considerable intellect and writing ability is a real gift to all who have commented on SecondSight, and all who read his intriguingly interesting posts.