Litigious Priests

"Be at agreement with thy adversary betimes, whilst thou art in the way with him: lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison."


"But I say to you that hear: Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you. Bless them that curse you, and pray for them that calumniate you."

These were the words of Our Blessed Lord to His Apostles. Of course, these words are challenging, but the idea of a Priest taking another Priest to court over something said reproving him or rebuking him for articles written which do not reflect Church Teaching is scandalous, a total and sublimely ridiculous betrayal of the Gospel, an affront to the virtue of Humility.

Monsignor Basil Loftus is clearly a writer who has forgotten that he is a Priest!

In June, Msgr Loftus had this letter in The Tablet:

The three articles on the tragic case of Sister Margaret McBride's involvement in the recent abortion controversy (The Tablet, 5 June) must encourage all who have been left puzzled. And encouragement must often suffice where enlightenment cannot be had, since in the Church we see only as through a glass, darkly.

I wonder, however, if one further consideration could be explored. Has sufficient thought been given to the possible role of the foetus as an unjust aggressor? The existence of a negative reply from a Roman dicastery is not proof that it has.

Is a victim allowed to take the life of an aggressor in order to save his or her own life, even if the agressor had not formed, or had been unable to form, an aggressive intent? If so, would not a foetus whose objective aggression was threatening the mother's life, be in the same moral/legal position as an unwitting aggressor, or an aggressive child or mentally defective adult?

I am sorry but that is a profoundly heretical letter, dissenting from Church Teaching and proposing the killing of the unborn child in cases where it is deemed to be an 'aggressor'. He can sue me too!