Background: (from Wikipedia)
On July 20, 2005, Canada became the fourth country in the world, and
the first country outside Europe, to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide with
the enactment of the Civil Marriage Act which provided a gender-neutral
marriage definition. Court decisions, starting in 2003, had already legalized
same-sex marriage in eight out of ten provinces and one of three territories,
whose residents comprised about 90% of Canada's population. Before passage of
the Act, more than 3,000 same-sex couples had already married in those
areas.[1] Most legal benefits commonly associated with marriage had been
extended to cohabiting same-sex couples since 1999.
The Civil Marriage Act was introduced by Prime Minister Paul Martin's
Liberal minority government in the Canadian House of Commons on February 1,
2005 as Bill C-38. It was passed by the House of Commons on June 28, 2005, by
the Senate on July 19, 2005, and it received Royal Assent the following day. On
December 7, 2006, the House of Commons effectively reaffirmed the legislation
by a vote of 175 to 123, defeating a motion of the Conservative minority
government to examine the matter again. This was the third vote supporting same-sex
marriage taken by three Parliaments under three Prime Ministers in three
different years.
------------------------------------------------
May
2005
Dear
Archbishop,
I came
across some news items last week that have captured my attention and my
thoughts almost continually. The first was a quote attributed to Prime Minister Paul Martin:
“If I have to choose between the Church and the Charter, I’ll choose the
Charter.” The second was a headline stated: “Nearly four out of five Catholic
politicians in Canada to vote in favour of gay marriage.” The report further claimed that the majority
of Canadian Catholic MPs will vote for same-sex 'marriage' despite the fact
that the Vatican, in 2003, has stated categorically: "When legislation in
favour of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time
in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express
his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favour
of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral." The most
shocking statement in the news item was this one: “Of note, although that
statement was issued by the Vatican in 2003 to date the Canadian Conference of
Catholic Bishops has not related it to Canadian politicians.”
I was
quite stunned when I read that and my first thought was that the writer was
somehow mistaken. How could timely instruction from the Vatican on such a
serious matter, instruction aimed at guiding and protecting a nation from a
grave moral evil through its lawmakers, not be relayed to the very people it
concerned and warned most? Such direction sounds to me a clear warning against
grave (mortal) sin and unconfessed mortal sin can condemn a soul to hell. Is it
possible that bishops, upon receipt of such crucial guidance from the Vatican
could ignore their responsibility to inform Catholics of such a grave danger?
What could be more important for the souls of these Catholic politicians than
this warning? Without a clear confirmation by bishops of such warnings the
counsel of Mother Church is frustrated, truth is maligned, evil will expand,
and souls will be forever lost. Can it be that Canadian Catholic bishops doubt
or ignore this? If so, once such a precedent is set, what other areas of grave
sin will be faithful not be alerted to or reminded of in future, to the
detriment and loss of thousands of souls? My thoughts along these lines disturb
me tremendously because a further question emerges: Have Catholics en masse in
Canada been denied the truth of the grave immorality of other actions and the
severe consequences that accompany them?
Has there truly been forty years of virtual silence on marital moral
sexual issues from the Canadian bishops? Is such a spiritual failure on the
part of Canadian bishops to blame for the desperate moral state (to say nothing
of the grim spiritual fate) of Canadian Catholics and Canadians in general?
Other
questions have flooded my mind this week due to the distress caused by this
subject. I wondered if maybe the failure to inform our Catholic politicians was
a major reason the same sex ‘marriage’ issue has progressed to the stage that
it has. After all, is it too much to believe that our Holy Mother Church sees
by the Holy Spirit the correct time to intervene with vital instruction to the
leaders of the Church for the good of the faithful and all of society? I
wondered also what could possibly be the human line of reasoning which would
prevent the Vatican instructions from being passed on. Maybe it was because the
Conference did not think it would alter the actions of the Catholic
politicians. I suppose that suggesting to them that it was gravely immoral
would only curb their plans if there were some serious consequences associated
with their disobedient and immoral actions. Would the bishops in unity follow
through with serious consequences, specifically the withholding of Holy
Communion if necessary, as is the Catholic Church’s policy in cases of clear
obstinate mortal sin?
Archbishop
Raymond Burke of St. Louis has made clear forthright statements on this matter
it seems to me. Again it was only this week that I read his statement “that as
Catholics continue to speak out on life and family issues they will face
persecution." It appears that Archbishop Burke speaks plainly the teaching
of the Church on matters of crucial importance, even though he might be
attacked or labeled politically incorrect. In regard to refusing Holy Communion
the Archbishop said that "although the refusal by a pastor or bishop to
distribute Holy Communion to anyone is a source of great sorrow . . . What
would be profoundly more sorrowful would be the failure of a bishop to call a
soul to conversion, the failure to protect the flock from scandal and the
failure to safeguard the worthy reception of Communion." This seems to me
to be a statement in full accord with the teaching tradition of the Church and
when applied faithfully and consistently how could it not succeed to bring
about the results that God desires in the life of any Catholic, whether
politician or layperson.
Is it
possible to imagine, ten or twenty years from now, a small association, perhaps
called the Right to Free Christian Expression Association? Imagine this
association faltering and in imminent danger of failing due to persecution,
Church disinterest and lack of financial support; an association reeling from
the constant bombardment by a tyrannical state controlled by homosexual
activists seeking to extinguish every expression of authentic Christianity. And
further imagine only one or two solitary priests, perhaps even the local bishop
only, encouraging the few faithful heroes remaining to keep up the fight
because without them the truth would be forgotten. Now multiply this scenario
throughout the entire land of Canada and mourn the loss of free Christian
expression and testimony in Canada. And
consider now, how different from the Right to Life Association is the above
described association?
How
likely is such a thing to happen? Is it possible that it already has happened
once when the Canadian bishops held back their full authority and duty to
Canadian society by dissenting from the truth of Humanae Vitae; did it happen
again when Canadian bishops failed to discipline Canadian politicians endorsing
abortion in the years before abortion was legal? And is it happening in these
days again, as Canadian society is under extreme attack and radical surgery to
remove its Christian heart altogether, leading to its ultimate corruption and
death? Perhaps today the only obstacle that stands in the way of preventing the
formation (and failure) of the Right to Free Christian Expression Association
is a courageous bishop, the spark that ignites a great fire of genuine Catholic
faith and life in Canada.
Yours
sincerely, in Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment