Posted on 08/04/2003 9:31:07 AM PDT by Polycarp
An impending religious persecution in Canada?
By Pete Vere web posted August 4, 2003
Less than two months ago, Prime Minister Jean Chretien was assuring Canadians that the legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada would not lead to religious persecution. Various religious bodies in Canada would be permitted to continue holding and teaching their beliefs. My how things changed have changed over the summer. According to a recent article in the Globe and Mail, Bishop Jean-Louis Plouffe of the Diocese of Sault Ste Marie is now under attack by some among Canada's political and social elite. Why? Because he had the audacity to take the Prime Minister at his word and clarify Catholic teaching for Catholic politicians who prefer to fudge the issue.
"I don't think a man can allow himself to be divided by his convictions," the Globe and Mail quotes Bishop Plouffe as having stated. "A politician cannot be totally schizophrenic. If he is, he is not being real [...] I would expect a Catholic politician would not push away his Catholic convictions because he's a politician. I would expect him to be authentic." According to this same article, the words of Bishop Plouffe's counterpart in Calgary were much more forceful. The Prime Minister is "endangering his salvation," Bishop Henry reportedly states.
I know Bishop Plouffe. I grew up in his diocese and he confirmed me as young teenager. Under his episcopate, my father was ordained to the Catholic Church's permanent diaconate. Most Canadian Catholic commentators like myself would describe Bishop Plouffe as a moderate progressive - hardly an icon of Canada's religious right.
And yet, according to the same Globe and Mail: "The comments by Roman Catholic Church leaders have angered gay-rights activists and other religious groups. ‘It's just appalling,' said Michael Leshner, who legally wed his partner, Michael Stark, in Toronto in June, Canada's first same-sex marriage. ‘It's sickening, it's obnoxious and it's got to stop.' [...] He accused the Catholic church of preaching ‘religious intolerance,' adding, ‘The Charter of Rights trumps the Bible.'"
As a young Canadian social conservative, I have a few choice words for Mr. Leshner's arrogance in asserting a pan-sexual hedonistic legal positivism over the wisdom and authority of the Natural Law. However, I think I will save this response for an American publication, where at least the First Ammendment protects my freedom of religion and expression. For while some might dismiss Mr. Leshner's threats as empty, I cannot share this optimism.
Mr. Leshner is a Crown Attorney in Toronto - Canada's largest city, and one of its most politically influential ones. As such, Mr. Leshner is part of the judicial culture that usurped the role of our democratically elected legislature in bringing about the legalization of same-sex marriage. Thus in reading between the lines, I am reluctant to dismiss Mr. Leshner's threats as those of your average homosexual activist. As he has already shown, he more than capable of carrying them out in our current milieu of judicial activism.
Nevertheless, what has Bishop Plouffe done to deserve what appears to be a veiled threat of legal action? His words are nowhere as politically incorrect as those of his counterpart in Calgary. Nor is Bishop Plouffe, like some fundamentalist Baptist ministers I have encountered since moving to the United States, encouraging his flock to picket homosexual funerals with "God hates Fags" placards. Knowing His Excellency well, I am certain he condemns such religiously inspired hate. After all, Christ preaches the Gospel of Love, calling all sinners to conversion.
Rather, Bishop Plouffe simply reminds politicians claiming to be Catholic of their moral obligation to behave as Catholics in Canada's legislative assemblies. According to the Second Vatican Council, this is one of the three main functions of the Catholic episcopate, namely, to teach the Catholic Faith to the Church's adherents. Almost all religions make similar requirements of their clergy.
Unfortunately, in the opinion of at least one prominent homosexual legal activist, Bishop Plouffe's words now constitute religious intolerance under a new judicial oligarchy in which the feelings of sexual minorities trump religious rights and freedoms. So much for our Prime Minister's promise to protect religious freedom in Canada. As a young Canadian social conservative, I feel more secure in the United States where the First Amendment guarantees my freedom of religious expression. And unlike Canada's political leadership, President Bush both respects the religious convictions of all Americans and possesses the strength of character to live according to his own.
Pete Vere, JCL is a canon lawyer and a Catholic social and religious commentator from Sudbury, Ontario. He now writes from Nokomis, Florida, where he and his family enjoy no state income tax along with life within walking distance of the Gulf of Mexico. His work has been published in numerous Canadian and American Catholic publications.
Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com
| Legal warning to church on gay stance Liam Reid
Clergy and bishops who distribute the Vatican's latest publication describing homosexual activity as "evil" could face prosecution under incitement to hatred legislation.
The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) has warned that the language in the 12-page booklet is so strong it could be interpreted as being in breach of the Act.
Published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, it states that Catholics have a duty to oppose the introduction and operation of legislation recognising same-sex unions. It identifies politicians as having a duty to vote against any such moves.
According to the document, Catholic teaching states that while homosexuals should be treated with "respect, compassion and sensitivity", homosexuality was "objectively disordered".
"Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimisation of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalisation of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil," it states.
It also claims that allowing children to be adopted into same-sex unions would mean "doing violence to these children". This would place them "in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development".
Ms Aisling Reidy, director of the ICCL, warned yesterday that the statement could be in violation of the 1989 Incitement to Hatred Act. Those convicted under the Act can face jail terms of up to six months.
"The document itself may not violate the Act, but if you were to use the document to say that gays are evil, it is likely to give rise to hatred, which is against the Act," according to Ms Reidy. "The wording is very strong and certainly goes against the spirit of the legislation."
Under the Act literature which is threatening, abusive or insulting, linked with the intent of stirring up hatred, is illegal.
|
(If your church is not being persecuted in the coming wave of hatred, flee that church. It is apostate.)
And a man lusting after another mans hairy anus is not?
"Woe to those who call evil good, and call good evil." -- Christ.
Prophacy said the liberal legions would be attempting to do this as we come closer to the end of the age. Israel becomming a nation once more started the count down, and Satan knows he has but little time to destroy as many souls as he can. Satan and his liberal legions have been working over time.
The church was warned over 2000 years ago that they were comming. They never should have let Satan in the door. They should have stuck clearly with the words givin to them by the Alpha-Omega, the Beginning and the End, the Great Star of David. They now sow what they have reaped.
Yeh. There's no "diversity." According to the sodomites themselves, children cannot live in a world that's not "diverse" enough.
That's what the rapture is for. Imagine a world without the rightous restrainers. Sin will abound, and those left to live through it will recieve no aid.
Maybe in this world. But I wouldn't count on its protection in the next.
Is persecution of Catholics coming? The notion doesn't seem so far-fetched anymore.
Still think Santorum was wrong?
Still think its only about what they do in the privacy of their own bedroom?
Still have the unmitigated gall to imply that anyone who opposed the SCOTUS decision "just wants to lock up homos"?
You, along with all the other FReepers who denigrated those who opposed Lawrence and supported Santorum, were wrong then, as each passing day and international headline proves over and over.
You all have got a lot of apologies to make. But I doubt they'll be forthcoming.
(BTW, I'd hate to go to judgement knowing I blew it on the single most important issue of my generation. Especially as an ordained minister of the Church.)
"There will be scoffers in those days, saying 'Where is the promose of his comming'?"
No Sir all I have are my clothes and this Bible.
Put your hands on your head and step out of the car!"
You distort my views, as usual, but it's more important for you to jump offside in your glee to try to show me up.
You're a kid, Brian, a kid eaten up with hate.
You'd better deal with it before it breaks out in violence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.