Archbishop Prendergast speaks out.

Halifax--In a July 16 Zenit interview, Archbishop Terence Prendergast of Halifax, NS, spoke out strongly on the "gay-marriage" issue. The bishop first described the government's actions as "an astonishing and abrupt closure on a fundamental issue for democratic debate."

"Marriage so redefined," he then stated, "becomes an institution designed to meet the requirements of same-sex forms of life but not of the complex needs and aspirations of opposite-sex conjugal couples."

The legal "redefinition signals the end of the state's support as we know it." The redefinition" transforms the civil institutions of marriage into a registered domestic partnership system and "eliminates the distinctive characteristics of marriage."

The Archbishop foresaw these legal decisions having most impact on the younger generation. They would see "law and public policy as indifferent to the unique social project [of] marriage ... namely, bringing men and women together in a stable and intimate form of life for conceiving and raising their children." More marital instability coupled with further declines in marriage and birth rates lie ahead.

He also noted that previous court decisions and media bias have already limited the ability of faith communities to speak out publicly on these issues. He described the court's and government's behaviour as a "call to action "for all faith communities.

Ottawa--If June was a tough month for Christians, July marked a resurgence in confidence and a growing determination to fight back. Evangelical Christians and Catholics organized townhall meetings in the Hamilton-Niagara region putting the fear of defeat into the hearts of the four Liberal MPs there. The idea spread to other parts of rural Ontario and Canada with similar effects.

On July 7, at a press conference, the President of the Ontario Bishop's Conference, Bishop Jean-Louis Plouffe of Sault Ste-Marie, announced a coalition of Catholics, Evangelicals and Muslims "to defend marriage as it has existed for millenia." Marriage, he said, "cannot be allowed to slip away quietly" (Globe, July 8). "Coalition to battle same-sex marriages," roared the pro-homosexual Toronto Star (July 8) which for a while, together with the Toronto Globe, almost daily printed photos of men with beards and mustaches kissing each other on the lips after their "weddings" at Toronto City Hall.

Same-sex "marriages" really hit the media after Justice Minister Martin Cauchon announced that the government's draft law defined marriage as a union 'of two persons'. For several weeks from July 18 onwards, not a day went by when the four Toronto newspapers [the Star (in favour), the Globe & Mail (jubilant with the decision), the Sun (opposed) and the National Post (opposed because of the bypassing of Parliament]--did not run three or more reports including the growing opposition to the proposed legislation throughout the country.

The Ontario Bishop's Conference called upon the clergy and laity to become active. Its general secretary, Tom Reilly, organized several strategy sessions. Archbishop Gervais of Ottawa revealed that he had sent a second letter to Mr. Chretien as his spiritual pastor, warning him of his religious duties as a Catholic layman. The roof came off when Calgary's Bishop Fred Henry gave an interview explaining that he was worried about the Prime Minister's "eternal salvation." (Chretien's 'morally grave error,' Globe, July 31). This was immediately translated by the press by the simpler and more graphic sentence of Chretien "going to hell."

It so happened that the Vatican's 12 page letter Considerations (condemning same-sex unions, see News in Brief, page 23) was published at the same time. Its effect on Canada was not lost: "Vatican raises stakes in Gay debate" read the front page headline of the Post (Aug. 1); "Vatican rips gay unions" declared the Sun (Aug. 1); and the Star headlined, "Ban gay marriages: Pope."

The Toronto Star also reported the reaction of future Prime Minister Paul Martin in the headline "Martin says duty comes before faith" (July 31); the immediate reaction from Bishop Plouffe was described in the Globe the next day as "Top bishop challenges Martin on same-sex" (Aug. 1).

The United States also figured in the debate with their Supreme Court's decision to negate the sodomy law in the state of Texas, together with the American President's reaction to it: "Bush moves to prevent gay marriage" (Post, July 26) and, "Bush to fight gay marriage" (Sun, July 31). Bush, of course, was doing the exact opposite of what Cauchon and Chretien were proposing.

The Globe, needless to say, was seriously disturbed by the growing resistance. Its August 1 edition contained the stern editorial "The Vatican's reach, the politician's duty." The paper has encouraged "gays" and lesbians in their lobbying efforts for a decade or longer, but now it declared that "the Vatican "s insistence that politicians put their religion first in determining public policy on the question is beyond the pale. It is an unacceptable proposition outside a theocracy." Imagine Catholics and Evangelicals giving priority to the word of God instead of accepting the Globe's words.

The Globe's cartoonist, Jenkins, put the paper's hatred for the Catholic Church in a picture the next day (Aug. 2), called "Sermon on a mount ...". At the top of the Mount a papal figure shouted, "Thou shalt not. Period." The mountain itself consisted of layers one on top of another, beginning at the bottom with "The Inquisition," and above it, "Persecution of Galileo," and from there on rising upwards, "Culpability in Slave Trade, "Role in WW II persecution of Jews," "Role in anti-contraception edict in world overpopulation," "Sexual misconduct among clergy & cover-up"; and at the very top, "Intolerance of same-sex marriage." Hate literature, you say?

By August 1 both the Post and the Star had noted the effects of the controversy on the political scene: "Liberals deeply split over marriage, MPs say," stated the Post (July 30), reporting that MPs were snowed under with faxes and e-mails. On Sunday, August 3, a Toronto Star account under the front page banner "Gay unions split Liberals" brought the unhappy news for Liberals that in solidly Liberal Ontario (100 seats out of 103) the backbenchers were abandoning the Feds in droves.

Accordingly, the Globe decided the time had come to go on the offensive. First, columnist Jeffrey Simpson declared that resistance was absolutely futile, as everything had been decided already (Aug. 2). Next, the front page of the Monday, August 4, edition, pitted the parish of Paul Martin's parents in Windsor, ON, where the parish priest, Father Joseph Gosselin, had devoted a homily to the same-sex "marriage" controversy, against the parish priest of Jean Chretien's parish in Shawinigan, Father Alain Gelinas, who had not done so. Speaking to the Globe reporter after Mass, Fr. Gelinas indicated that he did not intend to speak on the subject because his parish 'was tolerant of people of different sexual orientations.' "My mission," he was quoted as saying, "is not to change people but to welcome them."

Also in the same August 4 edition, former federal minister and former Newfoundland Premier Brian Tobin mocked the Church's threat of excommunication. After all, he pointed out in his column, he had been threatened when he shocked a Liberal group by declaring himself pro-abortion back in 1992. He was threatened again when he wiped out the Catholic schools in Newfoundland in 1997. Today he favours same-sex marriage. But lo and behold, no thunderbolt from heaven has struck him down. On the contrary, he and his brothers and sisters went to Mass recently on their mother's anniversary and received communion together. Nobody said a thing. Why? Because in Canada separation of Church and State is well established, Tobin said. The Catholic faith has nothing to do with the administration of this country!

Like other Canadian dailies, the Globe endlessly quoted the scoffing remarks of the homosexual activists marching in Gay Pride parades in various cities as proof that Canadians hail the Chretien-Cauchon legislation. Best of all, however, was to find Catholic priests who contradicted the Church. They found Father Raymond Gravel accusing the Church of hypocrisy in a letter to Montreal's daily La Presse and blew it up into a full-scale article with photo on August 6.

Note: There was one event which truly disturbed Catholics. That was the uncalled-for belittling of Bishop Henry's statement (about Mr. Chretien being in danger of foregoing eternal salvation) by CCCB secretary-general and spokesman Msgr. Peter Schonenbach. The Toronto Star took his deprecating comments to mean that Bishop Henry had now been contradicted and rebuked by the CCCB.

There was a similar pooh-poohing by the same spokesman of the Vatican document called Considerations. He described it as "mere considerations," as if to say that this was just tentative and experimental and not, as it is was in fact, the firm and fully thought-out Magisterial teaching of the Church (Life Site News, Aug. 1). Later on, he was heard as saying on radio that we are taking the Vatican document under "advisement", that Bishop Henry is "very emotional" about this issue, and that the CCCB is looking for a "made-in-Canada" solution, recognizing the traditional teaching and the rights of homosexuals. With defenders like that, who needs enemies?

The CCCB has had compromising and vacillating secretaries-general before. It is high time to find one who will defend Catholic teaching without embarrassment and apologies.