Enough appeasement already.

The following discourse is taken from the Newman Association of Vancouver Newsletter, December 2004, printed there under the title "Matters which concern the good of the Church."

--Editor

I wish to thank those of you who responded to my request for comments on the scandal perpetrated by politicians in high places when they contradict the teachings of the Church. The answers ranged from; They should be excommunicated" to "If in their minds they are in good conscience then they are free to do what they please".

The reason for my request was that about a year ago I started to write to Canada's archbishops the following or similar letter (Archbishop Roussin had not been appointed at that time) seeking an answer to my question.

Dear Archbishop,

When our political leaders such as Jean Chretian, Joe Clark, and Paul Martin publicly and proudly claim that they are practicing Catholics and at the same time personally introduce and enact legislation that is contrary to the teachings of the Church, what are we to do?

The challenge they offer (and it is a public, knowing and deliberate challenge to the Church's authority) is, "I am a faithful Catholic. My religion is my personal affair but rest assured it does not influence my political opinions and activities."

Public opinion polls show that a majority of Canadian Catholics are tolerant of, if not in favour of abortion and same-sex "marriages," both of which are contrary to the Church's teaching. Either the majority is denying the truth or in some way they have been misled as to the teaching of the Church.

Assuming that they have been misled, it may partly be because Catholics in the highest authority, whose opinions enjoy wide publicity and respect, are expounding teachings that are contrary to those of the Church.

"An attitude or behaviour, which leads another to do evil," is by definition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church called scandal. The Catechism further states that, "Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized". And, "Scandal can be provoked by laws, by institution, by i fashion or opinion".

The Catechism states further, "Scandal prompted our Lord to utter this curse: 'Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea' "

Evil and scandal are not words that we like to use. They are not politically correct. However, when the people occupying the highest stations--prime ministers and cabinet ministers--scandalize those in the lowest stations of society, namely the nation's unborn children, it would seem that there is a compelling case for public denouncement, primarily for the benefit of those who, being weak and confused in their faith, are misled or misinformed.

Some five hundred years ago, an English king challenged the teaching of the Church regarding marriage. Only one bishop in the whole country had the temerity to publicly advise that His Majesty Henry VIII was, with all due respect, acting contrary to the teachings of the Church and could no longer receive the sacraments. He promptly got his head chopped off. Had all the bishops or perhaps even if two of those many bishops had had equal courage history might have been different.

What is to be done?

In faith and love, Hugh Buckley

Only one archbishop replied and his answer was guarded and non-committal. So I wrote again to each of the remaining twelve but again got not one reply.

It became clear to me that our hierarchy is unprepared to give an answer to the question, "What is to be done?"

Prime Minister Paul Martin is consistently on record as being against the teaching of the Church. To Linda Frum he said, "I am a legislator. I basically will vote where I think the public interest lies. I voted prochoice."

Robert Leishman in reporting on the election debate said: "Martin tried to pin down Stephen Harper on the abortion issue. Martin charged: 'You would take away a woman's right to choose.' ... He (Martin) promised he would 'Strongly advise his backbenchers not to thwart party policy by introducing private members' bills on abortion.'"

Today there are millions, including many of our members, who believe that our avowed Catholic prime ministers from Trudeau to Turner to Mulroney to Clark to Chretien to Martin have effectively liberalised the laws of matrimony, contraception, suicide, abortion and sodomy so that our bishops are quietly accepting it as inevitable.

It would appear that ever since Pierre Trudeau formulated, introduced and enforced the legalisation of abortion in Canada, our bishops were caught in a policy of appeasement. Rather than demand that Catholic prime ministers examine their consciences and reject Trudeau's false reasoning and flawed theology, they seem to have been cowed into silence by the power and persuasion of Catholics in the highest office.

We know that Paul Martin has been advised by his bishop of his scandalous behaviour and since he, like his predecessors, persists in contradicting the Church's teaching, he is according to Canon law among "Those who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to he admitted to Holy Communion." Again in Canon Law, the Newman Association as an association of Catholic intellectuals, "Have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their view on matters which concern the good of the Church."

This is not a matter of party politics but a concern for the immortal souls of our Prime Minister, his predecessors and those who follow in their beliefs, and for the unity of the Church in Canada.

Recent Vatican pronouncements on this particular matter say that under the circumstances stated " ... the Minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the position where he "must" refuse to distribute Holy Communion." (Worthiness to receive Holy Communion. L'Espresso July 3, 2004) Note the word "must."

Therefore our role as Catholic intellectuals is no longer to ask: What is to be done? but, rather, to pray and as best we can to encourage our bishops to give their urgent attention to disciplining those who choose with Herodian pride to receive the sacrifice of the Lamb by day and to offer on the altar of secular humanism the sacrifice of human babies by night. Unlike the Magi after witnessing the birth of the Lamb, we cannot go home another way.

Hugh Buckley, was born in Sooke, BC. Studied Civil Engineering at the University of B.C. and Town planning at the University of London. He is retired from Consulting Engineering. He is a full time volunteer with Agape Street Ministry in Vancouver's Downtown East Side and is President of the Vancouver Newman Association.