From Jean-Nil Chabot re charter.

In the November issue of Catholic Insight you write: "As Cardinal Ouellet pointed out (see September editorial), this Charter is incompatible with the moral teaching of the Church."

I was astonished! Is it the Charter that is incompatible with the Church's moral teaching or is it the interpretation that the courts make of it? I had never heard it said by any Church authority that the Charter was morally wrong, and was very surprised that Cardinal Ouellet would have made that statement.

I did not find any reference to Cardinal Ouellet in your September editorial, but part III of your article entitled "The Catholic rebellion: politicians and Communion" was dedicated to the Cardinal. However I search, I cannot find the part that quotes the Cardinal's reference to the Charter as being morally wrong.

Since I would like some kind of confirmation or clarification (and probably so would other readers) would you be so kind as to state which articles of the Charter are "incompatible with the moral teaching of the Church" and explain why they are so?

Barry's Bay, ON

Editor: The reference to the September editorial was wrong. It should have read October. Also wrong is the reference to Cardinal Ouellet.

Deacon Chabot is correct. Cardinal Ouellet did not attack the Charter as such but rather Bill C-38 (same--sex marriage). He stated that Bill C-38 was based on "a false understanding of the fundamental equality between persons, on an erroneous understanding of minority rights, on a faulty interpretation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and on a truncated understanding of freedom of religion."

On the Charter itself please see Doug McManaman's "The Charter and the supremacy of God" in our December issue. In the future we may be able to find other analyses of the Charter.

The following were among the more than 30 congratulatory notes received during the months of October and November 2005. We thought we should publish some of them to start off our fourteenth year of publication. We also would like to extend our deep gratitude to the 578 supporters who responded to our October 1, 2005, bi-annual fundraiser. All those who requested an acknowledgement should have received one in writing. If not, please let us know.