And back to our deal with the Bishop. Finally, in Canada, a Canadian bishop decided to grow a sack of balls and speak up on a major morality/sexual/ethics/political related issue. Nowhere in the history of the CCCB/Canadian Catholic Church since Vatican II, and my young life under 35 years of age have I witnessed such a spectacle.
Remember that nerdy looking guy with the glasses and gray hair who looked like an aged Gilbert Lowe from Revenge of the Nerds? Yeah, that one who got the red hat from our Holy Papa Benedict the XVI? Yes. That guy.
Cardinal Thomas Collins of the archdiocese of Toronto, held a press conference that was covered by a number of Toronto/Ontario major news outlets and discussed Bill 13. Unfortunately, there is no archived footage currently online on the outlets. Hopefully the diocesan website for Toronto will post up a video either on their main .com site, or their YouTube channel. Regardless, Collins has taken a stance on this issue and made a bold move doing the press conference in the public media, knowing full well this could bite him in the butt from those he works with, and also the government. In fact, he’s being attacked left, right and center for doing do. Here’s some examples from weblinks from the media:
–> The liberal rag and public media engine for liberals everywhere in Toronto/Ontario and the Liberal Party (unoficially, but rarely do they criticize the party in this paper).
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/canadian-cardinal-talks-gay-straight-alliances-schools
–> From a liberal catholic rag that is of theologically poor quality, espousing the “Jesus loves everybody” garbage that makes today’s Church sermons suck and the “Let’s be tolerant and inclusive to make the Church more welcoming and bring people back” arguments.”
–> Some Toronto left-wing socialist site. This is just another example of the vitrol and hate thrown our way at the Catholic church. Their latest front page article has another one of those “creepy B16″ pics commonly shown to paint our Holy father in an evil light with the usual intolerance arguments by our enemies.
So what was the crux of what Cardinal Collins said and what’s the commentary from the media? First, THIS: A statement from Him as part of the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario on the issue:
I`m going to try and pick the meatiest parts of the statement in order to show you how he`s decided to sacrifice his comfort and prestige and may be on his way to both the Papacy, and maybe, even martyrdom if Overlord McGuinty finds a way to legally enact a 1984 scenario.
Let`s start with this:
“…. This may not always happen in a Catholic school, for we are all sinners, but we earnestly try to live up to this standard. We have a rich array of spiritual resources, and methods developed
out of our faith tradition, which not only fight bullying, but shape a school environment that is welcoming to all. Our schools also provide competent and compassionate personal support for
individuals. We also consistently have sought, and continue to seek, to work together cooperatively with the Ministry of Education to assure that Catholic schools meet and exceed all
government standards ….“
Here`s what he`s saying. Some of his detractors will say “your schools are hypocritical and don`t teach the Gospel“ as he alluded to prior to this paragraph. HE OPENLY ADMITS that our schools have failed many a time in this regard, from the teachers to the students. This is a “mea culpa on behalf of the liberal, watered-down catechized people if you will. He also is saying that the schools have their own, genuinely Catholic (and possible moral law abiding) methods for dealing with bullying and welcoming others. Also, the Catholic School system, aside from the religious ed courses unique to it, DO NOT teach outside of the government mandated curriculum (what teachers do in individual classes, is another story). In other words, they teach according to code. Could they be better, like Catholic private schools in their religious education? Absolutely! Remember though, the government cares only about the non-religious issues. In other words, “Our Catholic school systems render to Caesar the things that are due to Caesar, and to God that things that are God’s” (cf. Mark 12:17). Also as a side note, this paragraph could contain proof that one of the four conditions are agreed upon for a just war under the Just War Theory: Consistent negotiations or means of dealing with the enemy are ineffective and have failed.
“…. A “Gay-Straight Alliance” is a particular method of addressing one form of bullying, and providing personal support. The GSA model was developed in the United States in the 1980′s. Because this model is so closely related to a movement with particular views concerning the human person and the issues of life, people who disagree with those views are understandably concerned that the model can serve as a means not only to address bullying, but to promote the views with which they disagree. Those who share those views will no doubt wish to use the GSA methodology. They are certainly free to do so….”
Whoa! I can`t believe this. This is old news? Collins! Why the heck aren’t you writing a book or something! I can’t believe GSAs have been around for a long time that I feel guilty I didn’t know the history. Really this is something that should be researched. As for the bolded paragraph … that’s right Collins. It is all tied together: Contraception, Abortion, Homosexual relations, Co-habitation …. It all points back to the value of the human person and the issue of life, that all life begins at conception and the person is given the soul at it. You really think when someone is pregnant they will birth anything but a human being? Of course those anti-life/anti-human views are simply self-serving, pointing to a person’s selfish desire to deny life for their own wants.
Finally from his statement, I highlight this last question of a series of questions he asks to show that the government isn’t thinking about one’s best interests:
5. Apart from whatever one thinks of the idea of GSAs, in any particular school is a GSA the most effective method to help students being targeted by bullies? Who makes that decision in a
local school? Is it those adults who are entrusted with responsibility for the local school community and all of its members? The new policy says that they do not. Is that wise?
Here we have the most simplistic argument right here: Is this “anti-bullying policy” going to stop bullying? Well maybe for the homosexual kids, but what about the ones with mental disorders? The ones with physical handicaps? What about little Jimmy just cause he is actually a “nice guy” and the other boys are mean jock types? Or what about little Suzy who like Jason the cool guy and he likes her back, but because Lilette and her band of gossip-jackals who are dressing in skimpy shorts and crop-tops at the ages of 12, is jealous, she start malicious cyber-bullying online and gossiping with her friends at school, lowering the self-esteem of poor Suzy and possibly, Suzy ends up killing herself? Worse, it sounds like the adults will have NO say in this matter. You don’t want a GSA in schools or want to promote different type of club that can more effectively manage a kid with possible/ID’d same sex attraction in a Catholic way? TOO BAD!!! What overlord McGuinty and his general in command, Broten say, goes. Worse, if a kid actually, practically, lives out their faith and actually knows his/her catechism 2357-2359, will a kid have to violate their consciece and faith to evade the “homosexual” or “tolerance” police from suspending or expelling him/her, even their own teacher??? Will the teacher use this as an excuse to lower their grades and due to this policy the teacher gets away with it? While we’re at it, what about ADULT BULLYING via the abuse of power as the “tolerant” teacher? This has a lot of far reaching implications.
Now, what about other media coverage? here’s some links:
http://www.torontosun.com/videos/1660439848001
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/29/fight-against-gay-straight-alliances-just-warming-up
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/29/mcguinty-bullies-catholic-schools
http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/05/28/church-rejects-ontarios-gay-straight-club-decision-accuses-government-of-micromanagement/
http://www.catholicregister.org./component/k2/item/14592-father-of-suicide-victim-pleads-for-anti-bullying-bill-that-protects-all-students
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/31/liberal-hypocrisy-on-catholic-schools
While there’s a lot of 2ndary media coverage out there now that Pandora’s box is open, I’ll only highlight certain things:
- in the National post article, it lists this correctly about our Catechism: “The Catechism of the Catholic Church says homosexual behaviour is “intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstance can it be approved.” However, the Catechism also teaches that homosexuals “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” YES! Finally a mainstream media source actually gets it right and quotes/summarizes properly the Catechism’s teaching. Combined with the sensitivity sentence it correctly quotes from paragraph 2357-2358. In a nutshell “love the sinner, hate the sin.” Thank you National Post for finally doing this right!
- The Post also cites that the Toronto DISTRICT (Public) School board examined in a survey what the most common reason for bullying is. While the pro-gay group EGALE stated 64% of gays have been subject to bullying, the TDSB looked at bullying across the board and found: “…The most cited reason was “body image” (38% in Grades 7 to 8; 27% in Grades 9 to 12), followed by grades or marks (17% and 12% respectively), and 7% in all grades noted language as a cause.The next three categories at 5% or lower were gender, religion and income. The issue of gay bullying did not register in the study.
- The CR story about the gay kid who committed suicide has two important highlights I must comment on: 1) The father in the story would rather see the bill protect the rights of all students, even as far as a merger of 13 and 14 (I disagree with this fully. Just pass the broad-spectrum bill 14). (2) The gay kid did a one up by starting a “rainbow club.” Despite the name, this club was for all types of students affected by bullying. Even this openly gay kid, knew what the heck to do and not to close off and clique. Bullying is crap, regardless of whose doing it and who’s targeted. He got it, McTyrant and Broten do not. Isn’t it ironic that the gay kid knows what’s better in this issue than the politicians?
- Blizzard’s latest posting is quite poignant with her message. Here’s the juicy and important points with my Fr. Z tinted comments:
> “Yep, our fearless leader is taking on the mantle not just of secular leader of the people of this province, but also as our moral, religious and spiritual authority” “
[Exactly! He wants to tell us what to think, do, and say. It's the first step towards a real 1984 scenario here. By 1984 I'm referring to George Orwell's titled book. Excellent read, get it. My older, borrowed school library copy at the time, even had the eye in the triangle on it. Creepy no?]
> “And it’s pure hypocrisy. The premier’s four children went to Catholic school. His wife, Terri, teaches in a Catholic school. Education Minister Laurel Broten’s sons also go to Catholic school.”
[ Exactly! What a stupid irony. You're screwing over the system you have put your kids in. If you really value public education McGuinty and Broteh, and you KNOW that what you are doing goes against the system, why the heck put your kids and work in the system?]
“The Catholic church isn’t a buffet. You don’t pick and choose which values you want and which you don’t. You either buy into the whole bundle — or you pull a Martin Luther and start your own religion.“
[ HOLY BAT FARTS BATMAN!!!! Here's a secular media reporter who has just launched the bomb. 200% Correct! As a Catholic, when it comes to specific doctrines and dogmas, as well as central core teachings of the faith, one cannot be a Catholic and pick and choose what to believe. The same goes for those in charge of running the system. I personally think it's sad that a secular journalist gets the picture when so many liberal clergy, theologians, and laity don't. They purposely choose to ignore how the Catholic Church works. If it isn't a discipline or discussable topic, you can't reject it publicly (private discussion behind close doors, is another story). Really this is a bloody embarrassment on us. I think there's even a Ghandi quote about the average Catholic's hypocrisy too, and that I think made it into the Grade 11 World Religions textbook now used in the diocese of Toronto, the one with the Canadian Catholic perspective. And BTW, those other sects and religions did just that. They didn't like what Mean Old Rome was giving, they started their own sect of Christianity or religion]
“The Catholic system does what the public system cannot. It teaches morals and values and ethics to children. It’s able to enforce a stricter code of discipline, because it can expel students to the public system.“
[ This is another good reason why people in Ontario, Canada, even if you send your kids to public school, or aren't Catholic, you should fight against the government on this. Save the union and trustee crap, This school system strives to do more than teach ABCs. People PURPOSELY put their kids in this system for these reasons. ALSO, the system is widely known for giving a kid overall a better education than its public counterparts.]
“So put up or shut up, Premier. You won the 2007 election squawking about religious schools being a horrific form of “segregation and sequestration.” So, either leave the Catholic schools alone. Or pull their funding and go with one public school system. And everyone, please. Simmer down and do us all a favour. It you don’t subscribe to Catholic beliefs, don’t put your kids in Catholic schools and don’t have family members teach in them.”
[ This is one of the best closers of an editorial, ever. And this should also apply to everyone. either go do your own secular public thing and leave us alone, or if you are with us, "tolerate" the system or espouse its wholeness. It's works both ways you know. Tolerance is not unilateral.]
Now, to end off this post, I’d like to quote a few paragraphs concerning this issue of freedom of moral conscience and man, from the 1993 JPII encyclical Veritatis Splendor. These paragraphs I think are a good summary of the Church’s wisdom on this matter at hand:
42. 42. Patterned on God’s freedom, man’s freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the Council: “Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means” [The footnote for this is, believe it or not, a Vatican II document, Gaudium et Spes, paragraph 17.].
[ So Man cannot do this when an external force, such as one's social circle or his/her own government try to impose on their consceince and free will through the subversion of the civil law, which is infringing on the Natural Law that governs all humanity.]
For those who criticize the Church as a morality enforcer, as some of its critics say and will cheer McTyrant in opening the Catholic schools to be more “accepting,” here’s what JPII says on that: 95. “…. The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church’s motherhood can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride of Christ, who is the Truth in person. “As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm …. The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection” [The key word is proposed. Our Holy Mother Church is not the arbiter, or in other words the enforcer of morality and rules on people. It won't lie in what it demands and you can even access the Catechism online at www.vatican.va,. Ironically McGuinty's actions support this paragraph and makes him look like the one who's enforcing things, not the Church.]
Finally, one last paragraph with no commentary from V.S. that I think pretty much sums up what Bill 13 will result in or become one of the first major steps toward :
“101. In the political sphere, it must be noted that truthfulness in the relations between those governing and those governed, openness in public administration, impartiality in the service of the body politic, respect for the rights of political adversaries, safeguarding the rights of the accused against summary trials and convictions, the just and honest use of public funds, the rejection of equivocal or illicit means in order to gain, preserve or increase power at any cost — all these are principles which are primarily rooted in, and in fact derive their singular urgency from, the transcendent value of the person and the objective moral demands of the functioning of States.160 When these principles are not observed, the very basis of political coexistence is weakened and the life of society itself is gradually jeopardized, threatened and doomed to decay (cf. Ps 14:3-4; Rev 18:2-3, 9-24). Today, when many countries have seen the fall of ideologies which bound politics to a totalitarian conception of the world — Marxism being the foremost of these — there is no less grave a danger that the fundamental rights of the human person will be denied and that the religious yearnings which arise in the heart of every human being will be absorbed once again into politics. This is the risk of an alliance between democracy and ethical relativism, which would remove any sure moral reference point from political and social life, and on a deeper level make the acknowledgement of truth impossible. Indeed, “if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism“
Everyone, please add Cardinal Collins to you prayers. I’m sure that people are now going to rally really hard against him for what he did, both in the public sphere of society, and even in his chancery offices and dioceses. He will not have it easy from this point on, even though he was not stern and aggressive in his message. That does not matter to liberals or the immoral, even being polite counts as an affront to their selfish desires, even if they don the clerical collar or the pointy hat. Whenever someone actually proclaims the Gospel and the Good News or the true Catholic faith in this day and age, they will be “crucified” for it. I’m sure this will only intensify in future, even after bill 13 passes and 14 is likely rejected. Let’s also pray if this man lives on, that perhaps he might one day lead the church as our next Holy father as a viable candidate for the Papacy.
Pax Tibi Christi, YCRCM.
View original article:
