My Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, Results of
recent polling of Canadians indicate that, by almost two thirds, “same
sex marriage” is unacceptable to Canadians, an oxymoron. Now in an
attempt to regroup, appealing to our sense of tolerance and justice,
proponents of “same sex marriage” have attempted to shift the focus of
the debate, opting for “equal marriage.” However, all the packaging in
the world doesn’t alter substance.
There are many kinds of friendship open to all; but that particular
kind of friendship that is marriage involves gender complementarity and
the life-creating potential that can be found only in the relationship
between a man and a woman. To construe anything else as similar to
marriage or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and the
family is to confront an insurmountable biological impossibility.
A marriage is a union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all
others.
Nevertheless, according to Bill C-38, the social institution that has
always symbolized our society’s commitment to the future - our children
- will be transformed into an institution that symbolizes our commitment
to the present, the needs and desires of adults. Marriage will have a
new primary purpose, to validate and protect sexually intimate adult
relationships.
Legislation which redefines marriage cannot achieve the impossible.
It cannot alter the simple reality that there is a fundamental
difference between a relationship that, by its nature, has the potential
to create a child and a relationship, that by its nature, absolutely
does not.
It is not unjust, or a limitation of anyone’s legitimate rights and
freedoms, to insist that marriage is a covenant between a man and a
woman. If one were refused such positions because of race, or religion,
or ethnic background, or something not related to the nature of the
reality at issue, then that would indeed be an injustice and a denial of
individual rights.
If, however, one were refused because one excludes basic elements of
the role itself, that is not in any way an injustice.
The Supreme Court of Canada did not state in the reference case that
opposite sex marriage was discriminatory against same-sex couples. It
merely stated that the government may, as a matter of policy, extend
marriage to same-sex couples, but it did not require the government to
do so, on the basis that it was an equality or human right issue.
In one of my previous pastoral letters I wrote: “Since homosexuality,
adultery, prostitution and pornography undermine the foundations of the
family, the basis of society, then the State must use its coercive power
to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good.”
Each, in its own way, undermines the foundations of the family. My
list was never meant to be exhaustive as the Catechism of the Catholic
Church also mentions: divorce, fornication, rape, etc.
The state obviously responds to each of these threats to family life
in different ways as it exercises its coercive power. The government has
a solemn obligation to protect, not re-engineer, an institution that is
more fundamental to human life than the state. In a word, it must “build
fences” to protect the institution of marriage.
The coercive power of the state extends to traffic laws, tax policy,
education curriculum, communication regulations, and a whole host of
other areas including marriage.
For example, in the case of marriage, federal legislation prohibits
people from marrying if they are related linearly or as brother and
sister, whether by whole blood, half blood or by adoption. Specifically:
a woman may not marry her grandfather, father, grandson, son or brother.
A man may not marry his grandmother, mother, granddaughter, daughter of
sister.
The time has come for the government of Canada to use its coercive
powers to legislate that a couple being married must be one man and one
woman.
This is not a fascist or Hitler-like position, nor even an
anti-homosexual stance, but it reflects Christian teaching on the
primordial status of marriage and family life.
As an Albertan, I am afraid that we have been so concerned with the
Bill - C 38, communicating with and attempting to influence federal
politicians that we have neglected the provincial scene. As a result,
Premier Klein and our provincial government continue to flip flop on
traditional marriage.
One minute, posturing as the champions of traditional marriage, and
promising to renew the notwithstanding provision of the Alberta Defence
of Marriage Act, and the next moment, allowing the notwithstanding
provision to expire on March 22. The ultimate argument being that
provincial legislation would end up being a waste of tax-payer dollars.
Such an argument is hollow as there is no better place for Alberta to
invest its money than in the defence of marriage and family life. It is
time to be pro-active, not reactive. We don’t have to wait for the
federal government to act.
We should renew the notwithstanding provision of the Alberta Defence
of Marriage Act and add an amendment to the existing Marriage Act
stating that in order for a marriage to be solemnized in Alberta and a
marriage licence issued, the couple needs to be a man and a woman. The
issuing of marriage licences is a provincial right and this is where our
power resides.
April 21, 2005
F. B. Henry
Bishop of Calgary |