Well folks, after this past week, Canada has now fallen behind enemy lines in the culture war. We’ve also shed our last vestiges of democracy and laid the foundation for a future religious persecution at the hands of the Sexual Revolt. First off, a motion to protect the traditional definition of marriage as “between a man and a woman” was narrowly defeated in our federal legislature. The Bill C-250 passed the following day (Thursday), which adds “sexual orientation” to the Canadian Code of Criminal Law in such narrow terms that basically the Bible and the Catechism of the Catholic Church now fulfill the legal definition of hate literature. Lifesite News provides a pretty good roundup of the situation. Meanwhile, all is not lost… John Pacheco continues to soldier on in the provincial election. However, I’m on the verge of seeking US citizenship.
Author: Pete Vere
Canon Law and Pornography in a Church
A number of readers have asked me to comment on what canon law has to say about the Italian church where some evil and blasphemous pornographers lied about filming a wedding scene. Basically, canon 1211 covers this subject in stating as follows: “Sacred places are violated by acts done in them which are gravely injurious and give scandal to the faithful when, in the judgement of the local Ordinary, these acts are so serious and so contrary to the holiness of the place that worship may not be held there until the harm is repaired by means of the penitential rite which is prescribed in the liturgical books.” I would say that filming a pornographic scene between a prostitute (they’re certainly not actors) pretending to be a priest and one pretending to be a bride that mocks not one but two sacraments (confession and marriage) is certainly gravely contrary to the holiness of a parish church.
Hi Alex!
This is Alex Cassar. Alex is the VP of the Family Coalition Party. Earlier today, Alex stopped by Catholic Light and kindly clarified his party’s platform about lowering taxation for families. (The FCP is the party for which our very own John Pacheco from St Blog’s is running.) So why aren’t you running Alex? You would make a good candidate yourself!
The Rosary vs. Contraception (and the Battle of the Bond)
Back in the Spring, a number of our readers asked me to post excerpts from a talk I gave to a regional CUF conference in Tucson, AZ. In this talk, I had contrasted the Rosary and contraception as far as their effects on marriage is concerned. I had mentioned at the time that this talk was being edited into an article for CUF’s magazine The Lay Witness, and I would let everyone know once it was out. For those who are interested, CUF has now made this piece available on their website under the title The Battle of the Bond. Here’s an excerpt:
Take the Joyful Mysteries, for example. In the Annunciation, we recognize Mary’s complete and total self-gift in consenting to be the tabernacle of the Incarnate Word. Her simple fiat—“let it be to me according to your word”—would change the course of human history. Because she humbly consented to the beginning of the divine life within her womb, man was to find redemption and salvation. Yet, in contraception, we find man frustrating the beginning of life in such a way that he becomes a self-contradiction by being opposed to (“contra”) his own conception. He becomes the arbiter of life and sets himself up as a god.
Split the Right Now
SHAMELESS SELF-PROMO ALERT!
California is not the only place suffering from election shennanigans right now, as true conservatives debate over whether they should support Arnold. Ontario, which is Canada’s largest province, is also going through an interesting election. In my latest Enter Stage Right column, I share why social and fiscal conservatives should not be scared to vote Family Coalition Party as an alternative to the Progressive Conservatives, even though it will likely mean splitting the right. Here’s a juicy excerpt from “Not Just For So-Cons: Why Fiscal Conservatives Should Vote Family Coalition Party in Ontario”:
In fact, one of the things I find interesting about the Family Coalition Party is that unlike many other social conservatives I come across, the party resists the temptation of paleo-conservative protectionism. According to their campaign literature, the FCP “supports the long-term removal of all measures that insulate industries, businesses, financial institutions, professions and trade unions from domestic and foreign competition.” In this sense, the FCP appears much more in tune with the global thinking of modern conservatism than the federal PCs under David Orchard.
Thus the FCP’s social conservative roots provide for solid fiscal conservative policy. The party clearly explains this correlation in their policy handbook. “The family has an important and necessary role in protecting and nurturing life,” one reads. “This role makes the family, rather than the individual, the basic building block of our society. When families are strong and prosperous, democracy and economic enterprise flourish. Strong families lessen problems in many areas of society; e.g.: marital separations, child abuse, teenage rebellion leading to alcohol and drug abuse, teenage pregnancies, runaways, school drop-outs, vandalism, theft and violence. Strong family ties and stable relationships are economically and socially beneficial, leading to fewer cases of single parents, better job stability, more productive members of society and decreased welfare costs.”
Because strong families make for a robust and free-market economy, and vice-versa, the Family Coalition Party proposes an education policy more in tune with the free market than the current status – or should I say statist? – quo. “The state should not push its own political agenda onto children in classrooms,” the policy manual states. “Choice is to education what competition is to business. It unleashes the pent-up creativity of educators, in response to consumer demands. Just as competition works to improve quality and lower prices, so taxpayers will save money when parents are allowed to choose in the education marketplace. Choice is the catalyst that will drive other school reforms — it will spark innovations in teaching, management, and learning.”