BishopAccountability.org
	Priests Who Oppose Church View Are Muzzled By Doug Millroy The Sault [Canada] August 23, 2003 Columns - WHEN THE ISSUE of same-sex marriage finally reaches the floor of the House of Commons, it will be decided by a free vote, members being allowed to stray outside party lines to speak their pieces and vote their consciences. That will be much more than is being allowed by the Roman Catholic Church, which, vehemently opposed to same-sex marriage, has clamped a muzzle on its priests, threatening expulsion to those who expressly oppose the church's position. Yet two have courageously spoken out strongly against the church's stand. One, Rev. Paul Lundrigan, has been reprimanded; the other, Rev. Raymond Gravel, expected a reprimand but in stark contrast to Lundrigan received none, even though he was called before his bishop. In a recent sermon to his two Newfoundland parishes — St. Kevin's Parish in Goulds and St. Joseph's in Petty Harbour — and in comments to the media, Lundrigan criticized the church for being hypocritical by fighting same-sex marriages when it has remained silent about sexual abuse by its clergy members, criticism to which most of us on the outside would say amen. Lundrigan, like other priests across Canada, received a letter from his archbishop urging him to encourage parishioners to lobby members of Parliament to vote against same-sex marriage legislation. He told his two congregations he could not in good conscience follow the instruction and received applause from both when he finished his sermons. Last Sunday, the CBC reported, the Archbishop of St. John's went to Lundrigan's parishes to publicly scold the priest and tell the parishioners that his comments were totally unacceptable. Archbishop Brendan O'Brien, taking over the pulpit, said that a priest has a responsibility to deliver the official teachings of the church, including any scripture-based position the church takes. However, he said since Lundrigan was repentant he would let him remain in the church. Many parishioners shook their heads as the archbishop spoke and Colleen Brophy told the CBC, "They're trying to get people back into the church and this is certainly not doing it. It was absolutely terrible to tell the priest that either he be quiet, or you're gone." Lundrigan, who sat near the altar during the archbishop's message, would only say later that he accepts the archbishop's ruling. Gravel spoke out about the church's stand in a letter in Montreal's La Presse, saying the Vatican's position against same-sex marriage is "discriminatory, hurtful and offensive . . . for everyone who works to promote human rights and to re-establish justice and equality." Labelling the church's hierarchy as outmoded and sick, he said today's world needs "words of hope rather than a verdict of condemnation." "If Christ came today, he wouldn't condemn anybody," Gravel said. "He welcomed people, he didn't condemn them." Gravel, who is a priest in the parish of Saint-Joachim-de-La-Plaine and is also chaplain for the Laval police force, said the Vatican is wrong to say that homosexuality is a deviance. "Everyone knows that sexual deviations are not exclusively related to gays, but to everyone who has to live his or her sexuality clandestinely. In this matter, the clergy has become masterful, as numerous priests frequent parks, saunas and public washrooms to let off steam," his letter said. He said he knows lots of priests who share his views but they are afraid to speak out, a sad commentary indeed on the church leadership. But Gravel, who knew he was putting his career on the line by speaking out, was quoted in The Montreal Gazette as saying his meeting with his bishop was cordial. "He (Joliette Bishop Gilles Lussier) didn't judge me or muzzle me. He said my (writing) style was a bit harsh" but despite that criticism Gravel said Lussier "was very warm and understanding." "But I know it won't go over well in Rome." It undoubtedly won't, the Vatican already waging full-scale war against the same-sex marriage legislation — witness its attempt to cow federal politicians. The thought, of course, is that fear for their jobs will bring the MPs into line. It is obviously working as many Liberals, forsaking their roots, suddenly have begun to look as though they are in the wrong party, their seeming lack of tolerance pushing them closer to Canadian Alliance conservatism rather than small "l" liberal values. They do not care about the rightness or wrongness of the legislation; they care only about themselves, about protecting their livelihood. The votes of such MPs, cast out of fear, could hardly be considered honest — or admirable. Prime Minister Chretien, who is Catholic, has been under pressure but has held fast, stating that as prime minister his responsibility to his country overrides his responsibility to his church. His heir apparent, Paul Martin, also a Catholic, said his duties as a lawmaker "must take in in a wider perspective" than his faith, but he is now waffling somewhat, saying that although he supports the legislation he is willing to "explore other options," an attempt to please everyone that leaves me wondering if he is really the strong character he is made out to be. Both agree, however, that it is Parliament, not the church, that will make any decision in regard to same-sex marriage. Sault MP Carmen Provenzano obviously is one politician who is feeling the heat and apparently succumbing to it. Whereas his counterpart in Algoma-Manitoulin, Brent St. Denis, is voting his heart and conscience and supporting the legislation, Provenzano is opting out. Quoted as saying he personally favours it, he says he will follow the wishes of his constituents and vote against it. I'm having trouble understanding how he knows what the wishes of his constituents are, since they are obviously varied as they are on any issue. I think he is simply reacting in knee-jerk fashion to those making the most noise, this always coming from those who are against anything. Usually little is heard from proponents, although I note in this case there have been a lot of letters of support appearing in this paper. I thought the one by Matthew Carlton that appeared Monday said it all. "Allowing same-sex marriage to be legal in this country is strictly about being fair and allowing homosexuals the same rights and privileges that our heterosexual citizens have. It is really that simple," he wrote. "When our members of Parliament sit down to finally vote on allowing same-sex marriages to be legal, they must ask themselves this question: ‘If I vote to allow homosexuals the same marriage rights as heterosexuals, will that, in fact, do harm to heterosexuals and break down the institution of marriage for them?' "The simple and obvious answer is, ‘No.' There is no way a fair-minded member of Parliament could come up with any other conclusion." Nor can anyone else. Those who are against same-sex marriage are against it simply because it offends them, not that it will bring them or anyone else any harm. They just don't like the idea. It's as simple as that. Doug Millroy is editor emeritus of The Sault Star. Many parishioners shook their heads as the archbishop spoke and Colleen Brophy told the CBC, "They're trying to get people back into the church and this is certainly not doing it. It was absolutely terrible to tell the priest that either he be quiet, or you're gone." Lundrigan, who sat near the altar during the archbishop's message, would only say later that he accepts the archbishop's ruling. Gravel spoke out about the church's stand in a letter in Montreal's La Presse, saying the Vatican's position against same-sex marriage is "discriminatory, hurtful and offensive . . . for everyone who works to promote human rights and to re-establish justice and equality." Labelling the church's hierarchy as outmoded and sick, he said today's world needs "words of hope rather than a verdict of condemnation." "If Christ came today, he wouldn't condemn anybody," Gravel said. "He welcomed people, he didn't condemn them." Gravel, who is a priest in the parish of Saint-Joachim-de-La-Plaine and is also chaplain for the Laval police force, said the Vatican is wrong to say that homosexuality is a deviance. "Everyone knows that sexual deviations are not exclusively related to gays, but to everyone who has to live his or her sexuality clandestinely. In this matter, the clergy has become masterful, as numerous priests frequent parks, saunas and public washrooms to let off steam," his letter said. He said he knows lots of priests who share his views but they are afraid to speak out, a sad commentary indeed on the church leadership. But Gravel, who knew he was putting his career on the line by speaking out, was quoted in The Montreal Gazette as saying his meeting with his bishop was cordial. "He (Joliette Bishop Gilles Lussier) didn't judge me or muzzle me. He said my (writing) style was a bit harsh" but despite that criticism Gravel said Lussier "was very warm and understanding." "But I know it won't go over well in Rome." It undoubtedly won't, the Vatican already waging full-scale war against the same-sex marriage legislation — witness its attempt to cow federal politicians. The thought, of course, is that fear for their jobs will bring the MPs into line. It is obviously working as many Liberals, forsaking their roots, suddenly have begun to look as though they are in the wrong party, their seeming lack of tolerance pushing them closer to Canadian Alliance conservatism rather than small "l" liberal values. They do not care about the rightness or wrongness of the legislation; they care only about themselves, about protecting their livelihood. The votes of such MPs, cast out of fear, could hardly be considered honest — or admirable. Prime Minister Chretien, who is Catholic, has been under pressure but has held fast, stating that as prime minister his responsibility to his country overrides his responsibility to his church. His heir apparent, Paul Martin, also a Catholic, said his duties as a lawmaker "must take in in a wider perspective" than his faith, but he is now waffling somewhat, saying that although he supports the legislation he is willing to "explore other options," an attempt to please everyone that leaves me wondering if he is really the strong character he is made out to be. Both agree, however, that it is Parliament, not the church, that will make any decision in regard to same-sex marriage. Sault MP Carmen Provenzano obviously is one politician who is feeling the heat and apparently succumbing to it. Whereas his counterpart in Algoma-Manitoulin, Brent St. Denis, is voting his heart and conscience and supporting the legislation, Provenzano is opting out. Quoted as saying he personally favours it, he says he will follow the wishes of his constituents and vote against it. I'm having trouble understanding how he knows what the wishes of his constituents are, since they are obviously varied as they are on any issue. I think he is simply reacting in knee-jerk fashion to those making the most noise, this always coming from those who are against anything. Usually little is heard from proponents, although I note in this case there have been a lot of letters of support appearing in this paper. I thought the one by Matthew Carlton that appeared Monday said it all. "Allowing same-sex marriage to be legal in this country is strictly about being fair and allowing homosexuals the same rights and privileges that our heterosexual citizens have. It is really that simple," he wrote. "When our members of Parliament sit down to finally vote on allowing same-sex marriages to be legal, they must ask themselves this question: ‘If I vote to allow homosexuals the same marriage rights as heterosexuals, will that, in fact, do harm to heterosexuals and break down the institution of marriage for them?' "The simple and obvious answer is, ‘No.' There is no way a fair-minded member of Parliament could come up with any other conclusion." Nor can anyone else. Those who are against same-sex marriage are against it simply because it offends them, not that it will bring them or anyone else any harm. They just don't like the idea. It's as simple as that. Doug Millroy is editor emeritus of The Sault Star.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.