"It is...Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as 'profane novelties of words,' out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: 'This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved' (Athanasian Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim 'Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,' only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself." -- Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum 24 (1914)

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Waterloo Catholics Don't Know The Catechism

Peaceful protest greets controversial lecturer

Peter Lee/Record staff
1
2
WATERLOO — More than 100 people protested peacefully outside a University of Waterloo auditorium on Tuesday night as an American scholar known for his anti-gay views spoke inside.
And the protestors — lined up behind temporary fencing and carrying rainbow flags and homemade signs — outnumbered those who had come to hear University of Notre Dame professor emeritus Charles Rice.
Addressing the half-empty Modern Languages Theatre, Rice, 80, said he was surprised that his selection by a university committee to deliver the annual Pascal Lecture on Christianity and the Universe had generated such controversy. “I’m just a guy from Mishawaka, Indiana.”
And Rice — an accomplished and respected legal scholar — took great pains to explain that his talk wouldn’t stray from its focus on such concepts as conscience, reason and natural law.
But his reputation — as a devout Roman Catholic who believes same-sex marriage and abortion are wrong and who views homosexuality as a “moral disorder” — preceded him to the University of Waterloo and drew dozens who wanted to ensure Rice knew they don’t agree.
“I’m a practicing Roman Catholic and I cannot conceive of anybody in this day and age talking the way he talks,” said Jean Coughlan of Waterloo.
“I thought we had put this behind us,” she said. “I thought we had a society that was accepting of everyone.”
Melissa Sky and partner Shelley Secrett brought their six-year-old son, Liam, to the protest.
“The university chose to honour someone who blatantly discriminates against our family,” said Sky, a UW alumnus. “We’re not here to silence him. We’re here as a counterpoint.”
The university beefed up security inside and outside the theatre on Tuesday, with at least four paid-duty Waterloo Regional Police officers on hand to bolster the ranks of several campus police officers. No incidents were reported and no one disrupted the talk.
Rice told the audience that he respected the protestors. “I admire, as a matter of fact, their tenacity and their fervour.”
But before launching into a lecture sprinkled with humour and philosophical questions, he defended his contentious beliefs.
“I adhere to and advance the teachings of the Catholic Church on same-sex marriage and other issues, and I plead guilty.”
Rice’s visit to UW includes teaching a philosophy class and giving a private seminar to select faculty. Another group plans to protest his visit by holding a symposium on tolerance and inclusivity in Christianity on Thursday evening, after Rice will have left the campus.

3 comments:

  1. I couldn't make it because of a family obligation, though I wanted to attend.

    The most disturbing part about this article is not the fact that there were protests (that's to be expected).

    Nor is it that the protests were nonsensical (e.g. UW is honoring a man who discriminates against my family...oh brother).

    Nor is it even that the article itself is shockingly biased (no mention of Dr. Rice's actual defense of his views, pointing out more sharply that there were more protesters than attendees...begging the question of why this is worthy of coverage in the first place etc.)

    No. The most disturbing part of this article is Ms. Coughlan's comment:
    “I’m a practicing Roman Catholic and I cannot conceive of anybody in this day and age talking the way he talks".

    To be fair, I don't know if Ms. Coughlan was referring to Dr. Rice's rhetoric while allowing that his basic positions are in line with Catholic teaching. But that seems to be an overly charitable interpretation. Of course, it's the ridiculous bias of the article that even permits that understanding as a possibility.

    Even if that's the case (and I strongly doubt it), the scandal of this quote is still considerable, because the only thing Dr. Rice is reported to have said is that he advances the teaching of the Catholic Church. Ergo, Ms. Coughlan is made to sound as though she is lying either about being a "practicing Catholic" (a term I consider redundant) or about being incredulous about Dr. Rice's positions. It's more likely, however, that Ms. Coughlan was not misquoted. Reporters like this one rarely misquote dissident remarks. They save their "editing" skills for faithful Catholics who don't channel the spirit of the age.

    Ms. Coughlan's quote would have done less damage and caused less scandal had she simply said "I don't agree with the Catholic Church on these issues, and here's why...". But instead, assisted by the reporter, she muddied the waters by obfuscating the authentic Catholic position on these issues in the minds of public, especially in those who genuinely don't know where to find authentic Catholic teaching. My concern is for those who would otherwise be interested in the Catholic Church, to the salvation of their eternal souls. Comments like this one turn away inquiring minds and open hearts. Not to mention that they also confuse the uncatechized faithful, who, in turn, will be even less effective in their public witness for Christ and His Holy Church.

    So.....I know the title of this blog post actually says it all.
    I know anyone reading this already knows all this. I apologize if I have wasted your time.
    But it felt good to write it anyway.

    Let us pray for Dr. Rice.
    Let us pray for Ms. Coughlan.
    Let us pray for Mr. Davis.
    Let us pray for the protestors.
    Let us pray for our bishops, that they may diligently teach the Faith.
    Let us pray for Our Holy Father, that he will not flee because of the wolves.
    Let us pray for vocations.
    Let us pray for ourselves and our families, that we may boldly and powerfully proclaim the Faith with our lives.

    Let us weep with Our Lady of Sorrows for the Church and the world.

    JG

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Joe, Sadly, there are many Catholics like Jean Coughlan who think they know the faith but don't. In my humble opinion, the contraception debate in America and the Gay-Straight-Alliance school clubs in Ontario will flush out the truth and educate many people. There will be casualties. Many saints are formed during times of crisis.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Indeed.
    Although nothing can actually "offset" even a single casualty, as if a soul is a commodity, I do hope that in the mess of it all, a harvest of converts may be cultivated in this crisis. Honest thinking Protestants, of which I was one, will have no choice but to face decisions about the knowability and revelation of ultimate Truth, much like the next article you posted elucidates.

    ReplyDelete