The
Catholic Bishops of Canada address this message on marriage to the faithful of
their communities, yet also in the hope that these reflections will be widely
heard by all who are participating in the current debate.
Many voices have made themselves heard since 17
July 2003, when the federal government referred to the Supreme Court of Canada
its draft legislation to redefine marriage, for civil purposes, as “the
lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others”. This proposal has resulted in unprecedented
controversy as it concerns a fundamental social and religious institution to
which people have profound attachment.
Marriage
is a human reality, a natural institution that precedes all social, legal and
religious systems. Marriage has existed since time immemorial. “Marriage
predates our present government or any other and predates, as well, the
founding of the Church. Marriage is not the creature of the State or Church,
and neither a government nor the Church has authority to change its nature.”[1]
This form of life for couples has always been valued and protected as an institution
because of its unique character, its way of ordering human relationships, and
its procreative potential.
Marriage
between a woman and a man constitutes a unique good for all society. It has a
fundamental and irreplaceable role in building societies and civilizations. The
social value of marriage comes from its role as a stabilizing force for the
family, which in turn is the basic unit of society. The conjugal partnership of
a man and a woman has always been considered to be the basis of the family,
providing a stable and positive environment in which to care for children and
so educate future generations. The family is at the heart of the social bonds
that unite one generation with the next, and it is within the family that
tomorrow’s society learns how to love and relate to others, as eloquently
indicated by the statistics from the last Census.[2]
A Specific Commitment
In
marriage, what is socially and legally recognized is not only a personal
commitment, but also a social commitment: to contribute to the future of
society by having and raising children. It is true that procreation is not the
only goal of marriage, but it is certainly a key component.
Laws
must be developed not only according to their impact on individuals, but also
according to their impact on the social fabric. It is important, for the
stability of the family and indeed for the stability of all society, to
strengthen the institution of marriage. “The
State has a demonstrably genuine justification in affording recognition,
preference, and precedence to the nature and character of the core social and
legal arrangement by which society endures.”[3]
Since
the very beginnings of this debate, we have acknowledged there is a desire to
give formal protection to other forms of adult personal relationships which
also involve commitment, mutual care, and emotional and financial
interdependence. We remain convinced solutions can be found without proceeding
to a radical redefinition of marriage.
Invoking the principles of equity, equality,
autonomy and freedom of choice, the government in its draft legislation
proposes to remove the distinctions between heterosexual spouses and same-sex
partners in order to give the latter access to normative marital status.
However, the State must not confuse equality with uniformity by simply
substituting one for the other. Non-discrimination does not require uniformity;
it requires respect for diversity and differences. Society should value
diversity. In the current context, refusing to establish the necessary
distinctions leads to confusion and to the devaluing of diversity. It is not
discriminatory to treat different realities differently.
There has been a
vigorous and interesting debate in the media about the relationship between
faith and politics. This is not solely a Catholic or even a religious issue but
one that applies universally, since everyone has an overall sense of
fundamental values and beliefs. For some people, this is informed largely by
religious convictions; for others, it is based on philosophical principles; and
for yet others, it involves what are called secular values. The Catholic Church
does not draw a rigid line between faith and life. On the contrary, it expects
its members, whatever their vocation, profession or occupation, to incarnate
their faith in everyday life.
Whatever the issue,
be it politics, the economy, military intervention or marriage, one should
assume that most politicians will bring their fundamental values to the
discussion and form their consciences accordingly. What the Church asks of
Catholic politicians, and indeed of every Catholic, is to develop their
conscience through prayer, meditation, careful reading of Scripture and
respectful listening to the teaching of the Church, in order to heed that “objective
moral law, which as the ‘natural law’ written in the human heart, is the
obligatory point of reference for civil law itself.”[4]
Far from taking away
the freedom of the Catholic politician, the Church recognizes it, putting the
personal responsibility on the individual politician to discern on the basis of
a well-formed conscience the best possible way to achieve the common good. All
politicians are first and foremost accountable to their conscience, and then to
their constituents.
Much has been made
of the fact that the draft bill on marriage which has been referred to the
Supreme Court of Canada states in its second clause that “Nothing in this
Act affects the freedom of officials of religious groups to refuse to perform
marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.” While
the intention is appreciated, the fact remains that freedom of religion is
already guaranteed in the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. The proposed
clause adds nothing further.
Moreover, while
supporters of the bill constantly reiterate that religious officials will not
have to perform marriages that may be contrary to their beliefs, their argument
misses the point on why Catholic religious leaders are participating in this
debate. Clearly, marriage as one of the seven sacraments of the Church has
important religious meaning. But it also has enormous social importance and
significance because of its pivotal role in the procreation of children and the
nurturing of future generations. Likewise, the anthropological, personal,
religious and social dimensions of marriage are deeply rooted in history and
culture.
The Catholic Bishops
of Canada are participating in this debate and encouraging lay people,
especially those who are married, to do so as well, not just because we are
concerned about the freedom of clergy to celebrate the sacrament of marriage,
but especially because we believe that marriage between a man and a woman benefits society and serves the common good
which all Catholics are called to promote.
The
biblical text on the creation of the world in the first two chapters of the
Book of Genesis uses poetic imagery to convey fundamental truths about
humanity. Two major points can be taken from this text which offer a profound
understanding of the conjugal state. First, God gives human beings freedom,
fertility, power, and the stewardship of all the earth and everything that
inhabits it. Secondly, human beings are created in God’s image: “God created
humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he
created them” (Genesis 1.27). This is the wellspring of the dignity, meaning and
life of the human being.
The
image of God is manifested in both a personal and a conjugal way. In Genesis
1.31, this image of God is the pinnacle of creation which leads to its
fullness: “God
saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good.” The image
and likeness of God is not only in the very nature of the couple, but also in
their power to give life through procreation.
In the eyes of the Catholic Church, marriage
takes on a primary importance because Christ elevated it to the dignity of a
sacrament. “Even if the love between a man
and a woman is imperfect, it is always called to manifest in a tangible way
what Jesus revealed in abundance: the irrevocable love of God that is forever
linked to our humanity…. Married couples take part in this mystery. They become
living signs of it.”[5] The sacrament of marriage is a sign of the union between
Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5.31-32). As the icon of God’s love,
the sacrament of marriage is also the icon of human dignity and greatness. The
key image of creation is reflected in the richness of the masculine and
feminine dimensions of the heterosexual couple. The fact that human beings are
created female and male, in God’s image, and that procreative power flows from
their union are two fundamental aspects of marriage.
This
social and conjugal unit – by its binding love, by its inherent ability to bear
children, and by the ensuing responsibility of father and mother to care for
their children – not only enriches society but is its very cornerstone. For
Christians, marriage marks a new page in the sacred story
that began at baptism. It is a new moment in salvation history when the
couple, forming a community of life and love, becomes a sign of Christ’s love
for his Church. The marriage bond is thus a covenant to be lived, an
unconditional promise between two people that also involves the community.
Looming
Problems
For the first time in its history, Canada is faced
with a proposal that it accept two conflicting definitions of marriage, one
that would be civilly valid and another that would be religiously valid, at
least for most faith groups. The two definitions are inherently contradictory.
Society needs to think long and deeply before going down this unknown and
troubling road.
The
marriage of a man and a woman is not just one form of association or
institutional model among others. It is the institution on which society is
founded. The relationship created by marriage between a woman and a man is a
fundamental human reality which is at the basis of the social community.
Marriage needs to be preserved as an
institution uniting two members of the opposite sex. For the common good of
society, it must be protected. Together with so many other Canadians, as
Catholic Bishops we call on the State to protect and support marriage as the
union of a woman and a man, in accordance with both its institutional nature
and its foundational role for the family. We reject the attempt of the State to
reduce all intimate personal relationships to the same level, leading to the
disappearance of the civil institution of marriage as understood in all human
societies since time immemorial. Because of the recognized contributions that
the institution of marriage brings to the stability of the family and to the
future of society, legislators have the duty of preserving the distinction
between marriage and other forms of relationships involving two persons.
The
Catholic Bishops of Canada call for the definition of marriage to remain
intact: “the union of one man and one woman to the
exclusion of all others.”[6]
We ask all those who believe that marriage is the legal union between a woman and a man to the exclusion of any other
person to assume their responsibilities as citizens and to indicate to
their political representatives, in a spirit of love and deep respect for all
people, their firm opposition to a redefinition of marriage that includes
same-sex partners. Such a fundamental change, we are profoundly convinced, will
have a serious impact on society.
10
September 2003
Most
Reverend Jacques Berthelet, C.S.V.
Bishop
of Saint-Jean-Longueuil
President
of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops
Together
with the other members of the Permanent Council of the Canadian Conference of
Catholic Bishops:
–Most
Reverend Brendan O’Brien, Vice President, Archbishop of St. John’s
–Most
Reverend André Gaumond, Co-Treasurer, Archbishop of Sherbrooke
–Most
Reverend Anthony Tonnos, Co-Treasurer, Bishop of Hamilton
–His
Eminence Jean-Claude Cardinal Turcotte, Archbishop of Montreal
–His
Eminence Aloysius Cardinal M. Ambrozic, Archbishop of Toronto
–Most
Reverend Marc Ouellet, Archbishop of Quebec and Primate of Canada
–Most
Reverend Michael Bzdel, C.Ss.R., Archeparch of Winnipeg and Metropolitan of the
Ukrainian Catholics of Canada
–Most
Reverend Roger Ébacher, Archbishop of Gatineau-Hull
–Most
Reverend Terrence Prendergast, S.J., Archbishop of Halifax and Apostolic
Administrator of Yarmouth
–Most
Reverend Thomas Collins, Archbishop of Edmonton
–Most
Reverend V. James Weisgerber, Archbishop of Winnipeg
–Most
Reverend Frederick Henry, Bishop of Calgary
–Most Reverend Clément
Fecteau, Bishop of Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pocatière
–Most
Reverend Paul Marchand, S.M.M., Bishop of Timmins
–Most
Reverend Paul-André Durocher, Bishop of Alexandria-Cornwall
ENDNOTES
[2] The
results of the 2001 Census show that of the 8.4 million families in Canada, 5.9
million (70%) are headed by married couples, 1.3 million (16%) are headed by
single parents, 1.2 million (14%) by common-law partners, and 34,200 (0.5%) by
same-sex partners. The Census also shows that 68% of children ages 0 to 14 live
with their married parents, 13% live with common-law parents, and 19% do not
live with both parents. Furthermore, “The proportion of married-couple families was 70% in 2001…. Still,
while younger Canadian men and women are more likely to start their conjugal
life through a common-law relationship … most will eventually marry (roughly
75%) if trends observed in 2001 were to continue.”
Statistics Canada, Analysis of the 2001 Census Data, “Profile of Canadian families and households:
Diversification continues,” 22 October 2002, pp. 3-4, 7. Also cited in
Catholic Organization for Life and Family, “Backgrounder: Recent statistics
about marriage and other unions”, March 2003.
[3] Mr. Justice Ian Pitfield, in a
decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, October 2001, expressed this
opinion regarding the social dimension of marriage.
[4] Pope John Paul II, Encyclical
Letter Evangelium Vitae, 1995, No. 70.
[6] The House of Commons on 9 June 1999
agreed with this traditional and universal definition of marriage in approving
the following resolution by a vote of 216 to 55: “That, in the opinion of this
House, it is necessary, in light of public debate around recent court
decisions, to state that marriage is and should remain the union of one man and
one woman to the exclusion of all others, and Parliament will take all
necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada to preserve
this definition of marriage in Canada.”
Since then, the Parliament of Canada has
reaffirmed the definition of marriage as the legal union of a man and a woman
to the exclusion of all others in the following statutes:
–
The
Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, 1999 (Bill C-78);
–
The
Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, 2000 (Bill C-23), which
according to the Department of Justice was amended at the time specifically in
order to “confirm the Government of Canada’s commitment to the institution of
marriage by reaffirming that nothing in the legislation affects the meaning of
marriage, which remains ‘the lawful union of one man and one woman to the
exclusion of all others’”;
–
The
Federal Law–Civil Law Harmonization Act, No. 1, 2001 (Bill S-4).