| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | Groups together "homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and pornography..." |
| Calls for governments to use "its coercive power to proscribe or curtail" homosexuality. |
Carol Johnson filed the first complaint. She wrote in her letter: "I believe the publication of Bishop Henry's letter is likely to expose homosexuals to hatred or contempt. These remarks are particularly dangerous when made by a person in a position of trust and authority."
Norman Greenfield filed a personal complaint with the Commission on MAR-29. 1 He was allegedly shocked when he found that Bishop Henry had released his name to the press. Complaints to the commission are supposed to be confidential. Greenfield said: "I'm not doing this because anybody in my family is gay, I'm just doing it because what Bishop Henry seems to think he can get away with saying in public against an identifiable group. I think the debate over same-sex marriage has gotten way out of hand, and we need to bring it back to some level of civility. "
Some reactions to the complaints before the Commission:
| Bishop Henry held a news conference on 2005-MAR-30. He expressed concern that
his freedom of religion and free speech have been violated. He said: "Those
that support same-sex marriage want to shut the churches out of this
important debate. Those who favor same-sex marriage have been given a
full opportunity to state their views on the issue. But now they are
saying anyone who speaks out against same-sex marriage is discriminating
against homosexuals." Henry was disappointed that the Commission didn't dismiss the two complaints without further study. He said: "I assumed that the one who fields this would have looked at this and said this doesn't stand. This is not an Ernst Zundel case by any means. We cannot give credence to this." [Zundel is a holocaust denier who lived in Canada and was recently deported to Germany where he was arrested.] |
| Bishop Henry, in an interview with LifeSiteNews, said: "If the Human Rights Complaint is successful, it will prevent me from expressing my views and the position of the Roman Catholic Church. It prevents me and other Church leaders from speaking out freely in opposition to same-sex marriage. It also prevents me from outlining the position of the Roman Catholic Church to those who attend church in my Diocese." 2 |
| Egale Canada's regional director, Stephen Lock, acknowledged that Bishop Henry has an obligation to represent the views of his church. But he said that grouping homosexuality together with pornography and prostitution is going too far. He also said: "When anyone starts calling for the coercive power of the State to suppress or curtail any legal activity, that's really oppressive to be saying stuff like that." Egale Canada is a gay rights lobby group, |
| Focus on the Family Canada's spokesperson, Derek Rogusky, feelt that churches and other religious groups should enjoy freedom of speech on matters like homosexuality and same-sex marriage. He commented: "We're talking about changing something that's a foundational institution of our society, we're not talking about changing the speed limit on the street. If anyone is successful in bringing charges against Bishop Henry, they would come after other organizations. It shows that religious freedom protections that the government talks about really aren't there." Focus is a Evangelical Protestant group. 1 |
| Catholic World News reported that: "A supporter of same-sex marriage is using the human rights process in Canada to take away Bishop Frederick Henry's right to freedom of religion and free speech, supporters of the bishop said...They said proponents of same-sex marriage want to use intimidation to silence the Catholic Church on the issue." 3 |
| According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) Bishop Henry stated: "I stand by the letter, I wouldn't change one comma. Why should I apologize? I think I'm owed an apology for putting me through this rigmarole of harassment, intimidation and attempt to silence me.....Right now, I find myself in the very interesting position of, having been an advocate of social justice all of my life, I'm cast in the victim position right now, where I must defend myself. Defend the freedom of religion and the freedom of the right to speak on this particular issue." 4 |
| David Mainse of Marriage Canada wrote: "There is legal action now underway against a Roman Catholic Bishop for simply writing to his priests calling homosexual acts sin." 5 |
| The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada wrote: "Putting sanctions or restrictions on Bishop Henry is nothing short of censorship of religious expression." 6 |
| Lorne Gunter of the National Post wrote: "...the Roman Catholic bishop of Calgary,...is being hauled before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for having the audacity to tell Calgary Catholics, in an open letter last January, that homosexual marriage is contrary to Catholic teaching, and that the government should act aggressively on that teaching." 7 |
| In an article subtitled: "Calgary Bishop Fred Henry Defends Religious Freedom," LifeSiteNews.com wrote: "A supporter of same-sex marriage is using the human rights process to take away Bishop Frederick Henry's right to freedom of religion and free speech. Despite the Catholic Church's established role in preparing men and women for marriage and conducting religious marriage ceremonies between men and women, it appears that supporters of same-sex marriage do not want religious leaders to be part of the debate on this issue." 2 |
| The Catholic Civil Rights League supported Bishop Henry. President Phil Horgan said: |
"This action strikes at the core of freedom of speech and freedom of religion guaranteed to all Canadians in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Bishop Henry's remarks were completely consistent with a Church leader fulfilling his teaching function. Homosexual practices, adultery, prostitution, and pornography are all sinful acts in the teachings of the Church. It has always been recognized that with all serious sins, the state has a responsibility in exercising its authority to promote the common good whether through the Criminal Code, tax policy, education standards or the other broad areas of its jurisdiction. Bishop Henry raises legitimate questions of what impact current policies will have on the understanding of the family.
"In fact, Bishop Henry has personally been the subject of the state's coercive power, starting when an official of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency threatened to challenge the charitable status of the Diocese. (The bishop had spoken out on the apparent moral incoherence of the Prime Minister, who continues to make reference to his standing in the Catholic Church..."
“A bishop has every right to raise concerns on matters directly related to the teachings of the Catholic Church, as many of our bishops are currently doing in the public debate on marriage and family" 14
| The Calgary Herald is reported to have quoted the Very Reverend Bill Phipps, former Moderator of the United Church of Canada, as saying, "If you're going to use freedom of speech, you've got to take the consequences of what you are saying...He portrays himself as a victim. Well, please. Why are we focusing on one bishop who loves the spotlight?...This is about a group who have been maligned, who have been beaten up physically, mentally and spiritually." 15 Phipps is also quoted as saying: "If you're going to use freedom of speech, you've got to take the consequences of what you are saying." 16 |
The applicable Alberta legislation:
The basic question is whether Bishop Henry has committed an offense under the Alberta Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act when he published his letter concerning SSM on 2005-JAN. 8
Section 3(1) of that act states:
"No person shall publish,
issue or display or cause to be published, issued or displayed before the public
any statement, publication, notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation
that
(a) indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or
a class of persons, or
(b) is likely to expose a person or a class of persons to hatred or contempt
because of the race, religious beliefs, colour, gender, physical disability,
mental disability, age, ancestry, place of origin, marital status, source of
income or family status of that person or class of persons."
9
Although sexual orientation was not included in the act as passed by the legislature, the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission has a note on their web site which states: "Although it is not expressly stated in the Act, as of April 2, 1998, sexual orientation is 'read in' to the Act by the Supreme Court of Canada as a protected ground of discrimination in Alberta." 10
The Human Rights Commission's resolution process:
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported:
"Mary Riddle, director of the Alberta Human Rights Commission, says she can't discuss specific complaints, but that an attempt will be made to resolve it through conciliation.
'That's the first step, and it's like mediation. The parties get together with a staff person from the commission, talk about the issue and try to find some common ground, try to resolve the issue,' Riddle said.
If conciliation doesn't work, a complaint is investigated and could be put to a panel which would decide whether there has been a breach of the Charter. The process could take up to a year.
Failing a successful outcome to the conciliation process, the complaint will be investigated by the commission and potentially put to a panel who will decide whether there have been any charter breach. That process could take up to a year." 4
Are the complaints before the Human Rights Commission reasonable?
Reactions to Bishop Henry's pastoral letter has concentrated on four of its passages:
- The Roman Catholic Church opposes homosexual behavior and SSM. It recognizes only opposite-sex marriages of one man and one woman. Bishop Henry wrote that the church considers "...marriage to be a sacrament, a sacred covenant in which husband and wife express their mutual love, and join with God in the creation of a new human person, destined for eternal life..... A same-sex union is not a physical union that transmits human life, producing children. A same-sex union is not the joining of two complementary natures that complete each other." 8 Here, Bishop Henry appears to be accurately explaining the Church's position.
- "...homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and pornography undermine
the foundations of the family, the basis of society." Here, he links
homosexuality with one behavior that is generally considered to be immoral
(adultery) and two behaviors that can be a criminal act (soliciting for the
purposes of prostitution, and possession of certain kinds of pornography).
It is not clear what Bishop Henry meant by the word "homosexuality."
 | It could refer to persons who have a homosexual orientation as opposed to a heterosexual or bisexual orientation. |
| It could refer to persons who engage in same-sex behavior. |
We suspect that it is the latter. Rreligious conservatives almost always refer to behavior when they use the term "homosexuality" Religious liberals, gays, lesbians, human sexuality researchers, mental health therapists etc. generally describe homosexuality as a sexual orientation.
The term "coercive power" itself was not clear at the time that the complaints were made. It might imply that homosexual behavior, adultery, and possession of pornographic images should be criminalized and that penalties for soliciting for prostitution be continued. This may contradict Church teaching on homosexuality. in 1992, the Vatican issued a new Catechism for the church. It states that gays and lesbians "...do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial....One must avoid all unjust discrimination against them." 11 The church believes that there are both just and unjust forms of discrimination against gays and lesbians. For example, they advocate that homosexuals be excluded from marriage and from certain professions. But, to our knowledge, they do not now advocate jailing adults for private, consensual same-sex behavior.
Religious conservatives and gay-positive groups have zeroed in on different passages in Bishop Henry's letter:
| None of the reactions by religious conservatives that we have seen in the media or on the Internet refer to Bishop Henry's suggestion that the state oppress homosexuals or that homosexual behavior is "evil." Their concern refers solely to the first point listed above. That is, Bishop Henry must enjoy the religious freedom to express his church's beliefs on homosexuality. So far, nobody has disputed this point. The Bishop's religious freedoms do not appear to be in jeopardy. | ||||||
| Most of the reactions by gay-positive groups and individuals refer to passages in the letter which:
|
Tom Cerber posted an essay on The Politic web site, which said in part: "EGALE draws a dubious distinction between Henry’s legitimate (in their eyes) representation of his church’s viewpoint, and 'crossing the line' to promote coercion. What if his church’s position is identical with that of the Canadian state 35 years ago - that homosexuality is a crime? Does advocating a belief once held by the Canadian government a crime?" 12
A case before the Commission might be made that a widely distributed letter which:
| Considers homosexuality to be similar to adultery, prostitution or adultery, and |
| Advocates that governments apply "coercive power" to "proscribe or curtail" homosexual behavior, and |
| Calls homosexual behavior "evil," |
is an offense under the act. But the case has yet to be proven.
One complaint against Bishop Henry dropped:
During a conciliation session at the Alberta Human Rights Commission on 2005-AUG-25, Norman Greenfield met with Bishop Henry, the bishop's legal representatives and a Commission lawyer. LifeSiteNews.com commented "...that the conciliation process is held 'without prejudice,' so what is said remains in the room and falls under the banner of confidentiality." However, both Bishop Henry and Norman Greenfield did make general comments about the process:
| Bishop Henry said that he was pleased with the outcome of the conciliation process. |
| Greenfield said that: "What I wanted to do is bring the issue to the media. There really is no other platform to do this, with the media selective in what sort of discussions they want to hear and the lack of public forums in the city for people like myself to go on and talk about this issue.....I never had a problem with the bishop or what he's preaching from the pulpit. I just had a problem with him asking our provincial government to use their coercive power to make same-sex marriage illegal." 13 |
LifeSiteNews.com reported that:
"Calgary Sun columnist Rick Bell comments on the case saying: 'Sadly, the commission isn't going to go after Norm for instigating this episode in the theatre of the absurd'."
"Others suggest it is time to put the ideologically oriented human rights commission process to bed. 'These Mickey Mouse courts have been frequently used by homosexual activists around the country to quash free speech and freedom of conscience,' Campaign Life Coalition President Jim Hughes told LifeSiteNews.com. Indeed, the mostly unnaccountable [sic] human rights complaints process has successfully been used to force Christian mayors to declare gay pride days, to force a newspaper and a Christian man to pay a fine for having an ad merely citing Biblical references on homosexuality, to have a Christian printer pay a fine for refusing to print materials for a homosexual activist organization and much more." 13
The second complaint before the Commission continues.
References used:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
- Bill Graveland, "Position on same-sex marriage prompts complaints against Calgary bishop," Canadian Press, 2005-MAR-30, at: http://start.shaw.ca/
- "Human Rights Complaint Filed Against Catholic Bishop for Defence of
Traditional Marriage
Calgary Bishop Fred Henry Defends Religious Freedom," LifeSiteNews, 2005-MAR-30, at: http://www.lifesite.net/ - "Human rights complaint filed against Canadian bishop," Catholic World News, 2005-MAR-31, at: http://www.cwnews.com/
- "Bishop defends anti-gay remarks," CBC Calgary, 2005-MAR-31, at: http://calgary.cbc.ca/
- "David Mainse' Letter to the Queen," Marriage Canada, at: http://www.marriagecanada.ca/
- ":: Defending Marriage," The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, at: http://www.evangelicalfellowship.ca
- Lorne Gunter, "Gay? Cool. Christian? Not so much," National Post, 2005-APR-11, Page A16.
- F.B. Henry, "On Same-Sex Marriage," 2005-JAN, at: http://www.rcdiocese-calgary.ab.ca/
- "Human rights, citizenship and multiculturalism act," Queen's Printer, at: http://www.qp.gov.ab.ca/
- "Sexual Orientation," Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, at: http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/
- # 2358 in the English version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
- Tom Cerber, "Homosexuality, Newspeak, and Censorship: Bishop Henry Hit with Human Rights Complaint," The Politic, 2005-MAR-30, at: http://www.thepolitic.com/
- "Gay Human Rights Complaint Against Calgary Bishop Dropped - Was All About Getting Media Attention," LifeSiteNews.com, 2005-AUG-25, at: http://www.lifesite.net/ Copyrighted © LifeSiteNews.com. Used by permission.
- "CCRL supports Bishop in human rights filing," Catholic Civil Rights League, 2005-MAR-31, at: http://www.ccrl.ca/
- "Bill Phipps," Reference.com, at: http://www.reference.com/
- "Frederick Henry," Reference.com, at: http://www.reference.com/
|
Home page > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > Canada > here |
Copyright © 2005 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Initial posting: 2005-NOV-03
Latest update: 2005-NOV-03
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
