Government-regulated Christianity

  • On the Ortho-convert list, some­one posted a tran­script of an arti­cle that was so crazy that I sus­pected it of being the kind of hoax that Chris­tians e-mail to each other in per­pe­tu­ity. But no, this one appears to be real: On July 20, a retired pro­fes­sor named Bob Fer­gu­son pro­posed on Cana­dian pub­lic radio that reli­gion there be reg­u­lated by the fed­eral gov­ern­ment. (It came by way of LifesiteNews.com, but here’s a link that con­tains a link to the orig­i­nal speech — I assume. It has a .ram suf­fix and I can’t open it myself.)

    This would include all reli­gious peo­ple — or RRPs (reg­is­tered reli­gious prac­ti­tion­ers) as they would be des­ig­nated once they had reg­is­tered with the gov­ern­ment — but Fer­gu­son zeroes in on the Catholics as those most in need of being con­trolled by the state.

    “Given the iner­tia of the Catholic Church, per­haps we could encour­age reform by chang­ing the envi­ron­ment in which all reli­gions oper­ate,” Fer­gu­son began his com­men­tary in mea­sured tones yes­ter­day. “Couldn’t we insist that human rights, employ­ment and con­sumer leg­is­la­tion apply to them as it does other orga­ni­za­tions? Then it would be ille­gal to require a par­tic­u­lar mar­i­tal sta­tus as a con­di­tion of employ­ment or to exclude women from the priesthood. “

    Fer­gu­son con­tin­ued, “Of course the Vat­i­can wouldn’t like the changes, but they would come to accept them in time as a fact of life in Canada. Indeed I sus­pect many clergy would wel­come the exter­nal pressure.”

    Cer­tain of the more objec­tion­able prac­tices would be out­lawed out­right, like cir­cum­ci­sion, and RRPs would be made to adhere to a “moral code” (par­don me?) that would force them to accept gay mar­riage and women in the priest­hood, as well as mak­ing it a pun­ish­able offense to pro­claim that one reli­gion was true and another false.

    I won’t even go on with this. The arti­cle, which just con­tains frag­ments of the speech, has enough incen­di­ary mate­r­ial in it to make the gen­tlest soul want to book a flight to Ottawa just to seek this indi­vid­ual out in per­son so you could tell him off. I don’t repeat it here because I think that it will come to pass here, or come to pass in Canada in this gen­er­a­tion. But things are still trend­ing toward sec­u­lar human­ism in the mod­ern world, and some­times it takes some­thing this far ahead of the lev­els of accept­abil­ity to get us to notice it. All the more rea­son, per­haps, why I go ahead and get a lit­tle worked up over cur­rent events and pol­i­tics. For a serendip­i­tous hand­ful of rea­sons, we’ve got a bit of breath­ing space in Amer­ica at present. The forces that have attacked Chris­tian­ity for many decades have had to fall back and regroup. It’s won­der­ful. But I don’t see any rea­son to believe it’s per­ma­nent. Just as well for us to do what we can to build our­selves — indi­vid­u­ally and parish by parish — into the sol­diers for Christ that St. Paul advised to armor up for battle.


    No related posts.


3 Responses and Counting...

  • MAtt 08.10.2005

    Oh well, that hap­pens all the time. Haven’t we heard things like this before?

    “Make them burn incense to Caeser.” “Take away their lcons” “Make them leave their monasteries”

    Now the thing is homo­sex­u­al­ity. “Make them say that what they think is wrong is right”.

    No big­gie. God’s Church will con­tinue on as before.

  • No hoax. I blogged this back in July and alerted some Chris­t­ian folks in Canadia.

    I agree with matt: doesn’t mat­ter what the Gov’t does. They can’t do any­thing to the Church — espe­cially when they take her on “head on” like this.

    I’d be more con­cerned about recent Amer­i­can court deci­sions regard­ing tak­ing of pri­vate prop­erty and the cur­rent gov­ern­ment inter­est in using implanted chips to “pro­tect” us.

  • Matt and Huw,

    Prob­a­bly both right. There’s enough to really be alarmed over that I don’t mean to hit the panic but­ton unnec­es­sar­ily. I think there was just some­thing so coldly cal­cu­lat­ing about this one that it dis­turbed me, even though it was a Cana­dian thing. Canada is more lib­eral than we are over­all, so I’m curi­ous what the response was there.

Leave a Reply

* Name, Email, and Comment are Required