Last Updated:Friday - 09/24/2010

WCR Letters to the Editor

Is JP II Bible School hurting the Church?

I feel, however, that talking about the Bible school behind closed doors isn't fair, since the Bible school doesn't get a chance to defend itself so I decided to come out in public with my concerns.

You see, I don't really think the Bible school has problems; it's more that I think it's hurting the Church. So I wanted to come out and say . . . stop . . . stop hurting the Church, because we need people of great faith to work in the Church right now, but what the Bible school is actually doing is hurting us.

The people at John Paul II have the very best of intentions; they honestly want to strengthen young people's faith. This isn't bad. It's hurting the Church because what they are creating is Catholics who appear to be confident and strong in their faith, but, on closer examination, may not necessarily possess a deep understanding of what it means to be Catholic.

My understanding is that the basis of the school is the charismatic renewal movement. This movement has a certain amount of danger associated with it because it can often lead to a faith that over emphasizes emotions at the expense of reason.

Students at JPII are not always given adequate tools to know how to discern what is truly from God. This can lead them to mistake their own emotions and desires for direct revelation from God.

Often their students feel strong in their faith, but lack the tools necessary for a true understanding of their faith.

The location of the Bible school is also problematic because it breeds a level of exclusivity.

Some of those I know who have attended the Bible school essentially believe that proper faith formation is not possible outside its walls. In order to be truly effective, we must not separate those who are being formed in faith from the world, we must teach them to confront the world.

We need Catholics who love and accept, rather than Catholics who believe that they have all the answers. This type of mentality smothers discourse and allows the secular world to dismiss religious arguments. There are many who think that JPII is helping because those who emerge from it have a "strong faith" and a personal relationship with Christ.

Perhaps what they need to ask is "A strong faith in what?" and "What limitations does this world view place on their relationship with Christ?" Is it a faith in God or faith in an institution?

What we actually need are Catholics of a different breed. We need smart, charming, well-spoken Catholics. The people we need must both understand their faith and face off with the culture by presenting intelligent arguments.

We need people, who understand how the culture has thoroughly subverted Christian values, and why the Church is losing more and more ground in the culture wars.

We can settle for no less than people who can debate the culture and point out its moral and intellectual shortfalls and inconsistencies.

We need Catholics who have more than just a deep faith, who do more than merely pray for change; we need Catholics who can organize resistance. John Paul II Bible School isn't helping us . . . it's hurting us.

Jeff Brassard
Edmonton

Marriage is a vocation from God

No one has the right to be married - either homosexual or heterosexual. In fact, the notion that people view marriage as a right rather than privilege and a responsibility that has to be earned - is one of the main causes for so many of the common marriage problems among heterosexual couples.

These problems have unfortunately detracted from the credibility of many who claim to espouse "Christian family values."

The truth is that marriage is and has always been a religious reality: it is a vocation from God, wherein two people are called to commit themselves to each other for the purpose of sharing intimacy and creativity - and in doing so, they themselves become living images of God, who creates and who is love.

And this definition of marriage applies not just to our Roman Catholic understanding, but is held by every religion in every culture and from every tradition.

So in my view, as a people of faith, we need to own up to our own responsibility in this controversy, in that, years ago, we should never have allowed the state to take their purely civil, financial and legal contract, and use the word "marriage" to name it in the first place.

Rev. Michael Mireau
Leduc, Thorsby

No one has had their rights taken away

At that time, the Liberal Party, with its large majority, did not believe that this definition of traditional marriage violated the rights of homosexuals and lesbians.

Now six years later, a Liberal minority government strongly believes that this traditional definition of marriage violates the rights of homosexuals and lesbians. Why? No rights have been taken away from anyone.

As the state has the power to authorize social benefits and also protect individual rights for any of its citizens, there is no need to change the law on marriage. This traditional structure of marriage - the union of one man and one woman - was designed to procreate, nurture and protect children. It is a structure shared by Canadians of different cultures and faith and it has served Canada extremely well for countless years.

I have asked my representative in Parliament, Aileen Carroll, the minister for international co-operation, to uphold marriage as "the legal union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

Gord Nixon
Barrie, Ont.

Letters to the Editor

Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 -- Western Catholic Reporter