State Control of Religion -- the newest thing in Canada?
Call for state control of religion in Canada Ottawa, Jul. 20 (LifesiteNews.com/CWN) - As Canada's Senate approaches the final vote on the gay marriage bill C-38, the country's national public radio, CBC Radio, has aired a commentary by a retired professor from the Royal Military College calling for state control over religion, specifically Catholicism. While parliamentarians dismissed warnings by numerous religious leaders and experts that the same-sex marriage law would lead to religious persecution, former professor Bob Ferguson has called for "legislation to regulate the practice of religion." "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 on Monday. "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." The former professor pitched his idea as a boon to religious freedom. "We could also help the general cause of religious freedom by introducing a code of moral practice for religions," he said. "They will never achieve unity so why not try for compatibility? Can't religious leaders agree to adjust doctrine so all religions can operate within the code?" Ferguson also suggested "obvious" prohibitions on religion including preaching of "hate." "I won't try to propose what might be in the new code except for a few obvious things: A key item would have to be a ban on claims of exclusivity. It should be unethical for any RRP (registered religious practitioner) to claim that theirs was the one true religion and believers in anything else or nothing were doomed to fire and brimstone. One might also expect prohibition of ritual circumcisions, bans on preaching hate or violence, the regulation of faith healers, protocols for missionary work, etc.," said Ferguson. The retired professor concluded his comments saying, "Now what is the point of proposing this? I do it because I am worried that the separation between church and state is under threat. Religion is important in our lives, but it can become a danger to society when people claim that the unalterable will of God is the basis for their opinions and actions. Yes religion can be a comfort and a guide, but we cannot take rules from our holy books and apply them to the modern world without democratic debate and due regard for the law." © Copyright 2005 Domus Enterprises. All rights reserved.
Call for state control of religion in Canada Ottawa, Jul. 20 (LifesiteNews.com/CWN) - As Canada's Senate approaches the final vote on the gay marriage bill C-38, the country's national public radio, CBC Radio, has aired a commentary by a retired professor from the Royal Military College calling for state control over religion, specifically Catholicism. While parliamentarians dismissed warnings by numerous religious leaders and experts that the same-sex marriage law would lead to religious persecution, former professor Bob Ferguson has called for "legislation to regulate the practice of religion." "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 on Monday. "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." The former professor pitched his idea as a boon to religious freedom. "We could also help the general cause of religious freedom by introducing a code of moral practice for religions," he said. "They will never achieve unity so why not try for compatibility? Can't religious leaders agree to adjust doctrine so all religions can operate within the code?" Ferguson also suggested "obvious" prohibitions on religion including preaching of "hate." "I won't try to propose what might be in the new code except for a few obvious things: A key item would have to be a ban on claims of exclusivity. It should be unethical for any RRP (registered religious practitioner) to claim that theirs was the one true religion and believers in anything else or nothing were doomed to fire and brimstone. One might also expect prohibition of ritual circumcisions, bans on preaching hate or violence, the regulation of faith healers, protocols for missionary work, etc.," said Ferguson. The retired professor concluded his comments saying, "Now what is the point of proposing this? I do it because I am worried that the separation between church and state is under threat. Religion is important in our lives, but it can become a danger to society when people claim that the unalterable will of God is the basis for their opinions and actions. Yes religion can be a comfort and a guide, but we cannot take rules from our holy books and apply them to the modern world without democratic debate and due regard for the law." © Copyright 2005 Domus Enterprises. All rights reserved.
2 Comments:
At 7:02 AM, July 22, 2005, Dan Trabue said…
I would oppose his efforts to do as he's suggested, even if I agreed with the premises of many of the ideas he mentioned.
However, when he concludes, "religion can be a comfort and a guide, but we cannot take rules from our holy books and apply them to the modern world without democratic debate and due regard for the law," he is absolutely correct from at least a Catholic, anabaptist and baptist (three traditons I've heard from on this matter) understanding and I support this notion wholeheartedly.
At 1:15 PM, July 23, 2005, voixd'ange said…
I am really troubled by this article. Having worked in a Christian school, I have personally seen the negative results of hiring those who really are not in tune/line with the values held by religious organization by which they are employed. We are always up front about who we are and what we stand for...so I always ask myself why such people sought employment with our organization in the first place? To undermine the mission? To rock the boat? I don't get up in the morning looking to fight with people... Even though I feel women should be allowed to be ordained into the priesthood, I wouldn't want to make that kind of gain as a result of such legislature. I am also having an issue with the exclusivity part. While I fully beleive that no denomination can claim this, Christ most certainly can and did and does. If I lived under this kind of legislation I would no doubt end up in jail... after they sawed my handcuffs off of the front door of the appropriate government building...
Post a Comment
<< Home