LifeSite Daily News ­- May 18, 2000

CANADIAN BISHOPS' ORGANIZATION CONTRADICTS VATICAN POLICY

OTTAWA, May 18 (LSN.ca) - Campaign Life Coalition leader Jim Hughes is shocked by the recent
reaffirmation of support issued for the International March of Women 2000 by the Canadian
Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), the Catholic Women's League (CWL), the Canadian
Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP), and the Canadian Religious
Conference (CRC). Hughes told LifeSite News that given the irrefutable evidence that the
march includes the support for abortion as one of its objectives, the CCCB endorsement is
scandalous. Moreover Hughes asserts that the Vatican would disagree with the endorsement.

"Campaign Life Coalition has worked directly with the Holy See at the United Nations for many
years lobbying on these very issues," said Hughes. He noted that the stance of the Vatican on
such matters is clearly exemplified by the withdrawal of even token financial support for the 
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). While UNICEF, like the March of Women, has some
goals which are commendable, the UNICEF support for contraception and abortion ruled out
even symbolic church monetary support for the group.

United Way support has similarly suffered. Mr. Hughes was chair of the Toronto archdiocesan
pastoral council under the late Archbishop Phillip Pocock. He was a member of the
archbishop's executive when support for the United Way campaign was withdrawn due to the
inclusion of Planned Parenthood, the world's largest abortion agency. "[ Pocock ] did not
want to associate with Planned Parenthood for fear that people would believe them to be
worthy of support," said Hughes.  The archbishop scoffed at assurances that Catholic money to
United Way would not go to Planned Parenthood saying it wouldn't matter which pocket they
took the money from.  "Thank God for him and his leadership," said Hughes, "he is one of the
reasons why I got involved in the pro-life movement."

The National Post reported yesterday that the CCCB endorsement comes despite the public
protest of at least several prominent bishops. Other than the signature of CCCB president
Bishop Gerald Wiesner on the original document supporting the march, the only Canadian bishop
to publicly defend the funding of the march has been Calgary's Bishop Fred Henry - the sole
Canadian Bishop on the executive of the CCODP. The Post notes that Cardinal Aloysius Ambrozic
of Toronto, Bishop Anthony Tonnos of Hamilton, Bishop Paul-Andre Durocher of Sault Ste.
Marie, and Bishop Jude Saint-Antoine, the auxiliary Bishop of Montreal, oppose funding to the
march.

In related news CCODP has embarked on an intense campaign to discredit the LifeSite News
reports exposing the march as being supportive of abortion. A package of information has been
created by CCODP and sent to dioceses all over Canada to justify their $110,000 support for
the march. The material is also on the CCODP website. Coverage in the Catholic Register
quoted CCCB general secretary Msgr. Peter Schonenbach (reportedly the original impetus behind
the CCCB endorsement) criticizing Cardinal Ambrozic's decision to withdraw support for the
march. "There has been a very, very quick reaction in Toronto . . . They took that quick
action without consulting," said Schonenbach. "The trouble with the pro-life people is they
take everything out of context," he said.

Both the CCODP information package and the reaffirmation of support letter by the CCCB and
others attempt to suggest that the demands for the march do not include abortion. However,
both groups also conveniently fail to include the known fact that the full coordinating
committee of the World March of Women "unanimously decided that the demand to have a 'pro-
life' contingent at the World March is unacceptable to us since the anti-choice position
defended by your organization is in clear contradiction with the objectives pursued by the
march."

The women's march is also strongly supportive of various UN Women's agreements about which
the Vatican has expressed serious reservations. For instance, the governing body of the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW opposes the
recognition of Mothers Day by any nation.

See reports on CEDAW
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2000/may/000515.html#7
and http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/1998/july/980725.html
© Copyright: LifeSite Daily News, a production of Interim Publishing.
Acknowledgement of source is required.
Comments or questions: lsn@lifesite.net
LifeSite Daily News archived at http://www.lifesite.net

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesite.net or to David or Steve at (416) 204-1687
Subscribe http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/e_subscribe.html