|
The Troubling World March of Women 2000 Published in Reality Last October, REAL Women received an urgent request for information from the World-Wide Movement of Mothers, a pro-family organization based in Paris, France, with whom we work at the UN. That organization had been requested to participate in the World March of Women 2000, which was being organized in Montreal. We investigated the March at its request, and learned that it was being organized by La Féderation des Femmes du Québec, which advocates abortion on demand and lesbian rights. The Canadian representative on the International Liaison Committee for the World March, and its Canadian Co-ordinator, is the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC). Other participants include the Ligue Communist du Canada, Collectif pour le Libre Choix, Canadian Abortion Rights Action League, the National Association of Women and the Law and the Canadian Labour Congress, to name but a few - all radical feminists and hard-line advocates of abortion and homosexual/lesbian rights. We forwarded this information to our French counterpart, advising it not to participate in the March. We thought nothing more about the matter until early March of this year, when a pamphlet promoting the March 2000 was forwarded to us. We were shocked to read, according to this pamphlet, that the March had been endorsed not only by the usual assortment of radical feminist groups and the Canadian Congress of Labour (the latter spear-headed by pro-abortion / lesbian NDP activist, Nancy Riche), but also by the Anglican, Presbyterian and United Churches in Canada. Also specifically listed as assisting in the March are the Catholic Women's League, the Canadian Religious Conference, (the umbrella organization for Catholic religious orders), and Development and Peace, which contributed $110,000 to the Women's World March between 1997 - 2000. Apparently, the religious institutions listed in the pamphlet had joined the March on the understanding that the purpose of the March was limited to eliminating women's poverty and violence against women - goals that cannot be faulted. However, the objects of the March had, unfortunately, been considerably broadened to become dominated by a much wider radical feminist agenda, in particular, lesbian rights, homosexual / lesbian marriage, and abortion on demand. These objectives are opposed by the Catholic Church in Canada, and certainly, homosexual marriages are not acceptable - not yet, anyway - to the Presbyterian and Anglican Churches. Catholic Participation in the March The Catholic participation in the March began when the General Secretary of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), Msgr. Peter Schoenenbach, consulted with the Conference's Commission for Social Affairs and the Catholic Organization for Life and Family before drafting a letter supporting the March. The letter was approved by the CCCB Executive Committee, which included Bishops Jacques Berthelet (Longueuil,Que.), Andre Gaumond (Sherbrooke, Que.) and Brendan O'Brien (Pembroke). On February 18th, 2000, Bishop Gerald Wiesner, OMI, Bishop of Prince George, President of the CCCB, signed a letter endorsing the March. In his endorsement letter he specifically stated, "I support the March's objectives of ending poverty and violence against women …". He stated further that:
On learning of the endorsement by the churches, REAL Women carefully reviewed all of the information available on the Women's March 2000, including a review of the March of Women website (www.canada.marchofwomen.org/en/eommittee.html) and its official "World Demands of the March" (www.ffq.qc.ca/marche2000/en/cahier/iste.html). According to the web site, marchers are urged to "oppose the [traditional] definition of marriage" inserted in federal Bill C-23 (same-sex benefits). (The CCCB had raised its objection to Bill C-23 before the Justice Committee of the House of Commons on March 24, 2000.) The web site also includes demands that lesbian partners be admitted into Canada as "spouses" under the Immigration Act. Further, a member of REAL Women in Vancouver had, on December 29th, written to the March organizers in Montreal requesting permission to include a pro-life contingent in the March. On March 29th, she received the following reply: ..
On April 14th, 2000, REAL Women wrote to all the Canadian Bishops, in French and English, pointing out that when the marchers demand "total control and respect of our bodies," they mean abortion on demand, that is, the death of their pre-born children. Further, when the organizers state that they "aim to bring down the patriarchy," this indicates a profound animosity towards fatherhood, family and the priesthood. Another disturbing element of the World March of Women 2000 agenda, we pointed out, is its requirement that "custom, tradition or religious considerations should be subordinated to human rights and fundamental freedoms." This last statement amounts to the subordination of religion to the secular, and possibly hostile, state. We also made reference to the fact that there is a wide disparity between the UN Women's Conference in Beijing and the World March of Women 2000. This is due to the fact that UN conferences allow for free discussion and negotiation on contentious issues, and there is an official procedure to register an objection to specific sections of a UN document. This is done by way of placing "reservations" against controversial paragraphs. (In fact, there were 69 reservations placed against the UN Beijing Platform of Action - more than were placed against any other UN document.) These reservations were nearly all directed to reproductive rights - (abortion and the radical feminist provisions of the document.) Unfortunately, the March 2000 provides no formal process in which the Catholic Church's "reservations" can be placed against the many controversial issues now being promoted by this March. Finally, we stated in our letter to the Catholic bishops:
A similar letter was also sent to the heads of the Presbyterian, Anglican and United Churches in Canada; to approximately 500 Religious Orders in Canada, as well as to the National Executive Members of the Catholic Women's League (CWL), and the Presidents of their Provincial CWL Councils. In regard to the latter organization, we were surprised to read an article appearing in the Canadian League Spring 2000 issue, written by Joan Hastie, the League's National Convenor for Legislation stating that the CWL had joined and worked with the Inter-Church Council of Women on the March, since the beginning of its organization. The Women's Inter-Church Council, however, was one of the signatories of a petition currently being distributed by the front organization, Catholics for Free Choice [for abortion], which is seeking to have the Holy See (the Vatican) removed from the UN, where it holds the status of a Permanent Observer. Catholics for Free Choice has no members and is a front organization for Planned Parenthood Federation of America. It is also funded by the anti-life foundations such as the Playboy and the Ford Foundation. A strange bedfellow indeed for the Canadian Catholic Women's League! Catholic Response to Concerns About the March We received many concerned replies from Catholic Bishops and religious orders. Some Bishops withdrew their diocese from the March. Cardinal Ambrozic of the Archdiocese of Toronto did so and also reduced its funding to Development and Peace by a proportionate amount to the share of the money Development and Peace gave to the March. Other dioceses withdrawing from the March included Hamilton Diocese and Peterborough. However, the leaders within the four national Catholic organizations still thought their support of the March to be a good idea. (It is significant that their decision that their four organizations support the March was an "executive" one, without any consultation with its members.) On May 16, 2000, a joint statement was issued by the four national Catholic organizations involved with the March. It reaffirmed their support for the true objectives of the March, poverty and violence against women. It also went on to state:
United Church Response to the March REAL Women has also received a letter dated May 23, 2000, from Rev. William Phipps, Moderator of the United Church. He stated that his church supported the March for Women with full knowledge of its objectives. He also enclosed the United Church position in its brief to the House of Commons on Bill C-23 (same-sex benefits). According to this brief, the United Church supports the intention to permanence and fidelity in intimate relationships, regardless of the sexual orientation of the partners. The brief stated as follows:
Mr. William Doyle, Co-Chair, the United Church in Society Co-ordinating Group, appeared on behalf of the church at the Senate Legal Committee Hearings on May 17th. In his presentation, Mr. Doyle stated:
Presbyterian Church of Canada The Moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, Dr. Art Van Seters, e-mailed REAL Women on May 31st, expressing his astonishment that the Presbyterian Church in Canada was listed as a sponsor of the World March of Women 2000. He stated that there was no references to this in either the Minutes of the 125th General Assembly of June 1999, nor in any of the reports going to the upcoming Assembly. He requested us to send him information that would indicate an official endorsement by his church of the March. We immediately faxed to him the World March of Women 2000 pamphlet which lists the Presbyterian Church as a sponsor. Dr. Van Seters stated that he asked a member of the National Office staff to explore the matter and get back to him with her findings. Anglican Church No response has yet been received from the Anglican Church. If you are a member of the Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian or United Church, please write to them as follows: Most Reverend Gerald Wiesner, OMI The Most Rev. Michael G. Peers Reverend Bill Phipps Dr. Art Van Seters In addition, if you are a member of the Catholic Women's League, please bring this matter to the attention of your local Parish CWL Council. Courtesy of LifeSite
Daily News, a production of Interim Publishing. |