Way to go relapsed catholic.

Kathy Shaidle picked up this story in the LA Times (registration required and bug-me-not doesn’t work)

With Canada’s gay marriage bill just days away from becoming law, the country’s top Catholic leader has warned that the church could refuse to baptize the children of same-sex parents.

“If I take the example of the ceremony of baptism, according to our canon law, we cannot accept the signatures of two fathers or two mothers as parents of an infant,” Cardinal Marc Ouellet, the archbishop of Quebec and primate of the Canadian Catholic Church, told a Senate committee hearing held here on the pending legislation this week.

Bill C 38 is almost through Senate comittee, it then goes to the governor general for royal assent.

There are 12 million Roman Catholics in Canada, making it the country’s largest faith group.
Last week a priest refused communion to an MP that supported the bill. Another MP was asked to step down from his responsibilities in his church until he had ‘a change of mind.’ That came from his bishop.

Even Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, a Catholic, has not been immune to the church’s hard line against gay marriage. A Montreal priest has said that the prime minister should be denied Communion and that he hoped Martin would lose his seat in the next federal election.

Ouellet declared that the Catholic clergy felt “threatened” by the same-sex legislation.

“Even our priests sometimes do not feel free to preach on homosexual and sexual morality because they are accused of homophobia,” he said in his testimony, which was delivered in French over two hours on Wednesday.

“Once the state imposes a new standard affirming that homosexual behavior is a social good, those who oppose it for religious motives or motives of conscience will be considered as bigots, anti-gay and homophobes, and then risk prosecution,” he said.

Ouellet told reporters after his presentation that supporters of same-sex marriage had created an “insane atmosphere” in Canada.

“It is not good for religious freedom if you cannot express your views and you cannot teach your beliefs,” he said.

There are about 80 thousand children waiting adoption in Canada, many of them with special needs, kids that heterosexual couples aren’t willing to take.
I’m not going to get into a debate about the sexual orientation of children adopted by gay couples. The Cardinal isn’t going there. He is targeting a small group of adults that have become open and have entered knowingly into relationship.

It is one thing for the church to refuse to recognize adult marriages, it is another to refuse children that may find a Catholic home.

Richard Bott has some serious questions for the Cardinal.
I have respect for the Catholic church, and I have questions also.
What has the church done in Belguim, Spain and the Netherlands?

The key word is ‘could’, not ‘won’t.’
The Archbishop of Quebec City wants to keep his opposition to Bill C 38 out there on the table.
This is an eye catching way to do so.
It will harm the church. The average person doesn’t understand canon law. We don’t understand the authority structure. I do not understand if Ouellet is speaking for all Canadian bishops or about the technicalities of canon law.
He appeared before the senate committee as the representative of the Conference of Canadian Bishops. It was an opportunity to be heard.

1983 Code of Canon Law, requiring, as it does for the licit baptism of a child, a “founded hope” that the child will actually be raised Catholic (see 1983 CIC 868, and its predecessor 1917 CIC 750 suggesting the same point).

Checking in Canadian English news so far the LA Times piece hasn’t been picked up. Checking Google News the LA Times hasn’t been picked up by French news outlets. This was reported earlier this week in french and english.

If this statement hits more Canadian news outlets and there is a public uproar, the San Francisco archbishop or the Pope can step forward with a statement.
According to Canon Law, I think that an argument could be made just like Ouellet did. But, there is also an argument about hope. If the gay parents are wanting Baptism and they’re not doing it for show, then they’re only there by the Grace of God.