Letters
Interim helps bring together 'friends for life'
I wish to thank The Interim, June 2002, for publishing my ad regarding a gold crucifix which was lost in Ottawa during the March for Life, in May of this year. I also published it in the Ottawa Citizen, and when the clerk there heard the size of the cross, and the enormity of the area covered by the march, she remarked that it would take a miracle to have it found and returned.
Again, as always, St. Anthony was petitioned, rewarded and thanked, but in the days, weeks, and months that followed no news came. I was beginning to feel a little disheartened. Some people, when they heard the story, counselled that perhaps someone else was meant to have the cross. It might be an instrument of convention. This stuck in my throat and I had to examine my conscience: was I paying too much attention to the sentimental value of the cross, rather than to the person, Jesus, who had died on it for love of me? A dear priest friend had given this little crucifix to me when I was leaving for Canada more than 30 years ago.
Surprise! On a Monday morning, Oct. 28 to be precise, a phone call came from a lady in Midland. She had been in the March for Life with her friend who was recovering from two hip replacements. In spite of her infirmity, this lady insisted on walking the walk. As the two approached the abortuary in the centre of Ottawa, silence had to be observed, in respect for the thousands of babies killed there. The lady from Midland told me her friend bent down and picked up something from the street and said as she gave it to her, "Here's a cross for you." Nothing more was said as they continued walking and praying.
When The Interim arrived at the lady's home in June, the advertisement about a lost cross was read, but no significance was paid to it. It was months later, when, for some reason, the notice came into her head again. She then remembered the cross found in front of the Ottawa abortuary and began to look for it in her pockets. Eventually, she found it in a dish with her earrings. Now she had to start searching for June's Interim. This too proved difficult, because sometimes it was shared with others or left at the back of the church.
In October, the pro-life conference brought her to Toronto, where she requested a copy of the paper from its circulation manager, but to no avail. (I was at the conference too, so our paths crossed again.) Eventually, another friend, who had found the June issue, called with my number. Good news! My crucifix had been found and was being returned to me. We chatted and laughed as we exchanged parts of the story. We also shared our involvement in the struggle for the survival of the unborn child.
Thanks again to The Interim and to all those who took part in the return of the cross. Now in Midland, and all around, I have new friends. May I call them "friends for life" (because of the cross).
Anne E. Rooney
Toronto, Ont.
Positive LifeChain
LifeChain photos in your November issue elicit two responses from me.
First, how wonderful to see people of all ages witnessing for life. Second, the number of participants has been plummeting for the past few years to the point that the public and media now comfortably ignore LifeChains in my city.
I strongly support LifeChain in principle, but I think it's high time we reformulate our strategy. We have to remember why we're there - not just to witness, but also to change hearts and minds. We need to return to the days when individual churches (of all faiths) were assigned X spots weeks in advance at a particular location. Until and unless LifeChains are kilometres long, we shouldn't expect serious media coverage or public attention.
We also know from recent research that to change hearts, we have to be prepared to hold a variety of signs with positive and affirming messages: e.g., "Adoption the Loving Option," "Choose Life", "I'm Glad You Were Born," "Life is Precious," etc., should be at least as visible as "Abortion Kills Children," or "Abortion Harms Women."
Michael De Robertis,
Thornhill, Ont.
Keep it to yourself
In your Nov. 2002 issue, Interim editor Paul Tuns included a column ("On turning 30") in which he cheerfully divulged that he sired a child in his teens, then some six years later married his high school sweetheart. That is information which might better have been kept to himself, and, in my case, will not improve my reception of his editorial opinions.
I dabble in genealogy, and well remember a cousin, much more deeply into it than I, being roundly chastised by his uncle for circulating a copy of their family tree, in which it was apparent that the first child of the uncle's parents was born some six to seven months following their marriage, which the uncle felt indicated a potential "shotgun" wedding. It seems that times have changed.
Frank J. Horgan
Toronto, Ont.
Author says book begins 'dialogue'
The publication of a book is an occasion for dialogue in a community. After its launch, the book is on its own to delight or depress. A History of Canadian Catholics has done just that.
It has demanded a response from those who are included and those who are excluded. A fuller picture of Canadian Catholicism is already appearing from the reviews ("Flawed history of Catholicism," September), articles, and books that emerged in response to the book.
As a people who are pro-life, we are concerned on this occasion about the description of the pro-life movement in Canadian Catholics. I followed the approach of Michael Cuneo's Catholics Against the Church: Anti-Abortion Protest in Toronto, 1969-1985 (University of Toronto Press, 1989) which places the pro-life movement politically on the right and other protest movements of social concern on the left.
Although being on the right is not such a bad place to be, after publication of my book it soon became clear, needless to say, that this was an inadequate description of the pro-life movement and the very committed people who serve it.
The inadequate treatment of the pro-life movement in my book I deeply regret. I should have made these pages an opportunity for dialogue.
In future when a new printing is needed, I will take the opportunity to dialogue with you in creating a more adequate treatment.
For instance, you might say that "dissenters" was an unfortunate choice of words because some readers want to see more in this word than was implied, but it is difficult to find suitable words for Catholics who disagree with one another.
I look forward to the further exploration of the themes of this book and the open dialogue that will emerge on Canadian Catholic history.
Terence J. Fay, SJ
Toronto, Ont.
Paul Tuns replies:
I thank Fr. Fay for responding to The Interim's review of his book A History of Catholics in Canada, but am saddened that none of the concerns raised in the review have been adequately addressed.
Fr. Fay excuses the mistakes made in his deeply and scandalously flawed treatment of the pro-life movement on the fact that he "followed the approach of Michael Cuneo's Catholics Against the Church: Anti-Abortion Protest in Toronto, 1969-1985.
Michael Cuneo's book was a sociological attempt to examine the pro-life movement but the author was blinded by his liberal ideology. Fr. Fay should have noticed the particular bias of Catholics Against the Church and dismissed the book out of hand.
Fr. Fay expresses "regret" at the "inadequate description" of the pro-life movement when he labelled it "right wing." But such a description is not merely inadequate, it is useless. What galled this reviewer even more than the use of useless political labels is the labelling of the pro-life movement as dissidents.
Fr. Fay says that "you might say that 'dissenters' was an unfortunate choice of words." It is not unfortunate; it is untrue. Catholic pro-lifers are not dissenting from any teaching of their Church. On the contrary, they are upholding the teachings of the magisterium.
Likewise, Fr. Fay says that "it is difficult to find suitable words for Catholics who disagree with one another." But aside from the fact that dissent is not the same as disagreement, the issue is not a matter of disagreeing with one another, as Fr. Fay says, but of some Catholics disagreeing with the magisterium.
Fr. Fay wants a dialogue. But about the sanctity of human life and the wrongfulness of abortion there can be no debate.
A dialogue is the exchange of ideas, but no Catholic can take a dissident view on this issue. So I wonder what Fr. Fay really expects or wants from such a dialogue.
There is, however, a sign of hope. Fr. Fay says, "As a people who are pro-life, we..." thus identifying himself with the pro-life movement. I welcome him to our ranks and look forward to seeing him take a strong, public position in defence of the unborn. It makes him neither "right wing" nor a "dissenter," but rather a priest upholding the teachings of his Church. I look forward to seeing him at the March for Life and other pro-life events.
He could start by asking his publisher (McGill) to recall the books, at least from university, college and seminary library shelves. A correction in future editions, as Fr. Fay's offer "to dialogue" suggests might be possible, is insufficient. The errors in the 3,000 copies currently in print will still be in circulation. Knowing his mistake and letting the errors remain, thus contributing falsehoods to the dialogue Fr. Fay is seeking, is simply wrong.
