PRESENTATION BY
THE ASSEMBLY OF CATHOLIC OF BISHOPS
TO
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS STANDING COMMITTEE
ON JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Toronto, April 11, 2003
Presentation by the Assembly of
Catholic Bishops of Ontario
Marriage and Legal Recognition of Same Sex Unions
Introduction
The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario thanks the Standing Committee on
Justice and Human Rights for the opportunity to make a presentation to you
on this very important issue.
We are particularly pleased to do so because
of our conviction that the House of Commons is the proper forum for action
to be taken with regard to marriage, one of the fundamental institutions of
our society. Members of parliament are the elected representatives of the
people and directly answerable to them. You will live and deal with the
results of the decisions you make. Although expert in law, judges are not
necessarily expert in social policy or life consequences, nor are they, in
the way you are, in touch with the people. We applaud you for undertaking
this consultative process. By its end, we feel that you will have a better
grasp of the issue than any other body that is in a position to affect the
law of the land.
It is our hope that parliament will
ultimately take responsibility for decisions on the future of marriage.
The Catholic Position on Marriage
Catholics place the greatest importance on the institution of marriage - the
indissoluble union of one man and one woman for mutual support and the
procreation of children - and see it as foundational to the well-being of
society. In a discourse to the Roman Rota (February 2001), Pope John Paul II
stated that:
- An ordering of the natural ends of
marriage - the good of the couple and the procreation and education of
children - is intrinsically present in masculinity and femininity. This
theological character is vital for understanding the natural dimension
of the union.
- In the Catholic view, marriage and the
family are of such importance that the state has an obligation to
support them and ensure that they thrive. The Catechism of the Catholic
Church (2210) states:
- The importance of the family for the life
and well-being of society entails a particular responsibility for
society to support and strengthen marriage and the family. Civil
authority should consider it a grave duty to acknowledge the true nature
of marriage and the family, to protect and foster them, to safeguard
public morality and protect domestic prosperity.
- Marriage, as an expression of natural and
divine law is sealed for Catholics by the sacrament of matrimony.
We urge MP's to consider the contribution
made to our society by marriage and the typical family as they contemplate
the appropriate recognition of other forms of relationship.
The Origins and Definition of Marriage
Marriage as the complementary union of a man and a woman has been known and
celebrated in all civilizations in recorded history. People then and now
have felt the need for mutual support and for the propagation of the species
in the form of the nuclear family and of the clan or tribe and, in effect,
the species.
Because of its importance to their
flourishing, societies have incorporated marriage into their laws and
customs in special ways. The major religions of the world have made marriage
a central part of their concern. They have elaborated ceremonies designed to
clarify the public commitment of the man and the woman in a marriage and to
support them in their service to each other and to the common good.
For most religions, and certainly in the
case of Catholicism, marriage has three essential aspects: the mutual care
of the couple, the openness to procreation and the special grace bestowed by
ceremony, in our case, the sacrament of matrimony.
All three aspects: mutual support, openness
to procreation and public commitment, even before one witness, are essential
in our view to a full definition of marriage. All three are essential and no
one or two sufficient to define marriage. To omit one of these and call the
resultant partnership "marriage" is to end with something which is
not marriage.
Catholics have an obligation to remain in
their marriages and to make them open to life. A definition of marriage that
does not support these responsibilities cannot be supported by us.
Marriage and the Law
We support the definition of marriage established in common law in the case
of Hyde v. Hyde and Woodhouse as being between a man and a woman to the
exclusion of all others. This definition merely reflected the reality of
what had existed in society from time immemorial.
Until recently the courts have generally
been very supportive of marriage as we know it and have recognized its
contribution to society. In the M v. H case in 1999, for example, the
Ontario Divisional Court stated that
One of the principal purposes of marriage is
the founding and maintaining of families in which children will be produced
and cared for, a procedure which is necessary for the continuance of the
species.
In the Supreme Court of Canada decision in
Nova Scotia v. Walsh, Mr. Justice Gonthier said:
Marriage and the family existed long before any legislature decided to
regulate them. For centuries they have been central to society, contributing
to its social cohesion and fundamental structure...Marriage and the family
promote psychological, social and economic well-being of all members of the
family unit.
However, you are here because the courts appear to be wavering. A court in
British Columbia has upheld the current definition of marriage and courts in
Quebec and Ontario have declared it to be unconstitutional.
The record of the federal parliament is less
ambiguous. In June 9, 1999, the House of Commons passed a motion supporting
the definition of "marriage" as being "between a man and a
woman to the exclusion of all others."
In March 2000, an amendment was added to the
Introduction to Bill C-23, the bill to extend benefits fully to same-sex
unions, which read:
Interpretation 1.1 For greater certainty, the amendments made under this
Act do not affect the meaning of the word "marriage", that is, the
lawful union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.
Marriage is so foundational to our society
that changing it will constitute an experiment in social engineering. Such a
change can only be contemplated after the broadest consultation, the most
exacting research and with the informed support of the populace. The courts
are not constituted or equipped to meet these criteria and we would hope
that you would reach your own conclusions.
The Social Contribution of Marriage
There is ample evidence that marriage results in durable and lasting
relationships in the majority of cases. It is also the most stable setting
for the rearing of children. It provides nurturing, role models of both
sexes and economic and social security.
A Statistics Canada study, "Growing up
with Mom and Dad" (National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth)
1998 states:
Results indicate that children born to parents who are married and had
not lived together in common law relationships beforehand are approximately
three times less likely to experience family breakdown than children whose
parents were living in a common law relationship when they were born and
subsequently married.
The study found that 26% of children brought
up in families with married parents were likely to have developmental
difficulties compared to 41% in other situations.
These statistics do not deny the heroic
efforts made in particular by single parents but they do emphasize the
difficulty of the task they face.
Marriage, as currently constituted, is a
wholesome and positive influence in our society.
The Consequences of Change
At this time, we know that the majority of
Canadians choose to marry; the majority of marriages are blessed with
children; the majority of children are reared in marriages; and the evidence
is that they benefit from such an upbringing. All of this in spite of the
fact that many would claim that marriage has already been weakened by easier
divorce laws and the equivalencies made between marriage and common law
unions.
Some have suggested that the only role of
government with regard to marriage is to provide an orderly framework within
which people can make a commitment to each other. We would suggest that the
interest of the state is much more profound than that. In a country which
would have a falling population without immigration and where the schools
are reporting increased numbers of disturbed children, government should be
very reluctant to change an institution with a proven track record for
stability and nurture, both of the partners themselves and of their
children.
The present impetus for change arises from
the desire of citizens in same-sex long-term relationships to be able to
marry. We have laid out the conditions that we see as necessary for
marriage. It is clear, that in our view, there are biological and natural
hindrances to such an outcome. In additions to that, however, we would ask
you to consider the public policy issue. We have abundant studies and
statistical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of marriage and what it
achieves. We have been unable to find empirical studies based on broad
samples of a general population as to what might be the contributions of
same-sex marriages. What is the percentage of the population that would be
directly involved? What would be the stability of these marriages? How many
children would come from these marriages? What would be the long term
outcomes of such families? We do not purport to have any answers to these
questions. However, at the present time, it seems to us, legislators,
changing the definition and status of marriage would be taking a great
gamble.
We have one further concern with the
consequences of such a change and that concerns the issue of religious
freedom. In their brief to this Committee, the Law Society of Canada stated
that:
While the state could recognize same-sex marriages for the purpose of
civil marriage, it could not take any position on religious marriages.
We are fairly convinced that this may well be true with regard to the state.
As for the courts, we are much less confident. Only time would tell if
religious groups could retain their freedom of religion. However, one
wonders if such an arrangement would not, in fact, end up with two kinds of
"marriage" in the eyes of the populace and those being married.
Is it possible to change the practice and
mind set of millennia by merely changing the legal definition of a word?
Words do change their meaning over time but such change is normally slow and
comes from common usage, not from government fiat.
We would suggest that legislators need to be
very prudent. Valuable as they are, the law and the Charter are not the
whole of life.
Alternatives
We recognize as a fact of life that there are other mutually supportive,
committed and economically inter-dependent relationships which deserve
recognition and attention from government. These include many types of
arrangements. The Church is concerned that no one be left in a difficult
situation by death, disability, or other difficulty in such situations.
A number of legislative arrangements have
been suggested to ensure that these relationships are treated fairly and
honourably without infringing on the current definition of, or practices
related to, marriage. A system of registration has been suggested which
would give people choices. The province of Quebec has enacted legislation
with the same purpose. Indeed, the federal and most provincial governments
have enacted laws to ensure that people in common law and same sex
relationships are secure. In justice, similar safeguards should be put in
place for all economically inter-dependent relationships.
The benefits to be accorded to all of these
relationships, including marriage, should be carefully and objectively
defined by government on the basis of legitimate need and the well being of
society.
Status
From a Catholic point of view, all human beings are equal in the eyes of
God. Some have a vocation to married life, some to a celibate single life,
some to religious life and some to the clerical life. There is no automatic
additional status conferred by any of these. They are all open to God's
grace, which can be accepted or rejected. Status comes from how you live the
life you have chosen.
We would ask you to preserve the current
definition of marriage as it is wholesome for the common good, in keeping
with the natural law and in conformity with God's design for the world.
Submitted by
The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario
Presenters;
Most Rev. John Boissonneau, Auxiliary Bishop of Toronto
Dr. Sylvia Santin, Ph.d.
Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario
|
