Should grown men – or women – allow themselves to be ‘whipped’? Now, before readers think we’re speaking of so-called ‘S and M’ – the less said, or sade, of which, the better, with the furor over Fifty Shades having faded – the reference here is metaphorical, but apt: Last week, the leader of every political party in Canada, with the exception of the Conservatives, ‘whipped’ their members into voting for the expansion of euthanasia. That is, they were not to dare deviate from the party line: the more opportunity to have oneself killed, the better. Erin O’Toole permitted MP’s to vote according to what shreds remain of the Canadian conscience.

Trudeau, feeling his tyrannical oats, demanded all his MP’s – whipped into submission – vote to expand euthanasia, basically for any purpose. Patients – or victims – might walk into a doctor’s office, and be murdered forthwith. Even the safeguards offered by the Conservatives – fig leaves, really – were refused. Hence, we may soon have death-on-demand in Canada, which means everyone may soon be demanded to die. In fact, it’s more or less already here.

What would happen if these elected representatives had actually represented their constituents, or, perish the thought, their own conscience, and stood up like men, and women, telling Trudeau where to go? Well, they’d be cast into the outer darkness, losing their jobs, their prestige, their pensions.

For clarity’s sake, here is what they voted for:

  1. Bill C-7 removes the requirement in the law that a person’s natural death is reasonably foreseeablein order to qualify for MAiD, as required by Truchon. Therefore people who are not terminally ill can die by MAiD. The Truchon decision only required this amendment to the legislation.
  2. Bill C-7 permits a doctor or nurse practitioner to lethally inject a person who cannot consent, if that person was previously approved for MAiD. This contravenes the Supreme Court of Canada Carter decision which stated that only competent people could die by MAiD.
  3. Bill C-7 waives the ten-day waiting period when a person is deemed to be “terminally ill.” Thus a person could request MAiD on a “bad day” and die the same day. Studies prove that the “will to live” fluctuates.
  4. Bill C-7 creates a two-track law. A person whose death is deemed to be reasonably foreseeable would have no waiting period while a person whose death is deemed to be not reasonably foreseeable would have a 90-day waiting period.
  5. Bill C-7 claims to prevent MAiD for people with mental illness. The law permits MAiD for people who are physically or psychologically suffering that they find intolerable and that cannot be relieved in a way that the person considers acceptable.

Bill C-7 states: Exclusion (2.1) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(a), a mental illness is not considered to be an illness, disease or disability.

We can only hope they knew not what they were doing, for we are now well into the real of 1937 Germany, and full-bore culture of death. Even their euthanasia program didn’t go this far. Trudeau and his minions have sown, for themselves and for all of us, a whirlwind of destruction, death and damnation.

Ironic, for it is only by not going along with such evil that the politicians – finding their inner orca to bite the hand that feeds them – will find true peace and happiness. After all, the only ‘pension’ worth working for is the one God offers, eternal life. Everything else is refuse.

What is to be done with the many politicians claiming to be Catholic, but yet flouting the Church’s teaching? The Prime Minister might retort that he is simply following his own conscience, something he denies his fellow politicians. Should he, metaphorically, be whipped into line? Of course, the Church does not act in this way, but asks her members rather to submit freely to the truth, and only asks that if one does not accept what the Church teaches, the gracious thing would be to leave. And the Church only responds with medicinal measures if the recalcitrant and contumacious do not do so.

Which brings us to Trudeau: His obsession with death gets more bizarre than his blackface-banana-pants escapades with each passing day; but, then, the two are likely not unrelated, a release for his tortured conscience, perhaps?

Peruse this timely exhortation from Archbishop Chaput about the similar case of Joseph Biden, a purported Catholic who not only repudiates Catholic teaching on just about every principle of life and sexuality, but actively works to undermine those who do try to instantiate laws for life and family, or any limits at all on abortion.

Chaput – who has so far been passed up for a cardinalate – criticizes fellow bishop’s Gregory Wilton’s public admission that he will not refuse Joseph Biden to Holy Communion:

Public figures who identify as “Catholic” give scandal to the faithful when receiving Communion by creating the impression that the moral laws of the Church are optional. And bishops give similar scandal by not speaking up publicly about the issue and danger of sacrilege. 

And what holds for Biden holds perhaps even more for Prime Minister Trudeau, who seems even more oddly zealous for these evils than almost anyone on the planet. Yet our Prime Minister was – and we may presume at times still is – given the Holy Eucharist, with scarcely a word – at least in public – in protest. Archbishop of Montreal Christian Lépine defended giving Trudeau Holy Communion back in 2017, describing the act as a ‘gesture of hope’.

But what ‘hope’ is one supposed to have, as the juggernaut of death slouches into the depths? And this Sacrament is primarily about charity and truth, signifying ‘communion’ with the Mystical Body, with the Church, her divine teachings and hierarchical authority. Is to offer and partake in Communion to one not in communion, itself not an offense against the truth, to maintain the lies against life, family and sexuality that are at the heart of his agenda?  Is not Trudeau deciding for himself what is ‘good and evil’, and would it not be a sign of hope to point out to him that this leads nowhere good? Is giving Communion to, and refusing to confront, pro-abortion-and-euthanasia politicians – and all those persisting in ‘manifest grave sin’, not an act of scandal and complaisance?

His Grace, and all their Graces and Excellencies would do well to peruse the 2004 Instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, under then-Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, ‘On Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles’, to which all bishops are bound, which said in no uncertain terms that politicians who promote laws in favour of abortion – and other scandals – must first be instructed, and if they prove recalcitrant, denied Communion. Here are the relevant paragraphs, 5 and 6:

  1. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
  2. When “these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,” and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, “the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it” (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration “Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics” [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

This is not, as the document says, a judgement on the state of their souls, but rather a medicinal measure, if you will, both to help the politicians reform their ways before they face the judgement of Christ. And it also prevents scandal to the faithful, that the binding teachings of the Church on fundamental matters of faith and morals – requisite to enter heaven – are somehow up for grabs.

True mercy – to save the Church’s children from eternal loss – requires courage, boldness – the parrhesia of the Apostles – and we can only hope that our politicians, priests and episcopacy avail themselves of the strength that Christ offers, even, or especially, in the face of persecution.

Esto vir, Moses and God told Joshua. He manned up. So can we all.

 

The post Trudeau, Whipping Into Submission appeared first on Catholic Insight.